Why in all tests and comparisons with 5D2 is no ISO 50 available? See this comparison:http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)287|0(appareil2)279|0(appareil3)205|0(onglet)0(brand)Nikon(brand2)Canon(brand3)NikonBut we know that:Canon 5D has ISO 100 - 6400 native, ISO 50 - 25600 expansionNikon 3Dx has ISO 100 - 1600 native, ISO 50 - 6400 expansionNikon D700 has ISO 200 - 6400 native, ISO 100 - 25600 expansion

ISO 50 isidenticalto ISO 100, with +1 EV bias.

GaborSchwrote:ISO 50 isidenticalto ISO 100, with +1 EV bias.Acording with DxO the D3X has: ISO 50 = 78 ISO 100= 78(see ISO sensitivity):http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)287|0(appareil2)279|0(appareil3)192|0(onglet)0(brand)Nikon(brand2)Canon(brand3)Canon... so, i suppose the D3X do the same trick as Canon 5D2.also, why no ISO 50 for 5D2?Gaborhttp://www.panopeeper.com/panorama/pano.htm

mariusswrote:GaborSchwrote:ISO 50 isidenticalto ISO 100, with +1 EV bias.Acording with DxO the D3X has: ISO 50 = 78 ISO 100= 78YES. That's what I wrote:ISO 50 is IDENTICAL to ISO 100; only the metering is different, which can easily cause overexposure (actually, itshouldcause overexposure).... so, i suppose the D3X do the same trick as Canon 5D2There is no trick here.

Gabor, sorry, but here is my proof that I had right to rise this issue:http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)287|0(appareil2)292|0(appareil3)291|0(onglet)0(brand)Nikon(brand2)Canon(brand3)CanonIts really strange that 1Ds3 and 5D2 have become ISO 50 over night. Good to know that DxO has listen to meGaborSchwrote:mariusswrote:GaborSchwrote:ISO 50 isidenticalto ISO 100, with +1 EV bias.Acording with DxO the D3X has: ISO 50 = 78 ISO 100= 78YES. That's what I wrote:ISO 50 is IDENTICAL to ISO 100; only themetering is different, which can easily cause overexposure (actually, itshouldcause overexposure).... so, i suppose the D3X do the same trick as Canon 5D2There is no trick here.

No really important but interesting is again in favor of Nikon.See this:http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)287|0(appareil2)292|0(appareil3)291|0(onglet)0(brand)Nikon(brand2)Canon(brand3)Canon Nikon D3x has Color Depth: 24,7And here:http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)287|0(appareil2)292|0(appareil3)291|0(onglet)0(brand)Nikon(brand2)Canon(brand3)Canonhas 24,6!Strange, isn't it?!

mariusswrote:No really important but interesting is again in favor of Nikon.Marius, this is not in favour of Nikon vs Canon but of the D3X vs the 5D2.If I had a 5D2, I would have no problem to find out, that another camera costing more than double is better in this area.This aside from my opinion, that the DxO analysis istotalgarbage in this point.

GaborSchwrote:Marius, this is not in favour of Nikon vs Canon but of the D3X vs the 5D2.This issue (no ISO50) has affected 1Ds3 too, not only 5D2.If I had a 5D2, I would have no problem to find out, that another camera costing more than double is better in this area.Of course you have right. I am very happy for Nikon and those who will have a 3Dx.I am only disappointed with DR on the 5D2. There is almost no improvement in DR from ISO400 to ISO100.This aside from my opinion, that the DxO analysis istotalgarbage in this point.I don’t think this either. It’s only strange that these "errors" were only in connection with Canon.

mariusswrote:This issue (no ISO50) has affected 1Ds3 too, not only 5D2This is an advantage.Think about this so: as the quantum efficiency of the sensors are getting better, the well (the "photon bucket") reaches its maximum capacity (of storing electric charge) with lower light collection. If it reaches the capacity at ISO 100, thenit can not functionat ISO 50, because that means collecting twice as much light - but where to put the charge?I am only disappointed with DR on the 5D2. There is almost no improvement in DR from ISO400 to ISO100This too is upside down.ISO 100 is not a "development" of ISO 400Rather, ISO 100 is the basis, and if ISO 200 and ISO 400 come close to it, that reflects that the amplification works excellently, without causing much noise.

GaborSchwrote:This aside from my opinion, that the DxO analysis istotalgarbage in this point.Why do you think the DxO analysis is total garbage?