Has DXO got it's head up it's *ss?

[Paul Szilard]

I got another promo from DXO this morning, advertising how great they are and how many awards they had recently collected and the ever expanding range of supported cameras.

Unfortunately their management seems to be completely ignoring the Fuji X cameras, which are gaining popularity in leaps and bounds. Fuji is introducing new high quality lenses, new bodies and many pro's and prosumers are embracing the Fuji X cams (my humble self included), yet DXO refuses to support their new(-ish) sensors.

I had written to DXO on more than one occasion, and they just pump out the standard party line.

[/rant] I just had to get it off my chest. Sorry guys

 

[Richard Weisgrau]

Q: Has DXO got it's head up it's *ss?

A: Yes!

 

[toomanycanons]

No.

 

[Ernie Misner]

I understand they still have no adjustment brush???

 

[OpticsEngineer]

Yes.

DXO has stated that their testing methodology does not yield results on X-Trans sensors that make any sense.

What that means, if you connect the dots, is that their testing methodology lacks a good basis in how their results relate to human visual performance. If they had that fundamental knowledge, it would be no big deal to make the connection to Fuji sensors.

But at least it is better this way. If they did report results on Fuji sensors, we can be pretty sure they would be nonsensical. I am just glad DXO is willing to admit defeat rather than publish the nonsensical results.

If I remember correctly, they also had to admit defeat on the Sony A77 and did not publish results for that sensor. (please someone correct me if I am wrong on that account)

 

[hotdog321]

I used to think that the DxO criticism was just nonsense generated by disgruntled fanboys, but their most recent analysis of the Canon 16-35 f/4L IS seems completely at odds with the LensRentals tests and my own experience. Some of their tests seem dead on, but other times . . .

 

[Paul Szilard]

I can only speak for myself, but I used to like DXO and kept buying the license upgrades until they gave up with the Fuji X-TRANS sensor. I have 3 Fuji cameras, so it is Good Bye DXO for me. I just think it is amazing that a company that claims to have industry leading tech, can't cope with something even though many others can.

 

[eeper]

Yes.

DXO has stated that their testing methodology does not yield results on X-Trans sensors that make any sense.

What that means, if you connect the dots, is that their testing methodology lacks a good basis in how their results relate to human visual performance. If they had that fundamental knowledge, it would be no big deal to make the connection to Fuji sensors.

But at least it is better this way. If they did report results on Fuji sensors, we can be pretty sure they would be nonsensical. I am just glad DXO is willing to admit defeat rather than publish the nonsensical results.

If I remember correctly, they also had to admit defeat on the Sony A77 and did not publish results for that sensor. (please someone correct me if I am wrong on that account)

Essentially you're saying DXO are idiots because they don't do Fuji. Most camera's use a common sensor design so it's pretty easy to test, however for Fuji x-trans they are a different design making it harder to decipher the results because they're not Fuji engineers. That's like getting mad at Honda for not being able to get an audi engine management chip to work on their Civic engines. Technically it could work but at what cost to reverse engineer it just to even work, let alone get the most out of it.

With most camera's it hey I have an acura engine management chip, I know how that works because I have the input/output specs, change a couple things then plug it in.

So what you're saying is that you would rather have them crap out something even though it's nothing special, only to turn around and criticize them for not much more than whats out of the camera? It's not worth the time and money to really go after the fuji x-trans sensors from their perspective.

I'm not trying to defend dxo or fuji, just don't like seeing people bash companies because they don't support their use case. There are other software raw editors for Fuji, just that most people find that they don't really do the camera's justice.

 

[ranalli]

I got another promo from DXO this morning, advertising how great they are and how many awards they had recently collected and the ever expanding range of supported cameras.

Unfortunately their management seems to be completely ignoring the Fuji X cameras, which are gaining popularity in leaps and bounds. Fuji is introducing new high quality lenses, new bodies and many pro's and prosumers are embracing the Fuji X cams (my humble self included), yet DXO refuses to support their new(-ish) sensors.

I had written to DXO on more than one occasion, and they just pump out the standard party line.

[/rant] I just had to get it off my chest. Sorry guys

 

[justinwonnacott]

Even if this company adds support for the xtrans sensor I cannot see myself as a customer. Post processing is onerous enough for me without adding a third "module" to my workflow (LR and PS.) What I have works quite well and I would rather concentrate on shooting and editing than post processing.

I also find their Camera and lens testing results confusing and difficult to compare with other laboratories. Cannot be bothered.

 

[ranalli]

Even if this company adds support for the xtrans sensor I cannot see myself as a customer. Post processing is onerous enough for me without adding a third "module" to my workflow (LR and PS.) What I have works quite well and I would rather concentrate on shooting and editing than post processing.

I also find their Camera and lens testing results confusing and difficult to compare with other laboratories. Cannot be bothered.

Exactly..between LR and PS what more do most photographers really need? With the exception of DxO's very specific perspective corrections that one might use for architectural type stuff I have no need.

Who has time to be bothered with that?

 

[justinwonnacott]

You know . . . when it comes to architecture and perspective corrections . . . a prime lens, stepstool and a level tripod can save a lot of time later! Photoshop usually gets me out of any trouble that remains.

Post processing eh? - it is the elephant in the room nobody seems to acknowledge when quoting for a job. Nobody wants to admit how big a task it is - or pay big bucks for it. I want it as simple as I can make it and still be able to deliver the quality I need.

 

[ritmikov]

Might be better for DXO to concentrate effort on programming rather than marketing.

Over one minute for 'Prime' noise reduction? The time the program takes to open is bad enough.

I almost expected results to come out punched on paper tape.

 

[ranalli]

You know . . . when it comes to architecture and perspective corrections . . . a prime lens, stepstool and a level tripod can save a lot of time later! Photoshop usually gets me out of any trouble that remains.

Post processing eh? - it is the elephant in the room nobody seems to acknowledge when quoting for a job. Nobody wants to admit how big a task it is - or pay big bucks for it. I want it as simple as I can make it and still be able to deliver the quality

I need.

I agree...getting it right in-camera is huge in that particular arena.