The Canon 1D X is the most expensive among the mainstream, full frame, professional DSLRs out there, and its scores on DxOMark aren't going to help the camera sell...
DxOMark's tests involve many aspects of the camera and weigh these aspects differently. So in quite a few circumstances, the certainly has an edge. But when talking about pure image quality issues -- like ISO, dynamic range, and color depth -- the 1D X falls short, almost tying Nikon's three-year-old flagship while the D4 really jumps ahead in ratings.
DxOMar's ratings are generally controversial for their 'overall' scoring. But what do you guys think? Should Canon have stepped it up for such an expensive camera?
Via Photorumors.com
![[Gear] New Favorites: Zeiss, Leica, Hasselblad, and More!](https://cdn.fstoppers.com/styles/small-16-9/s3/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/hasselblad-xpan.jpg)
Cannon should just start buying their sensors from Sony just like everybody else...
I've been shooting with the Canon 1DX for several weeks in a studio and on location and in poor lighting conditions. I've owned the Canon 1D, 1D mark II, 1D mark III and the 1DS mark II. The camera is stellar!! Amazing quality image even in extreme low light. The auto focus is the best yet, super fast. I call BS on this review! Anyone who is a working pro using this camera knows its just a stellar camera.
Event the best kit is pointless if you can't compose a photo. This obsession with the latest and greatest only seems to attract the weekend photographer. Noone can tell the difference once the image makes it to press!
bullsh*t.......
Thanks, FStoppers, for this wonderfully insightful article.
just use the best camera for your type of image making and shut up!
canon fans should get mad with canon, not with DxO...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YnhJk4hoq8&feature=youtu.be
Some just don't understand that trying to compare the D3X, the D4 and the 1DX is pointless, it is an exercise in futility as they are designed to be used DIFFERENTLY....
The Nikon D3S is purely a 'stills' camera with a Full Frame 12.1 Effective MP Sensor
The Nikon D4 is purely a 'stills' camera with a Full Frame 16.4 Effective MP Sensor
The Canon 1Dx is a 'Still' and 'Movie' Camera with a Full Frame 18.1 Effective MP Sensor...
Now, if you really understand the technicalities of light, you would understand that in order for Canon to create the 1Dx, the sensor had to be a compromise in order to be able to shoot HD at 1920x1080 for 24,25 & 30fps.
Now, although I have been a Canon user for many years, I started on a Zenith EM, moved to an Olympus OM10 Quartz before my first professional Canon, the EOS 1NHS 35mm that I still use to this day, together with my Bronica ETRSi... these are working alongside the EOS 1Ds MKII and 1Ds MKIII.
The 1Ds MKIII still kicks the arse out of the three (3) cameras tested for the purposes of which I use it and combine with the new releases of a number of the Canon Glass, I can see no reason to change it for the foreseeable future - I might consider an upgrade and make it the 'back-up' body when Canon release their MF Sensor in a DSLR body - which is WHY the lenses are all being upgraded...
I am so bored of this.... if anyone asks me what i shoot i say 'a dSLR' and move on. Do you go to a restaurant, have a great meal, and ask the chef what pots and pans he uses? Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Look at anything on that chart, it has nothing to do with taking a photo, let alone a GOOD one. DXO is crap, people who want to put any stake in it are more concerned with #s on a computer screen than they are creating a beautiful photograph. We should collectively banish DXO to the depths of photo-hell.
Your camera doesnt take shit photos.....you do. The end.
here here
On the one hand, I don't put much stock in laboratory tests. And I think DXO is kinda biased or skewed.
On the other hand, I post-produce RAW images for a living, and have seen tens of thousands of images from every camera currently in production. And I gotta say, Canon has really been dropping the ball when it comes to dynamic range over the past few years. Like I said I don't fully believe exact ranking charts, but my real world experience is not very surprised to hear that the best dynamic range from a Canon ranks #40 on DXO's charts.
Canon, get your act together and step it up! This is about as bad as how far behind Nikon was with respect to ISO performance, oh say, 2005-ish.
=Matt=
Go banana!
It's nice to see that nikon brings a little bit of competition to nikon. But sad to see that they have to pay a review website to do so. Maybe this will get a few stupid people to switch to nikon. It's nice because pro photogs will have less competition.