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: 2817, showing: 961 – 980
« First‹ Previous4748495051Next ›Last »
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1645 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ross Murphy: "Meanwhile, DPReview's Andy Westlake expressed his disappointment that there's no option to directly select AF points, as is possible with cameras like the Nikon D7100 and Olympus OM-D E-M1."

would be a huge let down if that is true, surely a HUGE oversight ?????

In the sense that you can't just move it - you have to press another button first.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 05:59 UTC
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1645 comments in total)
In reply to:

OliverGlass: DPRreview, does the X-T1 have Real Time Live Exposure Simulation
like the ones seen on Point and Shoots and Canon bodies?

I believe you have the choice of whether the camera does or doesn't represent the current exposure.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 05:55 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThePhilips: DPR, feel the wrath of Sony fans...

@The Philips - the scores are as objective as possible and based on around 50 specific data points, benchmarked against the camera's peers.

The awards are based on whether the reviewer liked it or not, after extensive use, trying to put themselves in the position of a would-be buyer. All reviews, by their nature, include opinions.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2014 at 00:35 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

jkokich: I just think that in this day and age, there is no excuse for substandard JPEGs. Yes, I know shooting RAW is great, but there's no reason, with today's tech, to have anything less than great JPEGs, especially at this price, and I'm a Sony fan!

@querza - as with the posterization, it's something we saw in our real-world images first, that we then tested so that we understood and could explain when it would and wouldn't have an impact.

Once we'd seen it, very obviously in a couple of images, would you prefer us to just not say anything? Or say 'it happens sometimes, we don't really know when'? Or should we say 'this occasionally happens, it seems to only be an issue in these circumstances'?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 21:52 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timbukto: The overly detailed investigation into jpeg posteration may be fitting to the OCD nature of many gearheads out there, and I do not think Sony jpeg is that great (compared to the likes of Canon/Oly/Fuji) and agree it has a negative impact especially in face of its wi-fi capability, but I find the level of investigation over something arguably minor could similarly justify in-depth investigation of shutter-shock in many MFT cameras that do not have EFC, or in-depth investigation of PDAF errors of bright primes in *many* entry level DSLRs without MFA, or investigation into PDAF competency among different DSLRs, etc for that matter. We get the point, Sony doesn't make for the best jpegs...I agree with that point to a good extent. However so much investigation when IMO there are plenty of similar flaws deserving of research as well. In fact I would wager PDAF inaccuracy of bright primes on non-MFA cameras to be far more detrimental with no good work around.

With regards primes on non-fine-adjusted bodies, there are many, many factors involved: which lens, sample variation between bodies, compatibility, given the additional sample variation between lenses. Then you have to create a test that is reasonably representative of real-world conditions for a reasonable number of hypothetical users.

Then you test. With multiple lenses and multiple brands.

Before finally being told 'you must have got a bad copy,' 'everyone knows that lens is no good,' 'you're being biased because you didn't show it also occurs in *this* brand' and 'if fine adjust exists, why didn't you use it - dpr doesn't know what it's doing.'

I agree there's plenty of things worth looking into, but it's not always possible.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 21:48 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timbukto: The overly detailed investigation into jpeg posteration may be fitting to the OCD nature of many gearheads out there, and I do not think Sony jpeg is that great (compared to the likes of Canon/Oly/Fuji) and agree it has a negative impact especially in face of its wi-fi capability, but I find the level of investigation over something arguably minor could similarly justify in-depth investigation of shutter-shock in many MFT cameras that do not have EFC, or in-depth investigation of PDAF errors of bright primes in *many* entry level DSLRs without MFA, or investigation into PDAF competency among different DSLRs, etc for that matter. We get the point, Sony doesn't make for the best jpegs...I agree with that point to a good extent. However so much investigation when IMO there are plenty of similar flaws deserving of research as well. In fact I would wager PDAF inaccuracy of bright primes on non-MFA cameras to be far more detrimental with no good work around.

@Timbukto - it's a difficult balance to strike. We came pretty close to moving the posterization section into a sepatate article, or maybe presenting less about our findings. In the end we elected to put a note stressing that we didn't think it was a big issue and that the reason we'd shown so much detail was to explain the subtleties of what we'd found.

The problem is, once you've started to notice something that affects your conclusion (to any degree), how much depth should you go into? We had to check whether all cameras exhibit the problem and whether it was just a JPEG issue. Did we present too much information? Possibly. But we wanted to be clear the extent (large or small) of the issue, so that people could make up their own minds.

Since we don't have the time to investigate *every* issue on every camera, we have two choices: to not investigate anything, in the name of 'fairness' or try to pin-down those issues we encounter and think we can explain.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 21:41 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

ConradWinchester: JPEG Problems? I think you reviewed a faulty camera1

That's exactly why we asked Sony to send us a second A7, to check against. We saw the same (fairly minor) flaws in that one.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 18:13 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

Retzius: I can't believe this is actually listed as a negative:

"Tools for shooting with third party lenses need improvement"

OK, lets be fair. Next time you post a Nikon review, I want to see "Tools for shooting with Canon lenses needs implementation" as a negative point.

Docking Sony for not giving you a full featured tool set for shooting with non-Sony lenses is just ludicrous and down-right biased. I don't see Nikon and Canon going out of their way to implement 3rd party hardware. To the contrary, Nikon releases firmware updates to hinder it!

@Retzius - you make a fair point that our 'Pros' section didn't give Sony enough credit for including these features (even if we believe they would benefit from a few adjustments).

We've re-phrased one of the Pros to address this.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 02:44 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

DaveCS: I'm not a "fanboy" (or "fanboi" as some are want to spell it). I own a Nikon D600 (w/o the oil issue) and a Leica M7 and a Rolleiflex T and the Sony A7. I usually don't get hung up on reviews - I just do my own - if it's good enough for me, then I'm happy with the product/camera/item.

But as a photographer with about 35 years experience I'm behooved to understand how 1/60 shutter speed can result in "blurry photos". I'm more apt to believe this isn't the shutter speed's problem so much as the shaky hands of the photographer in question (or the fact that you're using 1/60 to shoot F1 race cars - people walking 3mph are not blurry @ 1/60s). Mind you, this issue occurs with Auto-ISO, according to the review, on the Sony - a feature which I don't use (either on my Nikon nor on the Sony) - perhaps it's due to my film days and how I was taught photography. I simply set the ISO for my conditions and work accordingly. Conditions change, and I change the ISO. Not difficult really.

We're not saying you can't take steady images at 1/60th - more that we'd like more control over the shutter speed threshold in Auto ISO.

At the moment the camera uses roughly 1/FL or 1/60th, whichever is faster, and that's less control than we'd expect.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 02:24 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chris Page: I bought into the NEX system, now they are changing the lens line up again I just find it hard to trust this new camera. How long before they move to another set of lenses?

You can use the lenses from this on your NEX and be in essentially the same position the majority of Canon and Nikon users are in: their cameras are compatible with all the lenses, but only a subset are really designed with APS-C in mind.

Only the future will show how much effort Sony makes to support both APS-C and FF, but I'd expect APS-C to make up the bulk of their sales for some years to come, so I doubt they'll stop expanding the (non-FE) E mount range.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 02:22 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

quezra: A question about JPEG quality - you praised the RX100II which has the same engine - does it exhibit the same levels of posterization?

Quite possibly. To start out with, we don't think the posterization is a big issue (we explicitly say it isn't).

It's *possibly* a bit more prevalent in the A7 because you're more likely to get blurred backgrounds, with what should be smooth transitions as a result. Ultimately, though, we look more closely at IQ in an $1700 body than $650 compact.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 01:21 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

osv: wrt a7r jpeg image compression, a quote from imaging-resource.com:
""Dave Etchells Mod
• 3 months ago
Hi Yaj - Yes, amazingly enough, these are just in-camera JPEGs. I think by far the best in-camera processing we've seen from any camera to date. This always used to be an achilles heel for Sony, but they've really outdone themselves on the 7/7R. They made a point of this in the initial NDA briefing, pointing out that they were able to produce *very* sharp images, with no halos or "outlines" as they called them from the sharpening process. Very impressive."

@osv - the A7 offers two levels of JPEG compression - Fine and X-Fine. Annoyingly, the camera won't let you shoot X-Fine and Raw at the same time, so a lot of our shots were taken in Fine mode.

All our JPEG testing was conducted in X-Fine mode, to make sure it wasn't the compression causing all the little things we kept seeing.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 01:13 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bervilat: Almost 20 minutes late, DPreview. That was not british punctuality.

@Bervilat - think of it instead as British Rail punctuality.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 01:10 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

SonyA7r: Great to see that majority of the A7 owners are in agreement that the DP review is off the rails. As far as I know and all the reviews I read, the JPEG engine of this camera is way way better than other Sony cameras!

@RussellInCincinnati - We don't expect anyone to automatically trust our judgement. All we can do is present the evidence on which we drew our conclusions, then state our conclusions.

If you don't have a problem with any of the things we didn't like about the JPEGs, then fair enough. If you do, then you're in a more informed position to make a decision about whether this is the camera for you.

We think it's a really good camera (hence the silver award), we just didn't think it was *great.*

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 01:08 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

osv: wrt a7r jpeg image compression, a quote from imaging-resource.com:
""Dave Etchells Mod
• 3 months ago
Hi Yaj - Yes, amazingly enough, these are just in-camera JPEGs. I think by far the best in-camera processing we've seen from any camera to date. This always used to be an achilles heel for Sony, but they've really outdone themselves on the 7/7R. They made a point of this in the initial NDA briefing, pointing out that they were able to produce *very* sharp images, with no halos or "outlines" as they called them from the sharpening process. Very impressive."

They briefed us on the same feature. Sadly our real-world experience just don't seem to live up to the promise of the the sample images they showed us.

Out of context, I can't tell what image Dave is talking about, but overall, we don't share that enthusiasm for the processing.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2014 at 00:24 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 Review preview (1606 comments in total)
In reply to:

quezra: Page 14 of the review, under Overall Image Quality you have an incomplete sentence: "Overall, they're not terrible, but we're disappointed to see such limited..." Are there supposed to be swear words here that got censored out or something? :D

No, not swear words. It would seem my over-tired brain wandered off as I was writing that.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2014 at 21:58 UTC
On Using third-party lenses on Sony Cyber-shot a7 / a7R article (495 comments in total)
In reply to:

sillette: Can not understand what he means when stating that aperture priority always gives a 1/60 sec shutter speed. It will if the correct exposure is 1/60 at whatever aperture is set. The answer: set a larger aperture. I use aperture priority all the time (most of the time) when using manual focus lenses on my Nex 5 or EOS M and have no problem with the camera setting the correct shutter speed to suit the light. When a manual focus/aperture lens is used the camera automatically changes the shutter speed (or ISO, if set to do so). Of course the A7 may operate in a different manner to the NEX.

Yes, there are work-arounds, but most other modern cameras offer more control over the Auto ISO threshold (eg Nikon, which lets you manually select a shutter speed or one of three 'Auto' settings).

By no means does this make the camera unusable, but the Auto ISO system is a little primitive, compared to its peers.

That said, if it were me, I might be inclined to shoot the way le_alain suggest.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2014 at 19:11 UTC
On Using third-party lenses on Sony Cyber-shot a7 / a7R article (495 comments in total)
In reply to:

sillette: Can not understand what he means when stating that aperture priority always gives a 1/60 sec shutter speed. It will if the correct exposure is 1/60 at whatever aperture is set. The answer: set a larger aperture. I use aperture priority all the time (most of the time) when using manual focus lenses on my Nex 5 or EOS M and have no problem with the camera setting the correct shutter speed to suit the light. When a manual focus/aperture lens is used the camera automatically changes the shutter speed (or ISO, if set to do so). Of course the A7 may operate in a different manner to the NEX.

The problem is the really simplistic Auto ISO implementation, which uses 1/60th as its lower threshold almost all of the time.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2014 at 17:27 UTC
On Using third-party lenses on Sony Cyber-shot a7 / a7R article (495 comments in total)
In reply to:

quezra: The question I'd like to ask Barney - which camera has he shot that shoots third party lenses better?

@quezra - we *absolutely* understand the relevance of a (comparatively) affordable camera that lets you use other lenses with their intended field-of-view. That's exactly why we has someone spend time shooting with them, evaluating the usefulness of the tools provided.

For instance (as has been noted on previous Sonys) the focus peaking is tuned such that, when you magnify live view, you often need to stop and switch to a different level of intensity, which is hard to do.

The point is that anyone thinking of buying it needs to know how well it does or doesn't work - knowing that you've bought a piece of history seems like small comfort if it's annoying to use *as a camera*.

Ultimately, though, this isn't a review of the camera (less still a review of these particular lenses), it's a look at the experience of shooting with non-native lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2014 at 00:29 UTC
On Using third-party lenses on Sony Cyber-shot a7 / a7R article (495 comments in total)
In reply to:

Astrophotographer 10: A surprisnigly negative review. The reviewer clearly is biased against Sony. The excellent manual focusing ability of this camera - the best out there - is suddenly no good.
Not my experience at all.
Who tests an A7/r with junk legacy lense as well???
How about the beautiful Zeiss, Contax g, Contax Yashica, Canon FD, Nikon AIS, Leica R lenses. The images posted from these are stunning.

Noone in their right mind is going to use a 17mm Vivitar which is a lens unsuited to this camera which the reviewer obviously does not know.
A hatchet job of reviewing.

Greg.

@Tone Row - it's more like trying to fit a pair of bald tyres to a Subaru and finding that it's more tricky than you'd expect to change wheels, and that the speedometer suddenly stops working - it's not necessarily the traction of the tyres that's being investigated.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2014 at 23:07 UTC
Total: 2817, showing: 961 – 980
« First‹ Previous4748495051Next ›Last »