Lives in United States MO, United States
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at www.williamchuttonjr.com
Joined on Oct 28, 2009


Total: 22, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review preview (2295 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: From a camera with tremendous microcontrast, color and detail (a6000) to one that has none of the above costing six times as much. Ain't this a great hobby? :^)

The color-filter array micro-lens quality is important. In order to pass more light to the sensor photo diodes, some brands use lenses with weaker color filters. This increases in color cross contamination which in turn can affect color rendering.

However the signal-to-noise ratio and dynamic range performance are improved.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2014 at 15:30 UTC
On Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review preview (2295 comments in total)
In reply to:

Black Box: "The Leica T's body is formed from a 1.2kg block of aluminum, which is machined down to 94g"

If it's true, it's an incredible waste of natural resources. I've never been a tree-hugger, but this kind of squander would... let's say, surprise any man of reason... I hope.

I'll give the Germans (who have never been mindless wasters) the benefit of a doubt, however, and assume the ever-lying marketologists just "forgot" to mention HOW MANY 94-g pieces are machined from a single 1.2-kg block of aluminium.

And, it takes no energy whatsoever to transport the Al scrap, melt it to form a billet, and transport the billet to it's destination.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2014 at 15:25 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 Review preview (564 comments in total)
In reply to:

J2Gphoto: "A high-end camera is nothing without optics to match, and while the X-system is little more than 2 years old, the lens line-up is starting to look distinctly mature."

Personally the lens line up and the price of their lenses are what are steering me toward going with the E-M1. Also does anyone else think the white balance is way off on the E-M1 sample images? I've used the E-M1 and have never seen whites look so yellow.

The Fujinon prime lenses' performance-to-price ratio is one of the reasonss I decided to abandoned Nikon FX for Fujifilm X.

When my second XT-1 body arrives, my remaining Nikon body and lens will go out the door. I just started to use the Fujinon 10-20/4 and it outperforms my Nikkor 16-35/4 G lens.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2014 at 13:23 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1657 comments in total)
In reply to:

Francesco De Lorenzo: Why the strong overexposure in many samples? The camera tends to behave like this?

Photographers determine exposure. The camera just does what it's told to do.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 10, 2014 at 14:56 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1657 comments in total)
In reply to:

Backstage: I had the chance to use it for an evening. Next to all the pros and cons already written I have two comments: The four way control buttons are quite on the same level as the back plate and I could not identify them clearly while keeping my eyes on the viewfinder. The second is that the X-T1 with the grip and the 56mm 1.2 lens is a heavy beast.


Because carrying around two XT-1 bodies with one battery grip from gig to gig to gig, is much less of a burden than carrying two Nikon Pro DSLR bodies.

Then there's the difference in lens size and weight.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 10, 2014 at 14:53 UTC
In reply to:

Digital Suicide: Fuji guys, stop toying around.
Just install a lens mount on the next gen X100SS.

Most consumers would resent paying for a shutter over, and over, and over again. Those who would benefit from fast sync speeds are in the minority. Niche needs get met last in consumer markets.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2014 at 23:16 UTC
In reply to:

Cal22: I had thought the converter makes a 75mm (FF, equiv.). If it is not more than 50mm, it's not worth the money and the inconvenience. You'd better forgo the converter and crop the image!

Perspective depends on only one thing, the subject to lens distance. If you use the 23/2 and the lens is the exact same distance as the lens with the new teleconverter attached, the perspective rendering of a cropped 23 mm image would identical to the perspective rendering of the teleconverter image. The out of focus rendering might be different and the pixel dimensions would be different. But not the perspective.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2014 at 23:07 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1657 comments in total)
In reply to:

Naveed Akhtar: Silver shell please!!

Just popped back from a brief trip into the future. Silver will be offered later on as a special edition.

(ps buy Apple stock)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 19:31 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1657 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jim Salvas: I bought my E-M1 a couple of months ago, but I wondered before the intro what I would have done if the X-T1 had been available at the time. I think I would still have chosen the E-M1.

In the Fuji, you get a slightly larger sensor and maybe an improved EVF plus possibly improved video, but on every other significant point of difference, the Olympus comes out ahead. More customizable. In-body stabilization (a huge deal if you want to use legacy lenses). Better lens selection.

Still, it's good to see more competition in this space. Who knows, we might even see reasonable prices someday.

Your concept of slightly is different than mine.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 16:50 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1657 comments in total)
In reply to:

goloby: I always loved the Fuji colors, in my opinion they are the best. Fuji lenses are stellar as well. But one thing will keep me from buying this camera and that is the crop sensor. I need bokeh, I love my 50mm f1.4 and I do not want it to be a mid tele, I want it to be a 50. Same with the 35 f1.4. For anybody that thinks oterwise please rent a ff camera with either a 35 or a 50 1.4 lens and you will be hooked.
One question about this camera's autofocus, how low can it go? 0 eV like Sony's A7, -1eV like most Nikon dslrs or -3 eV like Canon's 6D?

What is a noise control?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 16:47 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1657 comments in total)
In reply to:

icexe: Can someone explain why ISO100 is so difficult or impossible to engineer into some cameras? It seems many manufacturers either leave it out entirely, or resort to "special" settings in order to use it, even on their high-end cameras.

The majority of buyers feel optimum performance at ISO (800, or even 1600, is more important than a native ISO 100.

You can't have both because A native ISO of 100 would increase underexposure of the sensor (and decrease signal to noise ratio and dynamic range) by one stop at all ISOs above 100.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 16:42 UTC
On Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R real-world samples gallery article (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

topstuff: I have to say, purely objectively and not currently as a Fuji user, that the general look and quality of the images from the Fuji camera and lens is very, very pleasing in my opinion.

The IQ is lovely.

They have my attention for sure.

I own this lens.

When you first put the lens on the camera, its length gives you pause. When you use the camera the length does not get in the way. However if the lens was 10% longer it would be too much - for me anyway. It is not heavy.

The price is not an issue for me because this lens delivers performance. I sold my X100 two weeks after I started to use this lens (and I love the X100).

The longitudinal CA is much less than any fast Nikkor G series prime I've used or seen examples from. Of course the fast Nikkor primes are even more expensive (and heavier). The out-of-focus rendering can be a bit nervous in some back lit scenes - such as light filtering through trees. Otherwise the OOF rendering is fine for a 23 mm focal length lens.

The biggest problem is the ugly, gigantic hood. I spent less than $20 on eBay for two screw in hoods (one vented and one not).

I also have the 40/2.8 and 18/2 XF lenses which I use when I prefer a smaller, somewhat less conspicuous lens.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 9, 2013 at 14:01 UTC
On The longevity of Raw files - a reconsideration article (12 comments in total)

There is no reason not to take the opposite view. Every DNG standard has been published so far. Why would future DNG standards not be published? Where is the evidence Adobe will not publish future standards? How does an eight month delay translate into fear about a complete reversal of Adobe's strategy? I wish Pardee's would elaborate on how Adobe will make more profit abandoning open DNG than staying the course.

Instead of fear and loathing, optimism and confidence are equally justified. I do not share any of the Pardee's concerns. Pessimistic speculation is no more or less valid than optimistic speculation. But I do know this. If DNG failed for sny reason, there are millions of DNG files right now and millions more will be recorded. Opportunity for ample profit will provide incentive for DNG data to be converted into something useful no matter what.

The sky is not falling.

Of course one prints photographs to increase the odds they will be around for a long time.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 4, 2013 at 19:49 UTC as 3rd comment
On The longevity of Raw files - a reconsideration article (12 comments in total)

Are you saying Adobe plans to take DNG out of the public domain? As long as DNG is open, people can convert DNGs to something else. In principle the raw data within a DNG from 2010 could be converted to any other two-dimensional space array in the future. This could be done by highly motivated amateurs decades from now.

I am not concerned about on-board lens correction either. Are you saying the lens correction parameters written to raw fils are proprietary or encrypted so only Adobe can read them? Even if that were true, it would be possible to reverse engineer the corrections empirically. This too could be done by highly motivated amateurs decades from now.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2013 at 15:26 UTC as 4th comment

Changing their name would have the same benefit as painting a a new name on the Titanic right after it hit the iceberg.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 31, 2013 at 06:12 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: I have to admit....I'm actually surprised the new M is 'only' $7000. It's very unlike Leica to drop prices and the M9 sold for $8k not that long ago. With that said, the M-E should be cheaper than $5500....it's nothing but old technology from the M9 re-badged and sold as new. Leica would have sold a tonne of these ME's at $4000.

This is not SONY chip.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2012 at 00:36 UTC
In reply to:

FTW: We will have at least the satisfaction that in any test we will not read anymore that the D600 or A99 make a better shot, it is the same sensor. Remains the absence of mirror, this can give it a serious advantage, the lenses can be used on the other brand with adapters too, so all plays on the mirror absence. But, I will not pay a surplus of 5000$ for that only. Bet all you want that NEX-7 with same lens makes the same good or even better shot. I have seen A99 and D600 shots. Up to 3200 Iso, A99 is cleaner and better than D600. Also the A99 body offers much more working comfort and the price difference is justified, it is an amazing piece of technology and D600 looks a bit poor compared to it. I do not compare this Leica to it, that would be waste of time. Starting by the price, all comment is useless. The day Leica sells it's cameras at a real value price, one can consider doing it.

It certainly is not the same SONY sensor.

I do think their color superiority claims are fraudulent. Their marketing prpaganda for the M8 being a lifetime investment didn't work out unless the LCD screen lasts forever. Why should he sensor magic be any different?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2012 at 00:32 UTC

Oh praise be!

After all these years someone finally got color quality right on CMOS. Every time I looked at a Nikon or Canon photo all I could think was, "when will they ever get those colors to be just like a CCD sensors' 'natural and brilliant' colors." Finally SONY and Canon's incompetence is corrected. Pros will now flock to the new CMOSIS technology or go bankrupt.

What a joke. At least Leica is consistant by invoking magic Leica sauce in every digital product they ever made. Everyone without a CMOSIS or CC'D sensor remains a second rate photographer.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2012 at 22:52 UTC as 80th comment | 1 reply
On Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 review article (373 comments in total)

Unlike small micro 4/3 cameras, at least you don't have to put enormous zoom lenses on this thing to ge decent zoom performance.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 28, 2012 at 22:06 UTC as 104th comment | 3 replies

My understanding is the only reason Kodak is still making film stock is to fulfill an obligation to the motion picture industry. I believe the motion picture film is part of a court ordered settlement involving their bankruptcy.

Kodak is under no obligation to produce still-camera film which is why they are trying to find a buyer. It could be the real crisis, with regard to Kodk film stock, will come after the court-ordered motion picture contract period is over.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2012 at 00:49 UTC as 58th comment | 1 reply
Total: 22, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »