Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 3680, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

nyrn: "It's important to keep these findings in context: the 1D-X II produces very pleasing, *nearly class-leading* Raw and JPEG images for the most part, but it falls slightly behind in certain respects when compared to its *best-performing peers*."

That's a funny way to say it came in 2nd in a class that contains exactly 2 cameras (the D5 and the 1DxII, as the D750, D810, 5D's and A7's belong in a different category. And even if they weren't, the 1DxII is only better than Canon's own 5DS in the studio tests).

wri7913 - So you've not bothered reading the first page where in both cases, although the 1D X II is compared with the best full frame sensors (to show how its performance compares with what is possible), both sections end by highlighting how well it performs against the D5?

Link | Posted on May 4, 2016 at 19:00 UTC
In reply to:

Azathothh: yay another article about dynamic range and 5 stops shadows push... Can't wait for you 10 stops push article. Do it more please. I really get excited looking at the noise.

The article covers several aspects of the camera's image quality, not just dynamic range (the area where there's probably most difference between cameras, these days).

However, although our tests show a 5EV push, this isn't only relevant if you push your images by 5EV.

If you have to take a photo in challenging lighting, you may already have a lot of shot noise. As soon as you come to process your files, your ability to lift shadows or adjust contrast will be dictated by this shot noise + any noise your camera has added. The camera with the cleaner results in our test will be more likely to let you make your adjustment without revealing noise, even if the edit you make doesn't involve pushing the exposure slider.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2016 at 18:56 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Enthusiast Long Zoom Cameras (109 comments in total)
In reply to:

texasfz8: I always thought a "long" zoom was greater than 200mm. Glad DPR corrected me. I guess small sensor bridge cameras aren't for enthusiasts. For the kind of money the Sony costs it seems you could go M43 with more reach.

Stephen McDonald - The DL24-500 is delayed indefinitely. (Nikon has said it's having difficulty with the imaging processor and hasn't announced when it will be available)

It would be a bigger omission to not leave our roundups from last year un-updated for another month, two months, three...

Link | Posted on May 4, 2016 at 18:07 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Enthusiast Long Zoom Cameras (109 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThePhilips: I wonder in how many more roundups the Pana TZ100 would show up.

We have no intention of reviewing travelling zoos.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2016 at 18:02 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Enthusiast Long Zoom Cameras (109 comments in total)
In reply to:

deep7: While that "Equivalent Aperture" graph isn't wrong per se, it is quite misleading. If the y axis started at f1 (the functional zero point of aperture calculations), the lines would appear much closer together, reflecting how the real world aperture differences have been exaggerated. Further, using a logarithmic scale on the x axis is very misleading and plays down the significant differences in focal lengths.

I'm not accusing anyone of anything but the graph, as presented, looks as if someone had an agenda...

The difference between a 50mm field of view and a 100mm field of view is essentially the same as the difference between a 100mm field of view and a 200mm field of view. So why not make them the same distance on the scale?

More importantly: the difference between 24mm and 48mm is essentially the same as the difference between 100mm and 200mm.

If you express focal lengths as a linear scale, you significantly under represent the effect of short focal lengths and exaggerate the effect of longer focal lengths. Log(2) isn't the perfect answer but it's arguably *less* misleading than a linear scale.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2016 at 18:00 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

bentheoandrews: Fuji X30 and XQ2 now officially discontinued. Keep up DPR.

I agree. I think the other makers could learn a lot from the XF/XQ compacts when it comes to making a good interface whether you want to point-and-shoot or take control.

I'd love to see that in a 1"-type compact some day.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2016 at 19:55 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

bentheoandrews: Fuji X30 and XQ2 now officially discontinued. Keep up DPR.

There's a page of recommendations at the end of the article in which neither is included.

We haven't recommended them, which isn't the same thing as recommending against choosing them. I realise my phrasing is ambiguous.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2016 at 19:07 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 First Impressions Review (978 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tactical Falcon: Now that the K-1 is available, I wonder when a review is coming.

Ricoh USA has not shipped review units out yet. We're poised to start testing the camera the moment it gets here.

Link | Posted on May 2, 2016 at 19:05 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alhazen: With all the camera comparison tools on the site, why not add an equivalent aperture comparison tool? I mean, the equivalent aperture charts that show up in reviews are nice and all, but it would be much much handier to be able to choose which cameras show up in the chart, rather than needing to look at one of 9 lines in this chart and try to compare to one of another half dozen lines in another chart that doesn't have the same axis scaling.

At the moment the data is stored in an Excel spreadsheet I maintain. We'd need to get the data into the database, then set up the code to plot the curves and the interface for choosing the cameras for comparison.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 21:50 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

photominion: Does the equivalency-comparison account for the fact that the LX100 uses a crop of the 4/3s sensor and not the entire surface at any given time?

Yes, both the LX100 and G1X II are calculated based on the crops of the sensor they can actually use.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 21:49 UTC
On article Nikon D7200 Review (636 comments in total)
In reply to:

nwfmike: Sorry, didn't read all the comments (628 and counting) so maybe this has been answered, but how does this score an 84 and get a Silver and the Sony a6000 scores an 80 and gets a Gold. The link http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Guides/dpreview_scores_and_ratings_01.htm that describes the scoring rules is down.

Not that it is a big deal, Gold and Silver stars don't mean much and these reviews with pros and cons can be a bit of a moving target...just wondering how the Gold and Silver is applied.

Try [this link](http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained) instead.

It tries to make clear that:

*They are not awarded to every camera, just those we feel deserve one.*

*There is no direct link between the overall score and the awards: they are not given automatically to cameras reaching a certain threshold. Crucially a camera can get an award even if a camera with a higher overall score didn't.*

The scores are mainly based on the objective measurements we make and are heavily weighted towards image quality. The awards are the lead reviewer's overall assessment of what the camera as a whole offers. We try to explain why one camera does and doesn't get an award.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 18:59 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

bentheoandrews: Fuji X30 and XQ2 now officially discontinued. Keep up DPR.

Define: 'Officially'

The sources we ask say that they're still available. Ultimately, though, we don't recommend either of them, so you can just skip over those pages if you're not interested or they're not available.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 18:36 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

CopCarSS: Reading any DPR article that discusses equivalency and the shouting match that it's sure to bring about gives me the equivalent heart burn of a chili cheese dog and an order of buffalo wings.

However, in an article that includes cameras with different sensor sizes pitted against one another, it makes sense to provide a way of visualising their lenses on a common basis.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 18:34 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joel Ebel: Why does the line for the RX100 I/II end below 50mm on the equivalent aperture graph? Those cameras have a longer zoom range that the III/IV versions. That seems like an error.

Sorry about that. A really basic Excel error on my part had chopped the rest of the line off.

It should now be appearing.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 18:30 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

JDar: Thanks for the post. Informative and nice update. You may consider to include an iPhone in comparison chart. It would be nice to get a perspective how much you gain by actually getting one of those cameras. A lot of people nowadays (including me) have their phones on them all the time. The newest one (6s+) has 4k video and optical image stabilization which I've got to say, works great. And of course touch screen. But how does the size of the sensor, depth of field and IQ compare to these cameras? Is it still worth to invest in another device to carry around. Or maybe just move on to DSLR, because at least we get APS-C sensor and some nice glass. Would love to see that kind of analysis.
... For my part I was thinking of Pana LX-100 for it being the closest to DSLR experience in a small package. But the lack of IS in video and fixed touch-less screen made me wait for something new... And yeah, the build in ND would be nice too. Maybe film log...
Still I love my cannon's color rendition.

The iPhone has a roughly 30mm equivalent field of view, I believe and its f/2.2 maximum aperture would be equivalent to roughly f/15.5.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 18:12 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (277 comments in total)
In reply to:

aramgrg: Dear Dpreview, In G1X II "allowing you to maintain the same angle of view at 3:4 and 4:3" should probably be 3:2 and 4:3

That's true - only in 1:1 can you have the same angle of view in both portrait or landscape orientation.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 18:02 UTC
On article Video: Meet the Nikon D500 (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

DogsOdMarymoorPark: I have already limited my AF area mode selection (a9) but you say there is a quick way to change the AF area mode without pushing the AF mode button, can you explain how?

Most of the custom buttons can be set (Menu f1) to 'AF-area mode' or 'A-area mode + AF ON' depending on whether you want the camera to then refocus in your newly-chosen mode.

You get to specify which AF-area mode the camera jumps to.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2016 at 00:00 UTC
On article Video: Meet the Nikon D500 (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rambler358: I might just sell off my Sony gear for this.

Very few cameras feature built-in GPS - the logic is probably that those people who need it will be willing to pay for it, but there aren't enough of them to force everyone to have to pay for it (especially given this camera can pull location info across its link to a smartphone).

Again with the pop-up flash: I suspect Nikon felt more people would appreciate the bigger, better viewfinder of the D500, than would use the pop-up flash. I think they'd also like to encourage people into using the RF flash triggers via the 10-pin connector on the front of the camera.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 23:57 UTC
On article Video: Meet the Nikon D500 (186 comments in total)
In reply to:

TN Args: Referring to the long wait is as good as admitting that the D300 was uncompetitive since a long time ago.

The D300 was launched eight and a half years ago. I don't think there's anything controversial about suggesting it's no longer cutting-edge.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 23:52 UTC
In reply to:

Alphoid: That's a pretty impressive camera. In the review, please review the lens quality. Bokeh, CA, distortion, coma, the full gamut. That's critical with a non-ILC camera.

We didn't go into quite *that* level of detail, I'm afraid, but we did take [a bit of a look at the lens](http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/power-zoom-panasonic-lumix-dmc-zs100-tz100-review).

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2016 at 22:57 UTC
Total: 3680, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »