Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 4809, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ramonjsantiago: "85mm F1.2 is equivalent to 67mm F0.95"
How is that? Maybe its equivalent to to a 67mm F1.2.

Because in most respects (diffraction, depth-of-field and light per image), an 85mm F1.2 on 44 x 33mm sensor will behave in a way that's [equivalent to](https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/) a 67mm F0.95 on full frame sensor.

The lens itself remains an 85mm F1.2 and, since exposure is designed to work across different formats, F1.2 is the value that matters for exposure.

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2017 at 00:05 UTC
In reply to:

surlezi: To DPR staff:
You're comparing Canon to Sony, and forget about Nikon...
True they're already way behind Canon in the sports market, but is it also because they're somewhat bound to suffer more than Canon ?

The thing is now that the AF comes on the sensor itself, Nikon are depending on sensor provider for AF.
Only Sony and Canon produce their own sensors, which means soon only Sony and Canon will have a full control of their AF system ?

It just happens that all four of the photojournalists we spoke to shoot Canon (though some of [the structural reasons](https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/1937765842/) why it's difficult for pros to move to Sony have probably also had an impact on how many people moved back to Nikon, post D3).

Hansen said that she'd shot Nikon when working on the (US) East Coast, and that Nikon has more of a pro presence there, which was a perspective I'd not heard before.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 21:17 UTC
In reply to:

chshooter: Using the 85mm lens on medium format doesn't convince me. The lens was designed for 35mm sensors so heavy vignetting and soft corners seem to be pretty likely on a bigger sensor

The company says it's a G-mount version of their existing 85mm F1.4. It's not clear how much beyond the 43mm diagonal of 'full frame' the image circle is, so it's not clear how much vignetting there would be.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 21:00 UTC
In reply to:

CanonKen: Why are these tools needed for video *capture*, but you don't see this sort of stuff being used for still photography?

These tools were developed for videographers (and are very familiar to them), so most camera makers don't think to put them on stills cameras. I have to say, I've found it fascinating, even from a stills perspective, to start to learn waveforms, the RGB parade and vectorscope.

Even though I'm just learning how to properly interpret and recognise what they're telling me, I'd love to shoot with a stills camera that offered these features (I'd find the waveform much more useful than a histogram, personally).

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 17:42 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (707 comments in total)
In reply to:

D7000ShooterUK: This article has been written on the assumption that the a9 is a superior camera. This is a very rash assumption and has not been proved. 20 fps does not make it the better pro sports camera - there are a lot of other considerations which need to be taken into account including weather sealing, durability and many others.

It's difficult to do nuance in headlines. The point I was trying to make is even *if* the a9 is better, that in itself wouldn't be enough to elbow in on the established brands just yet.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 17:18 UTC
In reply to:

Dave Oddie: Why does it matter how much it costs? At the end of the related article here:

https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/1937765842/sony-a9-why-being-better-might-not-be-enough

It says "Hansen, having already moved from Nikon to Canon..."

So this tells us pros switch systems occasionally. I doubt that was a cheap move but I also doubt Hansen paid for it himself either. There must have been some compelling reason to move from Nikon to Canon regardless of cost and if Sony can provide one to switch to them, then (some) pros will switch.

I think the cost of switching systems is far more relevant to amateurs like me than pros but even then we amateurs don't have to replace the entire lens lineup in one go and can phase the move as funds allow.

I believe she moved from an employer that used Nikon to one that used Canon.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 15:07 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (707 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: I take it that Richard didn't get to go to New York and was left behind at the office... 😉

F.A.B

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 23:59 UTC
On article Canon will add C-Log to the EOS 5D Mark IV for $99 (461 comments in total)
In reply to:

CreeDo: no video expert but does this mean a different codec to record this higher-dynamic-range video?

From my understanding, canon video uses an ancient inefficient mjpeg codec that creates monster filesizes, like 4 gigs per minute at full res. Basically each frame is a full jpeg file.

So if this is the video equivalent of raw vs. jpeg, does that mean these already huge filesizes will get like 10x bigger? Can this format record that extra data, when you consider the fact that a jpg still can't hold all the highlight and shadow data in a raw still?

Yes, it's a question of how it's processed before being compressed as a video file.

Raw video does exist (there's a CinemaDNG format and several high-end, multi-thousand-dollar cameras can shoot Raw), but it requires large amounts of super-fast storage and a lot of post-processing work, so it's currently primarily the domain of professional production teams/post production houses at present.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 18:43 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (707 comments in total)
In reply to:

Haim Hadar: @Richard - first Paragraph - "its able" should be "it's able" :-)

Sorry about that. Articles finished at the weekend don't always get the level of spit and polish they deserve.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 18:10 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (707 comments in total)
In reply to:

sibuzaru: At least from those guys perspective Sony is basically a single lens from being ready for the prime time then? Everything else but the 2.8/400 is present for e-mount

And I can already smell the Siver Award on the air

The structural reasons why pro shooters can't easily swap systems is not going to be a factor in our scoring.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 15:22 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (763 comments in total)
In reply to:

redhed17: Do Professionals only exist in America, and maybe Canada to get the support Sony's eyes! :-/

The Pro Support scheme is also in several other countries. Germany, Switzerland, Austria, UK, Australia and Japan, off the top of my head (there should be a few more details in the article we publish tomorrow). However, we're US based so we only get direct access to Sony USA, which means it's their updates we mainly report.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 00:10 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (763 comments in total)
In reply to:

sh10453: Nice to know that Sony has now made a sensible menu, and the user is no longer feeling lost. So this will no doubt percolate to other Sony cameras.

If the durability and weather sealing are not there, or not even close to the 1DX / D5, I am not sure who the target is for this very expensive camera.

Entoman - I do not believe it's the case that Sony semiconductor only sells older chips to other cameras companies. We've seen new chips turn up in other brand's cameras before Sony fairly regularly. Furthermore, it would be bad business for Sony's Semiconductor business if its clients thought they were getting second-rate products or unfair treatment (this has always been the line from Sony).

In a recent interview with IR, Sony seemed to say that its camera team sometimes commissions chips that include their own IP and it's these that only Sony cameras have. But, in principle, other customers could do the same. That's my understanding, anyway.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 18:01 UTC
On article Canon will add C-Log to the EOS 5D Mark IV for $99 (461 comments in total)
In reply to:

weixing: I'm sure think there will be someone out there that will open up a 5D4 and check what's the difference between a 5D4 with and without the C-Log upgrade... :-P

Their statement is: 'Due to the software architecture in the camera we need to connect and use our service tool to upgrade.'

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 18:47 UTC
On article Canon will add C-Log to the EOS 5D Mark IV for $99 (461 comments in total)
In reply to:

weixing: I'm sure think there will be someone out there that will open up a 5D4 and check what's the difference between a 5D4 with and without the C-Log upgrade... :-P

Canon has just made a 'clarification.' There is no hardware change.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 18:20 UTC
On article Canon will add C-Log to the EOS 5D Mark IV for $99 (461 comments in total)
In reply to:

CreeDo: no video expert but does this mean a different codec to record this higher-dynamic-range video?

From my understanding, canon video uses an ancient inefficient mjpeg codec that creates monster filesizes, like 4 gigs per minute at full res. Basically each frame is a full jpeg file.

So if this is the video equivalent of raw vs. jpeg, does that mean these already huge filesizes will get like 10x bigger? Can this format record that extra data, when you consider the fact that a jpg still can't hold all the highlight and shadow data in a raw still?

Log gamma absolutely isn't the equivalent of Raw vs JPEG, it's the equivalent of shooting the lowest-possible contrast image to squeeze everything you can into the confines of a JPEG specifically because you can't shoot Raw.

So, while it being an 8-bit file is a limitation, the use of a format that retains more information than usual might actually be a slight benefit in this instance.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2017 at 18:17 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10/LX15 Review (382 comments in total)
In reply to:

davids8560: The Canon G9X MARK II is clearly the winner at the moment if SMALLEST SIZE/BEST POSSIBLE IQ are the *sole* parameters.

(Those aren't the sole parameters for me, however)

But ask me again tomorrow, by all means!

Whether G9X II gives the best possible IQ depends on where in the lens range you are. It's significantly slower at the long end of the zoom, which will have a significant impact on IQ in situations where you're light limited.

I've added it to the graph on page 1, to demonstrate this.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 22:36 UTC
In reply to:

Tom Marshall: Just wondering how many have noticed this 'accessory' is listed at $399.99 USD at B&H.

That's interesting: I'll add it to the story.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 18:52 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G7 X Review (488 comments in total)
In reply to:

Truculent: Quite a sell job in favour of the newer G7X over the G1X II. And the comments are inaccurate. If the G1X II sensor was twice as big it would be a 2 inch sensor not a 1.5 inch sensor. And the only reason the G7x's noise is close to the G1X at high ISO is because they smear all the details to achieve this. Very bias and misinforming for those choosing between the two cameras. I thought this site knew better, very disappointed.

The noise (even in Raw) is [very close](https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-PowerShot-G7-X-versus-Canon-PowerShot-G1-X-Mark-II___978_941) to that of the G1X II because it has a more modern, more efficient sensor. When you also take into account the faster lens on the G7 X, you should find it's possible to get *better* low light images with the G7 X, despite the smaller sensor.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 22:39 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G7 X Review (488 comments in total)
In reply to:

Truculent: Quite a sell job in favour of the newer G7X over the G1X II. And the comments are inaccurate. If the G1X II sensor was twice as big it would be a 2 inch sensor not a 1.5 inch sensor. And the only reason the G7x's noise is close to the G1X at high ISO is because they smear all the details to achieve this. Very bias and misinforming for those choosing between the two cameras. I thought this site knew better, very disappointed.

The "inch type" system doesn't refer to a measurement of the sensor, it's an obscure naming system [based on vidicon tubes](https://www.dpreview.com/articles/8095816568/sensorsizes).

However, it's related to the diagonal of the sensor, so you don't need to double the number to end up with a sensor twice the size.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 22:19 UTC
On article Nikon D7500 vs Nikon D500: Which is better for you? (387 comments in total)
In reply to:

iceman003: Will the D7500 work(by work I mean focusing and metering) with http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/zoom/normalzoom/af-s_dx_16-85mmf_35-56g_vr/index.htm and http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/singlefocal/normal/af-s_50mmf_18g/index.htm ?

Yes, in both cases.

It's only the old AI type lenses that the D7500 no longer supports.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 22:04 UTC
Total: 4809, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »