On Nov 6, 2010, at 9:42 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: > P N Stenquist wrote: > >> On Nov 6, 2010, at 5:36 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: >> >>> Miserere wrote: >>> >>>> But for the record, DxO Mark is still worthless. >>> >>> Here's an interesting piece that seems to say the same thing, albeit >>> more diplomatically :) >>> http://falklumo.blogspot.com/2009/12/lumolabs-sensors-of-nikon-d700-d5000.html >>> This guy seems to know what he's talking about. >>> >> He does appear knowledgeable, although his analysis is obfuscated to >> the point where it's difficult to judge the accuracy of his >> conclusions. > > Obfuscated is the opposite of what his explanations are! What I > particularly like is how he's completely open about his measurement > process so that anyone could, potentially, duplicate it and > corroborate his findings. The comments and his answers are > particularly illuminating - pun intended! And I liked how he slapped > down the first "anonymous :)
IMO, they're obfuscated to anyone who isn't an engineer. (!). One can be correct and still imponderable. Some plain speak conclusions would be much more helpful for the vast majority of photographers. > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
