Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 3819, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2602 comments in total)
In reply to:

odpisan: Taht's the way of cooking grits ...
:o)

____ SERIOUS WARNING _________

Only for Pentax-fan-boys-club (or Pentaxisti) - CaNikon lovers .. please do not read this because of big danger of heart-attack !!!
:o))))
_________ I just warned you !! _________

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2016/07/19/pentax-k-1-review-hands-down-this-full-frame-beauty-is-the-most-impressive

K1000usr - my concern isn't so much in our evaluation but in how effectively we've communicated our findings. There will always be some degree of 'it works for me, so you're wrong to find fault,' regardless of brand and regardless of criticism, but I want to make sure that we've provided enough information for people to understand why this disparity can exist and to make sure one criticism hasn't overwhelmed all the other content of the review.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2016 at 00:58 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2602 comments in total)
In reply to:

odpisan: Taht's the way of cooking grits ...
:o)

____ SERIOUS WARNING _________

Only for Pentax-fan-boys-club (or Pentaxisti) - CaNikon lovers .. please do not read this because of big danger of heart-attack !!!
:o))))
_________ I just warned you !! _________

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2016/07/19/pentax-k-1-review-hands-down-this-full-frame-beauty-is-the-most-impressive

No, the AF testing of the K-5 was worse than for the K-1 (and other recent cameras).

That quote, which was written in good faith, shows what happens if you don't try to assess the different aspects of AF in a controlled and repeatable manner. You end up making general statements that risk boiling down to "it seemed fine for the way I shot it."

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 23:49 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2602 comments in total)
In reply to:

DuncanM1: Another K-1 review:
"Autofocusing was generally fast and accurate for still photography and the review camera had no problems focusing in very low light levels...."
http://www.photoreview.com.au/reviews/dslr-cameras/advanced/pentax-k-1#Full_Review

Again, it's unclear what they've tested.

We tried to look at and describe different aspects of AF performance (and in hindsight we probably should have done so in even more detail), rather than just saying 'it is good' or 'it is bad.'

There are plenty of ways of shooting where you'd conclude that AF was 'generally fast and accurate' and we'd agree that the K-1 can focus in very low light levels (though the speed drops, which can be a problem if your subject is moving). But we tried to break it down into more detail to find out exactly what it did well and what it didn't do so well at.

Posting a quote and link with no sign of detailed analysis doesn't change (or even challenge) what we've found (after repeated testing).

It's a shame that this comment thread has ended up so focused on autofocus, rather than the K-1's considerable strengths.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 22:48 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2602 comments in total)
In reply to:

odpisan: Taht's the way of cooking grits ...
:o)

____ SERIOUS WARNING _________

Only for Pentax-fan-boys-club (or Pentaxisti) - CaNikon lovers .. please do not read this because of big danger of heart-attack !!!
:o))))
_________ I just warned you !! _________

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2016/07/19/pentax-k-1-review-hands-down-this-full-frame-beauty-is-the-most-impressive

Yes, we also found it can focus in very low light. The problem is that it slows down considerably to do so, so that it helps to change to release priority if your subject is moving (it's unclear from IR's testing whether they mean a static or moving subject). It's very good but not an unqualified success.

My main concern is whether our review is accurate and proportionate (the vehement feedback makes it hard to assess whether our coverage of the AF system was given disproportionate weight by us or because it's become a point of contention). I can't speak to every phrase in every comment by all my colleagues. It's the review wording that's paramount.

As I say, we believe we gave the K-1 a good review, even though we found (and maintain) that its AF system isn't as capable as some of its rivals. 84% and a Silver award is a very good result, because the K-1 is a very good camera.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 22:29 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2602 comments in total)
In reply to:

odpisan: Taht's the way of cooking grits ...
:o)

____ SERIOUS WARNING _________

Only for Pentax-fan-boys-club (or Pentaxisti) - CaNikon lovers .. please do not read this because of big danger of heart-attack !!!
:o))))
_________ I just warned you !! _________

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2016/07/19/pentax-k-1-review-hands-down-this-full-frame-beauty-is-the-most-impressive

We didn't say the K-1 is "unsuitable for anything moving," nor can I find any clear detail of what aspects of autofocus IR tested.

We're not saying the camera can't focus, just that some aspects of its focus fall behind its rivals, especially in terms of continuous AF and tracking AF, meaning that you should probably consider other cameras *if this is something important to the photography **you** do.*

We also found lots to like about the camera (not just its really impressive price), so gave it a really positive review. If your photography is demanding in terms of autofocus, then it's not the strongest but It's a *really* good camera in many, many respects.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 21:33 UTC
In reply to:

Carl Mucks: "nor can you access the histogram in video mode" -- I hope they will fix it, there is no way anybody can shoot in flog without a histogram.

Zebra warnings would let you set log exposure. We're seeking confirmation whether they'll be available.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 21:13 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Ma: Every time I see their video, it looks impressive. Then I remember how their screen flips out the wrong way. It's like someone baked the perfect pizza, and then it fell on the floor face down. Sorry, I'll wait for the next one.

From my use, I've found it to be similarly useful to a fully articulated screen, other than it can't be flipped back on itself to protect the screen and for portrait stills you don't have a choice over the orientation of the camera. For video work it provides all the movement I needed and I didn't personally find it inconvenient for portrait orientation shooting.

Some of my colleagues like to shoot street photography and much prefer to be able to flip the screen out without it extending so obviously beyond the body of the camera, drawing attention to you. From their perspective, it's actually better than a fully articulated screen.

Horses for course, really.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 18:03 UTC
In reply to:

gskolenda: To be honest here, This not a good beta video to see the different shots and film simulations. DPR, if your going to provide test video's of a camera then shoot the Same Subject, with different lens's and the different film simulations. They need to be side by side, not switch to a different subject and different lighting. From what little I can tell, it does look sharp, and some of the skin tones look nice.

We're in the process of developing a repeatable video test for future reviews but this isn't a test. Think of it as being like our still image sample galleries - it gives you some real-world examples but that informs the assessment of image quality, it's not the test of it.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 17:59 UTC
In reply to:

Carl Mucks: The resolution seems to be fine on 4k, no moire. It's too short really to notice much. The only noticeable thing is that the dynamic range looks very poor, completely black shadows and completely wiped out highlights. Need to wait for more substantive reviews before buying.

I probably should have set shadow tone to -2 and highlight tone to +4 to flatten the tone curves, rather than using the standard stills profiles.

We'll test it properly when F-log is available.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2016 at 17:02 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1223 comments in total)
In reply to:

Miki Nemeth: Thank you Richard for the update on video. Exactly this is what I was afraid of: a great camera with totally crippled video AF system. Maybe firmware update 3.0 in two years will have these issues ironed out.

There are only two cameras I'd try to use for autofocus in video at the moment and only one of those will shoot 4K, so I'm less upset by than the absence of Manual WB in video mode, to be honest.

Fingers crossed for final firmware...

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 23:08 UTC
In reply to:

Jim Panzer: Great info and video, nice wool jersey! :) I had a question about this rolling shutter. I've seen it on other cameras, but does it only happen when you pan the camera fast, or say shooting from a window of a moving car...or does it happen as well if you have the camera on a tripod and someone goes by really fast. Will they be "rolled" as well? Thanks DP folks I love this site!

To be clear, what Sony claims with the RX100 IV is that their sensor reads out very quickly (which reduces rolling shutter), **and** that they use all those read-out lines to form the image. It's the reading out fast, not the reading out of everything that they're promoting.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 21:30 UTC
In reply to:

Jim Panzer: Great info and video, nice wool jersey! :) I had a question about this rolling shutter. I've seen it on other cameras, but does it only happen when you pan the camera fast, or say shooting from a window of a moving car...or does it happen as well if you have the camera on a tripod and someone goes by really fast. Will they be "rolled" as well? Thanks DP folks I love this site!

flektogon - I think you're conflating rolling shutter (which is defined by sensor readout speed) and sensor sampling (in which image processing speed also plays a role).

They're not directly connected (you can have a camera that line skips with very little rolling shutter and you can have a camera that makes use of full sensor readout with very visible rolling shutter). Though both sensors and processors get faster over time so they're both likely to improve hand-in-hand.

All the sensors we're currently seeing in consumer cameras use progressive shutters that read out line by line, so all will have some degree of rolling shutter, even if they read and process every pixel. Until we see so-called **Global Shutter** sensors (which read out their lines *simultaneously*) appear in consumer cameras, we'll continue to see rolling shutter.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 21:28 UTC
In reply to:

El Chavo: Fuji made real improvements in the video area compared to few years ago BUT...

As I said it before, and was almost murdered by Fuji fans, for the price (50% more than an a6300) this camera should offer LOG recording straight in camera, should have less rolling shutter but doesn't, AF continues to "breath" rocking back and forth, no touchscreen as well and few native lenses.

And to makes matters even worse the grip is a "requireptional" accessory for almost anything: Want longer than 10 mins on video? Buy the grip. Want faster FPS on stills? Buy the grip! Want to keep the camera away from overheating? Buy the grip!!! Want to record in F-LOG? BUY THE GRIP!!!

An a6300 was released almost 6 months before this one, Fuji had enough time to respond but managed to release something that gets close to it but the price isn't competitive.

And please, lets have some constructive conversation. It is tiring to talk to some that come ready for the crucifixion.

*Personally* I'd be surprised if we see an X-E3 in the near term. It could happen, of course, but I believe the DSLR-shaped Fujifilms out-sell the rangefinder shaped ones to an extent that might prompt the company to focus on those.

Secondly, some of the enthusiasm for such a camera stems from the hope of getting most of an X-T2 for less money. That would seem an odd move for Fujifilm from a business perspective, until all potential X-T2 customers have bought the camera. Given the X-T2 isn't shipping yet and that release firmware hasn't been finalized, I'd expect a significant gap before we see a similarly capable rival model.

I could be wrong, of course (this opinion is based on logic, not insider knowledge), but I wouldn't get my hopes up just yet.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 20:43 UTC
In reply to:

teddoman: Any chance of facial recognition AF in video?

Not at present, I'm afraid.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 19:20 UTC
In reply to:

Arizona Sunset: Looks a lot cleaner than before. That jersey would have danced with moire in the past. How are they downsampling? What algorithm? You can see the jittery artifacts at higher ISO, but it looks strong at lower ISO ranges. The OIS leaves a lot to be desired, too.

matthew saville - yes, I see what you mean.

Since the Super 35 format (roughly 1.5x crop relative to still image full frame), is a major format for video and that the XF mount is entirely built around 1.5x lenses, so offers sensible focal lengths for the format, I generally talked in terms of crops relative to APS-C/Super 35.

Unlike the D500, for instance, which is a 1.5x crop from APS-C.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 17:59 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 First Impressions Review (1223 comments in total)
In reply to:

JKAndersson: Wonder why the x-pro2 at HD1080 looks crispier, with the same lens and settings? Sampling maybe is different?

It may be a difference in focus, so we'll check that. There are enough similarities in where they're aliasing to suggest they're sampling in the same way.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 17:35 UTC
In reply to:

Arizona Sunset: Looks a lot cleaner than before. That jersey would have danced with moire in the past. How are they downsampling? What algorithm? You can see the jittery artifacts at higher ISO, but it looks strong at lower ISO ranges. The OIS leaves a lot to be desired, too.

It's 1.17x, not 1.7x.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 17:33 UTC
In reply to:

Tical: It always strikes me how video has become so important within a (still) photo community, although video and photo have nothing in common both technically and (more so) linguistically. Personally I haven't shot a single minute of footage in my whole life.
Great bike, BTW, I love titanium and have a similar one myself.
Now, if only Fuji made a full titanium X-Pro2 (in the loving memory of my Contax G2) I would jump on it no time: these are the things that really matter in a camera :-)

A Ti X-Pro2? That really would be a thing of beauty. Though I can imagine the complaints about the price already.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 17:11 UTC
In reply to:

El Chavo: Fuji made real improvements in the video area compared to few years ago BUT...

As I said it before, and was almost murdered by Fuji fans, for the price (50% more than an a6300) this camera should offer LOG recording straight in camera, should have less rolling shutter but doesn't, AF continues to "breath" rocking back and forth, no touchscreen as well and few native lenses.

And to makes matters even worse the grip is a "requireptional" accessory for almost anything: Want longer than 10 mins on video? Buy the grip. Want faster FPS on stills? Buy the grip! Want to keep the camera away from overheating? Buy the grip!!! Want to record in F-LOG? BUY THE GRIP!!!

An a6300 was released almost 6 months before this one, Fuji had enough time to respond but managed to release something that gets close to it but the price isn't competitive.

And please, lets have some constructive conversation. It is tiring to talk to some that come ready for the crucifixion.

El Chavo. It may well turn out to be true but we've not had confirmation from Fujifilm yet and there's still time for them to change that decision, so I'll wait until someone's seen it.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 17:02 UTC
In reply to:

HakanL: To Richard Butler and the Dpreview crew: what can you tell us about rolling shutter? The earlier generation of Fuji X cameras had horrible rolling shutter in video.

[We'll check in the final review](https://www.dpreview.com/news/4553387784/new-resolution-how-much-progress-has-the-fujifilm-x-t2-made-for-video?comment=9502783315)

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2016 at 17:00 UTC
Total: 3819, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »