Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 4683, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

sunilkumar: I was expecting that we will see crop mode feature in this review(50 , 70 mm) which some people reported is very nice on this camera. I have read on internet that camera performing some interpolation on those cropped images to keep pixel count better than straight crop?
Can you please add that in your review?

Regards,
Sunil

Something [like this comparison](https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x100f/4#DT), you mean?

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 05:45 UTC
On article Sense and Sensitivity (6 comments in total)
In reply to:

GeorgianBay1939: Very helpful article.
When you refresh it please correct the last sentence in the first paragraph: "As such it joins shutter speed and aperture as one of the three factors that define exposure." which is clearly incorrect.
A simplistic correction might be: "As such it joins shutter speed, aperture and scene luminance (Exposure) as another factor that determines the lightness (or brightness) of the final image."
Thanks for your good contribution to correct this often mis-understood and often mis-represented topic.

That's a good point. I've amended the article accordingly.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 23:57 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

jolive3: What about the quality of the digital teleconverter?

You'll find a quick look at the image quality of the Digital Teleconverter on [page four of the review](https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x100f/4#DT).

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 23:47 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

wolfloid: Thanks for the review.

Something that always seems to be left out of these reviews is a real sense of the ergonomics in the field. Given that so many photographers coming from high end cameras are used to back-button focus, why is there no discussion of whether or how this extremely useful facility can be implemented? If not, are there useful workarounds?

There is also something seemingly limiting when testing fixed lens cameras with 35mm lenses with this test board. Both the Sony RX1R and this X100F seem to underperform compared with other testing results. Tom Stanworth (http://thephotofundamentalist.com/) has just put up a large number of test shots showing this X100F lens/sensor combination to be superb, both centrally and in the corners, even at f2. Others tested the RX1r showing that lens/sensor as excellent, but which tested badly with this chart. What is it? Testing technique or just an unfortunate set up for these cameras?

Our standard focal length is 75-90mm equivalent, so 35mm forces us much closer to the chart than is ideal. However, the chart is quite big, so that still puts us around 1.4m away, so it's not excessively close up (the need to be able so shoot 24 and 35mm equivalent lenses was part of the reason for moving to the new, much larger chart).

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 23:42 UTC
In reply to:

virtualreality: DPreview staff:
Surprised to see that the AF sports tests were conducted at an outdoors location, iso 200 f/5.6 whereas Sony tests were conducted indoors with poor lighting, iso 1600 f/2.8!
Yes, that's a 5 stop bias for Panasonic...

A test with parameters that aren't as controllable as we'd like is better than a totally controllable one that doesn't represent anything beyond itself. Also, we've found that, despite not having the level of control we'd like, the bike test is pretty repeatable and gives fairly consistent results. Similarly, before publishing the indoor test, we shot it with several cameras whose performance in social settings we know, to ensure it gave results consistent with our broader shooting experience.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 22:05 UTC
In reply to:

virtualreality: DPreview staff:
Surprised to see that the AF sports tests were conducted at an outdoors location, iso 200 f/5.6 whereas Sony tests were conducted indoors with poor lighting, iso 1600 f/2.8!
Yes, that's a 5 stop bias for Panasonic...

There's literally no point in testing a model train if the distances and types of movement aren't representative of other shooting situations. Unless we were recommending cameras for railway modelling enthusiasts.

Our close-range test will be conducted under the same lighting each time and we try to choose days that are neither too bright nor too overcast for the bike test (though Seattle's weather doesn't help with this).

We try to test all the *appropriate* AF settings (we shot around 1600 images using six different sets of settings in the weaving bike test, for instance), however, Panasonic's descriptions of the behavior are not consistent with their recommended settings, so we're conducting more tests to find out what the appropriate settings are, in this situation.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 22:00 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

Angrymagpie: Love the feature image by the way

It's kind of you to say so: I'll make sure Sam sees your comment.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 21:30 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

120 to 35: Nothing in the review on how the "hybrid OVF/EVF" is implemented.

It's the same as on the X100T. I've added a link at the top of the body/handling page, linking back to the diagram and write-up in the X100T review.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 21:28 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

Faspotun: The review says that the focus/control ring is "unused in most modes". That would be great except that with my X100F the focus/control ring set to "standard" cycles between the digital tele-converter focal lengths. It is really easy to inadvertently change the focus/control ring and it is super annoying that it cannot be deactivated.

I've just checked again on this camera and the only reason this isn't doing that is because it's set to shoot Raw+JPEG. Because Digital Teleconverter is JPEG-only, it disables the control ring.

That's not good, given how easy it is to knock the focus/control ring by mistake (and explains how I accidentally shot some 50mm equiv shots before switching the pre-production camera to Raw mode, when I was in New York).

I'll update the review and send some feedback to Fujifilm.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 21:27 UTC
In reply to:

eno2: From a video with one of the Panasonic reps: The - settings on the auto focus parameters will make the AF more responsive while + settings will make it less responsive. Have you taken this into account?

Helpfully, that almost completely contradicts what we were told yesterday.

We've just shot a series of different settings and will see if we can find **any** pattern to the behaviour.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 20:14 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2406 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ruekon: Thank you for this article and the effort spent to make the comparisons and answer lots of comments!

Take Nikon 1 for example: it ships with a 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens. People come to the conclusion that picture quality doesn't catch up with larger sensor cameras. Which surprise when considering that the lens is equivalent to 27-81 f/9.5-15. Don't even people at Nikon know about this and rather tend to stop the Nikon 1 instead?

I wouldn't expect the CX to have equivalent lenses available (as you say, there's an increased risk of overexposure), but, so far as I know, the numbers F3.5 and 5.6 are arbitrary. It might have been nice to offer something like an F2.0-3.0, so that it gave something comparable to an F3.5-5.6 on APS-C.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 20:08 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

John McMillin: DPR reviews certainly have changed over the years. There's nary a single graph to indicate the scientific rigor of your analysis. Just subjective user impressions. That's worth something too...

We've been trying to move to visual representations, rather than numbers and graphs, because we want to make clear what the photographic impact was (rather than presenting numbers with insufficient visual context).

But yes, I went back and looked at one of the reviews from when I first started and couldn't imagine producing something like that now.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 18:15 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

AngularJS: Thanks for the review. I don't see anywhere the flash sync speed mentioning. It's a leaf shutter, right?
Seems like an awesome camera, in spite of all shortcomings it definitely deserves "Gold".

That's a fair call. It's easy to accidentally overlook the things that have always been present in the series.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 18:09 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nick8: DPR, thanks for the article.
Maybe in the specs comparison table, the "Dials" cell should be green for X100F.

I'm not sure more is always better, in this instance. It's not necessarily *worse* but it's enough of a matter of taste that I didn't want to dictate the answer.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 18:08 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

jolive3: What about the quality of the digital teleconverter?

It's my plan to test that. I didn't feel enough people would use a crop-and-upscale mode to justify delaying the review for it, though.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 18:05 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

Daft Punk: "Exaggeratedly derided Adobe Camera Raw"...

Really? Given the history of how other software suites have done a (much) better job of handling Fuji X trans files, i think the derision is not unfair.

How does DPR come to the conclusion that the problems with Adobe and X trans are exaggerated?

The Fuji users who flock to C1 and Iridient aren't doing it for their health. They do it because the results are better.

I'm not contesting that other software gives better results, but ACR is not nearly as terrible as is sometimes suggested.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 18:04 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (665 comments in total)
In reply to:

cabo: One problem I have with my X100F is that the camera always resets itself to a focus distance of 7 ft. (a little over 2m) after it was switched off. This is really bothering me as I often switch off the camera while I wait for something interesting to happen and expect it to be at the same distance setting when I switch it back on again. This worked on all previous X-series cameras I had (X100, X100S, X-Pro 1, X-Pro 2, X70), but not on the X100F.

Knowing Fuji, I'm still positive they will fix this soon in a firmware update. Let's hope for the best.

Bear in mind that the front of the lens extends and retracts as the camera focuses: I think it's resetting to a 'home' position.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 18:00 UTC
In reply to:

virtualreality: DPreview staff:
Surprised to see that the AF sports tests were conducted at an outdoors location, iso 200 f/5.6 whereas Sony tests were conducted indoors with poor lighting, iso 1600 f/2.8!
Yes, that's a 5 stop bias for Panasonic...

asdf photographer - the close-range, low light test here will be included in most future reviews as it models the behaviour we're seeing when we shoot people in family/social settings. The bike test models the behaviour of something like a child running around on a lawn. I'm not sure what kind of shooting or movement a model train would represent.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 17:57 UTC
In reply to:

calgarykev: Maybe Panasonic has a UI problem. The bike test settings look like they are exactly the same wrong settings Photo Joe used on Youtube because of misunderstanding the descriptions. For that type of shooting, Panasonic recommends the camera should be set -2, -2, 0 per this video (which clears things up quite a bit): https://youtu.be/6PyqWrztPkc

Possibly the results are better +2,+2,+2. On my older GX8 I find AFF works better than AFC for my purposes. Whatever works best!

We're in discussions with Panasonic about this, since the wording and the presets suggest the opposite of what that video says.

We're going to conduct some additional testing.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 15:00 UTC
In reply to:

eno2: From a video with one of the Panasonic reps: The - settings on the auto focus parameters will make the AF more responsive while + settings will make it less responsive. Have you taken this into account?

It sounds like it depends on exactly what you're shooting and which AF mode you're in. We're in discussion with Panasonic (since the descriptions and presets in the camera appear to contradict some of the statements they're making).

We'll be conducting additional testing in the next few days (as soon as there's an appreciable break in the rain). Our existing testing got better results as we moved from 0 to +2 but there's enough ambiguity (interplay between settings?) to prompt us to test some more.

In the light of your update: that's interesting, since the Panasonic rep is proposing negative values. As if there weren't already enough combinations to check. ;)

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 23:25 UTC
Total: 4683, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »