Light theme [beta]
We're testing a lighter alternative to the regular DPReview theme. Both options will stay.
For more information, click here. Don't forget to leave some feedback.

Richard Butler

DPReview Administrator
Lives in United Kingdom Seattle, United Kingdom
Joined on Nov 7, 2007

Comments

Total: 3552, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

chipmaster: Interesting collection of pictures, clearly the review will reflect somewhat the pictures taking, LOL. Why am I not going to hold much water to what they say. Where are the pictures in the kind of situation that really push the focus and low light?

BTW we dont' need anymore posts about low DR, this is a camera built for high ISO and fast focus. I really wouldn't care much for reading about a sports car's performance on a snowy road either, duh.

Well we've already published a [low light gallery](http://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries?galleryId=4688833174) and will be looking for a floodlit or indoor game of some sort to test it further, prior to the review being finished.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2016 at 17:33 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2442 comments in total)
In reply to:

farandhigh: With no doubts, this is the camera i really would like to have. Hope my dream will come true soon.

Derbyshire?

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2016 at 19:50 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2442 comments in total)
In reply to:

DM Allen: When taking a photo is the camera silent like the Leica Q?

Battery life figures are not unlike fuel economy/gas mileage measurements - they don't tell you what you're going to *get* as such but they let you compare between cameras.

A camera rated at 600 shots would probably have got 1200 frames.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2016 at 19:47 UTC
In reply to:

Battersea: Looking at the photo of the two cameras makes me wonder if mirrorless will ever come in multiple sizes for essentially the same camera. A larger size could hold two batteries and offer better ergonomics especially for those who often shoot with large lenses, have larger hands or just prefer a more spacious button layout. I know a grip provides some of that benefit but not all.

@mr.izo No. That isn't what we did and it isn't what we said.

We showed the a6300 against *a* DSLR shooting the same frame rate. We then described the a6300 shooting experience compared to DSLRs in general. Not one DSLR in particular.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2016 at 00:01 UTC
In reply to:

kolyy: This is getting really tiring. There are other mirrorless cameras beyond Sony, you know? Like the Panasonic GH4, which came out in 2014 and has 7.5fps with live view. Or the Olympus E-M1, from 2013 and 6.5fps with live view. Maybe it would be more appropriate to compare the A6300 with those? Or is it not politically correct to show that the Sony camera is not nearly as exceptional as you try to make it? Or, horror, could its "live view" be actually inferior to cameras being on the market for years?

I'll go back and address that comment in the launch article. As for the shooting experience, I'll speak to Dan, since it's a reflection on his experiences.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 23:31 UTC
In reply to:

kolyy: This is getting really tiring. There are other mirrorless cameras beyond Sony, you know? Like the Panasonic GH4, which came out in 2014 and has 7.5fps with live view. Or the Olympus E-M1, from 2013 and 6.5fps with live view. Maybe it would be more appropriate to compare the A6300 with those? Or is it not politically correct to show that the Sony camera is not nearly as exceptional as you try to make it? Or, horror, could its "live view" be actually inferior to cameras being on the market for years?

I think you're over-thinking the idea that we're trying to send a specific overarching message to our readers. This was literally a piece of content from the review that I gained some extra insight into while shooting in my own time, this Saturday, so spun-out as what I hoped would be an interesting article.

The standalone [4K Photo article](http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0087942697/) I wrote after the GH4 and LX100 reviews would be another example.

If we were trying to prepare a 'Current state of mirrorless vs DSLR' piece it would take much longer (and probably never get finished).

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 23:05 UTC
In reply to:

kolyy: This is getting really tiring. There are other mirrorless cameras beyond Sony, you know? Like the Panasonic GH4, which came out in 2014 and has 7.5fps with live view. Or the Olympus E-M1, from 2013 and 6.5fps with live view. Maybe it would be more appropriate to compare the A6300 with those? Or is it not politically correct to show that the Sony camera is not nearly as exceptional as you try to make it? Or, horror, could its "live view" be actually inferior to cameras being on the market for years?

Jim Hully - no, we didn't.

No 7Ds were tested in any sense for this video. They were shot side-by-side for ***illustrative* purposes only.** (I'm really regretting including it in that image at the top of the page).

The comparison was a6300 live view vs. a [Platonic *ideal*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_idealism) of a DSLR, rather than a specific model.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 22:36 UTC
In reply to:

kolyy: This is getting really tiring. There are other mirrorless cameras beyond Sony, you know? Like the Panasonic GH4, which came out in 2014 and has 7.5fps with live view. Or the Olympus E-M1, from 2013 and 6.5fps with live view. Maybe it would be more appropriate to compare the A6300 with those? Or is it not politically correct to show that the Sony camera is not nearly as exceptional as you try to make it? Or, horror, could its "live view" be actually inferior to cameras being on the market for years?

The *real* competition is DSLRs, for all of these cameras.

The a6300's combination of shooting speed and AF capability meant that the next potential weak link in the chain in terms of competing with a DSLR is live view during continuous shooting.

I do take your point (though it genuinely isn't a brand issue). Maybe we should have done this with the GX8 as part of that review, though I'm not sure we were quite so impressed with the AF. Perhaps we should have shot the GX8 *as well*, so that we could write a more generic 'where does mirrorless stand, vs. DSLR' article, but we were mainly looking to make sure that work we'd already done didn't get lost in the midst of a big review.

We'll bear this in mind next time.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 22:12 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2442 comments in total)
In reply to:

farandhigh: With no doubts, this is the camera i really would like to have. Hope my dream will come true soon.

That's often true of mid-range models vs high-end ones (within the same sensor size). It's easy to point at the least-expensive camera to use a sensor and say 'you could get the same IQ for much less money.'

X-Pro2 users are likely to be aware that they're paying a premuim for the design and the shooting experience that the camera gives them. Dual card slots, *hybrid* viewfinder, solid-feeling build, direct shutter speed, aperture, exposure comp and ISO controls, etc, etc...

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 22:05 UTC
In reply to:

Advent1sam: The best mirrorless for fast action is the Fuji xpro-2 according to mirrorlessons
http://www.mirrorlessons.com/2016/04/06/fujifilm-100-400mm-review/
You can also use the ovf much like a red-dot sight
http://www.mirrorlessons.com/2016/03/30/fuji-x-pro2-ovf-birds-in-flight/
Unlike the a6300 the fuji also supports uhs-ii sd has a deeper buffer and quicker refresh/write with the faster card, has better overall iq and is weather sealed, it also has a very nice native 100-400 lens for the system, unlike Sony.

Having shot, tested and reviewed the X-Pro2 and a6300 I couldn't agree that the Fujifilm is in the same league when it comes to AF performance (even when I shot it with several of the lenses you list).

There's a lot to like about the X-Pro2 (and some aspects to love), but AF performance isn't near the top of the list of its strengths. And I say that as someone who really likes the X-Pro2 and XF lens range.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 21:25 UTC
In reply to:

kolyy: This is getting really tiring. There are other mirrorless cameras beyond Sony, you know? Like the Panasonic GH4, which came out in 2014 and has 7.5fps with live view. Or the Olympus E-M1, from 2013 and 6.5fps with live view. Maybe it would be more appropriate to compare the A6300 with those? Or is it not politically correct to show that the Sony camera is not nearly as exceptional as you try to make it? Or, horror, could its "live view" be actually inferior to cameras being on the market for years?

We shot the video as part of the review but wanted to dig a little deeper about what it meant. Now that we have more reviewers, we have time to look into these things a bit more closely: a luxury we didn't have when reviewing the GH4.

It's very likely we'll do things like this for the Nikon D500 and Pentax K-1 when they become available.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 21:15 UTC
In reply to:

emfor: So consequently the 80D review on DPR will have to compare its DR with a seven years old Sony or Nikon :))

The 7D is used for illustrative, not comparative purposes. We needed video that we could sync, side-by-side. That wouldn't have worked with a camera shooting at 7 fps or 10 fps. If we'd spotted the 7D II's menu option, we would have used that.

When we actually tested it, we shot the a6300 alongside both the EOS 80D and the Nikon D5 (which is a slightly unfair comparison for a totally different reason).

The article is writing about the a6300 vs the fact that a DSLR shows you a truly moving image between frames, not specifically in comparison to the 7D. I've re-phrased one of the sentences in the article to make that distinction clearer.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 19:40 UTC
In reply to:

Siobhan A: Hey DPR, there is now a 7D mark ii.
Maybe you've read about it.

The Canon 7D came about almost 7 years ago! LOL!

btw, looks like the A6300 again fell short of the NX1 (with last FW update) which is also old and not even made anymore. It will be interesting to see if the new NX1 hacking project will vault the NX1 even farther ahead.

ARGH! If I'd found that option we'd have done that.

Would have saved me the time spent having to track-down and borrow an original 7D. And the time spent explaining why we were shooting with such an old camera.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 18:28 UTC
In reply to:

emfor: So consequently the 80D review on DPR will have to compare its DR with a seven years old Sony or Nikon :))

If it isn't obvious, we chose the original 7D because it shoots at the same rate, so we could show the two videos synced up, side-by-side.

We'd have tested the a6300 alongside the 80D if it could shoot as fast as the Sony (or the seven-year-old camera you're joking about).

Though it's subsequently been pointed out that I could have saved myself the time spent tracking-down a 7D (and explaining its use) by digging through the 7D II's custom function menus and dropping its frame rate to 8 fps.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 18:23 UTC
In reply to:

Caerolle: If I was going to shoot a lot of action, for sure I would have a dSLR for the OVF and for the off-sensor PDAF for continuous AS.

Fortunately, I only take some pics of my son playing rugby occasionally, and can get some decent shots with my mirrorless system, so I don't need two systems. Though if I had enough money, I would for sure have something like a 7D Mark II (NOT the old one, lol) and probably a 100-400/4.5-5.6 even just for that. Action is one thing that dSLRs are just way better at.

I wouldn't make assumptions about off-sensor PDAF being inherently better, personally.

If it isn't obvious, we chose the original 7D because it shoots at the same rate, so we could show the two videos synced up, side-by-side.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 18:21 UTC
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2442 comments in total)
In reply to:

farandhigh: With no doubts, this is the camera i really would like to have. Hope my dream will come true soon.

It's a [carbon-fibre-reinforced thermoplastic](http://www.teijin.com/news/2015/ebd150413_38.html), so 'plastic' isn't incorrect, either.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 18:18 UTC
In reply to:

Battersea: Looking at the photo of the two cameras makes me wonder if mirrorless will ever come in multiple sizes for essentially the same camera. A larger size could hold two batteries and offer better ergonomics especially for those who often shoot with large lenses, have larger hands or just prefer a more spacious button layout. I know a grip provides some of that benefit but not all.

Don't forget there's some effect of perspective here. Also, that the Sony lens is stabilized and this particular Canon one isn't.

[![Opposite World](http://www.dpreview.com/files/p/E~TS300x0~articles/8617316604/Canon_7D_70-200.jpeg)](http://www.dpreview.com/files/p/8617316604/Canon_7D_70-200.jpeg)

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 18:07 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2051 comments in total)
In reply to:

bobfonte: You can not say that this site has not done its best to promote the Sony products. First, it was Sony a7RII and now Sony a6300. Why do they not mention the poor quality of the lenses (like this 16-55mm) or the absurd prices of few good quality lenses. Photographers know that the most important thing in photography is the quality of the lenses. It would be irresponsible to leave a robust and reliable system like Canon or Nikon and jump into an adventure with Sony, with proprietary and few accessories. Remember BETAMAX. Let's get real!

Yeah, the failure to mention our concerns about the kit lens and lens availability generally, other than the introduction page and the conclusion (including the final concluding sentence), is appalling.

The introduction and conclusion pages are far-and-away the most read pages, so it was pretty sneaky for me to bury it there.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 17:58 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2051 comments in total)
In reply to:

mailman88: Unscientific results, but looking at Bestbuy comments between the a6000 and a63000, the a6000 has a better customer approval rating.

I'm not surprised people are happy with those cameras: they're all really good cameras (that's what Silver means).

Also, I'd suggest that both the PEN-F and X-Pro2 are relatively emotional purchases: you buy (and pay a premium) because of the styling and design as well as the technical capabilities. Again, I think that's more likely to prompt a positive user review than a more capable camera that's harder to emotionally engage with (not least because of the ergonomics).

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2016 at 19:05 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2051 comments in total)
In reply to:

mailman88: Unscientific results, but looking at Bestbuy comments between the a6000 and a63000, the a6000 has a better customer approval rating.

There are several factors to bear in mind when looking at this:

Who is most motivated to submit a consumer review immediately after launch? (Contented customers or people who are angry for some reason).

Compare that with the effect of the product being available for several years, where the sheer number of owners might start to overcome that factor (fewer contented people bother to submit reviews but there are enough of them to balance-out the initial negativity).

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2016 at 18:47 UTC
Total: 3552, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »