Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 4986, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

mike earussi: I'm really sorry you were too lazy to get the best out of the camera by deciding to use DNG/ACR processing instead of using Sigma's own SPP software. There may be only a slight improvement from the H's regular raw file vs DNG, but there is a big difference when using it in SFD mode, which can only be processed using SPP and would easily rival any 50mp MF body both in DR and resolution, making it the cheapest "MF" camera on the market. If you're going to test a camera in the first place at least take the time to do it right.

mike - having looked at both SPP-processed X3Fs and ACR-processed DNGs, we focused the review on the camera as a DNG camera, since this significantly broadens its appeal (as discussed in [Carey's article](https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/9977248883/sigma-shoots-dng-raw)).

We probably should have shot the studio scene in SPF mode, in hindsight, but once that opportunity was missed it's hard to justify the time it would take to add it.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 22:11 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

mike earussi: I'm really sorry you were too lazy to get the best out of the camera by deciding to use DNG/ACR processing instead of using Sigma's own SPP software. There may be only a slight improvement from the H's regular raw file vs DNG, but there is a big difference when using it in SFD mode, which can only be processed using SPP and would easily rival any 50mp MF body both in DR and resolution, making it the cheapest "MF" camera on the market. If you're going to test a camera in the first place at least take the time to do it right.

mike earussi - Again you've made another leap of logic that's unsupported. I didn't test SFD but I did compare single-shot X3Fs to DNGs (the Gretag colour charts in the Text section should link to the full image conversions). For me and, I believe, others, the convenience of being able to use familiar software and workflows hugely outweighs the differences (and, correction of artefacts aside, those differences can be minimized, once you've decided how you wish to handle sharpening and noise reduction).

Battery testing has not been part of DPReview's tests during the nine and a half years I've worked here, so this isn't corner-cutting for the sake of this review. Sadly I can't justify the amount of time it would take me to formally test the battery life of this camera, vs the amount of reader benefit it would bring.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 20:46 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prognathous: What's the conclusion about the odd location of the EVF? For right-eye shooters having the EVF close to the left edge of camera seems ideal, as the nose doesn't touch the LCD screen. Is there any ergonomic rationale in Sigma's decision to put it more towards the *right* side of the camera, or is it just to make the camera look different?

It's certainly more comfortable for right-eyed shooters but even as a left-eyed shooter, I didn't find it unworkable.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 20:07 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

mike earussi: I'm really sorry you were too lazy to get the best out of the camera by deciding to use DNG/ACR processing instead of using Sigma's own SPP software. There may be only a slight improvement from the H's regular raw file vs DNG, but there is a big difference when using it in SFD mode, which can only be processed using SPP and would easily rival any 50mp MF body both in DR and resolution, making it the cheapest "MF" camera on the market. If you're going to test a camera in the first place at least take the time to do it right.

mike earussi - it's not the case that we didn't use the camera enough to run down the battery. We kept recharging the battery as we went. It's just that we didn't intentionally and repeatedly run the battery down in order to test the battery life. That's a **very** different thing.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 19:46 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

docmaas: Curious as to what you mean by "pixel shift" in the Sigma? There is no pixel shift but there is a stacking feature called "Super Fine Detail" or SFD. I think if that is what was used it should be: 1. clearly explained and 2. the "S HI" as used in the comparison should be distinguished from the SFD as they are separate features and can be used together or singly. The "S HI" is simply an in camera enlargement which I suspect very few use as external tools are available that do a superior job. The SFD stacking mode can be used to output a normal, 1/2 size, super-high or double size image and it would be better to have used a normal size image in the comparison to the pixel shifted k1.

There's no easy way to add larger resolution files to our comparison tool, so I've had to slot the S-Hi rendering from SPP in as 'Pixel Shift.'

The review does not cover the SFD feature, I'm afraid.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 19:25 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

xpatUSA: "photons of different colors have different amounts of energy and more energetic light would penetrate further into the chip."

OOPS, Richard!

Each pixel in the final image is made up from three pieces of information: red, green and blue. However, each photodiode only captures one of these three (in a conventional sensor).

My understanding is that the luminance values (taking into account the perception of brightness that each color contributes) is processed separately from the color information and then imposed back on the image when those three values are being derived for each final pixel.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 19:13 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

Xentinus: While I was using Pentax, I was shooting DNG. When I viewed them in ACDSee, amazing sharpness, clarity and very rich colors. But when I clicked to edit, everything was fading away. In lightroom and photoshop, it is less significant, but still.
Now I took a screenshot of 3 images.
Im just curious in which photo, colors are more realistic. ***(I will be appreciated if DPR staff replies)***
Im aware of that, DNG file is lil bit over saturated. Is there a way to open a RAW file and process as it is in DNG file?
Because for my eyes; first image is greenish, second one (DNG) just requires to decrease saturation but third one is too unrealistic and pinkish.

https://prnt.sc/febk42

There's no way (that I know of) to convert X3Fs to DNGs.

It's not really a question of the DNG being more saturated, though, simply that the color rendering specified by the profiles embedded into the DNG by Sigma are not the same as the ones being used by Sigma Photo Pro. You can download the DNGs from our test scene and you should find profiles called Standard, Vivid, Neutral, Portrait, Landscape and Monochrome in the file.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 18:06 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

xpatUSA: "photons of different colors have different amounts of energy and more energetic light would penetrate further into the chip."

OOPS, Richard!

Urgh, sorry. Longer wavelengths penetrate deeper, despite being less energetic.

I've corrected it.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 17:45 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: Great.

Any chance of getting raw samples in the X3F format, not the DNGs posted back in April?

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning.

We shot the test scene in both X3F and DNG and it seems I'd already uploaded the ISO 100 X3F, so that's available for download.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 17:38 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fois Giovanni: Who put so much green lamps and golden balls on the tree at the extreme right of the photo https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/7675116335/Samples/SDIM0159.acr_2.jpeg
We are at the middle of the year very far from Chrismas!

I'll upload the DNG in a moment so you can check whether it's artefacts from the processing or from ACR's attempts to remove CA.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 17:14 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

PropaPH: How is this camera for left eye shooters? looks like you might be picking your nose with your right thumb...

It's much better suited to right-eyed shooters - so much so that I found myself shooting that way sometimes. The grip is distant enough from the finder that you can shoot left-eyed, though.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 17:13 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

rrccad: Can you use DX / APS-C lenses without having it automatically crop down to APS-C dimensions?

In the menus there are the options On, Off and Auto. By default it's Auto, so it crops to APS-C if it detects a 'DC' lens, but you can set it to 'Off' if you want to maximise your image to the full extent of the image circle.

I'll add that to the review.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 17:05 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: Great.

Any chance of getting raw samples in the X3F format, not the DNGs posted back in April?

No. The camera can either shoot DNG or X3F so there have never been X3F files of these images.

I'll make sure I upload the X3F of the studio scene but both Carey and I focused our real-world shooting on DNGs, since it gave us more choice of converters.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 16:14 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (692 comments in total)
In reply to:

JackM: All the DNG/ACR shots look decidedly "un-Foveon" and soft to me. Try again with Sigma Photo Pro and X3F files?

I preferred the look I got when I dialed the sharpening down on most of my ACR conversions so they look naturalistic, rather than screaming 'I've got sharp pixels.'

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 16:08 UTC
In reply to:

tinternaut: Does this mean great DR and best in class high ISO performance are currently mutually exclusive?

Not so far as we know. As we understand it, the camera's speed reduces the DR at low ISO and its dual gain design helps it pull ahead at higher ISO. One isn't causing the other.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 23:23 UTC
In reply to:

cgarrard: Has the A9 overheated or given you any warning icons?

Not yet, but we've been primarily studio-based so far. It's something we'll test and look for as we get out-and-about more with the camera.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 23:18 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2694 comments in total)
In reply to:

KerryBE: A9 Raw is missing ISO 6400.

Ah! I uploaded it a few hours ago but I'll bet I forgot to flag it as public.

It should be visible now.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 22:04 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2694 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dante Birchen: The Pentax K-1 performs dramatically better. But that is because someone switched normal and pixel shift mode.....

That'll be me, then. I accidentally stripped all pixel-shift cameras of their metadata when working on something else. I'm trying to repair it now.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 21:23 UTC
On article Sony a9 Full Review: Mirrorless Redefined (2694 comments in total)
In reply to:

solarider: Nice info!
I'd like to compare with Pentax K-1, but don't see K-1 in the drop down menus.
Thanks.

Ah, that was a glitch with the way our system handles electronic shutter modes. It should now be resolved so that you can compare all cameras.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 19:19 UTC
On article Canon EOS Rebel T7i / 800D review (386 comments in total)
In reply to:

TheSunsAnvil: Just a quick comment to say that, even at the entry level of dSLRs, I like and read every word of DPR's usual "long form" reviews and was disappointed to see this one not get the same attention traditionally given to models in its class. A C$1k camera is NOT a trivial purchase for someone like me.

In particular I was hoping you would expound more on whether or by how much this model is improved in the dynamic range department. DPR's critique of the t5i in this respect (lagging behind its peers from Nikon etc) is what steered me away from that model. It would be great to know if Canon's tXi series is catching up or not.

That's covered in the Raw Dynamic Range section of page 3. It's much closer to its peers (close enough that the other benefits of Dual Pixel AF outweigh any difference, for me).

Link | Posted on May 26, 2017 at 22:21 UTC
Total: 4986, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »