Richard Butler

Richard Butler

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

Comments

Total: 5955, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

LadislavCZ: DPreview,

are you going to have the review article this month already or just after 10th April with production camera due to different release date in USA?

The reason I am asking is that in Europe the camera will hit retail on 15th March already.

Thank you in advance.

We're going to start our review as soon as the camera arrives in our office. I can't put a date on the final review yet, but we wouldn't delay it to fit with launch dates.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2018 at 17:02 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

John: Those green vertical lines are a massive disappointment. And no, if I was "just going to recompose my picture" or "just don't take backlit photos", I might as well buy the Fujifilm X-T2 instead. Already have the Fujifilm lenses.

Are phase detect pixel induced artifacts worth it? Can I have an option of a sensor without them and no artifacts?

Oh, and no, I shot a bunch of pics with the Nikon D610 and it did not have any of these strange artifacts.

SomeGearLowSkillz - Point 1 is convincing enough that we've removed the reference to Fujifilm from the story.

Point 2 strongly supports the idea that it's also some kind of flare/sensor interaction but not necessarily one that's PDAF related.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 22:48 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

thejohnnerparty: The photos look good. No, very good. And, really it doesn't matter if they PP'd. That's what would happen in the real world anyway. I would like to see something outside the studio before jumping on board with a new system.

They haven't been edited. The EXIF has been truncated by the software used to rate and select them.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 18:56 UTC
On article Fujifilm X-H1: What you need to know (239 comments in total)
In reply to:

marco ricci: Is the purple flare issue in back-lit situation solved?

We'll certainly look into it.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 18:50 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

darlot: it is not just vertical , it is horizontal too.

Near the light.

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/6769434587/sony-a7-iii-sample-photos/1005225836

It's always parallel to the long edge of the sensor, because the PDAF pixels are arranged in rows. If you're seeing vertical stripes, you're probably looking at a portrait orientation image.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 18:38 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

rfsIII: This hysteria over the ghosting (or whatever it is) highlights the leadership hole left by the tragic and untimely departure of Phil. If he were still here, he would remind you all that we survived the Great Nikon D200 Banding Crisis of 2005 and that some smart engineer will find a solution to this problem as well.

Perhaps, but I remember facing this exact challenge with Phil: trying to strike a balance between showing a problem and trying to keep it in proportion. It's a delicate balance to strike and, even when he was here, we didn't always get it right.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 17:19 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

PVCdroid: There is a problem with shots from Rishi including the two showing stripes/banding problems. They are stripped of EXIF and around half the size of the other DPR photographer samples. All examples from Rishi look inferior in IQ.

DPR, please explain.

As I say, the EXIF has been edited and truncated in Rishi's images. I'm hoping he'll re-upload the *S*OOC JPEGs when he gets a chance.

However, although there may appear to be a flare artefact/truncated EXIF correlation, I'd characterise it as a relationship between Rishi's Contre-jour portrait style and the flare artefacts. (ie the EXIF problem in his workflow is a red herring).

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 17:13 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

PVCdroid: There is a problem with shots from Rishi including the two showing stripes/banding problems. They are stripped of EXIF and around half the size of the other DPR photographer samples. All examples from Rishi look inferior in IQ.

DPR, please explain.

My understanding is that the software Rishi used to rate and select his images has edited (and truncated) the EXIF. This also means there's no way to check whether he and Dale were shooting using the same JPEG quality setting.

At the moment they have limited internet access so I don't know any more than that.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 16:57 UTC
On article Video: Sony a7 III overview (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

PerL: In Europe it is 3000 dollars, so the label "basic" doesnt fit here.

US prices tend to be maintained, whereas prices in Europe tend to drop away from MSRP around six or so weeks after the camera hits the shelves (assuming no supply shortfall), so although European MSRPs start high, most people don't end up paying more.

When I was looking at G7X IIs and RX100s for a gift at the end of last year, it was cheaper for me to buy them in the UK (even with the 20% VAT) rather than buy them in the US.

Eg: [US price](https://camelcamelcamel.com/Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-Digital-Camera/product/B00K7O2DJU?context=search) and [UK price](https://uk.camelcamelcamel.com/Sony-DSCRX100M3-Advanced-Digital-Tiltable/product/B00KW3BJ1Y?context=search) trends for the RX100 III. Given I'd have to pay 10.1% tax if I bought it in the US, it's the same price in either (and the lowest historical price in the UK is lower than the lowest US price).

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 02:20 UTC
On article Video: Sony a7 III overview (223 comments in total)
In reply to:

PerL: In Europe it is 3000 dollars, so the label "basic" doesnt fit here.

It does rely on you being willing to tolerate the concept of "basic" referring to anything full frame.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 01:15 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

new boyz: For me, personally, it's not really a big deal. It only appears under certain conditions, where flare and lack of contrast become much more of a problem. I consider that kind of shot an artistic shot(strong backlight). I will only care if it appears in a macro shot for example.

