DxO Labs added scores for three Sony SLRs to its site for image sensor tests. (Click to enlarge.)
(Credit: DxO Labs)Three midrange Sony SLRs now are included in DxO Labs' measurements of image sensor performance, and the Alpha A700 proves to be reasonably competitive.
Sony's A700, which costs about $1,100 with an 18-70mm lens, has a score of 66.3 on the test, which calculates how well the sensor handles color, a range brightness and darkness, and low-light shooting. That puts it behind the top-scoring camera with a comparably sized sensor, the Nikon D90, almost ties it with the Pentax K10D and Nikon D300, and gives it a a few points' lead over Canon's 40D and 50D.
Meanwhile, the A200 scores 62.9 and the A300 an even 64, according to the DxOMark Sensor test results that were updated Tuesday. A five-point difference makes a difference of about 1/3 stop in exposure, DxO says, meaning that a higher-scoring camera can attain the same raw image quality as a rival even though the higher-scoring camera is using a faster exposure or higher ISO.
DxO Labs, a French company, makes a business of measuring camera image quality, developing technology for image-processing hardware and software, and selling software to convert the raw files produced by higher-end cameras into less flexible but more convenient formats such as JPEG. The DxOMark score measures sensor performance based on the raw file, a foundation for overall image quality but only a facet of a camera's overall performance.
... Read More
X-Rite's vision-straining color test.
(Credit: X-Rite)There are some Web quizzes out there that are fun. Then there's X-Rite's test of how well you can distinguish between subtle differences in hue.
X-Rite, which wants you to buy its technology for precisely calibrating your monitor's colors, published the test, which requires you to put 100 colored chits in the right order. It presents you with a score and a color chart showing where you're unreliable.
I confess I enjoyed taking the test--it was intriguing to pay that much attention to the subtle color perception. For example, the part I found easiest also turned out to be the color range where I made the most errors.
Overall, I scored 90, which is better than random but nowhere near Michael Johnston's score of 4 (lower is better). The site shows how your score compares to your peers' scores, but only crudely: it's too bad there's no frequency distribution to show better how people fared.
I'm not sure how much faith to put in the test, which probably scores your monitor's quality and your patience as well as your visual abilities. But if nothing else, it's a good marketing gimmick.
My mediocre score on the test.
(Credit: CNET News)Update 6:50 a.m. PDT October 10: Yup, the technology you're using makes a big difference. Thursday's test was on a Lenovo laptop, but then I redid my test on my home machine's high-gamut Dell 2408WFP monitor. My new score was a less disgraceful 17--and the test was much easier, taking me only about half the time.
One more little tidbit: Lori Grunin, who gauges color fidelity all day long as she reviews cameras for CNET, scored a perfect zero. She uses a Sony Artisan CRT monitor.
My score was less embarrassing using the higher-end monitor I have at home.
(Credit: CNET News)- prev
- 1
- next
