[kwb]

I was amused enough to actually read dxomark Pentax 645Z sensor review as well as Hasselblad X1D-50c sensor review. I didn't know about this until now, unfortunately I know now, it's all your fault

Anyhow, 645Z review is much more nitpickier, the difference in the way words are chosen is striking. I don't bother to list everything but here's one example.

Look at color depth comments in 645Z sensor review, where Hassy (26.2 bits), 645Z (26.0 bits) and D850 (26.4 bits) are compared:

This graph illustrates where the Nikon D850 wins for Color Sensitivity — that is, at the lowest ISO setting. Once you push the sensitivity (ISO) above that value, it actually drops very slightly behind the two medium-format cameras. Nevertheless, if you want the highest possible Color Sensitivity, the D850 is the one to go for among these three cameras. Of the two medium-format cameras, the Hasselblad X1D-50c is very slightly better at the lowest setting.

OK. But in Hasselblad X1D-50c sensor review, where Sony AR7 II (26.0 bits), the camera with exactly the same color depth score with 645Z, fights instead of 645Z, they say this:

With such slight differences among them as to be indiscernible in the real world, the Hasselblad X1D-50c, the Nikon D850, and the Sony AR7 II sensors all boast excellent color of around 26 bits at base ISO, and very good color of over 20 bits up to ISO 1600 for normalized print results.

Exact same set of scores, but in one report, D850 is the one to go and X1D-50c is slightly above 645Z, that's important enough for them that they needed to highlight the difference using one whole paragraph, in another report the same difference is indiscernible in the real world and they needed to highlight that these are all basically the same.

Sad, I was thinking about switching to dxo from adobe lightroom.

[clackers]

Sad, I was thinking about switching to dxo from adobe lightroom.

Well, they might make for lousy and compromised journalists, but apparently they write decent software ...

[Zygonyx]

Exactly, i don't see the relation, unless revenge embargo.
This said, DxO's Photolab still lacks a few features to be a complete competitor for LR.

[Larrymc]

Well, they might make for lousy and compromised journalists, but apparently they write decent software ...

Regardless of how one thinks they have "dissed' the 645Z (which they have), Its very good software. I'm not into the Adobe Model of Digital Asset Management. I just use a simple folder tree sorted by date and use Zoner ZPS X to do my key wording in but I'm almost hopelessly behind on the key wording thing. What I really like about DXO PhotoLab is the "Prime" noise reduction mode which unfortunately works only upon RAW export or printing. That being said, I think its the best noise reduction available with the possible exception of Capture One Pro 10 which is over twice as expensive and has a Digital Asset Management that I don't need or want.

Another unique feature of PhotoLab is the extensive DXO database of camera and lens combinations called Optics Modules that the program uses and applies corrections as soon as you open a folder that contains RAW images, if you haven't already downloaded the proper Optics Module the software will prompt you to download the needed modules.

There are enough sliders to satisfy most slider freaks.

All in all I think its been a good choice for me and I'm just scratching the surface of its usability.


Larry

[angerdan]

The story which is told by DPReview isn't true. Only question is if the believe what DxO told them or if the know it isn't true.
Reason:
DxO did publish an MF review just six weeks before the test results of the 645Z have been available. DxO officially promised the full 645Z review on 11th october 2017.
Instead of keeping their official statement, they'd choose to use their ressources on other projects and abandon the review. That was seven months ago.
https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Pentax/645Z
https://www.dxomark.com/cameras/launched-between-2002-and-2018/launch_price-...taType=rankDxo

They only managed to put an preview of the 645Z online back in 2014.
https://www.dxomark.com/pentax-645z-preview-pentax-s-affordable-medium-forma...ts-an-upgrade/

Here's what DxO stated:
"Before they could publish, the company decided to pause medium format sensor reviews altogether. "We made a pause on medium format a few years ago just because of our production bandwidth,” a DxOMark spokesperson told PetaPixel, explaining that they simply couldn't keep up with the other tests they needed to do. "We will now soon republish this type of camera, and Pentax 645Z should be published soon […] in a matter of days.""
This is why the Pentax 645Z DxOMark score of 101 was never published: Digital Photography Review
The Pentax 645Z Got a Crazy DxOMark Score of 101 Back in 2015

[fg-one]

And now, DXOmark should give another bogus reason why they still have not rated the K-70 or the KP...

[Zygonyx]

DxO Mark are at this moment near legal liquidation.
Pentaxians won't moun this time if the process goes to such an end.

[Rondec]

DxO Mark are at this moment near legal liquidation.
Pentaxians won't moun this time if the process goes to such an end.

I don't know about that. Their publishing scores is neither here nor there, but they do make decent software that some folks here use and now own the rights to the Nik Effects Suite that I use fairly frequently. I wouldn't want to see them go away.

[D1N0]

DXOmark has been split of from DXOlabs which makes the software and gadgets. It is DXOlabs that is in suspension of payments for restructuring. DXOmark isn't They are an image benchmark service (not just the website also testing for commercial parties).

[Mistral75]

DxO Mark are at this moment near legal liquidation.
Pentaxians won't mourn this time if the process goes to such an end.

DXOmark has been split of from DXOlabs which makes the software and gadgets. It is DXOlabs that is in suspension of payments for restructuring. DXOmark isn't They are an image benchmark service (not just the website also testing for commercial parties).

Indeed, it's DxO Labs which is in receivership since March 7, 2018. In addition, another subsidiary, DxO Consumer, was deregistered on March 1st.

[RonHendriks1966]

DxO Mark are at this moment near legal liquidation.
Pentaxians won't moun this time if the process goes to such an end.

It is as polite as wishing that Ricoh-Imaging would go banctrupt. There are people working there that are depending on that job to support their families. There are customers used to use their products, bought them and hope to do so for some time. This is the ugly site of Internet.

[bxf]

It is as polite as wishing that Ricoh-Imaging would go banctrupt. There are people working there that are depending on that job to support their families. There are customers used to use their products, bought them and hope to do so for some time. This is the ugly site of Internet.

Fair and considerate comment, but I'm sure Zygonyx was merely making a statement about what we take to be unfair treatment of Pentax by DxO. No need to take this literally or too seriously.

[Zygonyx]

DXOmark has been split of from DXOlabs which makes the software and gadgets. It is DXOlabs that is in suspension of payments for restructuring. DXOmark isn't They are an image benchmark service (not just the website also testing for commercial parties).

Ok, that wasn't the info i had - the opposite.

---------- Post added 20-05-18 at 09:10 ----------

Indeed, it's DxO Labs which is in receivership since March 7, 2018. In addition, another subsidiary, DxO Consumer, was deregistered on March 1st.

Do you have an idea of the business content for DxO consumers ?

---------- Post added 20-05-18 at 09:10 ----------

Fair and considerate comment, but I'm sure Zygonyx was merely making a statement about what we take to be unfair treatment of Pentax by DxO. No need to take this literally or too seriously.

Indeed

[Mistral75]

According to the trade and companies register, DxO Consumer had the same activity as DxO Labs: software edition. It was set up later though: late 2007 instead of early 2003.

It was a SASU (Société par Actions Simplifiée à associé Unique = joined stock company with one single shareholder), therefore I presume it was some kind of subsidiary, set up 10 years ago with a specific purpose and dissolved by merger with the mother company DxO Labs in the framework of pre-receivership technical operations.

[Zygonyx]

Thanks