So let me break it down:
1. Strong backlight = 1% of my photography.. maybe 5 to 10 to be safe
2. Great Eye AF and tracking = 80%
3. Fast AF = 99%

Why should I be worried about that 1 percent? I am getting one. But will not preorder it. I want to try it in the store when it is available here.

I think it'll be less than 1%, since it's not all backlit images, so far as we can tell.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 01:09 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

Entropy512: Why is it that you stripped EXIF metadata from the two images that you say show issues with the camera?

Most of your images have EXIF data including shutter speed, but it is conspicuously missing from all images that show problematic behavior.

Of note, the problematic behavior looks somewhat indicative of banding in artificial light - possibly a high-frequency PWM dimming scheme?

I've just discovered the same thing. I'm trying to get to the bottom of it.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 00:26 UTC
In reply to:

Mastering Light: What a crazy day!
Everyone after reading the initial release: Quick, cancel my Fuji/Nikon/Canon order!!

Then after viewing the samples with the artifacts and weird colors: quick, reinstate my Fuji/Canon/Nikon order!

How bad are the issues? Are they real?? TBD

My question is, did Sony provide the lens and the scenes for the photo shoot? If so, that was the biggest fail during a release announcement in recent memory.

We've just published their hands-on video and I'm trying to get to the bottom of what's happened with the camera's EXIF.

Events like that are *very* busy. You're rushed from one place to the next: launch presentation, hands-on time, tech presentation, etc, etc. With horrendous background noise in this instance, from what I can tell and always with terrible Wi-Fi access, which makes uploading *anything* incredibly difficult.

It's usually a case of sitting at 2am in a hotel room, cursing the internet connection as your files utterly fail to upload.

In this case, they've already sent back an image gallery and hands-on video. But dropping everything to get involved in the many comments threads isn't really practical.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 00:23 UTC
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: I haven't followed this: do the latest A models offer 14bit RAW?

Yes. Either uncompressed or with the two-stage, potentially damaging compression.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 00:18 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

jazja: Nikon, look these pictures.

As soon as I can reach Rishi, I'll ask. They are supposed to be Straight OOC JPEGs but it looks like something being used to sort and select the images is truncating the EXIF and adding a profile. I'll try to get to the bottom of it.

However, there is no Raw support for this camera yet and these stripes are entirely consistent with the way PDAF stripes are processed.

The correlation you see between EXIF and image glitches is similarly well explained as between Rishi and his fondness for lens flare and sunstars in his portraits. Correlation not being causation, and all that.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 00:13 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

jazja: Nikon, look these pictures.

Entropy512: I think it's just lens flare catching only one set of directional PDAF pixels. You don't need a particular light source for that, just a very bright source of flare.

This is distinct from the blue-channel artefacts Jim Kasson identified (though has the same pattern, since it's PDAF-related). The repeating but non-uniform pattern makes light fluctuations very unlikely.

As has already been said, this is occasionally visible in the a6000. Early firmware with the Samsung NX1 showed much the same thing but appears to have been processed-out by later firmware.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 23:54 UTC
On article Sony a7 III sample gallery (555 comments in total)
In reply to:

Entropy512: Why is it that you stripped EXIF metadata from the two images that you say show issues with the camera?

Most of your images have EXIF data including shutter speed, but it is conspicuously missing from all images that show problematic behavior.

Of note, the problematic behavior looks somewhat indicative of banding in artificial light - possibly a high-frequency PWM dimming scheme?

That was an error in the software used to select the images. We've replaced the images with the originals with full EXIF.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 23:40 UTC
In reply to:

Donald B: this is just a ridiculous test, because the original em5 had fast eye detect. then I bought the em52 which wasn't as responsive , but after the first dance school shoot with the em52 and comparing the focus accuracy the em52 was way ahead. just because its fast doesn't mean its accurate.

When I tried a [slightly more haphazard demonstration with the a7R III](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1GmF7nq-z8), it ended up yielding [images so sharp you can see the pattern on the model's contact lenses](https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9985983572/sony-a7r-iii-sample-photos/0699655181).

It works *really* well.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 23:27 UTC
In reply to:

tecnoworld: What about a7r-iii? How does it compare?

The a7R III is much more like the a7 III, both in terms of Eye-AF and subject tracking.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 23:21 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: dear dpr you frame this as if the corporation care about what we want .... very few do

they segment the market and fractionate features ti drive profits or send a current model to the back of the bus and nothing else

A cynic would say that **no** corporations care, not can they: they're inanimate legal entities whose purpose is to make most profit.

A more charitable person might conclude that the best way to make profit is to create a product that the largest number of people want to buy, at a price they're able to tolerate, with the best-possible profit margin.

Those two statements aren't contradictory. Any company, from a 'mom and pop' store to a multinational wants to charge you as much money as they can in return for as little as possible. However, as a rational consumer, you get to choose whether the value you gain makes the deal worthwhile.

You meet in the middle.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2018 at 23:16 UTC
Total: 5955, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »