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: 3335, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

stromaroma: Great article but that last statement "We'd certainly recommend the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II for landscape photography"????? I wouldn't use either of these for landscape photography... unless of course one was magically in my hands when I wanted to take a photo, which would never happen because I doubt I'd ever touch one. There are much more practical / affordable alternatives for landscapes that would perform equally well if not better.

The sentence literally right before the landscape line says 'Ultimately, both cameras are excellent tools for action photography'.

The landscape line refers simply to the fact that the Canon's extra dynamic range makes it more useful for photography in tricky lighting conditions (i.e., landscapes) than the Nikon.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2016 at 16:58 UTC
In reply to:

BigOne: I understand why DPR did the reviews of those cameras - I like to play with big expensive toys, too, AND I believe it's an interesting reading. Thank you. But who THIS comparison is for is beyond me. Amateurs upgrading from their iphones? Professional photographers with more experience than the entire DPR staff combined? Chinese tourists looking for a new neck adornment?

I didn't read the article because of its ADHD-attention-span formatting but two things I know for sure. One, there are NO tangible physical difference in any characteristics between those two cameras. And two, no real buyers of those cameras will make a decision based on this article. (Chinese tourists buy their cameras on Alibaba which Bezos does NOT own.)

Again, reviews - YES, PLEASE. Comparisons - REALLY?

"I didn't read the article"

I'm sorry, that's when I stopped reading your comment.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2016 at 16:25 UTC
In reply to:

Lin Evans: Great job guys - just don't let the cowboys hear you say "steer riding" - LOL Those "steers" have all their original equipment!

Lin

Yeah, it's fair to say we might not have entirely assimilated.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2016 at 02:42 UTC
In reply to:

armandino: which sums up that the 1DX is easily the most all rounded camera. It is nice to have the amazing 3D af tracking, but how much further does really get you? 1DX AF is already incredible. Let's not forget flicker detection. Battery life, ISO performance and the other nice additions are consolation prices to make sure that the cameras score exactly the same.
Dual pix with touch screen is massive, 4K 60fps+ frame grab is massive, effective 16fps against effective 12fps is massive. DR is massive.
Lead in AF tracking and low light AF might be worth for very few out there, and makes the D5 more appealing to a minority, which indeed can be read between the lines of the politically correct DPR review.
Sorry Nikon

*Very* selective reading, but whatever makes you happy...

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2016 at 21:52 UTC
On article Gallery update: Nikon 300mm F4E PF ED VR (54 comments in total)
In reply to:

Manfred Bachmann: The 810 rocks with this lens, the D500 and D5 not so really, just imo.

Vis-versa, I assume you mean.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2016 at 19:43 UTC
In reply to:

GatanoII: Interesting and informative video and this makes me think:

In this scenario (I must repeat , _in_this_scenario_) it's evident that the direct competitor Nikon D5 should bite the dust , no usable smooth video AF for rapid moving subjects , way slower 4K frame rate for applying slow motion (same separation that exist from usable and useless), "slower" 12fps vs 14fps for getting more decisive moments and far less workable dynamic range for recovering shadows in high contrasty scenes (this is odd and new to Nikon vs Canon) ... and the Canon AF proved, obviously, to be up to the tasks, maybe Nikon could have an easier way to set up to be up to the different tasks, but not enough to separate them, while the pluses from the Canon 1DxII can make a real difference.

So the only think that puzzles me is why DPR did give the same points to the both cameras, since I see substantial advantages/disadvantages where it makes a difference to easily claim a winner.

<a href="https://www.dpreview.com/news/9402203921/nikon-d5-shows-drop-in-dynamic-range">Are you serious?</a>

You're actually trolling us for apparently not mentioning the D5's low(er) base ISO dynamic range when a) we totally do, in this article and the full review, and b) we literally posted an entire dedicated report, earlier this year, where we specifically make that point?

Is that actually what you're doing?

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2016 at 06:20 UTC
In reply to:

Thuravi Kumaaran: A great patch up for “Flagships compared: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II versus Nikon D5”.
Nice video. Congratulations.

patch up?

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2016 at 04:06 UTC
In reply to:

basshead: 1dx mk ii is recommended for landscape??? (LOL)

@ Eugeniu - it's for the pixels. All of them.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 19:03 UTC
In reply to:

rrccad: Barney needs to work on his y'all's.. :)

I surely do.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 17:02 UTC
In reply to:

GatanoII: Interesting and informative video and this makes me think:

In this scenario (I must repeat , _in_this_scenario_) it's evident that the direct competitor Nikon D5 should bite the dust , no usable smooth video AF for rapid moving subjects , way slower 4K frame rate for applying slow motion (same separation that exist from usable and useless), "slower" 12fps vs 14fps for getting more decisive moments and far less workable dynamic range for recovering shadows in high contrasty scenes (this is odd and new to Nikon vs Canon) ... and the Canon AF proved, obviously, to be up to the tasks, maybe Nikon could have an easier way to set up to be up to the different tasks, but not enough to separate them, while the pluses from the Canon 1DxII can make a real difference.

So the only think that puzzles me is why DPR did give the same points to the both cameras, since I see substantial advantages/disadvantages where it makes a difference to easily claim a winner.

Good lord...

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 16:51 UTC
In reply to:

basshead: 1dx mk ii is recommended for landscape??? (LOL)

Yeah we also said "Ultimately, both cameras are excellent tools for action photography" in the sentence literally right before the landscape line so calm down.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 15:17 UTC
In reply to:

basshead: 1dx mk ii is recommended for landscape??? (LOL)

And a lot of other things...

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 15:04 UTC
In reply to:

MadManAce: A click bait article if I ever saw one. Comparing spec sheets and making grandiose claims without any side by side testing, that is sinking to a new level. How about doing getting some PROs to compare the AF in different real life situations with lighting conditions and some repeatable dark studio tests. Lastly, I know very few situations that any PRO would use Dynamic Area Auto 3-D Select Focusing that reviewers are so keen on the D5. How the heck can one be satisfied with the camera making the decision on what to focus on. Now, I am not saying the Canon will win, but given these parameters, I would like to see the true results, not some spec sheet speculating article design to create controversy.

You, sir, are a troll.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 06:15 UTC
In reply to:

Scales USA: I see comments like "Best in Class", which cameras are considered to be in this Class? Is this "Class" including older models like D4, or do you consider the Sony A7R II to be in this class?

High-end full-frame.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 06:13 UTC
In reply to:

DualSystemGuy: In the DR section, why do you only touch on low ISO DR? Nikon DR is higher at high ISO, Canon DR is higher at low ISO. These cameras are most likely going to be used at high ISO's most of the time, not base ISO. It's only a step back at base ISO, more importantly at high ISO it's a step forward.

Arguably, low ISO DR is more useful, photographically. [backs away slowly]

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 06:12 UTC
In reply to:

Triplet Perar: Where are the flags? Where are the ships?
I see only cameras here.

You are not the first dpreview reader to whom I have been required to explain the definition of a 'metaphor' :)

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 05:05 UTC
In reply to:

tr573: "why don't you review the flagship cameras, how come you never review the flagship cameras? when are you guys going to review the flagship cameras?"
...
"you guys don't know how to use the flagship cameras, you have no business reviewing them, what's the matter with you."

If you're looking for logical consistency on the Internet, you'll be looking for a while...

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2016 at 23:38 UTC
In reply to:

MadManAce: A click bait article if I ever saw one. Comparing spec sheets and making grandiose claims without any side by side testing, that is sinking to a new level. How about doing getting some PROs to compare the AF in different real life situations with lighting conditions and some repeatable dark studio tests. Lastly, I know very few situations that any PRO would use Dynamic Area Auto 3-D Select Focusing that reviewers are so keen on the D5. How the heck can one be satisfied with the camera making the decision on what to focus on. Now, I am not saying the Canon will win, but given these parameters, I would like to see the true results, not some spec sheet speculating article design to create controversy.

Only some autres. Not tout.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2016 at 19:40 UTC
In reply to:

jkgal: D5 and 1DX II both got exactly same rating.
5D III and D800 both got exactly same rating. Is this coincidence?

Yes.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2016 at 18:27 UTC
In reply to:

MadManAce: A click bait article if I ever saw one. Comparing spec sheets and making grandiose claims without any side by side testing, that is sinking to a new level. How about doing getting some PROs to compare the AF in different real life situations with lighting conditions and some repeatable dark studio tests. Lastly, I know very few situations that any PRO would use Dynamic Area Auto 3-D Select Focusing that reviewers are so keen on the D5. How the heck can one be satisfied with the camera making the decision on what to focus on. Now, I am not saying the Canon will win, but given these parameters, I would like to see the true results, not some spec sheet speculating article design to create controversy.

Posterity.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2016 at 18:06 UTC
Total: 3335, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »