On 12/23/2018 6:48 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

dxo scores have less to do with the capabilities of the camera and more
to do with how much a particular company paid dxo.

Is there any evidence to support that claim?

yes.

What is it other than rumour or gossip?

it's neither of those.


Than please share your source.

sources.

here's one (of many):
https://www.androidpolice.com/2016/0...-stop-letting-
dxomark-decide-whose-smartphone-camera-is-best-opinion/
DxO Labs is first and foremost a consultancy. Their business model is
based upon being paid to conduct analysis and optimization of imaging
system performance by the companies that make those systems. DxO is
not an independent journalistic entity or trade organization - it is
a for-profit software consultancy for camera makers. Their product is
called DxO Analyzer, and licensees of this suite can opt to purchase
"installation, training and consulting services."
...
...Products that have received versus not received consultancy and
tuning from DxO Labs are not identified, and so it is impossible to
know which camera has likely been tuned to maximize its score under
the test conditions versus which tends to do well without having
specifically been adapted to DxO's parameters.

This also gives DxO Labs the power to silently "shame" the companies
that choose not to license its software or services.

also, their 'tests' claim what is physically impossible, making them
untrustworthy and their scale is whatever they want it to be, with
newer cameras scoring higher and higher.



There is a difference between taking bribes, and producing bad test
results. As to that article, read prior comments made here.

--
PeterN