Richard Butler

Richard Butler

DPReview Administrator
Lives in United Kingdom Seattle, United Kingdom
Works as a Reviews Editor
Joined on Nov 7, 2007

Comments

Total: 2818, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

stevez: The only thing, and I really mean the only thing I don't like about this camera is the removal of the accessory port which means I can no longer use my previously supplied pop up flash, fiber optic macro light, accessory viewfinder or accessory microphone.

This has a viewfinder, better pop-up flash and a built-in mic socket, so it's probably worth selling several of those items anyway, isn't it?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 18:54 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

brycesteiner: Is there an error with the USB? Only version 2? That cannot be right. It is nice that is has a 64 MP output in RAW.

USB 3.0 isn't being widely adopted by manufacturers yet, for whatever reason (it's still only offered on about five cameras).

Ultimately it's usually quicker to just put the memory card in a descent (USB 3.0, perhaps) card reader.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 18:49 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jan Chelminski: There appears to be an error in the text:

"However, because there's some overlap between the original set of four pixels and the set of offset pixels, the system doesn't quite yield four times the original resolution (64MP). Instead, the camera compensates for this overlap and outputs a 40MP file. These files are captured both as 40MP JPEGs and as vast, 100MB Raw files."

I believe there is indeed a 64MP output mode, but only with an (PS plug-in unavailable for now) externally processed RAW file.

According to Pekka Potka:
"64 MP is 9216 x 6912 pixels, or 192 MB when opened in Photoshop. The size of .ORF file is roughly 100 MB"

Please see Pekka's, or Imaging Resource's reviews.

Yes the camera outputs 64MP Raws but that doesn't mean it has 64MP worth of detail in the files - that's why Olympus outputs the JPEGs at 40MP.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 18:48 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2089 comments in total)
In reply to:

larryr: If I understand the article correctly, total light gives an idea of the quality of the images so a camera with a smaller sensor might do as well or perhaps better than one with a larger sensor IF it has a faster lens (AND using a slower shutter speed is not an option, forcing the camera with the larger sensor to use a higher ISO)? Pixel density is not important? This allows one to understand the relative importance of lens speed vs. sensor size (in terms of total light and IQ).

This changes the common wisdom that a small sensor camera performs pretty well in daylight but not so well in low light? But the daylight situation has not changed, and the low light situation has improved only where the camera has a faster lens and a slower shutter speed can not be used (allowing it to use a lower ISO?)

On cameras with smaller sensors does the adjusted aperture refer to the actual size of the aperture? In the cropped example the adjusted aperture does refer to the used part of the aperture.

Nobody is claiming that the sensor size has any impact on the light intensity.

However, light intensity is a measure of the amount of light cast on a particular area and sensor size gives an understanding of the area that you are sampling.

I repeat: an 25mm f/15.6 lens would clearly allow lower light intensity to the sensor than a 4.5mm f/2.8 but the difference between the two is proportionate to the different areas over which the light is being captured.

So: If both sensors have the same number of pixels, then each pixel receives the same number of photons during the same exposure time. The larger sensor experiences less light per-unit-area but has larger pixels.

Pixel size plays a surprisingly small role in image quality (if you resample images to a common size). Sensor size plays a much larger role because it determines how much light you can potentially capture (because it defines how much area you have measuring any given intensity).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 18:35 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

Helstor: Does it have a new shutter mecanism (real first curtain electonic shutter)?

In the anti-shock mode the mechanical shutter does not move at all at the start of the exposure - only at the end.

In electronic mode it isn't used at all.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 08:11 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

Franz Weber: Hi Richard, can you confirm whether or not the autofocus works in lowlight down to -4 EV like the Panasonic G6 or GH4?

And is the any information available if this camera sports full sensor readout in video like the Sony RX 10 and the GH4?

We've not been given a rating, nor had the chance to test yet, I'm afraid.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 07:56 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

Helstor: Does it have a new shutter mecanism (real first curtain electonic shutter)?

It can be used as a fully electronic (silent mode) or as an electronic first curtain (anti-shock).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 07:53 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2089 comments in total)
In reply to:

larryr: If I understand the article correctly, total light gives an idea of the quality of the images so a camera with a smaller sensor might do as well or perhaps better than one with a larger sensor IF it has a faster lens (AND using a slower shutter speed is not an option, forcing the camera with the larger sensor to use a higher ISO)? Pixel density is not important? This allows one to understand the relative importance of lens speed vs. sensor size (in terms of total light and IQ).

This changes the common wisdom that a small sensor camera performs pretty well in daylight but not so well in low light? But the daylight situation has not changed, and the low light situation has improved only where the camera has a faster lens and a slower shutter speed can not be used (allowing it to use a lower ISO?)

On cameras with smaller sensors does the adjusted aperture refer to the actual size of the aperture? In the cropped example the adjusted aperture does refer to the used part of the aperture.

Yuvalm - I'm standing by my original statement:

Panasonic FZ200 has a 4.5-108mm F2.8 lens

In full-frame terms that would be equivalent to a 25-600mm F15.6 lens.

A 4.5mm F2.8 lens on a 1/2.3" type sensor will allow exactly the same amount of light through as a 25mm F15.6 lens would on full frame, if given the same shutter speed.

You're absolutely right, the light intensity would be lower on the larger sensor, but that would be exactly in proportion to how much bigger the full frame sensor is. So, for instance, if both sensors had the same pixel count, each pixel would receive the same amount of light.

This article includes examples that demonstrate exactly this point.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 07:38 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

Athonline: One question: How does it compare with the E-M1? In terms of both handling and overall performance (with m4/3 native lenses).

Ah, sorry, I misread that as 'native 4/3.'

I've not had enough chance to compare the image quality or focus speed yet.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 07:11 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Are you guys posting article on London time? It is not even 2 in New York and your article has a time code of Feb 5, 2015 at 06:00.

Regarding the camera, I don't think it is a big enough improvement over mk1. Wondering if m4/3 sensors are limited by its size and cannot get much better. A7S, NX-1 and the upcoming 50mp FF all have exciting sensors but there is nothing on the m4/3 side since the switch to SONY 16mp.

Our site does work on GMT, yes.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 07:00 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

olyham: The high res mode may do interesting things with a waterfall...be good to see the result

We don't have a waterfall image, but we have got a shot of fast-running water over some rocks. It looks rather odd.

I'll try to post it tomorrow.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 06:56 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

Athonline: One question: How does it compare with the E-M1? In terms of both handling and overall performance (with m4/3 native lenses).

Since it doesn't have on-sensor PDAF, I wouldn't expect it to be as good as the E-M1 at driving Four Thirds lenses, which are primarily designed for PDAF. I've not had a chance to check yet, though.

The E-M1 is one of the best-handling small cameras I've ever used, so I wouldn't quite rate the E-M5 II as highly. The M5 II is smaller, cheaper and prettier, though.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 06:54 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

TN Args: Shocked to see still no touch screen, but otherwise very nice.

It does have a touchscreen - I've corrected our database.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 06:44 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

photodog25: Richard, can you please check the raw shots for the em5II in high resolution mode? They look really poor in quality compared to the jpeg. Thanks for getting this info out so quickly!

As the page should say, the Raw support is currently preliminary.

Somewhat oddly, Olympus outputs its JPEG as a 40MP file but the Raw file is 64MP. We're not sure why there's that discrepancy.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 06:42 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zeisschen: Is the High res mode compatible with HDR mode, so can it make those 8 shots at different exposures?

I'm afraid not. They're distinct modes, so engaging HDR disengages High Res.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 06:39 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cheezr: Can you turn the LCD inwards when using the EVF so it stays off?

Yes.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 06:32 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

olakiril2: One question: What is the highest available ISO in Movie mode?

In movie mode the max is ISO 6400.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 06:31 UTC
In reply to:

NAwlins Contrarian: The specifications say, "Body type Rangefinder-style mirrorless," but it is actually an SLR-style mirrorless. Unfortunately, without on-sensor phase-detection auto-focus, it lacks one of the major advantages most SLRs have over most mirrorless cameras. Still, I don't doubt that it has a lot to like.

I've corrected the database. Thanks for pointing that out.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 06:24 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1343 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tapper123: What sensor improvements have been made?

Any less noise at high ISO or increase in DR?

I'm not aware of any sensor improvements being promised, but it is there in the press release.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 5, 2015 at 06:14 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (792 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rspivack: Just bought the A6000 and want to try shooting some video in addition to stills.

I have never shot video before on a real camera (only camera phones), so I 'm wondering which video mode is the "best"?

For maximum quality, is there any reason not to simply choose the 60p "highest quality" mode?

Why would one choose a 24p mode? I read somewhere that 24p is the same as traditional film frame rates, but does that matter?

Footage shot at 24p (and around 1/50th of a second shutter speed) has a distinctive appearance in terms of how motion is conveyed. It's surprising how many people recognise it as being 'cinematic' even if they can't tell you why. Conversely, faster frame rates can look more soap opera-esque.

60p, although it sounds like it's higher quality setting, may not yield the results you want. It's better at *accurately* representing motion, but that's not always what you want.

Equally, many cameras shoot the same bitrate, regardless of how many frames per second you shoot (which means a lower frame rate will have more data representing each individual frame), so the 24p setting may appear less compressed, too.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2015 at 20:13 UTC
Total: 2818, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »