Welcome to our studio test scene

After many, many months of design and testing we are happy to announce the official unveiling of our studio test scene. The new scene was designed to address certain drawbacks with the previous test scene, as well as providing the opportunity to show more real-world relevant information about how cameras behave. We've increased the number of cameras supported to 23 and we'll be continuing to add models (old and new) in the coming weeks.

You can read a more detailed explanation of the scene, what it offers, how we shoot it and why we needed it in an article by our Studio Manager, Kelcey Smith.

Click here to find out more about the studio scene

Here you can see the studio scene based around our reference camera - the 80MP Phase One IQ180.

The Phase One is included to showcase the scene, rather than the camera, so will remain in daylight mode, even if you switch other cameras across to low light mode.

Comments

Total comments: 274
123
Herbert234
By Herbert234 (5 months ago)

The following cameras RAW downloads are broken; please fix them.

Canon S120
Fuji X-E2
Fuji XQ1
Nikon D3200
Olympus Stylus 1
Panasonic LF1
Panasonic LX7
Sony Alpha-NEX 5T
Sony RX 100 II
Sony A58

0 upvotes
RoxanneY
By RoxanneY (6 months ago)

Fantastic!

Please add Sony's a77 and a99 to your list.

1 upvote
ValeryD
By ValeryD (6 months ago)

Very impressive!

1 upvote
Tom Rush
By Tom Rush (6 months ago)

Great to see this comparison on dpreview. I’ve tested an IQ180 against a D800 myself and of course got similar results. In my more real world tests though the IQ180 is a lot harder to use in certain situations, like in a dark church, but then you’d expect that given its ISO range. It makes up for these shortcomings against the D800 in the studio or for landscapes which is why I want to add one to my permanent bag when funds allow. :-)

0 upvotes
qcofoto
By qcofoto (6 months ago)

I feel so very happy, because I have a d800 and look the difference is so close, I think that take a great chance buy this camera. 36mpx vs 80mpx, wow so many pixels, but 36 is to much detail for me. I shoot portrait, landscapes and pet , the d800 show the best tool in any condition scene, just awesome

0 upvotes
deep7
By deep7 (6 months ago)

While you can see some resolution difference comparing the D800 to it's closer competitors, the IQ180 whips the D800 in a way that leaves no doubt which is better. It's night and day. Fantastic!

0 upvotes
Chris Suton
By Chris Suton (6 months ago)

The IQ180 is very impressive, but unless the end result is huge poster prints I just see it as a huge waste of money. If you are shooting for even a two page spread you won't see the benefit and it's overkill and pointless. Over twice the resolution but 10 - 12 times the price.
If I win the national lottery I'll have two bodies with prime lenses on each - until then I'll stick with either the 5DmkIII or D800.

0 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (7 months ago)

Is there a problem with the RX1 R? It has softer corners than an APS format, and at the center, it doesn't resolve any better.

0 upvotes
peter zuehlke
By peter zuehlke (7 months ago)

looking at the paint tubes in the lower right of the scene in "low light" mode the edges of the cast shadows from the tube to the background are much softer in the iq180 shot than the 5DIII or D800 images. Looks like positioning and distance of the light changed. Is this really sensor / lens difference?

0 upvotes
Laszlo13
By Laszlo13 (7 months ago)

How on earth do you get to the new test scene from the menus? If you go to the studio test scene menu, and select a camera for which samples from thew new test scene are available (E-M5 for example) it still takes you to the old test scene.

1 upvote
John Miles
By John Miles (7 months ago)

FZ50 please

0 upvotes
ThePassenger
By ThePassenger (7 months ago)

Lots of good ideas:
- comeback of the two line-charts. I missed them in the previous test-scene.
- PhaseOne reference rocks! Its resolution is incredible and very useful to compare details.
- dim light function: cool, but I wonder if it is really reproducible
- print and web- buttons: gets us back to the real world

Well done dpr !

0 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (7 months ago)

in what respect would it not be reproducible? These are fixed lights built into the scene.

0 upvotes
ThePassenger
By ThePassenger (7 months ago)

In your explanation of the new studio scene you wrote: "The light source used in this low-light mode is a single standard household tungsten bulb ..." I am not sure, if this light source delivers reproducible light e.g. in terms of colour temerature or light distribution during its time of operation. Perhaps you could give some further information.

And...do you have a spare one ? ;-))

Anyway, I appreciate this new scene!

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
solsang
By solsang (7 months ago)

It would be really useful to have a lamp shining somewhere in the setup, that would show reflections which happen in real life, especially indoor and at night.

0 upvotes
JGonzo
By JGonzo (7 months ago)

It would be nice if there was an option to show the comparison windows to the right of the overall window - most of us use a wide format screen (16x9) on our computers. Scrolling up and down to access the cursor is a major pain when changing the viewing area - maybe your web site page can be rearranged when using this great tool !!! Thanks

0 upvotes
solsang
By solsang (7 months ago)

What about the full screen mode :)

0 upvotes
PhilPreston3072
By PhilPreston3072 (7 months ago)

Yeah, choose the full screen mode.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

the full screen mode is too small screen.

would like to see a 1600 x 900 full screen, though I don't think anyone who is serious at imaging has a display less than 1920 x 1080.

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
audiobomber
By audiobomber (7 months ago)

This comparator is brilliant, best of its ilk on the net, by far.

Why were WB and exposure corrected for some cameras? I think the jpeg images should be taken at default settings, with no adjustments. That would be useful for people who don't know or care what all the buttons are for. Raw shows the rest of us what we need to know.

Note, ISO 12800 for the K500 is missing. Please add the K-5 IIs.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
PhilPreston3072
By PhilPreston3072 (7 months ago)

I actually prefer that Jpegs have WB and exposure are corrected. It makes comparing colour palettes of different manufacturers much easier and consistent.

Raws are processed through third party software so you're not really getting the manufacturers colours.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

DPReview strongly prefer non-corrected images that they eliminated the base for comparison (same exposure) in favor of that.

comparator is not designed for comparison of image qualities but default camera settings.

0 upvotes
Ciskje
By Ciskje (7 months ago)

There is an hot pixel (purple) defect on the >800 ISO Canon 70d on the green plant on the lower left corner with lamp illumination!!!

1 upvote
Pythagoras
By Pythagoras (7 months ago)

why didn't you put a real white person in there instead of four people all with dark hair and dark eyes and olive or darker-colored skin? what about us poor pale bastards?

1 upvote
PhilPreston3072
By PhilPreston3072 (7 months ago)

Who'd want to photograph them? :D

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

we get old, put on or lose weight, get pale or sunburned, ...

0 upvotes
barjohn
By barjohn (7 months ago)

Will you be adding the Leica cameras? I really like this new setup. When will it replace the older one on the site?

1 upvote
PhilPreston3072
By PhilPreston3072 (7 months ago)

I love the 4 portrait shots in the new test scene. You can really see the slight skin tone differences between camera brands.

0 upvotes
pixelpro
By pixelpro (7 months ago)

I'm curious - The Olympus OM-D E-M5 and the PEN E-P5 have identical sensors and processors. The lens specs for each test are identical. Yet the E-M5 samples are consistently higher quality than the PEN throughout the image, at all ISOs, in low light or regular, JPEG or RAW. What other factors are at play here?

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (7 months ago)

Although the E-M5 shots say a 45mm f1.8 was used, download the photos and you will discover a 50mm f2 was used.

1 upvote
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (7 months ago)

Compared to E-P5 files to the E-M1. E-M1 as expected is sharper due to no AA filter but the quality of the E-P5 files drops off at the edges by the time you get to the cards. That does seem very odd.

0 upvotes
pixelpro
By pixelpro (7 months ago)

Thanks for this, Stu. So there is contradictory information in the lens stats...huh. Not much value in this comparison then, except to reiterate how good the 50/2.0 is, which we all know by now! I'd really like to know if the E-P5 stacks up to the E-M5.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

maybe Oly had less confidence when they designed E-M5 that they tuned NR too strong. then they made it less strong for E-P5 so images come with more noise but higher image quality.

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Marc Heijligers
By Marc Heijligers (7 months ago)

If you compare the RX1R and the D800, you can see that the light is not consistent. The light on the pallets is different, not showing the metal texture of the pallet for the RX1R. You can see also see the difference at the paint tubes.

0 upvotes
DELETED88781
By DELETED88781 (7 months ago)

What about Video resolution/Noise studio test scene?
Video is integral part of the IQ assessment this days.

Very easy to activate video and capture a single still at the exact same setup

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
rfsIII
By rfsIII (7 months ago)

Waaahhhh!!!! There's no substitute for megapixels and German lenses! The Phase is just so much better than every other camera! Where am I going to get $47,000? I may have to switch to watercolors...at least the water is free.

Great job DPR! You've really created a useful scene--especially in the middle to outer parts of the frame where all the really great photographs are.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
domina
By domina (7 months ago)

and what lens was used for each camera? it's more important to test the lens rather than the camera. The tool should allow to select the lens first, the camera second.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

See the i symbol in the low right corner. They just use random sharp lenses. For example, for NEX-6 they use Alpha-mount DT 50/1.8 through adapter - a combination almost no customer will ACTUALLY use given that the camera comes with a kit 16-50 and a reasonably priced native 50/1.8 OSS is available.
Also, who cares about resolution at portrait FLs and portrait distances with portrait lenses? Who actually strives to show every pore on the face of your victim? ;)
Their tests would be so much more useful with kit lenses at 28mm eq for static scenes and 75-85 mm eq for AF tracking - all at least 2m high.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (7 months ago)

In the long run, we may begin showing the behaviour of the kit lenses (separately).

These shots are about showing what the camera is capable of. We try to make sure there are plenty of real-world shots with the kit lenses in our galleries.

3 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

"We try to make sure there are plenty of real-world shots with the kit lenses in our galleries."

Unfortunately, they are all different in different conditions so not directly comparable.
As it is so far, the test scene might fool a person who does not know the details into thinking the camera kit will give better results than it actually is.
Thinking about it, I would test just by setting shutter speed (say, 1/1000 to test the most common speed able to freeze human body motion, like running children) and varying light. Whatever aperture and ISO a camera selects (and the kit lens would allow) is what the most people would get, underexposure, overexposure etc.

0 upvotes
Artpt
By Artpt (7 months ago)

Way to go DPReview!

Camera Manufacturers and advertisers, take notice. This is the main reason why I check this site. As a camera enthusiast, I purchase camera related products mainly because of this site. My opinion here is voluntary and without precondition.

I have no bias towards any camera systems, and I have changed camera system all together in the past based on the best camera for me. I am probably not the only one that fits into this marketing population.

Keep up the good work...and let your advertisers know that!

0 upvotes
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (7 months ago)

Your Olympus E-M5 Raw files show they are taken with a 45mm f1.8 when you hover over the 'i' button for information but when you download them them they have been taken on a 50mm f2. You need to either reshoot them with a 45mm f1.8 or reshoot the E-M1 files with a 50mm f2.

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

50/2 through adapter does not make sense on either.

0 upvotes
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (7 months ago)

No peevee1 it would not but at least it would be an even playing field.

0 upvotes
DaveR43
By DaveR43 (7 months ago)

Excellent ,thanks. One request. The 'Print' size appears to be set for 8 Mp (howering the mouse over the tab shows this); I thought your goal was to set the print size for an A2 print - which realistically would need a lot higher resolution than 8 Mp?

At 300 dpi and A2 print of 23.4 x 16.5:

23.4 x 16.5 X 300 x 300 = 34,749,000 or 34 Mp.

I guess you were assuming 150 dpi - the same calculation then gives 8,867,250... i.e. about 8 Mp.

Would it be possible to have a second tab set to e.g. 24 Mp, since a lot of cameras have that resolution or very close? With upscaling for cameras with lower resolution sensors? 24 Mp would be roughly equivalent to an A2 print at 254 dpi, which I know some labs use.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

Tokyo will have 8K broadcast (maybe cable first) by 2020.
we will have 8K screens the size of a bed in livingroom.
I think displays will go 16K a couple of years after that.

many of B0 posters will be replaced by flat displays.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

would appreciate if possible, to have several print sizes (pixel counts) that the highest resolution is automatically chosen among the current cameras compared.

of same size with same pixel counts, print mode is still not good for comparison between different aspect ratios for they have different magnifications (3:2 images are stretched 12.5% larger thus lower image quality).

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (7 months ago)

@yabokkie - on the basis the images were shot per-height, the downsized images are also based on a common height, not a common output resolution.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (7 months ago)

@DaveR43 - I don't know where you got the idea of A2 at 300 dpi.

These are around 8MP because it gives A3 at around 200dpi or nearer 300dpi for a 10 x 8.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

> not a common output resolution.

I see a common resolution for the common 4:3 area. the left and right of a 3:2 sensor are effectively cut off by DPReview already (or same number of pixels for a certain subject, which doesn't translate to same fraction of sensor area though, the test always favors 4:3 sensors by 0.17 stops).

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
DaveR43
By DaveR43 (7 months ago)

@R Butler - maybe I was mistaken about your intentions.

The issue is that the 8 MP test doesn't differentiate the cameras sufficiently - they all look pretty good at ISO 6400. 8MP/A3 is not really looking at the real-world situations where it would really matter - for example in wedding photography, where low light is a frequent issue, and where big enlargements are needed to fill a double-page album spread - 24 " or 600mm. Hence my interest in an A2 test at reasonable dpi. Which as above, translates to 20-24 MP.

0 upvotes
Advent1sam
By Advent1sam (7 months ago)

The test scene is now fairly irrelevant imo? Such is the step-up in iq from the d800 to the phase1 the bench in now so high as percieved against a phase1 I think you have used the wrong test scene. You should of used at most the 40mp MF 645D and probably the d800 as the benchmark and then pulled back for possible future iterations of the sensor upto 40mp+ As it stands the phase1 essentially demonstrates the detail at which the d800 should of been able to detect, ie you have too big a scene and you are too far away!

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (7 months ago)

You're suggesting we should have a scene that the current highest resolution mainstream camera can already out-resolve?

If we set the D800 as a benchmark, then we have to start all over again (which is a hugely expensive process in terms of man-hours), as soon as anything out-performs it.

4 upvotes
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (7 months ago)

Exactly, you have designed the test board with room to grow as far as resolution goes. Totally the right move.

2 upvotes
ErikvdH
By ErikvdH (7 months ago)

One more thing, if you bring back the watch, somewhere in the bottom right corner please...

1 upvote
ET2
By ET2 (7 months ago)

You can't bring back the "watch" as it will look totally different (tiny) in this much bigger scene.

0 upvotes
ErikvdH
By ErikvdH (7 months ago)

Not if it's possible to zoom in once or twice in the detail windows.
At this moment it is not possible to see the difference in resolution in some comparisons anyway.

2 upvotes
ErikvdH
By ErikvdH (7 months ago)

I still have to force myself to look at the new test scene. The old one just looked much better and I really miss my favorite object, the watch. Is it not possible to replace some doubles (brushes with paint tubes and playing cards with the color wheel with some real life items, like the watch and the robot? Items like this tell me so much more than the portrait photos. The need to have these items double escapes me. And I miss a shadow detail item like the old box with yarn bobbins. I also think it should be possible to zoom in further in the detail windows. Now it is in some comparisons impossible to see difference in resolution, for instance the banknote and brushes.
In the end I will get used to the new test scene, but there is (my opinion) room for improvement.
Your site is the best!

3 upvotes
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (7 months ago)

Doubling is hugely important. In fact everything should be quadrupled apart from what is in the centre. When you switch to the tungsten setting it allows you to compare the darker area on the left to the brighter area on the right. That way you can see what quality is being lost and if you download the files what effect noise reduction has on raw. It is also a way of telling if the lens/camera is aligned up correctly to the test board.

1 upvote
Aquaroid
By Aquaroid (7 months ago)

I miss the shadow detail part and the watch. Generally I hardly see a serious difference between similar cameras on the new test scene. The old one was much more obvious. IMHO, it is a step down!
The site is the best!

1 upvote
Juraj Lacko
By Juraj Lacko (7 months ago)

Thanks guy for what are you doing. I would appreciate if you could also test camera bodies with kit lenses. Would be interesting to see what can can combo do straight out of box. I know its fine to know what can you expect from prime lens+camera but still it would be interesting IMHO

1 upvote
Sho-Bud
By Sho-Bud (7 months ago)

It looks that there is something wrong with the Olympus E-P5 scene.

There is a lot less detail than in the E-PL5 and OM-D5 scenes.
It might be a good idea to check if all settings were correct.

2 upvotes
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (7 months ago)

Your quite right. Just had a look myself. It is really bad in places.

The bottom right appears to be the worse area.

Also it shows the E-M5 was used at f4.5 where the other three cameras were set to f5.6.

Comment edited 15 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Sho-Bud
By Sho-Bud (7 months ago)

Now you've done it. I need a Phase One camera.

1 upvote
Cihangir Gzey
By Cihangir Gzey (7 months ago)

Are you sure!? Check out the upper left corner of the test scene (and my below message)

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

Don't be fooled, read DPR comment. It is a single picture in every light setting.

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

Dear DPR,

you have missed the opportunity to make the test much more useful for more people, by testing what most people ACTUALLY use - the kit lenses!

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

DxOMark's lens-camera pair test is only one way of thinking.

1 upvote
PhilPreston3072
By PhilPreston3072 (7 months ago)

Then all the people who don't use kit lenses will complain. There are plenty of other sites like slrgear.com that test the whole gamut of lenses for you. Here we want to see how the sensor performs with a decent lens.

1 upvote
Cihangir Gzey
By Cihangir Gzey (7 months ago)

CAMERA DEFECTS OBSERVED!

OMG! Just check out the upper left side pallet for various cameras at various ISO settings such that there is a horizontal line crossing through the middle of brown brush-creme brush and sponge. Below that line is dark, upper side is normal. ALL CAMERAS show that defect. Some start just at ISO100, some at higher ISO's. WTH? Defected CD, harddisk, memory card, etc? Or a real sensor problem?
I guess there is a weak spot in all cameras sensors or processing ways since it is very unlikely to record the same scene to bad media for all cameras which will show up the same defected place(since all photo sizes are different for all different cams). If it is a known fact but I haven't heard of that well known defect, pardon me for my ignorance which resulted after pixel peeping. But after now, I know where to look at for ALL TESTS! :)
I am curious whether PHASE ONE IQ180 also shows up this defect for upper ISO settings(at ISO35 there is no defect in that camera's photo)

1 upvote
Cihangir Gzey
By Cihangir Gzey (7 months ago)

Some cameras have rectangular defected areas (NIKON D800, D7100, SONY NEX6, PENTAX K500 which is on the upper left side or top of the sponge). I guess these cameras share the same sensor and same defect! :)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Cihangir Gzey
By Cihangir Gzey (7 months ago)

IMHO, this new test scene showed the fault of the whole camera industry (however all RAW images show the same defect as well).The situation is even more serious since ALL RAW IMAGES are not RAW but they look processed as well! Why on earth a RAW image shows the same JPEG conversion failures as well. So, all our RAW images are pre-processed RAW images (which look cleaner than the real RAW). Believe it or not both ISO35 JPG and RAW images of IQ180 shows the same failure as well. I lost all my trust to digital cams. I am ready to be prohibited from pixelpeeping forever and/or forced to live on an island with a Large Format film camera!

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
1 upvote
IvanM
By IvanM (7 months ago)

If you ever wondered how the D800 stacks up against medium format...wonder no more....

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

it shows us the fact that we are pixel count challenged.
D800 is a small step in the right direction.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (7 months ago)

LOL...nevermind the Phase One uses a huge lens, a huge sensor, and huge pixels and all extremely high quality with a price to match. That doesn't have anything to do with the Phase One killing everything else in terms of detail resolution.

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
dszc
By dszc (7 months ago)

Thank you, dpReview, for all you do and for trying to deal with this issue.
But your current effort is very disappointing. I understand the difficulties and intent, but this is not a good solution. With a lack of 3-D curved objects, it is very difficult to see how the cameras do in attempting to draw subtle tonal gradations. Also, another critical element is how they do handling real skin tones, including the very difficult yellows and magentas in some skin - does it make it blotchy or does it render it smoothly. There are many other issues too.
For my purposes, the Imaging Resources test target does a much better job.

2 upvotes
PhilPreston3072
By PhilPreston3072 (7 months ago)

You want to volunteer some of your REAL skin? Just make sure it doesn't age with time.

1 upvote
Brandon birder
By Brandon birder (7 months ago)

Where are the feathers?
These were what I used as a bird photographer to assess what the cameras made of fine complex detail. Please put some feathers (like the green one by the blue vw in the old studio scene) back again.
Otherwise, very good job and more useful.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
ragmanjin
By ragmanjin (7 months ago)

The feathers are near the bottom left and top right, sticking out from the green fuzzy things. Matter of fact, it looks liek the green fuzzy things have green feathers at the bottoms of them. Check it out in the 180 reference shot

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Brandon birder
By Brandon birder (7 months ago)

Thanks , found them.

0 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (7 months ago)

GEEZ, the IQ180 can even resolve the texture of the backing paper, there's a scratch on the right of the water colours on the top left.

3 upvotes
ragmanjin
By ragmanjin (7 months ago)

You can even read the dates on all three of the Canadian coins with the Phase. 1990, 1958 and 1962. To everyone over the past year in these forums who've tried to tell me the D800's OK, medium format's outdated or that AA filters are there for the betterment of the photos, here's your proof. And DPR, please add the K-5 IIs to the cameras on this test scene :D thanks!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Podz
By Podz (7 months ago)

I like the choice of the banknote, it has very small details :)

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

would prefer an easily available one, like Hamilton or Romanesque arches, for us to compare the image with the real target (this also the reason why different texts are often used).

0 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (7 months ago)

They shoot the full frame cameras at f11? I'm sure that kills the resolution.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (7 months ago)

The only camera we might have shot at f/11 is the Phase One, which is considerably more than full frame.

2 upvotes
lensez
By lensez (7 months ago)

Good job on the new test scene, DPR. After reading about a hundred of these comments I suggest DPR create a limited run of 1,000 suitable for framing prints, on archival paper, of the previous test scene. Sell these to the aficionados who have become emotionally attached to the old scene. Invest the proceeds in faster reviews. It's a win-win.

1 upvote
RStyga
By RStyga (7 months ago)

I hope that DPR will include older cameras that are no longer in production. It is very important to be able to compare with older cameras. Last, PLEASE include Foveon-based and the Pentax 645D cameras!!!

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Anfy
By Anfy (7 months ago)

Including the Fujifilm S5 Pro, which many still own, would be a dream!

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

What, still testing with the different lenses at different apertures and shutter speeds even when the same ones are available? ;)

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

not a big problem if all the apertures on all the lenses are carefully tested, as well as all the shutter speeds used on each tested camera. this is the right way to go.

use of a certain copy of lens for several different mounts can simplify the time consuming process. it may run into problem in the future for sensors of different sizes but could be a good alternative at the moment.

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (7 months ago)

It was a real cruelty that the Phase One IQ180 has been included. Suddenly the IQ of the other cameras has gone stale.

3 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (7 months ago)

I like the IQ180 as a benchmark, how about also adding drum scanned film?

4 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (7 months ago)

Maybe Dpreview can add:
Simulation of the Low light condition. which almost like real condition. (about the candle light dinner light too)
I think it is very important now.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (7 months ago)

I don't think I understand what you're asking for - how does it differ from what you get when you hit the low light (lightbulb) button at the top?

2 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (7 months ago)

With filmmakers using ever-lower light levels (some scenes of "Game of Thrones" were lit with candles and torches) I think he means real candlelight. So go to the local Salvation Army and buy a couple of candelabras, try that for a while.

0 upvotes
tommy leong
By tommy leong (7 months ago)

i thought the shiny paper clips did throw up some artifacts in some camera.
It would be good to have them , maybe near the centre.
Seems a lot of space there.

0 upvotes
Joe Mayer
By Joe Mayer (7 months ago)

I'm happy to see the "crummy light" option. For many of us that are forced to work in poor quality light, it's great to compare how various cameras perform. Thanks dpr.

2 upvotes
tommy leong
By tommy leong (7 months ago)

i have a question.
When you use the 4 circles are near the center,
it seems like D800 out resolve Phase One IQ180
cause the center is much smaller.

( but actually its the reverse )
so how do you use those circles ?
There are no numbers in those circles.

1 upvote
Total comments: 274
123