-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Not so good as A6500 or even A6300 according to DXOMARK
- Thread starter Tommy S
- Start date
J
jb12
Guest
Dont worry, Advent1sam will enlighten you 
Stop thinking. These are just so-so numbers. Go out and visualize worthy scenes and work on your composition skills and on pp.
Stop Thinking! Thinking is not part of the visual arts, nor of the musical ones .... in my book.
Think philosophical thoughts, societal thoughts, about science problems etc, but shun it in the arts, please.
Stop Thinking! Thinking is not part of the visual arts, nor of the musical ones .... in my book.
Think philosophical thoughts, societal thoughts, about science problems etc, but shun it in the arts, please.
QuietOC
Veteran Member
There are the results at Photonstophotos as a counterpoint.
I've asked Bill Claff if sample variation could explain such discrepancies, and he said he didn't find much variation.
As an engineer the test should state the ambient conditions.
I've asked Bill Claff if sample variation could explain such discrepancies, and he said he didn't find much variation.
As an engineer the test should state the ambient conditions.
Adam-T
Forum Pro
............ on DXO for APS-c at 87 way to go old DSLR
the 6600 is lower than the A6400 too ranking it second to lowest in the a6k series - it is better than the 6yr old a6000 though whoopeedoo !!
but like ‘photons to photos’ it’s just meaningless measurebating, of little value in the wide world ..
I have an 8yr old canon G1X mk1 , got it new feb 2012 , it’s done nearly 50k shots and still use it for theatrical costume shoots (on dummies) as it’s convenient with the twisty screen, remote control and flash shoe and lovely canon colours. ,, for a laugh i took it out in raw mode to do some walkabout photography to see how it fared after all these years . Knockout images from the edge to edge sharp lens and weak AA filter , no more sky noise than the EOS-M6-II and better shadow recovery than the penny GX80 I had .. best of all in Capture 1 the pics had a liquid vibrancy usually only got with L lenses ....................this camera measurebates to about 60 on DXO , probably isn’t even listed on Pharts-to-protons ... who cares when the pics are lovely even at 20x16’
--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **
the 6600 is lower than the A6400 too ranking it second to lowest in the a6k series - it is better than the 6yr old a6000 though whoopeedoo !!
but like ‘photons to photos’ it’s just meaningless measurebating, of little value in the wide world ..
I have an 8yr old canon G1X mk1 , got it new feb 2012 , it’s done nearly 50k shots and still use it for theatrical costume shoots (on dummies) as it’s convenient with the twisty screen, remote control and flash shoe and lovely canon colours. ,, for a laugh i took it out in raw mode to do some walkabout photography to see how it fared after all these years . Knockout images from the edge to edge sharp lens and weak AA filter , no more sky noise than the EOS-M6-II and better shadow recovery than the penny GX80 I had .. best of all in Capture 1 the pics had a liquid vibrancy usually only got with L lenses ....................this camera measurebates to about 60 on DXO , probably isn’t even listed on Pharts-to-protons ... who cares when the pics are lovely even at 20x16’
--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **
Last edited:
Advent1sam
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 9,089
- Solutions
- 6
- Reaction score
- 4,212
It's interesting for sure, they see the max dr as iso50 when we all know it's a 1 stop pushed value, so not sure if dxo have lost the plot on this one! They do correlate with Bill on the noise, ie it's the best aps-c sensor for noise they ever measured, so high praise there. But the dr is a marked difference from photon to photos.
I have no answer except that dxo have made a mistake as the 1 stop push is obvious at iso50, there is no way it has more dr at that setting and I seem to remember they said as much for other sony sensors with iso50!
For me it is not a problem of ranking A6600 so low. I am perplexed as far as DXOmark way of measuring A6600 so low.
Advent1sam
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 9,089
- Solutions
- 6
- Reaction score
- 4,212
depends who you believe, the a6600 beats the d7200 on noise, on that ptp and dxo agree. I am sticking with ptp as there is no way iso50 is better than iso100, dxo messed up, again!
Advent1sam
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 9,089
- Solutions
- 6
- Reaction score
- 4,212
well, it is what it is, they have made an error in the base iso, there is no way iso50 is higher than iso100, it's just not possible! Just trust in ptp, Bill is much better these days than dxo, who are more interested in mobiles!
Adam-T
Forum Pro
They did that with the RX10 mk3 and you know what , thy were right, I get cleaner skies (cleaner than m43 or what I’ve seen from the m6-2) just as much shadow recovery as iso100 and no less highlights at that iso .. thought it was a peculiarity of the rx10s Bsi 1” sensor but maybe the 6600s pipeline has been improved so dr is better at iso50... I use the rx10 at that supposed pulled iso of 64 all the time . Never would use pulled ISO’s with any m43 cam i had
--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **
Last edited:
Advent1sam
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 9,089
- Solutions
- 6
- Reaction score
- 4,212
Adam, I await Bill's comment, as it stands there is no way the dr of iso50 is greater than iso100, its base, the noise might well be lower but the dr is simply not greater!
Adam-T
Forum Pro
I was amazed that it is on the RX10 (maybe iso64 isn’t pulled and they call it a pulled iso to stop ppl using it all the time as a base iso and complaining about shaky shots ? - (who knows with Sony ) .. have you tried iso50 as a base and pulled the raws around in the 6600 .... if you ha6ve and ISO100 is bettter then tell DXO . More measurbating to the nth degree won’t tell us anything , how malleable the files are in real life will and you’re the guy to do it !!..
--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **
Last edited:
Advent1sam
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 9,089
- Solutions
- 6
- Reaction score
- 4,212
Adam, I have checked the files in raw digger, they are exactly 1 stop pushed!
Adam-T
Forum Pro
Right ok ...
Michael Fritzen
Veteran Member
Hi,
just to take into account the logarithmic nature of the ISO comparison values - which means that low numeric differences mean nothing relevant. Something meaningful only perhaps for differences of some hundrets onwards.
So real nothing to be worried about here.
just to take into account the logarithmic nature of the ISO comparison values - which means that low numeric differences mean nothing relevant. Something meaningful only perhaps for differences of some hundrets onwards.
So real nothing to be worried about here.
dr jim
Veteran Member
Why in the world do people torment themselves over this stuff? There's not a rat's ass worth of difference between them, certainly nothing you would bed able to discern visually. Just my opinion, and I'm not going to sell my A6400.
Adam-T
Forum Pro
100% ........ Hopefully it`ll help cure our Sam and others of this dreaded curse of Measurbating disease . it`s whether it does what you need / has the features you want and the results put a smile on your (and others) face which counts .
Who cares what it scores if it ticks all the boxes ... Time for a Photography against Measurbating campaign
dr jim
Veteran Member
I should learn to proof read. That should say I'm not going to sell my A6600
Black Elk
Well-known member
Well said. And, the a6600 has the same sensor and AF as the "lowly" a6100. The a6600 is Sony's flag ship?
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum