Thanks, Chuck.
I mean that, for instance, my K-5 gets better scores than the much newer E-M5.
I do not gloat about this, at least because I don't know the system, but my
comment is that the E-M5 seems to be good, but only in the way of being the
best µ43 camera so far. It does not raise the results of µ43, in general,
above those of the higher quality APS-C cameras, in general.
According to these test page(s) . . . it's probably like reading newspapers:
you tend to read the ones whose opinions vindicate your own prejudices :-)
I had already formed my opinions about the E-M5 and it had nothing to do with
the excellent results that its users seem to be getting; it was about using the
electronic viewfinder, primarily.
But it is tempting . . .
Chris
On 29 Sep 2012, at 22:50, Frank Wijsmuller <wijsmuller@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> As I understand it there are some questions about how independent DxO is
> from the companies that fund it. Their methods and scores are not
> unquestioned as well.
>
> I don't know what you mean exactly mean by 'remain better camera's', but
> I'd say it is not fair to call it just 'good -- for a µ43 device'.
>
> Check this link: <
> http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/793%7C0/%28brand%29/Olympus/%28appareil2%29/640%7C0/%28brand2%29/Leica/%28appareil3%29/619%7C0/%28brand3%29/Canon
>> .
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|