Barney Britton

Barney Britton

DPReview Administrator
Lives in United States Seattle, United States
Works as a Editor
Has a website at www.dpreview.com
Joined on Nov 2, 2009
About me:

I'm in charge of the editorial content of dpreview. I joined dpreview when it was based in London in November 2009, after several years as a print journalist in the UK specialist photographic press. I moved from London to Seattle, USA, a year later and I've been here ever since.

Comments

Total: 3342, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

AmateurSnaps: Not usually one to comment on these articles but honestly, how much do dpreview get paid for these fluff pieces?

(I have an iphone so no hater but these articles are embarrassing)

Lazy troll. Amazon doesn't sell iPhones. And our sponsored content (what little of it there is) is clearly labeled, as per FCC guidelines.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2016 at 17:58 UTC
In reply to:

sh10453: Barney, Barney, Barneyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy ...
What happened to balanced journalism?
I got the humor part, but this article won't be complete or balanced without listing the 10 reasons NOT to buy the iPhone as well.
OK, forgiven. Just follow up with another article, with the 10 reasons NOT to ... :)
Have a great Seattle day.

I'm not saying you should buy it. I'm just saying that when Apple does things like introduces twin lenses, bokeh simulation and Raw capture mode into its latest iPhone, you should *care*. Because it will have an impact on the photography industry.

Apparently, the majority of the people commenting on this article have entirely missed that nuance. Which is a shame. Because just as you (rightly) expect balance from us, we also expect balance from you - our audience.

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2016 at 17:57 UTC
In reply to:

usernamealreadyinuse: Ass-kissing absurdity lost me at "3MP is good enough for a magazine cover".

I used to work for a photography magazine...

Link | Posted on Sep 11, 2016 at 06:04 UTC
In reply to:

BJN: A photography blog should know better than to equate a soft focus background with bokeh. It seems many photographers don't grasp the concept of bokeh meaning the characteristics of the out-of-focus areas, not the amount of blur or not. If you're going to post a listicle, at least stick to the general DPReview tradition of accurate description and photo education,

Who are you calling a blog?

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 04:37 UTC
In reply to:

The Sage Knows: Well I found it of interest - especially the Bokeh example.
It is an instrument (a very popular one) of digital photography. So why wouldn't the editor of DPR write something about it.

"This website has officially become a flame bait click bait joke, not an exaggeration, all journalistic credibility is now gone."

Seems like a fairly egregious exaggeration to me, to be honest.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 02:19 UTC
In reply to:

M H S: stupid article all around...but

Could you at least get the English right? The list contains multiple "reasons" for us to care. Therefore, it should be "Here are" 10 reasons, not "Here's 10 reasons" - Here's is the contraction of Here is - which would be for one reason.

I guess folks who would be interested in these "compelling" reasons probably don't care about your butchery of the English language.

I'm the editor of DPReview. Last time I temped for anyone was more than a decade ago. But I'll take feedback on my grammar any time it's offered, and I've corrected the article.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 02:17 UTC
In reply to:

zakk9: So the reason why I should "care about" the iPhone 7 is that it can do more or less the same as other current smartphones?

Dear dpreview,
When you insert an advertorial, please label it as such. This is just an attempt to boost sales for Apple and Amazon. The iPhone 7 looks like a good phone, but there's no rational reason whatsoever anybody should buy it except for increasing Apple's profits. Oh... and those who recently dropped their phones in the sea.

"This is just an attempt to boost sales for Apple and Amazon"

No it isn't. I think Apple is doing just fine, and Amazon doesn't sell iPhones.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 02:15 UTC
In reply to:

princecody: @Barney which iPhone 7 are you buying or do you get both for FREE since you write reviews?

@ dsumanchy - are you commenting on the wrong article, here? Where did I suggest that anyone could shoot sporting events on a cellphone...?

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 01:10 UTC
In reply to:

princecody: @Barney which iPhone 7 are you buying or do you get both for FREE since you write reviews?

Neither of them, and no.

You know what 'editorially independent' means, right?

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 23:34 UTC
In reply to:

Jim VeNard: You should correct your "Water Proof" to "Water Resistant"

It's buried in a footnote on Apple's site but this is actually rated at IP67 under IEC standard 60529, which as far as I can tell means that the phones should be fine if submersed under 1m of water for up to 30mins.

So water-resistant versus waterproof... seems like you could make an argument either way.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 23:07 UTC
In reply to:

Lightcapture: A word of warning, it's not waterproof, but water-resistant and splash-proof. The water-dust-resistant rating is slightly lower than all Sony flagship phones since 2013 (the Xperia Z series and now the XZ series). Sony, with slightly higher specification water-dust-resistant rating, warnS that it should not be submerged in salt water or under fresh water/pool for too long or too deep.

Ah yes. Edited.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:57 UTC
In reply to:

dsumanchy: There is a correction needed in the title of this article, here ill fix it:

"Apple noticed actual photographers saw through the media smokescreen and could potentially undermine iPhone sales, so they paid us some money to write an article in order to try and change the narrative."

When it comes to the iPhone 7:

I'd only be "worried" about using it to shoot a football game.

LOL!

I decided to write it, I wrote it, and I published it. I'm the editor of this site. So this is all me, I'm afraid. We are editorially independent.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:56 UTC
In reply to:

apertotes: That's how you get clicks, maybe, and lose readers.

I will never understand people who think they have a right to express any kind of negative opinion about articles that they haven't read. It reminds me of the people that picketed cinemas to stop screenings of 'The Life of Brian'.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:37 UTC
In reply to:

ChesterY: Wait...is it a "28-56mm zoom." or is it a...

28mm or 56mm "zoom"

I did say 'kind of'...

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:30 UTC
In reply to:

dsumanchy: There is a correction needed in the title of this article, here ill fix it:

"Apple noticed actual photographers saw through the media smokescreen and could potentially undermine iPhone sales, so they paid us some money to write an article in order to try and change the narrative."

When it comes to the iPhone 7:

I'd only be "worried" about using it to shoot a football game.

LOL!

Dude, if I got paid by Apple to write articles I could afford a much nicer apartment. Don't be a troll.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:30 UTC
In reply to:

miles green: Can we see a Pentax K1 dissection next please! They cram the AF motor and sensor SR system in there as well, and the moon-lander screen.

Don't be silly, the Lunar Lander is much too big to fit inside a K-1.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:28 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: While I agree with many of these points, it seems a bit over the top to make a special article for the Iphone 7, when most of these points apply to flagships from every brand.

Very well, sir. You and me, tomorrow - pistols at dawn. I demand satisfaction.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:24 UTC
In reply to:

Robert Schroeder: I never cared for ANY iPhone, and for good reasons, too, and I don't even need to look at any of those "10 reasons" (and actually I didn't and I won't) to know that the iPhone 7 won't change a thing in that regard.

Good to know.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:23 UTC
In reply to:

Skanderbeg: Have you noticed how Apple, after promoting the ad in the rain and claiming that the phone was splash proof, also clearly state that water damage is not covered by warranty?

Presumably because given a certain level of waterproofing, you'd have to be doing something truly irresponsible with the phone to still end up getting it water-damaged ;)

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:23 UTC
In reply to:

noisephotographer: There are rumours that only the 28mm lens has OIS. Furthermore there are rumours that the sensor of the 28mm camera is a little bit larger than the sensor of the 56mm camera.

Interesting, but I'd be very surprised if the latter rumor was correct.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:22 UTC
Total: 3342, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »