Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 3819, showing: 961 – 980
« First‹ Previous4748495051Next ›Last »
On article What difference does it make? Sony uncompressed Raw (621 comments in total)
In reply to:

sensibill: @richardbutler Did Sony say which other Sony models, specifically, would get a FW revision to allow this new 'uRAW' - and is it a new ARW rev?

We did ask and were told they can't be more specific, yet.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2015 at 22:36 UTC
On article What difference does it make? Sony uncompressed Raw (621 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kiril Karaatanasov: @DPreview folks can you check if noise performance improves with uncompressed RAW? Thinking through the details and looking at the very tiny example you give I suspect that the compression actually amplifies noise.

Maybe that is the reason that we see Nikon consistently producing lower noise values compared to Sony while using same sensor technology...

We've conducted a fairly in-depth SNR analysis of the two files and found no difference between the two until you get to the very darkest values in the Raw file (and even this difference isn't visually meaningful).

The only difference you should expect to encounter/avoid are the artefacts brought about by the localized stage of the compression.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2015 at 20:10 UTC
On article What difference does it make? Sony uncompressed Raw (621 comments in total)
In reply to:

vincent__l: Richard,

Thanks for the early heads up on the uncompressed ARW progress. Do you know whether or not the new uncompressed ARW format will require RAW converter updates (Lightroom, ACR, C1, etc ?)

The images in this article were processed using ACR, without us having to ask Adobe for an update.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2015 at 20:08 UTC
On article Sony brings uncompressed Raw to a7S II, a7R II and... (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

roserez: Any word on WHEN lossless raw will be available for the A7R II? I'm not buying until I see it.

Not yet. We'll report it as soon as we hear.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2015 at 19:36 UTC
On article Sony brings uncompressed Raw to a7S II, a7R II and... (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

fedway: Is DPR going to update the raw files in the studio comparison tool with the lossless raws? Will it make a difference?

Quite possibly. We'll certainly be looking at what difference it makes.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2015 at 22:59 UTC
On article Sony brings uncompressed Raw to a7S II, a7R II and... (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

Glenn Barber: Agreed - we want Compressed Lossless Raw like on Canon and Nikon. WHo thought Uncompressed Raw was what we wanted?

At no point does the press release say that the company has developed a new lossless compression system (which you'd probably mention, if they had).

We've spoken to Sony about this: the options will be uncompressed Raw or the existing (lossy) compressed Raw.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2015 at 23:51 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: "Having used cameras like the Nikon 1 J5, that can fire off full-res bursts with continuous AF and no black out, I was really expecting more out of the RX10 II."

Can you print that out and pin it to the wall of dpreview offices?

Every camera you review should be brought to a soccer game and tested like that. Every. Single. Camera.

Don't get me wrong: we're only going to be more (and more challenging) AF testing, so that we can give credit where it's due. But that probably won't mean shooting a soccer match with every single camera.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2015 at 01:31 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Murdey: "Having used cameras like the Nikon 1 J5, that can fire off full-res bursts with continuous AF and no black out, I was really expecting more out of the RX10 II."

Can you print that out and pin it to the wall of dpreview offices?

Every camera you review should be brought to a soccer game and tested like that. Every. Single. Camera.

We will be trying to do tests like this more often, but it won't be every single review.

Not least because it would mean every review takes even longer.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2015 at 01:04 UTC
In reply to:

SteB: It's the game called football in the rest of the world.

Rugby balls can roll. Just not quite as predictably as in the round ball game.

But yes, I can see the logic in the game with most foot/ball interaction being the one that gets primary use of the word 'football.'

Sadly, however, language doesn't work on such logic - it works on usage and consensus.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2015 at 23:50 UTC
In reply to:

LMCasey: So you will not be able to choose between uncompressed raw or lossy compressed raw. What about a lossless compressed mode like I use on my Nikon DSLR

The conversation we've had with Sony suggests the options will be:

Uncompressed 14-bit Raw

or

The same compressed Raw currently offered (which Sony has always described as 14-bit in the past).

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2015 at 23:47 UTC
In reply to:

fzrTom: The Nikon D5500 is a very good camera with a very fast AF (Phase AF).
The RX10-II has a contrast AF.
I'm not sure that a test is needed to show that phase AF is faster than contrast AF ?

Sorry, I wasn't talking about shutter/mirror interruption (which I can see the word 'constant' implied).

Yes, there'll be blackout for both systems, but a live view camera has high-res, colour information about the scene between shots. Most DSLRs have very little real scene information - at best a very low-res impression from the metering sensor. It's amazing that Nikon's 3D tracking system works at all.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2015 at 23:30 UTC
In reply to:

SteB: It's the game called football in the rest of the world.

I didn't: Rugby Union *is* the one true code.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2015 at 22:23 UTC
In reply to:

ryan2007: A better comparison would be the Nikon DSLR vs the Panasonic GH-3 or GH-4 vs the Fuji XT-1.

At least this is a more apples to apples comparison. A bridge camera is a different class.

When it comes to video Fuji will not fair well, I know that. However, the Micro four thirds should be good competition.

On the still side the sensor size does not matter, heck a comparison was done between a 1" sensor and a DSLR.

On the other side it is disappointing that a bridge camera can not do certain things if you are in the mindset you do not want a system of lenses to deal with and you graduated from a p&s camera even though the RX-10 is a p&s type camera, call it a high end one with more options maybe

Ultimately if you want to shoot video you really need a separate video camcorder and for stills a separate camera. Nothing has replaced one over the other. If it ever does.

However, this is part of an RX10 II review: so we wanted to find out how much of an all-rounder it really is.

We may well do the kinds of side-by-side tests you describe, over the coming months (we certainly want to). But that isn't what we were trying to test or show here.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2015 at 22:19 UTC
In reply to:

fzrTom: The Nikon D5500 is a very good camera with a very fast AF (Phase AF).
The RX10-II has a contrast AF.
I'm not sure that a test is needed to show that phase AF is faster than contrast AF ?

Because it's not about 'fast.'

In a single AF acquisition, the RX10 II may well be faster than the D5500 (it'll depend, to an extent, on the lens used).

However, live view potentially has an advantage over separate-sensor PDAF, in that the camera constantly 'sees' the scene, which can help tracking.

So which plays a bigger role: the depth information that the DSLR has (with limited scene understanding) or the more advanced understanding of the scene that the RX10 II potentially has (limited by the need to hunt to acquire focus)?

That's why it's worth testing: to see how much of a gap currently exists.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2015 at 22:17 UTC
In reply to:

SteB: It's the game called football in the rest of the world.

Yes, but non-US readers will still *understand* 'soccer,' whereas US audiences use 'football' to mean something else. Both are clearly wrong: the one true code of football being Rugby Union, obviously.

For the same reason, Jordan's interview with Otto Greule starts by talking about the National Football League, rather than just 'football,' which looks just as incongruous to a US audience as the use of 'Soccer' does to non-US eyes.

No one likes the referee, but we try to play fair by all our readers.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2015 at 22:00 UTC
On article Sony brings uncompressed Raw to a7S II, a7R II and... (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: I have to congratulate DPR's recent article and effort to get Sony to respond to their RAW files. Thank you!!!

I remember discussing the issue with Iliah quite some time ago, and bringing it up with Sony every time we met them for product briefings. I don't remember feeling 'shamed' into doing something we were already working on.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2015 at 19:58 UTC
On article Sony brings uncompressed Raw to a7S II, a7R II and... (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: Sounds good - finally! But *what* is for 1st Generation buyers, the A7, A7R and A7S?! We'd love to have also a Firmware Upgrade with 14-bit native RAW compressed/uncompressed Mode selectable via Menu! Thanks, Sony.

It's not yet clear how many models this will be extended to. Sony's statement says 'starting with the a7R II...'

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2015 at 19:56 UTC
On article Sony brings uncompressed Raw to a7S II, a7R II and... (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Lotus Eater: There seems to be a fair amount of concern as to whether Sony will offer lossless compressed files with these updates - I'm sure not many people want unnecessarily large raw files.

The terms lossless/uncompressed and lossy/compressed seem to have become almost interchangeable throughout this whole saga, to the extent that I suspect Sony's press team either doesn't understand the difference or hasn't communicated it as well as they could have.

Hopefully we can assume Sony's engineers will deal with it properly and to the satisfaction of everybody. Well, almost everybody.

I suspect that, for now, the cameras are going to offer the current lossily compressed Raws or totally uncompressed Raws.

I agree that losslessly compressed Raws would be the better alternative, but I suspect that it's easier to remove the (lossy) compression step than it is to then create a whole new (lossless) compression system to put in its place.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2015 at 19:23 UTC
On article Sony brings uncompressed Raw to a7S II, a7R II and... (562 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike Sandman: Thank you, dPreview, for pushing this issue on our behalf.

Sony, you need to ramp up production.

I'd like to echo Horshack's comment: our coverage wouldn't have been possible without Iliah Borg's work.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2015 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

DrummerCT: Can someone explain further, "the F2.8 lens may seem fast, but when you take into account that it is really the equiv. of F8 wide open"

F2.8 is not F2.8?

Well put, dr_X

It's an 8,8-73.3mm lens with a constant F2.8 max aperture.

This is equivalent to a 24-200mm F8 lens on full frame, in terms of angle of view, depth of field and the total amount of light captured (which gives a very good idea of noise level).

For more detail (perhaps more than necessary), [read this article](http://bit.ly/equivap).

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2015 at 23:04 UTC
Total: 3819, showing: 961 – 980
« First‹ Previous4748495051Next ›Last »