SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Recently there has been a flurry of activity here discussing the merits of DXO lab reports.
Certainly their findings are valuable as they would indicate the best performance attainable by either a sensor, lens or the two in combination under that test conditions.
Some here, seem to use the DXO results as a sort of a Bible, yet others don't seem to view the DXO tests as an accurate indicator of actual camera performance.
And most of the conprehensive camera testers refer to DXO results throughout their tests, but their overall performance conclusions don't always parallel the DXO tests.

So my question to you is: How important are the DXO lab scores to you when it comes time to pick a camera or a lens or recommend one.
Do you use the DXO results as your primary decision making tool, or do you look at other tests as well, or do you rely on some other means to pick new equipment? How do YOU feel about DXO?! ;-)
SS

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

its a good starting point and often as far as one needs to go.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Meh. I don't even real know what it is but I know good photographs. Charts are not photographs they aren't worth much and they move no one. When I look at a lens I look for photographs made with that lens to see if I like the look it will render.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Never paid attention to (as least as far as decision making goes).

jrb1213 Loc: McDonough GEorgia

I prefer field tests, but the problem is most field tests are done by people who already prefer one brand over another.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

It is a good starting point, but seldom as far as you need to go.

MarkD Loc: NYC

They are a consideration, but not the only one.

Rick36203 Loc: Northeast Alabama

I know your question is from the recent rating received by a new Canon release camera but, I have looked to their evaluation on different lens makes and models.

The DXO evaluation, coupled with owner reviews, has made me look at buying a Tamron lens instead of paying for the higher priced Nikon version. I'm not sure what I'll decide, but the test results have affected the decision making process.

Grammieb1 Loc: New Orleans

DXO is in the business of selling software. That is how I originally heard of them. Their test would be useful for some people as long as they take the results with a grain of salt. As far as being scientifically accurate, I would need many more tests & blind studies just as real scientist use to justify such a statement. I find that field studies with accompanying photos tell the story better. Even if a person is prejudice in favor of certain equipment, the results don't lie. If enough good photographers get great results from a camera & lens combination, then I agree that it is good. If a certain camera or lens shows consistently great results, that is good enough for me. I know the photographer is the most important ingredient but, why would really good photographers use poor equipment. If they are selling their work, they can use whatever gives them the best results. Bab

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Define poor equipment and best results? These are both subjective to the desired image. Sharpness in the later half of the 20th century became a measurement of a good result but pictorialism is back on the rise among some.

Swamp Gator Loc: Coastal South Carolina

I pay zero attention to DXO.
I'd rather spend more time out actually taking photos and less time worrying about micro analyzing photo gear anyway.

Grammieb1 Loc: New Orleans

I don't define the best results with razor sharpness. Some subjects need sharper images than others. In a portrait for example the eyes & hair need to be clearly defined & there needs to be texture to the skin but it does not have to be razor sharp. A Series of in focus sports action or moving wildlife photos is an imperative in my opinion. Though beauty is in the eye of the beholder, poor results in a photo are to me at least fairly obvious. Really good results are to someone with a discerning eye are pretty easy to spot. I am not a beginner & I really do think good results are more important than lab tests. Those who spend all of their time knocking other brands & going to the trouble of reading DXO results for other brands just so they can start a nasty diatribe against that brand can't be spending much time on photography. If a person is that desperate to prove how good their camera is, do it the old fashion way. Take some superior photos & post them. I personally don't care whether anyone likes my equipment, I only care about improving my photography. Insulting other people because of their choices isn't helping anyone. That seems to be the way a lot of people use DXO results. Bab

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

This should be good...

http://i.imgur.com/aVZgT.gif

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Bab, it seems to me that photography is an inexact science. The only thing exact about it is our camera.
I have made the observation that those that seem to rely mostly on the exactness of an activity, no matter what it is, are those that are less likely to perform at it.
I have said many times that the PROOF is always simply in the PUDDING.
Like you, my camera to me is less important the the results it gives me.
So to have to prove its exactness is a low priority. ;-)
SS

mechengvic Loc: SoCalo

The cameras and lenses I use don't score very well on DxO, and I know the reasons why. But if you know nothing of how the technology in your hands works, you might be tempted to buy gear according to what a site like DxO says without ever really knowing what it means, or how to take full advantage of those numbers.

As far as I'm concerned the gear I have makes me the best photog in the world!!! :mrgreen: