Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 4025, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Jefftan: "many GR lovers, it's a very emotional attachment. That's why we need to listen to customers about where we should go.』"

Most wanted in order of importance
1. Weather seal
2. in body 5 axis IS
3. brighter aperture like F2
4. wider lens like 24mm
5. 24 MP copper sensor as in A6300

Please Ricon, #1 most important, give all of us (the whole photographer community) a large sensor weather seal camera

My take from the interview was that they would consider building *additional* GR models, not replace the much-loved 28 equiv.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 15:52 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: 30mm is 24mm FF equiv., not 28mm.

I found this Trio of primes 30/45/90mm (24/36/71mm equiv.) just perfect TRIO for landscape and a few other fields of photography. For me this small X1D with its Trio primes is the greatest announcement in digital world in last 5 years though I can't afford it.

Sorry about that. My brain said 24, my fingers typed 28 (probably because I was already thinking ahead to the F2.8 bit).

I've corrected the mistake.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 15:40 UTC
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jay Kelbley: Missing the kölsch!
Please tell us more about "heat" and how it relates to image quality, dark dark current, etc.!

Jay, you've met me, you know I'm, how can I put it? Tech-inclined.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 04:39 UTC
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Clyde Thomas: Interesting your perspective on Sony supporting "three" formats... E, FE, and A.

Remember AMount has full frame and aps-c formats as well.

Two mounts, each supporting two formats, and the fixed lens 1" format.

Yep, that adds up to three formats for Sony!

Great coverage guys. Thanks. And thanks for the comments on heat management.

Hah, yes. I was more concerned with lens support, so was considering two format used in each of two mounts (and ignoring 1", since Sony doesn't currently offer a 1" ILC).

I was thinking in terms of permutations, rather than combinations, since FE lenses don't mount on A-mount cameras (so the full frame format isn't interchangeable) and that FE can mount on E but isn't always optimal for the user.

So, to be precise: Sony is trying to support a four permutations of mount and format.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 01:22 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2228 comments in total)
In reply to:

daddyo: The problem with this whole 'equivalence' discussion is that is has very little practical application is real-life, every day shooting. Virtually none of this is new technology resulting from switching from film to digital sensors. It is technical reality.
However, when I go do a shoot, I do not waste one thought about what lens or setting I need to make my Olympus E-M1 produce an equivalent 35mm full frame image -- none. I am concerned about the shutter speed, DOF, potential noise, focal length, etc. that will impact the image made by the system I'm using.
What makes me crazy is that so many 'equivalence' preachers will make the blanket statement that f/2.8 on m4/3 is the 'same' as f/5.6 on a FF sensor camera. Or that an f/2 lens on an APS-C sensor camera is 'faster' than an f/2 lens on m4/3 -- and will argue 'til hell freezes over that it is -- usually rocketing off into the 'total light' speech. My exposure meters don't care about equivalence, and I agree with them.

In which case, I'm sorry if my answer seemed a little combative.

I only wrote this piece because I wanted to try to cut through some of the misconceptions that get built up. Ultimately it doesn't imply one format is better than another. Large formats have always given better image quality but usually with a cost of size and price. And, as Olympus is showing with the E-M1 Mark II, there are performance opportunities for smaller sensors in terms of readout speed.

It would probably be an easier message to discuss if 'full frame' wasn't having a renaissance as a digital format, since the reference to 35mm film, although widespread, is entirely arbitrary. It risks people thinking things are being compared to full frame, rather than just being placed on a scale that happens to be calibrated around it (as a popular film format).

Equivalence can undercut some manufacturers' PR claims but if **you** like the balance Micro Four Thirds brings, then no aspect of equivalence can undermine that.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 01:16 UTC
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Clyde Thomas: Interesting your perspective on Sony supporting "three" formats... E, FE, and A.

Remember AMount has full frame and aps-c formats as well.

Two mounts, each supporting two formats, and the fixed lens 1" format.

Yep, that adds up to three formats for Sony!

Great coverage guys. Thanks. And thanks for the comments on heat management.

Although, yes, it's only two lens mounts, you're right in that it ends up effectively being four formats. And it'll be a first for a major camera maker if all those users end up getting similar levels of commitment.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 00:49 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2228 comments in total)
In reply to:

daddyo: The problem with this whole 'equivalence' discussion is that is has very little practical application is real-life, every day shooting. Virtually none of this is new technology resulting from switching from film to digital sensors. It is technical reality.
However, when I go do a shoot, I do not waste one thought about what lens or setting I need to make my Olympus E-M1 produce an equivalent 35mm full frame image -- none. I am concerned about the shutter speed, DOF, potential noise, focal length, etc. that will impact the image made by the system I'm using.
What makes me crazy is that so many 'equivalence' preachers will make the blanket statement that f/2.8 on m4/3 is the 'same' as f/5.6 on a FF sensor camera. Or that an f/2 lens on an APS-C sensor camera is 'faster' than an f/2 lens on m4/3 -- and will argue 'til hell freezes over that it is -- usually rocketing off into the 'total light' speech. My exposure meters don't care about equivalence, and I agree with them.

Ultimately the similarities between an image shot at F2.8 on Micro Four Thirds and one shot from the same position, with the same framing using an F5.6 lens and the same shutter speed on full frame will be more similar than they are different, irrespective of what the ISO ratings might be or what your light meter says.

So while saying they're 'the same' would be wrong, it would be fair to suggest they're... (and you get no prizes for guessing where I'm going with this) ...***equivalent***.

And saying they're 'the same' is probably no more unhelpful than saying F2=F2=F2. Because while it is true, it obscures the fact that not all the properties that might be associated with the concept of 'F2' are universal.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 00:32 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2228 comments in total)
In reply to:

daddyo: The problem with this whole 'equivalence' discussion is that is has very little practical application is real-life, every day shooting. Virtually none of this is new technology resulting from switching from film to digital sensors. It is technical reality.
However, when I go do a shoot, I do not waste one thought about what lens or setting I need to make my Olympus E-M1 produce an equivalent 35mm full frame image -- none. I am concerned about the shutter speed, DOF, potential noise, focal length, etc. that will impact the image made by the system I'm using.
What makes me crazy is that so many 'equivalence' preachers will make the blanket statement that f/2.8 on m4/3 is the 'same' as f/5.6 on a FF sensor camera. Or that an f/2 lens on an APS-C sensor camera is 'faster' than an f/2 lens on m4/3 -- and will argue 'til hell freezes over that it is -- usually rocketing off into the 'total light' speech. My exposure meters don't care about equivalence, and I agree with them.

This article explicitly says equivalence is not a tool that you'd use for setting exposure, that it's most useful when assessing the range of capabilities of different formats, relative to one another. For example, when choosing between enthusiast compacts with different sensor sizes.

However. While your exposure meter doesn't understand equivalence (because it's grounded in an exposure system specifically designed to allow operation across formats, even though that means getting very different results), that doesn't mean it's wrong.

I'd agree that an F2 lens on APS-C isn't 'faster' than an F2 lens on any other format. But only because the term 'faster' is generally used in relation to the per-area way of understanding exposure. However an F2 lens on an APS-C sensor will have access to more light at a given shutter speed than a lens with the same field-of-view at F2 on any smaller format for the same shutter speed.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2016 at 00:26 UTC
In reply to:

gameshoes3003: Person ignorant of the A-mount here. From what I'm understanding, these A-mount cameras have a translucent mirror, right? Does that mean that there is less light reaching the sensor? Do you have to start cranking up the ISO earlier relative to other cameras?

Jonathan Mac - ISO relates shutter speed and f-number to final image brightness. As a result, this camera has to apply a little more amplification (either analogue or digital) to achieve any specific ISO setting.

This is what I meant when I said that the lost light is factored-in. So the images at, say, ISO 800 will be just as bright as those shot at ISO 800 on an a7R II. However, while the same shutter speed, f-number and ISO setting were used, the a99 II's sensor will have received less light, so the image will be noisier.

So it's amplification (which may be mathematical/digital amplification) that needs to be boosted. Not ISO. The distinction is important.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 23:50 UTC
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: Watching this video made me thirsty. :-)

@steelhead3 - no accounting for taste, I guess.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 22:23 UTC
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: Watching this video made me thirsty. :-)

I'm kidding, I quite like Kolsch, it just becomes a little overwhelming, after hours at Photokina.

That said, I utterly disagree with regards English beer. It could be because it's what I grew up with but there are some British beers that I'd drink in preference to just about any Belgian or German beer, lovely though those can be. Slight problem that you have to drink it on cask, as close to the brewery as is practical.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 20:30 UTC
In reply to:

Rhawi Dantas: Ricoh, if you are listening bring a GR with an 35mm equiv. lens. While at it slap a 24mp sensor and we are done.

I volunteer as tribute for testing. (hard job but someone has to do it.´).

I suggested 40mm equiv but would be happy with 35. The implication was that if there was enough apparent demand, they'd consider making one.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 19:43 UTC
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: Watching this video made me thirsty. :-)

Whereas it just reminds me how glad I am that I won't have to drink kölsch for another two years. ;)

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 19:14 UTC
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

PowerG9atBlackForest: Amazing to see how suddenly beers can appear and disappear on the table. You guys can not be blamed for having missed the spirits of the Show at Cologne.

I think he's asking what you meant (presumably the middle section about pre-show orientation). I too am a bit baffled.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 19:12 UTC
In reply to:

Smitty1: Please more lenses, many more moderns lenses. And Sigma needs to get onboard too. Especially on the telephoto side where Pentax is rather thin. Pentax seems to be designing more primes but they don't provide any specific details beyond the vague roadmap.

I don't think many people in the Canikony camps want to trawl ebay or the like for old F and FA lenses. I think most would rather have a new design (reduced CA, in-lens motor, and perhaps weather sealing) with full support behind it.

I've just added in links to the company's latest lens roadmaps for both D FA and 645 lenses, so you can see what they've promised.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 19:09 UTC
In reply to:

Mariano Pacifico: Nikon DL 18-50 Premium Camera was introduced February 2016. To this day not a shadow of its release. Was it a joke or what? Will it be released on Halloween? Is Nikon going to make a praise release? I am tired of waiting.

I'm not sure how this pertains to Ricoh. Nikon warned in April that they weren't going to hit their June launch date and have offered no further update. Several sites quote the company as saying they are delayed 'indefinitely,' so I wouldn't hold your breath.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 19:05 UTC
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: 4:54 - Richard trying to say aluminum after two sips of lager ;-)

Yeah, but that was also frequently true during my chemistry degree and I'm pretty sure I could say 'aluminium' back then.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 18:52 UTC
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: 4:54 - Richard trying to say aluminum after two sips of lager ;-)

I suspect I was trying to decide whether to use the pronunciation I've used most of my life or the pronunciation a lot of our readers will be used to.

And, by trying to think about two things at once, I just ended up stumbling over the word altogether.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 18:35 UTC
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

PowerG9atBlackForest: Amazing to see how suddenly beers can appear and disappear on the table. You guys can not be blamed for having missed the spirits of the Show at Cologne.

Photokina takes place in Cologne, so it's kölsch all round, whether you like it or not. Carey managed to plead extenuating circumstances, meaning that he was allowed a pilsner.

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 18:03 UTC
On article Video: Photokina 2016 wrap-up (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richard Franiec: Drinking on the job seems appealing and highly liberating as this video shows.
Even Canon can be forgiven for being 2 years late to the party with M5.
Well, if you work 24/7, you deserve libation from time to time in order to clear the head LOL.

I like to think of it less as 'drinking on the job' and more 'continuing to work when we really should be drinking.'

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2016 at 18:01 UTC
Total: 4025, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »