Tim O'Connor

Tim O'Connor

Lives in Australia Melbourne, Australia
Works as a IT
Joined on Oct 1, 2002

Comments

Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

Seems that it does not work on the D500 + iphone 6 - no great loss really.

Edit - Did a complete uninstall of the app on the iphone, and now it is working.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 06:51 UTC as 8th comment

Looks a bit like a mirror lens mounted on the A7. Would be interested to find out how much larger a version built for DSLRs would be.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2017 at 22:24 UTC as 54th comment

Will they ever bother to fix snapbridge?

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2017 at 08:48 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

cosmicnode: Why are people assuming that full frame mirrorless lenses are smaller. Simply look at the specs on Sony Nikon and Canon comparable lenses in most cases there is little difference in size, Sony has few wide angle primes, the smallest is the 35mm f2.8 which is only a few mm smaller than Nikons faster 35mm f2D lens, weight differences can be down to the construction and materials used, less material more plastic can account for this.

@T3 The critical question is how much weight are you saving, and does it lead to an improvement in the shooting experience? You can pick extremes like the 1Dx or D5, but that is not what I would ever shoot with -
I prefer the D500 or 7D, because they fit my hand nicely, and I don't need the OTT build quality. Jared Polin or Matt Granger would not agree with me :)

The question is what you are shooting? that will determine what matters to you. A street shooter or travel shooter will have different desires to a wildlife or sports shooter, and as a keen bird photographer I want a D500 or 7D size body. I could definitely handle less weight in the body, but the size is important for me, because it just handles better, and is more enjoyable.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2017 at 13:59 UTC
In reply to:

cosmicnode: Why are people assuming that full frame mirrorless lenses are smaller. Simply look at the specs on Sony Nikon and Canon comparable lenses in most cases there is little difference in size, Sony has few wide angle primes, the smallest is the 35mm f2.8 which is only a few mm smaller than Nikons faster 35mm f2D lens, weight differences can be down to the construction and materials used, less material more plastic can account for this.

Well perhaps we are straying into the area of personal opinion, but I really dislike the handling experience of a large lens on small body. In my opinion past a certain point the size/weight advantage of mirrorless full frame becomes meaningless.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2017 at 08:39 UTC
In reply to:

cosmicnode: Why are people assuming that full frame mirrorless lenses are smaller. Simply look at the specs on Sony Nikon and Canon comparable lenses in most cases there is little difference in size, Sony has few wide angle primes, the smallest is the 35mm f2.8 which is only a few mm smaller than Nikons faster 35mm f2D lens, weight differences can be down to the construction and materials used, less material more plastic can account for this.

I own both Sony mirrorless (A7ii) and Nikon systems. Yes the Sony body is smaller and the lenses can be, but the problem is that there is a line when the body-lens size ratio starts to become a handling problem for the Sony. Using a large lens like the 24-70 or 70-200 becomes a very awkward experience, and you long for a larger chunky body to grip. Put a really long lens like a 300 f2.8, Nd you won't care a jot for the smaller body :).

The thing I like about the Sony is that you CAN have a very compact system if you want - you stick with the smaller primes,

Link | Posted on May 25, 2017 at 10:17 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (819 comments in total)

My favs, and also own: Pentax LX, Pentax MX, Nikon F2, Nikon F3, Nikon FM2, Nikon FE2, Minolta X700, Olympus OM2.

The LX is probably over priced, but it is incredibly nice to shoot with.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2017 at 22:26 UTC as 111th comment
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2156 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: "We'll be diving deep into the features and performance of the 5D Mark IV once one arrives at our offices. "

Thanks for wasting my time. Gosh y'all are making a lot of conclusion here on a camera you don't even have and probably haven't used in any reasonable way.

Question: Did you actually use, as in take pictures, put them on a computer, process them and generate some output from the 5D MKIV or is this all based on stuff you read on the internet?

Love how all of the white background 5DMKIV pictures were taken with a 40D. Blast from the past covering the latest and greatest.

A bit harsh, but I kind of agree.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 08:27 UTC

So sad. What a wonderful photographer and educator he was.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2016 at 21:26 UTC as 129th comment
On article Back to the action: Nikon D500 Review (1139 comments in total)

Actually it is 21 mp sensor...

Link | Posted on May 17, 2016 at 05:11 UTC as 237th comment

Very nice samples, thanks DPR team.

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2016 at 01:00 UTC as 59th comment

Wow, support for D5 and D500 already? Awesome work Adobe!

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2016 at 20:16 UTC as 35th comment | 2 replies

Well I have to agree with some other posters who have taken issue with the D810 results - bizarre indeed. I was just comparing my D810 and A7II and D7200 in light conditions that were very extreme to my eyes - 51,000 ISO at 1/100 of a second at F1.8. All three were able to get lock on, and all three hunted at various objects - I would say the A7ii was the most consistent, followed by the D7200 and then the D810, but it was pretty close.

The image quality is so bad that I would never consider using any of the images so it is kind of a moot point :)

Edit: note that I cant really find fault in the test, but I just don't understand the discrepancy.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2016 at 13:00 UTC as 23rd comment
On article Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II (1124 comments in total)

It is using the same battery though, which is a real bummer. The battery life on the A7mk2 is really really poor, so you will have to remember to carry ( and keep charged) some additional batteries. Not a deal breaker, but it is one big advantage that DSLR's still have.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 22:48 UTC as 206th comment
On article Samsung NX1 Review (1262 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tim O'Connor: I love what Samsung have done but I would still take a 7dmk2 or D7200 over this camera, just because of the lack of lenses and also finder blackout. That is a huge deal breaker for me personally.

Yes, I own a Sony A7mk2 and A6000. I am probably overstating it a bit, after reading some more reviews.

I guess the problem is really only when shooting large bursts, which I dont tend to do. MikeTheMentor mentions that the finder turns off when shooting high frame rates:https://youtu.be/GmlzqAy5Q68?t=707

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2015 at 01:37 UTC
On article Samsung NX1 Review (1262 comments in total)

I love what Samsung have done but I would still take a 7dmk2 or D7200 over this camera, just because of the lack of lenses and also finder blackout. That is a huge deal breaker for me personally.

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2015 at 00:09 UTC as 251st comment | 2 replies
On article New samples from the Sigma 24mm F1.4 DG HSM Art lens (232 comments in total)
In reply to:

oscarvdvelde: Should be interesting to see how it compares against Sigma's old 24mm f/1.8 EX and the Samyang 24mm f/1.4 also.

Modern DSLR's are not designed for manual focusing - old camera were.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2015 at 06:11 UTC

The LR update is still not showing up in Creative cloud for some reason...

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2014 at 20:30 UTC as 16th comment | 16 replies
On article Sigma updates USB dock for new lenses (20 comments in total)

This is such a brilliant little device - None of my lenses need AF calibration, but its great to have a tool to update lenses for compatibility and things like AF.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2014 at 01:56 UTC as 7th comment
On article Best Gear of 2013: The results are in! (157 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lee Jay: I don't consider the RX100 to be compact enough to be a compact. It's too thick and the lens sticks out too much. I consider it in the same category as the Canon G-series - too big to be a true compact. A Canon S-series is the upper end of the size I'd consider to be "compact".

If it were 8mm thinner and started at 24mm instead of 28mm, then it might be interesting.

I should add - it fits into the front and rear pockets of the jeans that I own. I guess stove pipe hipster pants would be out :)

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2014 at 09:57 UTC
Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »