>>4272710>its the same, just different tonez bro (aka different)lol. looks like a botched test to me. dpreview even says they edited the raws to present you with a ""raw"" image in ACR.
>split upnot me, but sorry bro, my favorite brand did win. it won pretty hard. the canoise r3duction is so much worse than the z8 it's unreal. do you even have a no-BG r3 equivalent with 45mp planned?
>its the peripheral shading>in the dead center>at f5.6lol...
>this sum you up perfectlyyeah, "proveit" lol. how do you know acr is this or that, etc... you're trying to compare closed source software to estimate closed source hardware performance AKA wasting your time on things that prove absolutely nothing of consequence.
>you dont like the test resultsthe cheaper z6 has better image quality than the r6, i like those results. enjoy your video/12 bit raw e shutter fps capability.
>ANY evidencealright so bill claff says every EOS R reduces noise at least at higher ISOs, and DXO scores are based on noise, i'm still not accepting any of that evidence because its all botched amateur "science" with absolutely no controls even though it works in my favor. i simply will not accept that "raw is raw" without a full source dump and professional analysis of the camera firmware and raw converter complete with hardware specs for the whole signal chain, so I simply will not care about these dumb tests about raws, only how you, the photographer, can make your final result look. even though these botched tests and meme charts clearly show that nikon makes the best cameras, the best lenses for normal/sane people who do not shoot weddings, etc. i'm just not buying it. it's bad science, what I learned in college primed me to expect better than this sociology grade trash in a field concerned with computers.
and
>, only how you, the photographer, can make your final result looki'm having a hard time seeing a major performance difference in THIS part so i say, stop looking at dpreview, stop caring
