Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 5294, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Fujifilm X-E3 First Impressions Review (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

panchorancho: Why can't Fuji make cameras that feel solid and not hollow shells?

I'm currently holding the X-E3 and can't relate to that statement, I'm afraid.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 18:21 UTC
On article Hands-on with new Fujifilm X-E3 (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sean65: Will someone please call the fashion police and immediately send them to DPR offices to arrest Richard Butler.

I'll be happy to call Sir Paul Smith in my defence, if they can put a case together.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 18:13 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E3 First Impressions Review (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

thxbb12: Thanks for this first impression preview.

@Richard Butler: does auto ISO work the same as other Fuji models or is it now possible to link shutter speed with focal length (with an adjustable bias) like what Pentax and Nikon do?

@dpreview: there is a typo in the last paragraph of the article: "betwixt" -> "between"

Thanks!

I'll add the Auto ISO section to the article shortly. There's an 'Auto' setting, which relates the minimum shutter speed to the focal length, but no was of biasing that faster or slower.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 16:55 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E3 First Impressions Review (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

John_Heiam: Why do the specs not contain the weight?

I don't know what's happened to the specs. The weight is 337g with battery and card.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 15:24 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E3 First Impressions Review (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

evilmagicnut: What is the eye point? Same as X-E2/E2s?

I'll check.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 15:23 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-E3 First Impressions Review (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

Miki Nemeth: X-T20 has touch panel since firmware update 1.1 see "Adds support for touch panel operation while looking into the electronic viewfinder" on https://www.dpreview.com/news/8058090990/fujifilm-announces-new-firmware-and-updated-lens-roadmap. It's not really fair to compare these cameras with their original specs, DPR should update their spec sheets accordingly. This is a new review, at least on this page the updated specs should be taken into account. It's typical from Fujifilm that they release cameras with partially complete firmware, and add new features in iteration during the subsequent two or three years.

I'll amend the table to say that it's pending.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 15:20 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: "They were some of the first cameras to feature extensive on-sensor PDAF..." -DPR

Nikon 1 had PDAF in 2011, but still hasn't put in Live View of any of their DSLRs. Innovation doesn't count, if you don't use it.

The on-sensor phase detection tech in the Nikon 1s was a Nikon technology, which is why it wasn't available to other manufacturers when Aptina offered to sell its 1" chips elsewhere.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 15:09 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III Review (564 comments in total)
In reply to:

tedolf: So, is off camera TTL flash control disabled in this camera or not?

Also, one big positive for this camera compared to its peer is the m4/3 lens line up. The number of good lenses available under $200.00 street price is pretty respectable, along with the ability to use legacy lenses with IBIS.

Why doesn't this ever factor into these reviews?

Tedolph

The availability of lenses is explicitly called out in the 'Social' use-case.

The E-M10 III can not remote control off-board flashguns: the RC settings are not in the menu.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 22:25 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III Review (564 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dames01: Nice bike!

Thank you.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 22:23 UTC
In reply to:

Arun H: To those saying 14 bit is always better than 12 bit, here is a counter example. Consider a sensor with a noise floor of 5e- and a top end of 100 ke-. The native DR of the sensor is 14.28. Since 100,000 takes 17 bits to store, suppose I simply clip the bottom 3 bits, i.e., count in steps of 8 during ADC. The effective dynamic range is 13.6 stops (log2(100000/8)). But a step of 8 is too coarse at the low end, and far too fine at the top end, where shot noise is > 300e-.

Now compare this to NEF, which in 12 bit uses a linear transform at the low end and quadratic at the high end. Here, every bit of information is stored at the low end where it matters, and larger quantization steps are used at the high end where shot noise makes small quantization wasteful. 12 bit NEF actually preserves the original DR of the sensor better than the 14 bit clipping scheme I described earlier!

Here's a guy that's done a comparison between 12 and 14 bit:

https://photographylife.com/14-bit-vs-12-bit-raw

keepreal - those examples and this article aren't in disagreement, if anything those photos prove my point.

Bit depth can't improve DR, but can act as a limit to it. Equally, though, once you have enough bit depth to encode your sensor's DR, there's no benefit to further increases in bit depth.

So the often assumed 'gradation' improvements of moving from 12-bit to 14-bit never materialize. The only place you'd expect to see a difference would be in the deepest shadows of a base ISO image and no such example is given.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 21:29 UTC
In reply to:

57even: Wouldn't 18% saturation be 2.5 EV below saturation?

In which case, is Nikon using 9% saturation as the mid-tone to preserve highlights?

As I say, the tilda is there for a reason. Since the exact number isn't relevant to this article, I didn't dig into it in very fine detail.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 19:55 UTC
In reply to:

gustavh248: Thaks for interesting article.

Coupling this to discussion on ETTR, do I understand correctly then if ETTR makes the sensor capture (or encode) signal in the part of its working range (dynamic range) where it encodes that signal with its highest degree of precision?
(The part of its working range where it has the largest number of values to encode the different intensities of the signal.)

(That is, a benefit using ETTR apart from giving you better SNR, through increasing exposure?)

That's a good question.

There's actually no significant connection between the effects of linear ADCs (being discussed here) and the benefits of ETTR.

Again, it *sounds* like ETTR-ing pushes your data into the region where there's most capture precision, but that's not why it helps. Your largest signal has the best signal-to-noise ratio, that's why it looks cleaner and that's why your images benefit from the most exposure you can give them.

This is because your largest signal also has the largest absolute level of shot noise. So if you think of two near-identical tones one pixel width apart, the high absolute levels of shot noise means that the information you'll capture from them can differ hugely (the fractionally brighter tone could end up being captured as significantly brighter or darker). At which point, the extra precision doesn't help you.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 19:41 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III Review (564 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scintilla Aquila: Why does the Dynamic Range section (on page 7) have the two boilerplate introductory paragraphs and then... nothing?

Yeah, not sure how that happened. It should be visible now.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 18:50 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III Review (564 comments in total)
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: Am I mistaking or this is the first Olympus camera with a 4 bar battery level indicator? If true, yesss! But it's about time. Can DPR confirm that? Because there ar only 3 bars showing but there's an empty space to the left for a fourth one.

You're right, it is now four bars. I kept noticing something about it, and kept meaning to go back and check against the Mark II but ran out of time.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 18:38 UTC
On article Video: Olympus OM-D E-M10 III 4K sample reel (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

tabloid: Can I load the 4k video straight into iMovie for editing.

I can be certain it'll work in Final Cut, since that's what we cut this reel together with.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 17:11 UTC
In reply to:

sharpbokeh: i can appreciate what's being said, but isn't shadow detail a major component of image quality? much of our 'real life' visual perception is dependant on shadows and it would carry that importance to 2d images

sharpbokeh - I'm happy to rephrase the article if there's something that's giving mixed messages. I'm just not seeing any section that talks about quality of shadow gradation.

Here I was just trying to demonstrate that Raw Bit depth biggest role is defining how much room you have to store DR. An explanation of why it doesn't play a significant role in terms of gradation would involve a lot more discussion of noise (shot noise in the highlights and midtones, plus read noise in the shadows), which may end up being another piece.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 17:00 UTC
In reply to:

57even: Wouldn't 18% saturation be 2.5 EV below saturation?

In which case, is Nikon using 9% saturation as the mid-tone to preserve highlights?

57even - where does the chart say it's measured in density?

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 16:52 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III Review (564 comments in total)
In reply to:

BostonC: Can you check what's the crop factor in 4K video? None of the early hands-on I've seen reports it. TIA

An extra 1.2x if you turn MIS 1 on.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 15:43 UTC
On article Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III Review (564 comments in total)
In reply to:

eno2: You should change the title from: "The Olympus OM-D E-M10 review" to "The Olympus OM-D E-M10 III review". In other words, you forgot the mark III in the title.

Throwback, er, Wednesday?

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 15:38 UTC
In reply to:

dkyl: Question: if you ETTR (without clipping any channels) but for the given scene the resultant brightness is too high. Does bringing it back in post processing result in better tonality compared to a shot that was exposed to have the desired brightness to begin with.
If so, wouldn't this method warrant using a higher bit depth?
My scenario doesn't have to be a very high DR scene. In fact most scenes are not that high and I'm specifically asking about these normal scenes without the very high DR but purposely exposing it to the right in RAW and bringing the brightness back in post. I'm interested in how to maximize smooth and subtle tones.

I'd have thought so, yes. I hope to get a chance before the end of the week to check this. The D810 at ISO 64 is exactly the sort of combination that would benefit from being shot in 14-bit mode.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 00:23 UTC
Total: 5294, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »