SenScore / LenScore: the alternative sensor and lens scoring system

[MFloyd]

About SenScore™ http://www.senscore.org
 
SenScore™ is a rating system for digital camera sensors. It is based on the performance of a sensor at all available ISO settings within the 100 to 25600 range as well as the sensor's resolving power across this range. The score is indicative of a camera's image quality across a wide range of real-world conditions. However, the score does not take into account a camera's speed, buffer size, AF, metering, build quality etc. and is therefore not a camera rating. The score is calibrated based on the Nikon D800 measurements, i.e. the D800 is the reference with a score of 1000 in each category. Measurements are based on raw files. JPEG engine performance is not part of SenScore™. Video performance is not part of SenScore™.

Nikon F-mount cameras are measured with: Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G
Canon EF-mount cameras are measured with: Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM
Sony A-mount cameras are measured with: Sony Planar T* 85mm f/1.4 ZA

The overall score ( = SenScore™ ) is the average of the following 5 scores:

Noise
The amount of noise added by the sensor and AD conversion process.

Dynamic Range
The ratio between the lowest amount of light a sensor is able to detect and the amount of light that pushes the sensor into saturation. Not to be confused with tonal range. A sensor with a 4-bit readout able to distinguish only 16 levels of lightness could theoretically have a very high dynamic range. We measure the dynamic range of a camera sensor with a custom built device for which we are in the process of seeking patent protection.

Color Range
The number of colors a sensor is able to distinguish.

Tonal Range
The number of lightness levels a sensor is able to distinguish. The imaginary 4-bit sensor mentioned in the Dynamic Range section offering an extremely high dynamic range would score very low on tonal range.

Resolving Power
Amount of detail a sensor is able to record. The lens plays an important part in this. All F/EF/A/E mount cameras are measured with the same F/EF/A mount lenses. The 3 lenses used for SenScore™ measurements never leave the lab and are used strictly for this purpose. There is variation in lenses. The F/EF/A mount lenses used for SenScore™ measurements have been carefully selected for their performance.

[Frank Fremerey]

Yet another score?

The scores seem to scale with sensor size. A fifth gen DX sensor receives half the score of a fifth gen FX sensor.

I do not see a relevance for real life application. I tested many of these cameras in practical studio, outdoor an indoor press like use.

My verdict: The D5-sensor is the clear leader when it comes to high ISO, the D810 offers the best spatial resolution, the D600/610/750-sensor the most bang for the buck. My practical experience is very well reflected in the DXO Score: http://www.dxomark.com/best-nikon-cameras

I also do not see any documentation of the RAW development process used by senscore.org

We have Bill Claff at http://www.photonstophotos.net/ who uses very well documented physical values to measure relevant features, we have http://www.dxomark.com/ and we have a lot of journalists out there in electronic and print magazines and for nerds http://sensorgen.info provides some valuable values...

[Frank Fremerey]

PS: Here are my three current cameras in a very realistic relation when it comes to practical use http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D3,Nikon%20D500,Nikon%20D600

[MFloyd]

@ Frank: Although, we come to the same conclusion (D5 / D810 / D600/610/750), SenScore reviews have always been much closer to my personal experience, for the couple of years I'm following them.  Something which has never been the case with DxO, as I'm concerned. And now they have D5's "Sports" rating, being completely off track. I don't mean that DxO's figures are wrong, I mean that their summaries give rise to false conclusions.

[Frank Fremerey]

@ Frank: Although, we come to the same conclusion (D5 / D810 / D600/610/750), SenScore reviews have always been much closer to my personal experience, for the couple of years I'm following them.  Something which has never been the case with DxO, as I'm concerned. And now they have D5's "Sports" rating, being completely off track. I don't mean that DxO's figures are wrong, I mean that their summaries give rise to false conclusions.

I agree the D5 rating of the DXO is completely off.

The D5 is a specialist camera set to pave the way for a steep increase in price for the next D8xx/D900
which will probably see an initial price at 4000 Euros. For sports, theatre, dschungle, wild life the HighISO
is stunning, AF is stunning, color consitency is stunning, speed too.

Not many people need that but those who need it pay the 6500 Euro street price easily.

[MFloyd]

If I can make a side comment on the D5, which I'm now using since end of March: the D5 is by far the best experience I had, especially with color depth and tonal range in higher ISOs.  Even my behavior has changed, as I put now the choice of aperture/shutter speed at a much higher priority, almost neglecting what the ISO outcome will be. Knowing that my main domain is action/sport (sailing, athletics, aviation, car racing*...).

(*) http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,4052.0.html

[Pistnbroke]

I lost faith in these people when they rated the  28-300  higher than the 24-85 for sharpness ..I have both and the 24 -85 VR is much the sharper puppy.

[MFloyd]

I lost faith in these people when they rated the  28-300  higher than the 24-85 for sharpness ..I have both and the 24 -85 VR is much the sharper puppy.

I have both, and I can neither blame the one or the other for not being sharp.  The 28-300mm has a lot of distortion and vignetting, but one thing you cannot claim is lack of sharpness.  And correcting distortion and vignetting is very easy in postproduction. I would tend to agree that the 28-300mm is the sharper one.