Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 4366, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2312 comments in total)
In reply to:

OntarioPhotog: The article on equivalence appears to have reversed the 50mm and 100mm entires in the first table.

It looks right to me: a 50mm lens on a Four Thirds sensor gives the same field-of-view as a 100mm lens on a 36x24mm sensor.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 19:57 UTC
On article New kid on the block: YI M1 review (695 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: The ability to convert RAW files to jpeg in camera is something of an emergency feature like being able to use alkaline AA batteries: technically useful, but something I have neither used nor factored in a purchasing decision for years.

These days when you can easily convert the RAW files on your phone even, I think we can safely consign the feature to history and no longer trot out a demerit if a camera is missing it.

I'm afraid I completely disagree. Whenever I'm travelling, whether for a weekend or a trip back to Europe, I really appreciate the ability to tweak and fine-tune an image from the Raw file. The feature becomes more valuable, the better the JPEG engine is, so I particularly appreciate being able to use it on, say, a Fujifilm or Olympus. It means my images are that bit closer to the way I want them, before I Wi-Fi them to my phone.

We're fully aware that it's not a way of working that everyone will want to use, so we list it as a Con (essentially 'a thing you *might* want to consider'), rather than actually factoring it into the final score.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 00:05 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 1 - Crop-Sensor (386 comments in total)
In reply to:

Absolutic: Did you guys consider that D500 is only $200 more these days? Updated price has been $1799. I had both D500 and XT2 and think. D500 is a better camera in everything other than video and of course EVF has its benefits

The text is written based on list price because we can't constantly re-check the current price across multiple markets, nor do we know whether lowered prices are temporary offers or long-term re-positioning.

Ultimately, we thought it would be fairly clear that if we say 'price is the only reason camera X didn't win,' then a reduction in the price difference makes the decision harder.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2016 at 21:15 UTC
On article Camera Roundups updated for the holidays (32 comments in total)
In reply to:

RedDog Steve: " ...for what America calls 'the holiday season,'" ?
That's a rather cynical expression coming from a major retailer. isn't it ?
Don't other regions share The Holidays, and the sales extravaganza it provides ?

It certainly wasn't intended as such.

It's an expression by me, a writer for a photography website, not by the website's parent company.

I, in common with many of our readers, come from a country where we don't celebrate Thanksgiving, so don't have a group of holidays that starts this early. I was trying to explain the timing of this article while being respectful of both perspectives.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 17:45 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10/LX15 Review (382 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jennyhappy2: 1" compact pocket camera F1.4 for $699.

End of story.

As I say: shoot them for the same exposure time and whatever ISO setting is required to make up for the difference in exposure.

In the situation i described (shooting from the same position), there's no difference in light-source-to-sensor distance, so light fall off doesn't play a role.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 00:05 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1213 comments in total)
In reply to:

sunjester: Very positive review. Though I am surprised a free trip to Iceland was left off the first page. Seems to me review sites should be very upfront with that kind of stuff.

While it's lovely to get out of the office, be aware these trips tend to be hard work.

You wake up early and work late, with a time zone change thrown in if you're lucky. And, while you struggle to learn a camera, often in challenging shooting settings, you're acutely aware of the need to start sending images, video and text back to the office - ideally before all the other websites can.

I'm not for a moment suggesting anyone should feel sorry for us, but press trips are not paid holidays - you usually end up working harder and for longer hours than usual and don't really get to experience the location (to the point that a short flight is usually preferable to a more exotic destination).

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 20:28 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1213 comments in total)
In reply to:

sunjester: Very positive review. Though I am surprised a free trip to Iceland was left off the first page. Seems to me review sites should be very upfront with that kind of stuff.

I should make clear that this camera was co-reviewed by someone who didn't go on the press trip and that all conclusions and ratings need to be agreed with the rest of the team, who also didn't get to stand around in the rain.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 19:24 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10/LX15 Review (382 comments in total)
In reply to:

TheMexican: The Panasonic LX100 sensor size isn't corrent. It should be 225 sq. mm

The LX100 can never use the full area of its sensor. 180 sq. mm is the maximum area that's used.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 18:09 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (349 comments in total)
In reply to:

noirdesir: Small correction: In the introduction you talk about 'the two Fujifilm options'. This should read simply as 'the Fujifilm option' (singular).

Also, the Canon models are missing from the equivalent f-stop graph.

Clearly banging my head against my desk has only made matters worse.

I was sure I'd got those links right.

They are now fixed (and G9 X added to the graph).

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 18:08 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Compact Enthusiast Zoom Cameras (349 comments in total)
In reply to:

noirdesir: Small correction: In the introduction you talk about 'the two Fujifilm options'. This should read simply as 'the Fujifilm option' (singular).

Also, the Canon models are missing from the equivalent f-stop graph.

[Bangs head against desk]

Sorry about that. Both those errors should now have been addressed.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 17:14 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 First Impressions (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): @DPReview - This is a first as far as I can tell where this volume of comments have been edited out. I trust we can expect the same policing to happen when the other manufacturers have a review posted?

'As far as I can tell' is the operative part of that post.

I'm seeing very few deleted comments. The only significant deletion I can see was at the request of the person who made the original post, having decided his comment was more ill-tempered than he intended.

The insinuation that we have the time to moderate comments on a per-brand basis is the strangest theory I've seen in some time. It is *utterly* false, just in case that needs saying.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 17:10 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 First Impressions (220 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stejo: This camera makes no sense to me at all. Why rush the successor to a 6 month old, well received camera?

Zdman - cameras take around two years to develop. Even if Sony had already done much of the development of the IS and touchscreens in other models, it's still not credible that they could market research. design, develop and put a new model into production after hearing about the M5.

Rumors that the a6300 was meant to be launched earlier are plausible but the idea that this is a *reaction* to anything that's happened since mid 2014 are exceedingly unlikely.

Stejo - Everything Sony has said publicly, plus the price and feature set differences points to them being distinct models. Though I agree the naming, similarity of body style and historical inconsistency about how they segment the market does cause entirely understandable confusion.

Personally I'd put money on the a6000 being replaced by, say, an a6100, at some point, but with Sony, who knows?

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 17:04 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2312 comments in total)
In reply to:

Deven-D7: Forgive me if this has been answered already, as I have not read all 2000+ comments, but to me 'equivalency' is only applicable when you are using the same 'sensor' but only smaller. Pixel size and Pixel density need to be accounted for as well. Otherwise you are trying to convince me that going on a safari with an IPhone will result in equivalent pictures to a 1DX with 600mm lens. Similarly will a phone sensor with panoramic feature give me the same picture as a 16mm lens on a FF sensor?

What I think needs to be described and tabulated is the angular resolution of different sensors and sizes as a relation to distance from subject. I am still having a problem accepting that a 4/3 sensor with 300mm lens will produce the same quality picture as a FF sensor with 600mm lens when shooting from the same spot on a bright sunny day.

Am I missing something? Or are we not talking about the quality of the picture, only the DoF and FoV?

Azathothh - it depends on your shutter speed, too.

Scene illumination, aperture and shutter speed are the three most significant variables when it comes to noise. On a modern camera, the ISO setting plays very little role in adding noise: it's the lower light level that prompts you to raise ISO that causes the noise.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 16:53 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1213 comments in total)
In reply to:

whumber: Two errors on the first page

1. E-M1 II only does 15 fps with mechanical shutter when the AF and AE are locked. It does 10 fps with AE/AF just like the D500. Maybe not an error per se, but misleading. Also, the E-M1 does 9 fps with mechanical shutter with AF-C, 6.5 fps with EFCS and AF-C.

2. Effective magnification for the E-M1 & E-M1II EVF is 0.74x, not 0.65x.

Ah, that was a firmware update, wasn't it? I'll double-check that our figures reflect the latest version.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 16:43 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1213 comments in total)
In reply to:

photofisher: Where is the DR testing. Incomplete review. Olympus marketing promised us 1-stop improvement in something. So far no one is seeing a 1 stop improvement in anything.

SHood is correct: we've shot our DR tests and analysed them as best we can with beta support. We'll publish the data as soon as we have a fully calibrated build of Camera Raw, so they're consistent with other cameras.

I would tend to treat any claims of 1EV improvements (in high ISO noise or dynamic range) with a container ship's worth of salt at this point: modern sensors are extremely good and a 1EV improvement means a 100% performance increase.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 16:35 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1213 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fun 4 all: I would really like to see reviews and scores updated when important firmware updates are released. The no longer sold Samsung NX1 was drastically improved with firmware adding features like top of the line focus tracking and also IBIS during video, and yet its review nor score were ever changed.

It could be the same with this camera. It appears Olympus has the hardware ready to go and is still improving the software. Just like focus-stacking and other improvements were added to the E-M1, I bet we will see many improvements in the future.

Anyway, this looks to be the best all around camera on the market today. It is easy to pick on the sensor but lenses make up for that. With today's cameras almost all have good quality images, but how many shoot at 18 or 60 FPS and have steady-cam like stabilization?

We try to address firmware updates where possible.

In the case of the NX1, we'd already had to completely re-work the review several times before publication, as Samsung kept adding features and fixing bugs, months after the camera went onto the market,. Eventually we had to just choose a point in time and finish the review with what was available at that time.

By the time the last firmware update was announced, there were question marks hanging over Samsung's commitment to the system, so we didn't take the time to go back and re-assess the NX1.

In general, we do try, if the update is significant.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 16:31 UTC
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

WastingTime: Why would the aperture change from f4 to f6.4 on an APS-C sensor? Do you meant equivalent minimum Depth Of Field?

The Aperture of a lens remains the same across all formats.

Edit: I just notices that the author also has done this calculation on other lenses reviews, but I really don't understand the logic behind it.

Equivalence in terms of just about everything except exposure, since exposure tends to be discussed and understood on the basis of light per unit area, rather than a whole image perspective.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 03:53 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2312 comments in total)
In reply to:

wwick: Because the information on this site is always so excellent – and I assume my grasp of “equivalence” is pretty good – I was surprised to find myself confused. I don’t get how “total amount of light” on large versus small sensors is supposed to figure into the topic at hand. My guess is that it’s meant to be a non-technical way of introducing the concept of the inverse square law. If so, the graphic accompanying that discussion does not fully meet the criteria. It seems to me the relevant concept could be stated like this:

A Full Frame camera with an Equivalent FL set to an Equivalent DOF of a Micro Four Thirds camera would need 4 times more light than the smaller sensor. This would necessitate an increase in shutter speed, ISO, or the light level of the subject itself.

As to the consequences of increasing shutter speed or ISO with large versus small sensors, I’ll defer to you guys, but in terms of the basic optics, I think the article got a little more entangled than was necessary.

No problem.

Ultimately all of this is background theory - differences between sensor technology can and will have an impact. For instance, I'm not saying that four smaller pixels combined *will* be better than one large one, just that the contribution from shot noise will be essentially the same and the differences made by read (electronic) noise will be small, such that the final result will be very similar.

Ultimately [this article](https://www.dpreview.com/articles/8189925268/) should (I hope) make it clearer why the total amount of light captured makes so much difference (because most of the noise in your images is from the light you captured).

Thank you for devoting so much time to this and for giving me the benefit of the doubt. It does run counter to the way 'exposure' is usually discussed, so does *seem* to contradict what many people have been taught. Keep pulling the threads and you get to see another perspective, I think.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 00:07 UTC
On article Sigma 12-24mm F4 DG HSM Art Lens Review (202 comments in total)
In reply to:

WastingTime: Why would the aperture change from f4 to f6.4 on an APS-C sensor? Do you meant equivalent minimum Depth Of Field?

The Aperture of a lens remains the same across all formats.

Edit: I just notices that the author also has done this calculation on other lenses reviews, but I really don't understand the logic behind it.

As the article tries to make clear, 'exposure' is based on light-per-unit area, so obscures the effect of sensor size.

Yes, taking an APS-C crop out of a FF image is exactly the same as just shooting with an APS-C sensor. Both will, at the same F-number, receive the same light per unit area, so the 'exposure' will be the same.

However, they will both be made up from less light than if you'd shot a full frame camera with the same field of view from the same distance at the same F-number, so will be noisier.

[This article](https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5365920428/) demonstrates the effect. The APS-C crop from FF is the same as the APS-C image but as soon as you bring the whole FF sensor to bear on the same framing, then the same F-number and shutter speed give you a cleaner image.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2016 at 22:40 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras around $500 (270 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jefftan: to editor:

please review X-A3
Thanks

We do hope to.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2016 at 20:20 UTC
Total: 4366, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »