DPR's review of the D3200

Alizarine · 07-25-2012, 07:08 PM

Well well well, it looks like the sensor really has its perks....

Nikon D3200 Review: Digital Photography Review

Check out the Dynamic Range page and switch on the ADL of the D3200....

JinDesu · 07-25-2012, 07:11 PM

Surprising. It has more DR than the k-5?

rawr · 07-25-2012, 07:45 PM

Originally posted by JinDesu

It has more DR than the k-5?

DXO pegs the D3200's DR at 13.2 EVs, the K-5's at 14.1 EV. The K-5 leads, but not by a huge margin. So the DPR tests are in the ballpark.

I look forward to seeing that sensor in the next Pentax APS-C. Pentax should be able to tune it up very well too, I think, if the way they did the K-5 is any guide.

JinDesu · 07-25-2012, 07:51 PM

It's a little tough for me to judge, but the DR graph they show on DPR seems like the D3200 beats the k-5 by a bit of a margin. And with correction on it's even crazier. Something feels weird.

pinholecam · 07-25-2012, 07:53 PM

Originally posted by JinDesu

Surprising. It has more DR than the k-5?

I not a fan of either site's DR claims (ie. I don't like to go about touting either site's results) , but if I am not wrong, the DPR one is JPG o/p (that is tweakable via camera menu).
The DXO one is pure RAW o/p, that can be pushed out of the sensor (until breaking point)

So if I was a JPG shooter or wanted to know how much DR I get from tweakable (ie. highlight/shadow in-camera settings) OOC JPG, DPR results works.
If I wanted to know how my DR the camera is capable of via RAW, then DXO is probably better.

Alizarine · 07-25-2012, 07:55 PM

For some reason I think they're hitting back at Pentax for the K-x

) and the D800 for the 645D.

When the K-x came out, it carried the same sensor as the D90's; one could say that there's little advantage the D90 has over the K-x, mostly in the AF area. So they put a high-end sensor in an entry-level model... or so I think lol

JinDesu · 07-25-2012, 07:55 PM

Originally posted by pinholecam

I not a fan of either site's DR claims (ie. I don't like to go about touting either site's results) , but if I am not wrong, the DPR one is JPG o/p (that is tweakable via camera menu).
The DXO one is pure RAW o/p, that can be pushed out of the sensor (until breaking point)

So if I was a JPG shooter or wanted to know how much DR I get from tweakable (ie. highlight/shadow in-camera settings) OOC JPG, DPR results works.
If I wanted to know how my DR the camera is capable of via RAW, then DXO is probably better.

I think you are right - correction can only be done on JPEG. I didn't even think of that. I wish they made it more explicitly clear - that's sort of misleading...

Alizarine · 07-25-2012, 07:58 PM

Originally posted by pinholecam

So if I was a JPG shooter or wanted to know how much DR I get from tweakable (ie. highlight/shadow in-camera settings) OOC JPG, DPR results works. If I wanted to know how my DR the camera is capable of via RAW, then DXO is probably better.

good point there... never really understood the difference between the tests DPR and DxO makes...

falconeye · 07-26-2012, 07:18 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by pinholecam

So if I was a JPG shooter or wanted to know how much DR I get from tweakable (ie. highlight/shadow in-camera settings) OOC JPG, DPR results works.
If I wanted to know how my DR the camera is capable of via RAW, then DXO is probably better.

I disagree.

DPR never understood the difference between input and output DR and as a result, their DR measurements are entirely meaningless. Entirely to be ignored. Period. And this includes JPG shooters, of course.

It became worse over time as more and more options for in-camera processing emerged and DPR cannot even use the most aggressive settings as results would be as arbitrary as they are now. AFAIK, NEX cameras now even have a dynamic option to always tone map all available input dynamic range into the JPG output.

The single best DR measurement you can find on DPR is the base ISO black noise measurement for RAW (use the graph view and scale number for resolution).

DxO OTOH is an entirely different story. It measures input dynamic range. No reason for any discussion (after they made PRINT the default), it's just the correctly measured value. You can cite it just like weight incl. batteries. Of course, they don't care to measure output dynamic range as this is determined by the image file format and color profile (for sRGB, it is 11.5 EV).

LeDave · 07-26-2012, 07:36 AM

A 24MP $700 camera? That's going to catch a lot of newbies eyes who "knows =P" MP is everything... This will bring back the times where only the smart and clever newbies who've done their research, like most Pentaxians in the past are today, will find out that the 16MP K-30 will still boast better high ISO noise levels for better image quality over that 24MP... And for $150 more they get built-in SR, weather-sealing, lens fine-tuning, twin dials, and more. Sadly these smart and clever newbies are hard to come by nowadays, poor Pentax.

**Rondec** · 07-26-2012, 10:16 AM

It just seems silly to have this sensor in an entry level camera. Folks that are shooting with a kit lens and maybe an entry level telephoto will seldom see significant improvement over a 16 megapixel sensor, maybe a little bit at iso 100 and 200, but otherwise minimal benefit. On the other hand, the files will be a lot bigger, with minimal difference in resolution in real world shooting.

Makes more sense to use the 24 megapixel sensor in mid to upper end SLRs, where hopefully folks have nicer glass and more skills...

**luftfluss** · 07-26-2012, 01:18 PM

Originally posted by LeDave

A 24MP $700 camera? That's going to catch a lot of newbies eyes who "knows =P" MP is everything... This will bring back the times where only the smart and clever newbies who've done their research, like most Pentaxians in the past are today, will find out that the 16MP K-30 will still boast better high ISO noise levels for better image quality over that 24MP... And for $150 more they get built-in SR, weather-sealing, lens fine-tuning, twin dials, and more. Sadly these smart and clever newbies are hard to come by nowadays, poor Pentax.

And for $150 less some smart and clever newbies will find a system they can buy into that has an upgrade path Pentax users can only fantasize about, a killer flash system, a greater selection of modern lenses, a microphone jack, and built-in GPS. Poor Pentax, indeed.

cali92rs · 07-26-2012, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by luftfluss

And for $150 less some smart and clever newbies will find a system they can buy into that has an upgrade path Pentax users can only fantasize about, a killer flash system, a greater selection of modern lenses, a microphone jack, and built-in GPS. Poor Pentax, indeed.

But what about 75 billion manual focus lenses from the 70's?

Big G · 07-26-2012, 01:41 PM

A lot of camera for the money.

**luftfluss** · 07-26-2012, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by cali92rs

But what about 75 billion manual focus lenses from the 70's?

Well, then you have to use the rather inelegant solution of an adapter that's the size of a Pentax pancake lens.

07-25-2012, 07:08 PM	#1
Alizarine Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Manila Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,185	DPR's review of the D3200 Well well well, it looks like the sensor really has its perks.... Nikon D3200 Review: Digital Photography Review Check out the Dynamic Range page and switch on the ADL of the D3200....

07-26-2012, 07:18 AM - 1 Like	#9
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by pinholecam So if I was a JPG shooter or wanted to know how much DR I get from tweakable (ie. highlight/shadow in-camera settings) OOC JPG, DPR results works. If I wanted to know how my DR the camera is capable of via RAW, then DXO is probably better. I disagree. DPR never understood the difference between input and output DR and as a result, their DR measurements are entirely meaningless. Entirely to be ignored. Period. And this includes JPG shooters, of course. It became worse over time as more and more options for in-camera processing emerged and DPR cannot even use the most aggressive settings as results would be as arbitrary as they are now. AFAIK, NEX cameras now even have a dynamic option to always tone map all available input dynamic range into the JPG output. The single best DR measurement you can find on DPR is the base ISO black noise measurement for RAW (use the graph view and scale number for resolution). DxO OTOH is an entirely different story. It measures input dynamic range. No reason for any discussion (after they made PRINT the default), it's just the correctly measured value. You can cite it just like weight incl. batteries. Of course, they don't care to measure output dynamic range as this is determined by the image file format and color profile (for sRGB, it is 11.5 EV). Last edited by falconeye; 07-26-2012 at 07:28 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DPR review gives Fujifilm X10 76% Silver Award	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	10	07-13-2012 07:36 AM
DPR Fujifilm X-Pro1 in-depth review, 79% Silver Award	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	14	06-30-2012 04:18 PM
DPR review gives the K-01 69%	jogiba	Pentax K-01	33	06-06-2012 12:15 PM
Sony NEX-5N Review now up at DPR	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	13	10-16-2011 10:29 PM
DPR posted K5 Review	Buckeye	Pentax News and Rumors	28	12-20-2010 05:30 AM

07-25-2012, 07:11 PM	#2
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	Surprising. It has more DR than the k-5?

07-25-2012, 07:45 PM	#3
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by JinDesu It has more DR than the k-5? DXO pegs the D3200's DR at 13.2 EVs, the K-5's at 14.1 EV. The K-5 leads, but not by a huge margin. So the DPR tests are in the ballpark. I look forward to seeing that sensor in the next Pentax APS-C. Pentax should be able to tune it up very well too, I think, if the way they did the K-5 is any guide.

07-25-2012, 07:51 PM	#4
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	It's a little tough for me to judge, but the DR graph they show on DPR seems like the D3200 beats the k-5 by a bit of a margin. And with correction on it's even crazier. Something feels weird.

07-25-2012, 07:53 PM	#5
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,706	Originally posted by JinDesu Surprising. It has more DR than the k-5? I not a fan of either site's DR claims (ie. I don't like to go about touting either site's results) , but if I am not wrong, the DPR one is JPG o/p (that is tweakable via camera menu). The DXO one is pure RAW o/p, that can be pushed out of the sensor (until breaking point) So if I was a JPG shooter or wanted to know how much DR I get from tweakable (ie. highlight/shadow in-camera settings) OOC JPG, DPR results works. If I wanted to know how my DR the camera is capable of via RAW, then DXO is probably better.

07-25-2012, 07:55 PM	#6
Alizarine Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Manila Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,185 Original Poster	For some reason I think they're hitting back at Pentax for the K-x ) and the D800 for the 645D. When the K-x came out, it carried the same sensor as the D90's; one could say that there's little advantage the D90 has over the K-x, mostly in the AF area. So they put a high-end sensor in an entry-level model... or so I think lol

07-25-2012, 07:55 PM	#7
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	Originally posted by pinholecam I not a fan of either site's DR claims (ie. I don't like to go about touting either site's results) , but if I am not wrong, the DPR one is JPG o/p (that is tweakable via camera menu). The DXO one is pure RAW o/p, that can be pushed out of the sensor (until breaking point) So if I was a JPG shooter or wanted to know how much DR I get from tweakable (ie. highlight/shadow in-camera settings) OOC JPG, DPR results works. If I wanted to know how my DR the camera is capable of via RAW, then DXO is probably better. I think you are right - correction can only be done on JPEG. I didn't even think of that. I wish they made it more explicitly clear - that's sort of misleading...

07-25-2012, 07:58 PM	#8
Alizarine Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Manila Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,185 Original Poster	Originally posted by pinholecam So if I was a JPG shooter or wanted to know how much DR I get from tweakable (ie. highlight/shadow in-camera settings) OOC JPG, DPR results works. If I wanted to know how my DR the camera is capable of via RAW, then DXO is probably better. good point there... never really understood the difference between the tests DPR and DxO makes...

07-26-2012, 07:36 AM	#10
LeDave Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,067	A 24MP $700 camera? That's going to catch a lot of newbies eyes who "knows =P" MP is everything... This will bring back the times where only the smart and clever newbies who've done their research, like most Pentaxians in the past are today, will find out that the 16MP K-30 will still boast better high ISO noise levels for better image quality over that 24MP... And for $150 more they get built-in SR, weather-sealing, lens fine-tuning, twin dials, and more. Sadly these smart and clever newbies are hard to come by nowadays, poor Pentax.

07-26-2012, 10:16 AM	#11
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	It just seems silly to have this sensor in an entry level camera. Folks that are shooting with a kit lens and maybe an entry level telephoto will seldom see significant improvement over a 16 megapixel sensor, maybe a little bit at iso 100 and 200, but otherwise minimal benefit. On the other hand, the files will be a lot bigger, with minimal difference in resolution in real world shooting. Makes more sense to use the 24 megapixel sensor in mid to upper end SLRs, where hopefully folks have nicer glass and more skills...

07-26-2012, 01:18 PM	#12
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Originally posted by LeDave A 24MP $700 camera? That's going to catch a lot of newbies eyes who "knows =P" MP is everything... This will bring back the times where only the smart and clever newbies who've done their research, like most Pentaxians in the past are today, will find out that the 16MP K-30 will still boast better high ISO noise levels for better image quality over that 24MP... And for $150 more they get built-in SR, weather-sealing, lens fine-tuning, twin dials, and more. Sadly these smart and clever newbies are hard to come by nowadays, poor Pentax. And for $150 less some smart and clever newbies will find a system they can buy into that has an upgrade path Pentax users can only fantasize about, a killer flash system, a greater selection of modern lenses, a microphone jack, and built-in GPS. Poor Pentax, indeed.

07-26-2012, 01:32 PM	#13
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by luftfluss And for $150 less some smart and clever newbies will find a system they can buy into that has an upgrade path Pentax users can only fantasize about, a killer flash system, a greater selection of modern lenses, a microphone jack, and built-in GPS. Poor Pentax, indeed. But what about 75 billion manual focus lenses from the 70's?

07-26-2012, 01:41 PM	#14
Big G Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 581	A lot of camera for the money.

07-26-2012, 02:03 PM	#15
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Originally posted by cali92rs But what about 75 billion manual focus lenses from the 70's? Well, then you have to use the rather inelegant solution of an adapter that's the size of a Pentax pancake lens.