Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 4983, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

bobn2: Looking at your overview video on the D750, I see a rather major error - you say that its chassis is mainly magnesium alloy. No, it isn't - it is Sereebo carbon loaded polymer in a monocoque construction (which technically means it doesn't have a chassis). It's the case than none of the DSLRs here, Canon or Nikon, has a magnesium alloy chassis, they are all polymer.

Nikon insists it's primarily Mag alloy, though it does include Sereebo CFRTP.

[![Image](https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/E~TS250x0~articles/4443389856/D750_Mgbody_01.jpeg)](https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/4443389856/D750_Mgbody_01.jpeg)

[![Image](https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/E~TS250x0~articles/4443389856/D750_Mgbody_03.jpeg)](https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/4443389856/D750_Mgbody_03.jpeg)

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 20:40 UTC
In reply to:

BokehFanatic: What is this whining about "pro" or "semi-pro"? Nikon and Canon always classified their cameras this way, and it seems plausible to use the same terminology for DPReview.

Yes, there are arguments to classify cameras in another way, but there will probably never be a unequivocal classification.

It's actually the other way 'round: these are the cameras that are too expensive to fit in the lower price ranges. The name was a way of describing the group we were left with, not used for deciding what was in the group.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 20:30 UTC
In reply to:

andre venter: No Pentax K1? :,(

It's a sub $2000 MSRP camera, which is why it's one of our recommendations in its price group.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 20:14 UTC
In reply to:

Gosman: Again no Pentax K-1? Another omission by dpreview of a fine Pentax product.

It's a sub $2000 MSRP camera, which is why it's one of our recommendations in its price group.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 20:12 UTC
In reply to:

41mm: Apropos Sigma lenses: When comes the from dpreview as "soon" announced review of the SIGMA SD QUATTRO ?
Thanks a lot for an info.

There were a couple of unforeseen holdups but it's now in progress and should be published in the next week or so.

It's the Quattro H we're reviewing.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 19:19 UTC
On article Fujifilm X100F Review (771 comments in total)
In reply to:

cabo: One problem I have with my X100F is that the camera always resets itself to a focus distance of 7 ft. (a little over 2m) after it was switched off. This is really bothering me as I often switch off the camera while I wait for something interesting to happen and expect it to be at the same distance setting when I switch it back on again. This worked on all previous X-series cameras I had (X100, X100S, X-Pro 1, X-Pro 2, X70), but not on the X100F.

Knowing Fuji, I'm still positive they will fix this soon in a firmware update. Let's hope for the best.

For those of you unhappy with this behaviour, please note one of the changes with today's F/w v1.01:

*2: When a camera turns on in MF mode, the focus position comes to the original position where a camera turned off.*

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 19:12 UTC
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Perplexing intro: "There are two stand-out choices here: the tiny but seeming end-of-life Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 II Aspherical II and the not-really-a-pancake at all Sigma 19mm F2.8 DN for Sony E-mount. Both"

Given the sigma is easily the worse of the original sigma trio and easily bested by the EF-M 22mm in every way. The sigma is bigger (not really a pancake), slower (F2.8 versus F2) and the IQ is nowhere near that of the canons 22mm.

I own both the A6000 with the Sigma 19mm and the EOS-M (original) with the 22mm F2.

The EOS-M combo is much more capable and much more enjoyable to use. The A6000 is a better for action but so frustrating most days I go with the M and the 22mm.

The Canon 22mm is a really nice lens, but it's a rubbish 28mm equiv (which is what's being discussed in the part of the article you quote).

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 05:42 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2457 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ruekon: Thank you for this article and the effort spent to make the comparisons and answer lots of comments!

Take Nikon 1 for example: it ships with a 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens. People come to the conclusion that picture quality doesn't catch up with larger sensor cameras. Which surprise when considering that the lens is equivalent to 27-81 f/9.5-15. Don't even people at Nikon know about this and rather tend to stop the Nikon 1 instead?

I've said consistently that exposure (f-numbers and ISO) is based on per unit area assessment. And, in exposure terms, F2 = F2 = F2 (ignoring the fact that ISO 100 ≠ ISO 100 ≠ ISO 100, perceptually).

You cannot mix f-numbers and equivalent f-numbers.

However, if you mount an 816mm F15 lens to a full frame camera you'll be able to shoot exactly the same shot at someone shooting a 300mm F5.6 on CX and there's nothing to stop you using the same shutter speed. They are equivalent but not identical/interchangeable.

I'm not claiming that nobody is confused (lots of people still believe focal lengths have inherent geometric distortion characteristics). But what the article says is correct and consistent and is not confused.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 22:27 UTC
In reply to:

Bombastic: That's it. I submitted. Just ordered an A9 form B&H. Can we return to our usual programming?

I don't think there's any way for us to solely publish a story to the camera's database page. I've added associations so that this will now appear on the TZ90 and a9's product pages but that means you also now get 'Buy' boxes on the story.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 18:50 UTC
In reply to:

Bombastic: That's it. I submitted. Just ordered an A9 form B&H. Can we return to our usual programming?

This isn't about the a9, it's about Adobe Camera Raw, which a large number of our reader use. We'd have published this story regardless of which cameras were being added.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 18:25 UTC
In reply to:

AARonron: Great article. I would like to see a follow-up that summarized when each style of shutter is most beneficial and examples of applications each excels at.
For example, I've read more than one photog gush over how great silent shooting is for their portrait work, keeping subjects more at ease and candid.
Conversely, from the article it sounds like e-shutters might be terrible for sports, but is it really? How fast do things need to be moving to cause noticeable distortion? (not rhetorical, I really would like to know)
E-shutters seem like they'd be great for shooting with a fast lens on a sunny day without having to stop down or use an ND filter to avoid blow-out. But, is it that simple?

The distorting effect of electronic shutter will vary between cameras, since their shutter rates vary significantly.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 18:20 UTC
In reply to:

Bombastic: That's it. I submitted. Just ordered an A9 form B&H. Can we return to our usual programming?

You realise we [regularly report ACR updates](https://www.dpreview.com/tag/adobe-camera-raw)?

Link | Posted on May 24, 2017 at 18:10 UTC
In reply to:

piratejabez: "The other way of doing things it to develop..." should be "is to develop..."

Great article!

Thanks for catching that.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 22:06 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2457 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ruekon: Thank you for this article and the effort spent to make the comparisons and answer lots of comments!

Take Nikon 1 for example: it ships with a 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens. People come to the conclusion that picture quality doesn't catch up with larger sensor cameras. Which surprise when considering that the lens is equivalent to 27-81 f/9.5-15. Don't even people at Nikon know about this and rather tend to stop the Nikon 1 instead?

@nigelht - There's no confusion here. Read the article above and you'll see a photographic demonstration.

It **is** F2, which tells us its behaviour in terms of exposure/ISO (light per unit area). However, it's **equivalent** to F5.4 in terms of its effect on the whole image (total light).

Because, while you say 'it's just cropping,' that's not how anybody takes photographs. I'm not convinced that people buying 2.72x crop CX cameras only shoot the central 14% of the image that full frame shooters do.

Instead, they'd use a 50mm lens from the same distance as a full frame shooter would use a 135mm lens (giving the same framing). At which point, the 25mm aperture diameter of a 50mm F2 will give the same depth-of-field and diffraction as stopping the 135mm lens down to F5.4 would (also, not coincidentally, a 25mm aperture diameter).

If the full frame shooter needs to use the same shutter speed to freeze action, they can use a higher ISO and still get very similar noise performance.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 20:38 UTC
In reply to:

Reactive: It's nice to see great 'tech' articles on DP. To the best of my knowledge, there's one useful fact missing in the explanation of the focal plane shutter. At fast shutter speeds, the second curtain starts to close before the first has finished opening, so the sensor (or film) is exposed by a moving slot of light. At the very fastest shutter speeds this slot can be very narrow.

I tried to cover that on page two of the article.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 19:57 UTC
In reply to:

Wilight: Richard, would you be so kind as to explain how the lack of Dynamic Range on A9 is related to the technology used to achieve the faster readout? Is it exactly the same reason of the global shutters?
When someone use the mechanical shutter of the A9, Is the DR at least as good as the one from the 24mp sensor used in A7II ?

It's something we're looking into, but our understanding is that running the sensor and its amplifiers faster generates electronic noise, which limits the dynamic range.

In global shutter cameras I believe it's the great complexity of the readout circuitry that adds the noise, reducing dynamic range. So no, it's not that the a9's design is similar to that of global shutter chips.

The a9's sensor always works at super-fast speeds, so there's no noise and DR benefit to using different modes.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 19:56 UTC
In reply to:

MaKeR: "Pentax pressed on with progressively trying to modernize their 1950s film mount."
The Pentax K mount was introduced in 1975 as a replacement for the M42 screw mount. It would be a stretch to consider the K mount a progressive modernisation of M42. Rather it was a pretty clean break, albeit with the option of using an adapter to mount legacy M42 lenses.
So Pentax pressed on with progressively trying to modernize their 1970s film mount, not their 1950s film mount.
Just for the record.

Thank you for that, I'll correct it. As someone whose first SLR was KA mount, I assumed K had existed forever.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 17:41 UTC
In reply to:

cdembrey: Use of legacy (obsolete intended) lens is not a good idea. "Yesterdays Technology Today" is a catchy hook to build your advertising around—not! How about "Suddenly It's 1̶9̶6̶0̶ 1987"—no that's too honest to be used in advertising.

The are a lot of legacy (obsolete intended) Nikon F lenses that will mount on modern Nikon cameras, but will not function. Better to do to the EF mount, what was done with legacy (actual meaning is obsolete) FD lenses.

Cdembrey - you could be right. Most puns are terrible so I didn't think flagging one up (and doing so overtly) would make anyone think I was clever. I was expecting more of a 'oh, did you have to?' response.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 15:23 UTC
In reply to:

Matsu: So far backwards compatibility has only helped Nikon and Canon. Moving the extant mounts to mirrorless costs nothing but a bit of body depth. The author's assumptions are not quite accurate regarding lens design. Once phase detection is moved onto the sensor there's no reason to design photographic lenses any differently. There is some difference in the demands of a video versus stills focused lenses, and that's where you see different technologies tried. But, they can all work perfectly well within the same mount.

There are good cost reasons for "each sensor size" to have an appropriately sized mount, which Canon is already addressing with EF-M. I would advise Nikon do the same for DX.

@Matsu - you could well be right, it's just interesting to see that Sony rarely used ring-type motors in its E-mount lenses and I'm not sure video needs alone explain that.

@peter zuehlke - I completely agree. I didn't mean to imply there's much scope for lenses to be smaller with a shorter flange back distance. If that's the way it reads, I'll try to tweak the phrasing.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 15:16 UTC
In reply to:

IdM photography: What is rumoured in this article just won't happen... What Nikon and Canon don't have is a FF sensor with integrated phase detect AF, and therefore they haven't released a mirrorless FF camera yet... Canon already have a mirrorless mount (1mm larger compared to Sony's E-mount, therefore FF compatible). I hope Nikon will be smarted and create a new mount also compatible with larger (medium format sensors)... But creating MF cameras based on their current DLSR mounts is a too ugly solution for companies like Canon and Nikon...

@IdM photography - have a read of our [explanation of Dual Pixel AF](https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-70d/3) from when it was first introduced and you'll see it absolutely *is* on-sensor phase detection. The only difference is that every pixel looks left and right, rather than having strips or clusters of left or right-wing pixels.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 15:10 UTC
Total: 4983, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »