Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 3912, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1014 comments in total)
In reply to:

left eye: So this dual-pixel sensor has 60MP photosites but a 30MP filter array.

In terms of noise, averaging 2 pixels will just about half visible noise.

In terms of dynamic-range the photosites are those of a 60MP sensor, so DR will not be great. I don't think averaging the result from two tiny photosites doubles DR, a blown highlight is a blown highlight.

On-chip ADC helps, but one wonders how down-scaling the 5DSR 50MP to 30MP would compare?

In many ways the 'dual-pixel' sensor of the 5D IV could be a 'single-pixel' 60MP. I'd buy the 'single-pixel' 60MP - with on-chip ADC, in an instant.

However, correct exposure on any given sensor tries to make full use of that highlight information. If you have two sensors that are identical except for a difference of full well capacity then the one with greater full well capacity would be considered to have a lower base ISO (because it can tolerate more light before overexposing).

To try to make maximal use of dynamic range, you (or the camera maker) will want to push the camera as close to clipping the first channel as possible because this maximises signal and hence minimizes noise.

Any highlight recovery comes from:
1) The two unclipped color channels (with color accuracy limited to certain colors)
2) Clever guesswork by the processing software
3) Poor exposure

All the differences in DR are in the shadows. Any highlight recoverability is a unreliable combination of luck and error.

Ultimately, digital is not film. There's a hard cut-off at one end of the sensor's response, not a linear, recoverable roll-off.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 18:47 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1014 comments in total)
In reply to:

JRFlorendo: Wow....this guy said 5D4 is a major flap!

http://www.eoshd.com/2016/08/1-74x-crop-odyssey-canon-5d-mark-iv-officially-announced/

Flap?

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 18:34 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1014 comments in total)
In reply to:

Earth Art: Dear DPR staff,

Are you sure your explanation of DP RAW Micro Adjustment is correct? I'm a little confused. It seems from Canon literature that it creates a data map for masking. Giving the ability to quickly sharpen only areas that are in focus.

Does it really allow for shifting focus in post? Or is there some gimmick for simulating the effect?

I've read IR's piece. They're saying essentially the same thing as us. The left and right perspectives on the scene allow very slight adjustment of point of maximal sharpness because it gives a tiny insight into where the light has come from. This allows the image to be rendered as if it had been focused in a very slightly different position.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 18:31 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1014 comments in total)
In reply to:

davidevans1: With pricing it's $3499 in the US and Calumet in the UK has emailed it at £3599 body only! The Brexit effect maybe?
Their 5d mk2 trade in is £950 with a £250 trade in bonus, so £1200 trade in total.
I'm a Nikon user anyway, and an accountant (!) but having noticed Sony prices go through the roof, the Canon prices stood out.

Also, bear in mind that US prices tend to be quoted without sales tax (which varies, state to state), while UK prices are quoted with 20% VAT.

£3599 would be £2999 without VAT. This still amounts to the equivalent of $3958 at the current exchange rate. This means you're paying a bit more than US customers (depending on the sales tax rate in a given state), but not as much as it seems.

Then add in the fact that UK prices (and European prices generally) tend to fall a few weeks after launch, in a way that US prices don't, and I suspect in two months time it'll be about the same.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 18:12 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1014 comments in total)
In reply to:

BarnET: Ow man,

Just discovered that as it stands this camera will NOT shoot 4k

The codec 500 Mbps

Fastest UHS 1 SD 150mbps write speed
Fastest compact flash 160 mbps

Ow dear.................

500Mbps is 62.5MB/s

However, although some SD card promise write speeds of more than that, the fastest standard for *guaranteed* sustained write speed is U3, which only promises 30MB/s

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 01:40 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon EOS 5D (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: If and when the "Falling Reflex Mirror" gets fixed... This is a great camera.

The most affected are the tropical countries with high humidity. The glue deteriorates quickly. To Canon's credit, they will do the recall and Reflex Mirror correction for FREE.

.

They used to, I'm not sure if it's still the case that Canon will repair for free.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 01:27 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1014 comments in total)
In reply to:

makistza: If the dynamic range has improved enough from M3
and the dual pixel refocus in post has ~1cm range ( the miss shot of the eye) I will buy it.
Probably it will cost around 4000 but there are too many and expensive L lenses
and flashes I already own to think another company.
The Sony looks like a toy, no professional user can rely on that system,
at least for now, besides if every one year the Sony has a new upgrade then
your old Sony camera are worth nothing.
Just think about how much will be the price of a used Sony Alpha 7R II after 4 years.
It will be three or four models behind the 2020 flagship. It will be 500-700$ at the most.
So you will lose pretty much all your money if you invest to Sony.
The Nikon is a very respected and serious company with superior dynamic range BUT.
1. I don’t like the ergonomics.
2. The Canon lens are far better.
3. The cameras and the lenses they are too ugly for my taste.
My women, my cars and my cameras are and will be beautiful.

The specific distance over which you can refocus will depend on the way you shoot the image. I wouldn't get your hopes up too high in terms of the degree of adjustment, though.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 01:15 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1014 comments in total)
In reply to:

PropaPH: some other blogs etc are saying the crop factor for video is 1.74 and not 1.64x crop you guys state.... what could explain the difference?

It depends on how you calculated it.

If you consider just the diagonal vs the full 3:2 still image then yes, it's a 1.74x crop. But by that logic, you'd consider using the full width of the sensor to be a 1.06x crop, which most people wouldn't.

It's a 1.64x crop compared to using the full width of the sensor.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 01:13 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon EOS 5D (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

aris14: "...Although the sticker price was the same as the Mark IV's, that $3500 would now be the equivalent of $4300 in today's money..."....
On the contrary R&D cost, promo etc etc should make this baby cost less than $2.000.

Sorry, I don't quite follow what you mean.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 00:46 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Canon EOS 5D (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

RedFox88: Thought it came out at $3300 not $3500. Then the 5D2 was $2700, then 5D3 $3500.

Imaging Resource said $3500 when they reviewed it. DPReview was UK-based at the time, so didn't have US MSRPs.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2016 at 00:45 UTC
On article Canon EOS 5D Mark IV First Impressions Review (1014 comments in total)
In reply to:

User1192886920: What is the bit depth of the JPEG video?
The reviewer only makes negative comments about a 500mbs recording ability.
In the world of pro video low compression is a positive feature!
1/So have Canon gone for 8bit or 10bit jpeg Video?
2/Does the dual pixel raw turn this camera from a 30MO sensor to a 60MP sensor?

Mn

It's 8-bit, so far as we know. I think it's 4:2:2 at least.

No, it's not a 60MP sensor in a conventional sense. It's more 30MP x 2, since both images are formed from the same microlens, so there's no increase in spatial resolution.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 21:36 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2154 comments in total)
In reply to:

el touristo: It is just me or is the spec published here importantly incorrect? : Image stabilization No

No. The camera does not feature image stabilization.

Stabilized lenses are available and there's digital stabilisation available in video, but there's no still image stabilization in the body.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 19:27 UTC
On article Canon EOS-1D X Mark II: What you need to know (146 comments in total)
In reply to:

tinternaut: Hmm... Notoriously mean me might pick up one of these from eBay a few years down the line. Nice summary. As a none Canon user, the main review was definitely a case of tl;dr. The AF systems of the professional cameras are impressive, but I assume they must still be properly learned...

Nobody has said otherwise.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2016 at 17:40 UTC
On article Rebel in your pocket: Canon EOS M3 Review (423 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kona Mike: Why even bother reviewing this?

Announced by Canon on February 6, 2015
Became available in Europe and Asia in April 2015
For sale in U.S. in October 2015
Reviewed by DPR August 2016

There are rumors of a new one coming out this fall? Is this review possible push back, from Canon? No early access to new camera if no review for previous model??

jdu_sq - we're not and we wouldn't. It would be impossible for us to do our jobs if any camera maker were trying to exert pressure on us to review or prioritise their product over someone else's.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2016 at 21:04 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

cxsparc: And STILL, Fuji "cheats" with ISO. Comparing the XT2 to the Sony A6000, same aperture, Fuji uses half a stop longer exposure. Same thing for other cameras.
This of course helps in maintaining the myth of low noise for the X-sensor, but for me it looks just plain dishonest.
I really wonder why they keep doing that, and stick to their ISO"200" base sensitivity? Other companies add ISO50 to allow lower DOF through wide apertures, Fuji rather adds a 1/8000 shutter to the camera instead of going to ISO100.

Again, if it is less sensitive and is given the same amount of light then the shadows will be noisier and processing to a common brightness will show that.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 16:38 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E2S: What you need to know (86 comments in total)
In reply to:

KCook: "As a decidedly midrange experience being sold at something approaching a more entry-level price, the Fujifilm X-E2S deserves a look."

$1k is now considered an "entry-level" price??? Gawd, I need to find a different hobby.

Kelly

My point would be that there's more to a camera than just specs and performance.

The user interface and user experience is radically different, not just the looks.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 16:29 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

cxsparc: And STILL, Fuji "cheats" with ISO. Comparing the XT2 to the Sony A6000, same aperture, Fuji uses half a stop longer exposure. Same thing for other cameras.
This of course helps in maintaining the myth of low noise for the X-sensor, but for me it looks just plain dishonest.
I really wonder why they keep doing that, and stick to their ISO"200" base sensitivity? Other companies add ISO50 to allow lower DOF through wide apertures, Fuji rather adds a 1/8000 shutter to the camera instead of going to ISO100.

However, our Raw files are shot with fixed illumination, shutter speed and aperture values across cameras, so the results are **directly comparable**. Any 'cheating' would count against the camera here.

But, if you want your out-of-camera JPEGs to be a set brightness, you'll need to give between 1/3 and 2/3EV more exposure than a light meter would lead you to expect.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 04:18 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

cxsparc: And STILL, Fuji "cheats" with ISO. Comparing the XT2 to the Sony A6000, same aperture, Fuji uses half a stop longer exposure. Same thing for other cameras.
This of course helps in maintaining the myth of low noise for the X-sensor, but for me it looks just plain dishonest.
I really wonder why they keep doing that, and stick to their ISO"200" base sensitivity? Other companies add ISO50 to allow lower DOF through wide apertures, Fuji rather adds a 1/8000 shutter to the camera instead of going to ISO100.

The best way of clearing this up is definitely to introduce a third, similar but not directly connected ISO sensitivity scheme.

ISO declared by cameras are JPEG-based and there are two methods. The SOS system is essentially (and intentionally) analogous to the film system. Under SOS, you should, based on a light meter, be able to predict what shutter speed and aperture are required to give a JPEG with middle grey presented as middle grey.

REI, the part of standard for multi/matrix metering, does not fit this pattern. For any given illumination level, shutter speed and aperture, the camera only has to give *whatever the manufacturer decides is correct*.

As I've said, the Fujifilms we've seen appear to be giving images between 1/3 and 2/3EV (depending on the ISO setting) darker images than you'd expect under the SOS part of the standard. However, if the ISO numbers given are based on matrix/multi area metering, then they're not necessarily wrong. Because the standard is vague.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 04:15 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1275 comments in total)
In reply to:

cxsparc: And STILL, Fuji "cheats" with ISO. Comparing the XT2 to the Sony A6000, same aperture, Fuji uses half a stop longer exposure. Same thing for other cameras.
This of course helps in maintaining the myth of low noise for the X-sensor, but for me it looks just plain dishonest.
I really wonder why they keep doing that, and stick to their ISO"200" base sensitivity? Other companies add ISO50 to allow lower DOF through wide apertures, Fuji rather adds a 1/8000 shutter to the camera instead of going to ISO100.

Except ISO is not ISO.

A better analogy would be rpm and distance a wheel travels. There's a connection between the two but, if different manufacturers can use different sized wheels, then there isn't a constant relationship between rpm and distance.

The ISO declared on camera is JPEG-based (distance travelled). DxO is reporting rpm (Saturation-based ISO). They're fairly directly related but there's no expectation of a single absolute connection.

Pointing out that Canon and Nikon use one wheel size and that others don't doesn't mean the rest are cheating. It might just mean you don't understand the connection between rpm and distance travelled.

To complicate the picture, the distance travelled by Fujifilm is not the same as their declaration would suggest, but it turns out the ISO standard is unhelpfully loose and allows this. But while you conflate this result with the distance/rpm difference, you're going to draw the wrong conclusion.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 19:38 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E2S: What you need to know (86 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: My opinion is that no award for the Fujifilm X-E2S after the X-E1 received a Gold award makes almost no sense. The fact that the X-E2S is using a proven 16 mp sensor is hardly a reason for no award at all. This is especially true considering that Fujifilm reduced the price of the X-E2S by $300 vs the release price of the X-E1. And it is also a consideration that many of the existing APS-C lenses from almost all manufacturers seem to struggle on the newest crop of 24 mp sensors (Sony E-mount anyone?). 16mp is a great sweet spot for resolution and file management. On DPR, there are only two scenarios where a camera doesn't get ANY award at all: either the camera performed great but oddly the reviewer didn't like the camera (i.e. Nikon V1, Nikon Df, and arguably the Pentax K-01), or the camera just didn't perform well. I cannot think of a time when the update of a Gold Award camera received no award at all. It's time to dump the awards or add a Bronze award, the XE series is great.

We discussed exactly this point in some detail before choosing the award.

One (small) consideration was 'who is the camera for' given the lowered pricing, relative to the X-E2's when it was reviewed. The lower price means we have to consider a more mainstream audience who won't necessarily understand or appreciate the interface and slower performance, though the reviewer points out that for photographers like him, it would be a silver.

By far the bigger issue, though, is how far the market has moved on. The X-E2 was reviewed before the a6000 raised the bar for both autofocus and video. It wouldn't have got a Gold after that point. Since then, cameras such as the NX1, a6300, D500 and 80D have further highlighted what is possible even if their prices mean it's not necessarily *expected* at this level.

I acknowledged in the conclusion of the X-E2 that it wasn't a great all-rounder and since then we've increasingly reviewed cameras that are, which show up the X-E2S's weaknesses.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2016 at 19:50 UTC
Total: 3912, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »