Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 3923, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Offside: From the home page: "The Canon EOS 5D Mark IV has significant rolling shutter, our tests show. We shot the 5D IV alongside both the EOS-1D Mark II and the Sony a6300 to show the effect."

That should read EOS 1DX Mark II.

Fixed. Thanks for that.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 15:55 UTC
In reply to:

DStudio: I don't think this 'defect' in Canon's new Wonder-camera is a huge publicity problem, nor do I believe this is scandalous behavior on DPR's part.

Nevertheless, I find it quite amusing that this is a "midnight release" - even on the West Coast! I wouldn't be surprised if this is about the slowest time of the entire week for the website!

What odd timing.

We're experimenting with this style of headline. We'd have just as readily used this headline about any other brand.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 15:48 UTC
In reply to:

wcan: I would like to know if when shooting 1080p, there are moire/aliasing/jaggies due to pixel binning or skipping, or has Canon taken the full sensor data and internally averaged it down to 1080p so as to avoid those issues?

We'll be posting that information very soon.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 15:43 UTC
In reply to:

rfsIII: Video sites have a rolling shutter measurement in terms of the time it takes the sensor to read out from top to bottom. It's in milliseconds IIRC. That would be a very helpful metric for DPR to add. (And then no one would complain about you whipping the camera around. )

I'm sure they'd complain if we told them any interesting results when we found them and would conclude we were doing it wrong. Or that it doesn't matter.

In all seriousness, though, yes we do need a test that allows us to measure the amount of rolling shutter do that we can test each camera without having to do a series of A/B comparisons. That's part of an ongoing project at the moment.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 15:42 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2197 comments in total)
In reply to:

emxgarcia: Just to further understand and please correct me if I'm wrong.
An f/1.2 full frame lens mounted on an APS-C body it not a truly so, maybe an f/1.6.
But, an f/1.2 MFT lens on an MFT body is f/1.2

Any lens, whatever you mount it on, *is* whatever it says it is.

So a 50mm F1.2 is a 50mm F1.2, since it knows nothing of the sensor size that's looking through it.

**However** if you mount a 50mm F1.2 on a four thirds sensor, it will give a result *equivalent to* a 100mm F2.4 lens on full frame, irrespective of what format it was designed for. Equally, a 50mm F1.2 on APS-C will behave in a manner *equivalent to* a 75mm F1.8 lens on full frame.

What the lens *is* doesn't change, regardless of what format it was designed for or what format you shoot in on. The results it gives *will* change as you mount it on different formats. Equivalence can help you understand what that change will be.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 09:04 UTC
In reply to:

Nobby2016: i would love when companys got rid of all video features and make the cameras a little less expensive. a two version system, one model with video features one without.

yeah yeah i know it will not happen.
and from a business perspective it makes no sense.

nikon was shunned for the lack of video in the DF, but i would not care at all.

still, all the development spend on video in DSLR/mirrorless cameras is wasted on so many of the customers. my friends have sony, nikon and canon cameras and the waste majority is using camcorders for filming.

i know it might be wrong to think so. but i can´t eliminate the feeling im paying for something i don´t need or want in a DSLR.

even when the implementation (hardware) of these video features don´t cost much, it sure has an influence on R&D cost.

ok a cameras with video features my attract more customers so the camera can be sold cheaper. who knows if that is actually true?

for video i have an extra camera i spend good money for.

Yes, and I think it's interesting that there's only one D810 (in terms of AA filter).

It's difficult to see how the D800E or 5DS R should cost more than the near-identical model.

I much prefer Ricoh's approach with their AA filter simulator, or Sony's in the RX1R II - an AA filtering effect only when you need it.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 08:44 UTC
In reply to:

DStudio: I don't think this 'defect' in Canon's new Wonder-camera is a huge publicity problem, nor do I believe this is scandalous behavior on DPR's part.

Nevertheless, I find it quite amusing that this is a "midnight release" - even on the West Coast! I wouldn't be surprised if this is about the slowest time of the entire week for the website!

What odd timing.

*This* is the article about the a6300 and I'll be adding a link to the Sony review in the morning.

The problem is that we don't (yet) have a standard test for rolling shutter and my 'style' (which is probably too grand a term) of shooting video didn't highlight the issue. However, having seen comments about the a6300's rolling shutter, I wanted to make sure that I gave the full context.

We do not, nor have ever, written exactly the same articles for each camera. We write about the things we notice. For instance, we wrote about how much better the 80D and 1D X II's DR was, compared to previous Canons, whereas we didn't highlight any aspect of the a6300's.

Impressions can be wrong and resilient to all manner of evidence to the contrary.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 08:39 UTC
In reply to:

Nobby2016: i would love when companys got rid of all video features and make the cameras a little less expensive. a two version system, one model with video features one without.

yeah yeah i know it will not happen.
and from a business perspective it makes no sense.

nikon was shunned for the lack of video in the DF, but i would not care at all.

still, all the development spend on video in DSLR/mirrorless cameras is wasted on so many of the customers. my friends have sony, nikon and canon cameras and the waste majority is using camcorders for filming.

i know it might be wrong to think so. but i can´t eliminate the feeling im paying for something i don´t need or want in a DSLR.

even when the implementation (hardware) of these video features don´t cost much, it sure has an influence on R&D cost.

ok a cameras with video features my attract more customers so the camera can be sold cheaper. who knows if that is actually true?

for video i have an extra camera i spend good money for.

I can only speak for our review, which didn't factor the Df's lack of video in, to any great extent.

Personally, I don't think adding video adds much to the cost of most cameras, but trying to differentiate between two models (one with video, one without), plus all the stocking errors that would occur as a result would *guarantee* extra expense.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 08:27 UTC
In reply to:

DStudio: I don't think this 'defect' in Canon's new Wonder-camera is a huge publicity problem, nor do I believe this is scandalous behavior on DPR's part.

Nevertheless, I find it quite amusing that this is a "midnight release" - even on the West Coast! I wouldn't be surprised if this is about the slowest time of the entire week for the website!

What odd timing.

Or, look at it the other way 'round.

I finished shooting and editing the video together last thing on a Friday night and stayed up until Europe woke up, so that it got seen. Believe me, I wouldn't have spent so much time annotating and preparing this if I *didn't* want people to see it!

For the record, part of the reason it took longer than planned is because I wanted to compare it to the a6300 - specifically because I didn't want anyone to think we were saying the Canon was bad and hiding that the Sony is similarly bad.

And, as I acknowledge in the text, nobody is likely to throw their camera around this much: it's a way of highlighting something that *might* subtly undermine your footage. Whether you shoot 5D IV or a6300 at 24p

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 08:20 UTC
In reply to:

Nobby2016: i would love when companys got rid of all video features and make the cameras a little less expensive. a two version system, one model with video features one without.

yeah yeah i know it will not happen.
and from a business perspective it makes no sense.

nikon was shunned for the lack of video in the DF, but i would not care at all.

still, all the development spend on video in DSLR/mirrorless cameras is wasted on so many of the customers. my friends have sony, nikon and canon cameras and the waste majority is using camcorders for filming.

i know it might be wrong to think so. but i can´t eliminate the feeling im paying for something i don´t need or want in a DSLR.

even when the implementation (hardware) of these video features don´t cost much, it sure has an influence on R&D cost.

ok a cameras with video features my attract more customers so the camera can be sold cheaper. who knows if that is actually true?

for video i have an extra camera i spend good money for.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't the lack of video that put some people off the Df.

THe question is: how much money is actually being spent by companies on video development? Canon, Panasonic and Sony already make pro and broadcast cameras, for instance, so they're already done the R&D. So how much additional cost is really being passed on to the consumer?

There are enough cameras on the market that feel like they've had a [REC] button added because the sensor supplier pointed out that the chip could do it, with little further effort being made.

However, while adding video (in a perfunctory way, at least) costs next-to-nothing, trying to market two distinct models *would* invoke all sorts of additional costs.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 08:16 UTC
In reply to:

Dr_Jon: It would also be interesting to see how much less it is in 1080p if you ever get a sec? But many thanks, it's just what I asked for (although may just be coincidence of course). Pity you're not still in London, you could try my patented (err,-ish) moire/aliasing test...

I'll be passing through London in September...

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2016 at 08:07 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1126 comments in total)
In reply to:

left eye: So this dual-pixel sensor has 60MP photosites but a 30MP filter array.

In terms of noise, averaging 2 pixels will just about half visible noise.

In terms of dynamic-range the photosites are those of a 60MP sensor, so DR will not be great. I don't think averaging the result from two tiny photosites doubles DR, a blown highlight is a blown highlight.

On-chip ADC helps, but one wonders how down-scaling the 5DSR 50MP to 30MP would compare?

In many ways the 'dual-pixel' sensor of the 5D IV could be a 'single-pixel' 60MP. I'd buy the 'single-pixel' 60MP - with on-chip ADC, in an instant.

However, correct exposure on any given sensor tries to make full use of that highlight information. If you have two sensors that are identical except for a difference of full well capacity then the one with greater full well capacity would be considered to have a lower base ISO (because it can tolerate more light before overexposing).

To try to make maximal use of dynamic range, you (or the camera maker) will want to push the camera as close to clipping the first channel as possible because this maximises signal and hence minimizes noise.

Any highlight recovery comes from:
1) The two unclipped color channels (with color accuracy limited to certain colors)
2) Clever guesswork by the processing software
3) Poor exposure

All the differences in DR are in the shadows. Any highlight recoverability is a unreliable combination of luck and error.

Ultimately, digital is not film. There's a hard cut-off at one end of the sensor's response, not a linear, recoverable roll-off.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 18:47 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1126 comments in total)
In reply to:

JRFlorendo: Wow....this guy said 5D4 is a major flap!

http://www.eoshd.com/2016/08/1-74x-crop-odyssey-canon-5d-mark-iv-officially-announced/

Flap?

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 18:34 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1126 comments in total)
In reply to:

Earth Art: Dear DPR staff,

Are you sure your explanation of DP RAW Micro Adjustment is correct? I'm a little confused. It seems from Canon literature that it creates a data map for masking. Giving the ability to quickly sharpen only areas that are in focus.

Does it really allow for shifting focus in post? Or is there some gimmick for simulating the effect?

I've read IR's piece. They're saying essentially the same thing as us. The left and right perspectives on the scene allow very slight adjustment of point of maximal sharpness because it gives a tiny insight into where the light has come from. This allows the image to be rendered as if it had been focused in a very slightly different position.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 18:31 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1126 comments in total)
In reply to:

davidevans1: With pricing it's $3499 in the US and Calumet in the UK has emailed it at £3599 body only! The Brexit effect maybe?
Their 5d mk2 trade in is £950 with a £250 trade in bonus, so £1200 trade in total.
I'm a Nikon user anyway, and an accountant (!) but having noticed Sony prices go through the roof, the Canon prices stood out.

Also, bear in mind that US prices tend to be quoted without sales tax (which varies, state to state), while UK prices are quoted with 20% VAT.

£3599 would be £2999 without VAT. This still amounts to the equivalent of $3958 at the current exchange rate. This means you're paying a bit more than US customers (depending on the sales tax rate in a given state), but not as much as it seems.

Then add in the fact that UK prices (and European prices generally) tend to fall a few weeks after launch, in a way that US prices don't, and I suspect in two months time it'll be about the same.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 18:12 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1126 comments in total)
In reply to:

BarnET: Ow man,

Just discovered that as it stands this camera will NOT shoot 4k

The codec 500 Mbps

Fastest UHS 1 SD 150mbps write speed
Fastest compact flash 160 mbps

Ow dear.................

500Mbps is 62.5MB/s

However, although some SD card promise write speeds of more than that, the fastest standard for *guaranteed* sustained write speed is U3, which only promises 30MB/s

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 01:40 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon EOS 5D (199 comments in total)
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: If and when the "Falling Reflex Mirror" gets fixed... This is a great camera.

The most affected are the tropical countries with high humidity. The glue deteriorates quickly. To Canon's credit, they will do the recall and Reflex Mirror correction for FREE.

.

They used to, I'm not sure if it's still the case that Canon will repair for free.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 01:27 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1126 comments in total)
In reply to:

makistza: If the dynamic range has improved enough from M3
and the dual pixel refocus in post has ~1cm range ( the miss shot of the eye) I will buy it.
Probably it will cost around 4000 but there are too many and expensive L lenses
and flashes I already own to think another company.
The Sony looks like a toy, no professional user can rely on that system,
at least for now, besides if every one year the Sony has a new upgrade then
your old Sony camera are worth nothing.
Just think about how much will be the price of a used Sony Alpha 7R II after 4 years.
It will be three or four models behind the 2020 flagship. It will be 500-700$ at the most.
So you will lose pretty much all your money if you invest to Sony.
The Nikon is a very respected and serious company with superior dynamic range BUT.
1. I don’t like the ergonomics.
2. The Canon lens are far better.
3. The cameras and the lenses they are too ugly for my taste.
My women, my cars and my cameras are and will be beautiful.

The specific distance over which you can refocus will depend on the way you shoot the image. I wouldn't get your hopes up too high in terms of the degree of adjustment, though.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 01:15 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1126 comments in total)
In reply to:

PropaPH: some other blogs etc are saying the crop factor for video is 1.74 and not 1.64x crop you guys state.... what could explain the difference?

It depends on how you calculated it.

If you consider just the diagonal vs the full 3:2 still image then yes, it's a 1.74x crop. But by that logic, you'd consider using the full width of the sensor to be a 1.06x crop, which most people wouldn't.

It's a 1.64x crop compared to using the full width of the sensor.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 01:13 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon EOS 5D (199 comments in total)
In reply to:

aris14: "...Although the sticker price was the same as the Mark IV's, that $3500 would now be the equivalent of $4300 in today's money..."....
On the contrary R&D cost, promo etc etc should make this baby cost less than $2.000.

Sorry, I don't quite follow what you mean.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 00:46 UTC
Total: 3923, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »