Comments on: EOS 5D Mark III DXO-Marks published, and then not – PUBLISHED http://www.canonwatch.com/dxo-marks-published-and-then-not/ Canon Rumors and News Mon, 20 May 2013 18:14:01 +0000 hourly 1 By: 4343434 http://www.canonwatch.com/dxo-marks-published-and-then-not/#comment-2903 4343434 Fri, 20 Apr 2012 15:58:45 +0000 http://www.canonwatch.com/?p=4548#comment-2903 http://www.techradar.com/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/digital-slrs-hybrids/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-1074186/review/page:5#articleContent

the techradar test:

Quote
TIFF images (after conversion from raw) have a consistently good signal to noise ratio across the sensitivity range comparing closely to the Canon EOS 1Ds Mk III and just having the edge over the Nikon D800. It also shows a slight improvement at all sensitivities over the Canon EOS 5D Mk II.

Quote
TIFF files (after conversion from raw) have a high dynamic range with results comparing closely to the Nikon D4 and D800. Compared with the Canon EOS 5D Mk II, there is a marked improvement showing over 2EV greater range at the lower end of the sensitivity scale.

i thought techradar is a DxO certified lab?

http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/noise-and-dynamic-range-results-explained-1027588

]]> By: Bill_K http://www.canonwatch.com/dxo-marks-published-and-then-not/#comment-2838 Bill_K Fri, 20 Apr 2012 02:25:33 +0000 http://www.canonwatch.com/?p=4548#comment-2838 Not surprise. It’s expected according to the reviews and comments over Internet.

]]> By: Alex http://www.canonwatch.com/dxo-marks-published-and-then-not/#comment-2753 Alex Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:16:40 +0000 http://www.canonwatch.com/?p=4548#comment-2753 I think after this score and the hardware issues reported lately, 5DMkIII’s $3500 price tag seems excesive…

]]> By: nikonian http://www.canonwatch.com/dxo-marks-published-and-then-not/#comment-2749 nikonian Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:47:38 +0000 http://www.canonwatch.com/?p=4548#comment-2749 81. And yet again, Nikon suckeredpunched C***on in the face!

]]>