Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 4438, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

PPierre: Regarding the touchscreen, people should complain, even if they buy the body : this clearly is something Sony can improve via firmware update, so the louder you get, the better it will be for you and for Sony, which might learn that customers don't want to drag focus points.

Ambulater - I didn't mean to suggest it's exclusively used that way in the US, just that it's used widely enough that it's broadly understood (at which point it's fine, regardless of what apparent literal meaning of the words).

Certainly it's used broadly enough that [British comedians feel it's fair game](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw).

But your point about it probably being regional difference is interesting. I've found people from different parts of the US tend to use bring and take in opposite ways, which I find fascinating.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 20:12 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rob: I'm dying to see how the IBIS performs for run & gun videos. I hope DPR's review will include a sample test video of just someone walking normally while recording a video with a focal length that's roughly 24~35mm (FF equivalent).

We'll try to make sure we include that.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 19:28 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

Erick L: It would be nice if you added a yes/no under battery specs for "USB charging" and "USB powered". Thanks.

Good idea. I've added it.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 19:27 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

broddesign: I am upgrading from a6000 to a6500. I don't care about video but doing a lot of street photography. Love my a6000 but really need an improvement for low light IQ and stabilization for my prime lenses. In your opinion - is this upgrade worth extra money?

Excuse my while I finish eating this tasty piece of crow.

It seems that the a7II does manage to underperform by so much that it allows the newer sensor in the a6300 and a6500 to overcome much/all of that difference.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 19:19 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

cavensar: Via cinema5d.com, An additional advanced feature which can be accessed via the menu is the ability to extend the 4K recording time. As we all know, the a6300 would have got warm and likely shut down while recording. Although this may still happen with the new a6500, you now have the possibility to delay this by accessing the menu, changing the Auto Power OFF Temperature to HIGH, and allowing the camera to get warmer… In fact, Sony recommends using a tripod as the camera can get really hot.

That's the 'Auto Pwr Off Temp (Std/High)' menu item called out on page 4 of this article.

Without more testing, we can't know whether it extends the a6500's recording beyond that of the a6300 or merely allows it to keep up with the a6300 (since the a6500's chip can't use the back of the camera body as a heat sync, as it's in an IS mechanism).

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 19:15 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

ObelixCMM: Page 1 comparison table list 4K crop on Sony X1.23 and Fuji X1.17.
I assume Sony crop is from photo (3;2) to video (16:9) aspect ratio crop, this number is missing for XT-2. This makes it look like Sony got larger crop factor.

No. Those are the crop factors relative to the full width of the sensor, so are 16:9 compared with 16:9.

The table is correct: the Sonys shoot 24 and 25p using their full sensor width but, in 30p mode, crop in by 1.23x.

![a6500](https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/E~TS250x0~articles/6717953325/Video-Crops/4k30Crop.jpeg)

The X-T2 uses a 1.17x crop for all 4K frame rates:

![X-T2](https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/E~TS250x0~articles/1061973559/Video/Crop_Comparison.jpeg)

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 18:54 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

ObelixCMM: Sony A6300 body only price is $998.00 not $1,100.00

Quite right. My comments about 'for $400 extra' make more sense if the difference is actually $400.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 18:44 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

zeratulmrye: A6500 has UHS II? You sure?

Good catch. Sorry about that, I've corrected the error.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 18:01 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

PPierre: Regarding the touchscreen, people should complain, even if they buy the body : this clearly is something Sony can improve via firmware update, so the louder you get, the better it will be for you and for Sony, which might learn that customers don't want to drag focus points.

MikeF4Black - you realise that's a UK/US difference? No matter how odd it looks to your eyes, 'could care less' is widely used and understood in the US.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 16:45 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

broddesign: I am upgrading from a6000 to a6500. I don't care about video but doing a lot of street photography. Love my a6000 but really need an improvement for low light IQ and stabilization for my prime lenses. In your opinion - is this upgrade worth extra money?

The sensor size difference should give the a7II a 1.3EV advantage. It's incredibly unlikely that the a6500 will overperform and the a7II will underperform by enough to close a gap that large.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 16:42 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

osv: what is with the fixation on the touchscreen? dpr ran a touchscreen poll a few months ago, the majority of the respondents did not want a touchscreen.

"I quite enjoyed using the flip-out screen at the skatepark we visited to get super low angles and the touchscreen allowed me to easily choose my point of focus." that was a classic manual focus shooting situation, the skater was making multiple passes, so you knew where he'd be ahead of time; pre-focus the camera, using magnification in the evf, no need for a touchscreen.

"engaging tap-to-track in video mode is far from intuitive and the exclusion of lock-on AF area modes in video is inexcusable at this point." dan, when was the last time that you saw autofocus hunting in a major hollywood production? video pros don't use af; sony knows that, they gave us the parfocal 28-135 lens for just that reason.

The touchscreen is one of the main features you get if you choose the a6500 over the a6300, so it seems like an obviois thing to test and describe for would-be purchasers.

Equally, this isn't a camera for video pros: how well the AF performs is a legitimate question. The camera has the feature, it gives control over video focus speed, so it's quite reasonable to check if it works.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 16:40 UTC
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1128 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeF4Black: DPR's current obsession with flavour-of-the-week catchphrases is really annoying.

What 'catchphrase' is it we're over-using?

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 16:35 UTC
On article Lensrentals tears down the Nikon 105mm F1.4 (157 comments in total)
In reply to:

noflashplease: Just how much cost cutting is acceptable in a $2,200 lens? For this price, I'd expect a ring ultrasonic motor, not a geared micromotor. The rest of the build looks cheap and old fashioned as well. This is what I'd expect from bargain bin 3rd party lens of yesteryear, not a Nikkor at this price level.

Ring-type AF tends to perform poorly for the constant changes in direction that CDAF (as used in video and live view on most Nikon bodies) requires.

It may be that this design is better, overall, when both PDAF and CDAF focus are considered.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 05:01 UTC
On article Lensrentals tears down the Nikon 105mm F1.4 (157 comments in total)
In reply to:

ultimitsu: I myself will probably not buy this lens, but I dont think it is fair to bash it just for the gears and micro USM. Nikon may have chosen micro USM for weight and size reasons.

This lens is designed for portrait, not sports. So while Ring USM has the higher class appeal, I am not sure if it would have made any difference in the performance. Nikon could have built this lens in japan, used metal in all parts of the lens, curved circuit board, exotic metal gears - and give you a true "no expense" spared lens - and price it at 4000. I think many people will then cry it being a zeiss pretender?

I think Cicala's point is more that Nikon's marketing claims its 'SWM' system is better than a micromotor and gears, and has then slapped the SWM name on a lens that uses micromotor and gears (a design that's probably **better** for video autofocus).

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 04:58 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2341 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chippy99: @Richard Butler: I think you need to develop a sense of humour!

And OF COURSE it can imply something about the suitability of one format over another. If your prime motivation is shallow depth of field for portraits etc, then clearly FF is better suited than M43 for example, isn't it. And likewise if you value compact telephoto lenses and lots of DOF, then FF is not the best.

Unfortunately the equivalence debate usually descends into a slanging match from different fanboy camps, from my experience.

The whole topic is a waste of time in my view. People usually have 1 system (FF, APS, M43 etc), so knowing what settings you might have needed were you shooting with another system you don't actually possess, is quite irrelevant.

After so many comments, it's sometimes hard to tell the people who are joking from people who have genuinely not understood and from people willfully misrepresenting the situation. Sorry if I got it wrong.

I've never suggested it's for know which setting you'd use, though. It's mainly about choosing between systems (especially in areas such as compacts, which feature a range of different sensor sizes).

However, while people still think that smaller sensors give you more depth of field...

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2016 at 04:50 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2341 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chippy99: equivalence
noun equiv·a·lence \i-ˈkwiv-lən(t)s, -ˈkwi-və-\

1. A term used bY FF enthusiasts to justify the excessive bulk, weight and cost of their camera equipment.

2. A term used by FF enthusiasts who seek to assert some kind of superiority over cropped sensor camera users.

3. A concept in photography that no-one other than FF enthusiasts give two hoots about.

Equivalence doesn't have anything to do with full frame.

The 35mm film format is used as a reference point because it was the *de facto* standard of the film era, so it became near-universally adopted when the digital age brought a proliferation of formats to the mass market.

**Equivalence doesn't favour any format over another.**

*Physics* says that larger formats can produce better IQ because they can capture more light, but that shouldn't be surprising or controversial.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 19:28 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2341 comments in total)
In reply to:

Chippy99: equivalence
noun equiv·a·lence \i-ˈkwiv-lən(t)s, -ˈkwi-və-\

1. A term used bY FF enthusiasts to justify the excessive bulk, weight and cost of their camera equipment.

2. A term used by FF enthusiasts who seek to assert some kind of superiority over cropped sensor camera users.

3. A concept in photography that no-one other than FF enthusiasts give two hoots about.

It sounds like you need a better dictionary. I'd propose the following definition:

1. A mechanism for understanding the full effect of one format, relative to any other.

That's all. It doesn't (and can't) imply anything about the suitability of a format's size/price/IQ/capability balance for any given person or situation. It just makes clearer what that balance is. Anything else you're reading into it is something you're bringing to it, not an inherent property of equivalence.

It does undermine the fallacy that small formats inherently offer greater depth of field, but that remains the case regardless of whether you think in terms of equivalence or not.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 19:21 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2341 comments in total)
In reply to:

OntarioPhotog: The article on equivalence appears to have reversed the 50mm and 100mm entires in the first table.

It looks right to me: a 50mm lens on a Four Thirds sensor gives the same field-of-view as a 100mm lens on a 36x24mm sensor.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2016 at 19:57 UTC
On article New kid on the block: YI M1 review (699 comments in total)
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: The ability to convert RAW files to jpeg in camera is something of an emergency feature like being able to use alkaline AA batteries: technically useful, but something I have neither used nor factored in a purchasing decision for years.

These days when you can easily convert the RAW files on your phone even, I think we can safely consign the feature to history and no longer trot out a demerit if a camera is missing it.

I'm afraid I completely disagree. Whenever I'm travelling, whether for a weekend or a trip back to Europe, I really appreciate the ability to tweak and fine-tune an image from the Raw file. The feature becomes more valuable, the better the JPEG engine is, so I particularly appreciate being able to use it on, say, a Fujifilm or Olympus. It means my images are that bit closer to the way I want them, before I Wi-Fi them to my phone.

We're fully aware that it's not a way of working that everyone will want to use, so we list it as a Con (essentially 'a thing you *might* want to consider'), rather than actually factoring it into the final score.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 00:05 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: $1200-2000 ILCs part 1 - Crop-Sensor (387 comments in total)
In reply to:

Absolutic: Did you guys consider that D500 is only $200 more these days? Updated price has been $1799. I had both D500 and XT2 and think. D500 is a better camera in everything other than video and of course EVF has its benefits

The text is written based on list price because we can't constantly re-check the current price across multiple markets, nor do we know whether lowered prices are temporary offers or long-term re-positioning.

Ultimately, we thought it would be fairly clear that if we say 'price is the only reason camera X didn't win,' then a reduction in the price difference makes the decision harder.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2016 at 21:15 UTC
Total: 4438, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »