There's now a 2GB SD card that also does WiFi transfers.
http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008022.html
So your lowly K110D can now have a capability once reserved for pro and
semi-pro bodies, for far less than the high 3-digit price of the Wifi
transmitters for those bodies.
-Adam
--
PDML Pen
On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:08 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
> There's now a 2GB SD card that also does WiFi transfers.
>
> http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008022.html
>
> So your lowly K110D can now have a capability once reserved for pro
> and semi-pro bodies, for far less than the high 3-digit price of
>
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:08 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
>
>> There's now a 2GB SD card that also does WiFi transfers.
>>
>> http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008022.html
>>
>> So your lowly K110D can now have a capability once reserved for pro
>> and semi-pro bodies, for far less t
On 10/31/07, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> > On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:08 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
> >
> >> There's now a 2GB SD card that also does WiFi transfers.
> >>
> >> http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008022.html
> >>
> >> So your lowly K110D can now have a capabili
On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 10:46:56AM -0400, Adam Maas wrote:
> Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> > On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:08 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
> >
> >> There's now a 2GB SD card that also does WiFi transfers.
> >>
> >> http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008022.html
> >>
> >> So your lowly K110D can now have
On Oct 31, 2007, at 9:30 AM, John Francis wrote:
There's now a 2GB SD card that also does WiFi transfers.
http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008022.html
So your lowly K110D can now have a capability once reserved for pro
and semi-pro bodies, for far less than the high 3
I just don't get it. What's so tough about hooking a
camera to the computer via a cable?
-Brendan
--- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's now a 2GB SD card that also does WiFi
> transfers.
>
> http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008022.html
>
> So your lowly K110D can now have a capabili
On 10/31/07, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 10:46:56AM -0400, Adam Maas wrote:
> > Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> > > On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:08 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
> > >
> > >> There's now a 2GB SD card that also does WiFi transfers.
> > >>
> > >> http://wifinetnews.co
Try doing that across a dance floor.
-Adam
Brendan MacRae wrote:
> I just don't get it. What's so tough about hooking a
> camera to the computer via a cable?
>
> -Brendan
> --- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> There's now a 2GB SD card that also does WiFi
>> transfers.
>>
>> http://wif
Interesting, but you do become dependent on another supplier/vendor for
the thing to work.
Adam Maas wrote:
> There's now a 2GB SD card that also does WiFi transfers.
>
> http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008022.html
>
> So your lowly K110D can now have a capability once reserved for pro and
> se
- Original Message -
From: "Brendan MacRae"
Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>I just don't get it. What's so tough about hooking a
> camera to the computer via a cable?
I haven't looked at the article yet, but if it c
On 10/31/07, Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just don't get it. What's so tough about hooking a
> camera to the computer via a cable?
If i wanted to keep my computer out of the elements at the show(s), i
would need, on average 300' of cables and more.
Dave
>
> -Brendan
> --- Adam Ma
-- Original message --
From: John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 10:46:56AM -0400, Adam Maas wrote:
> > Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> > > On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:08 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
> > >
> > >> There's now a 2GB SD card that also does WiFi tr
- Original Message -
From: "David J Brooks"
Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
> On 10/31/07, Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I just don't get it. What's so tough about hooking a
>> camera to the co
Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:26:03 -0600
>
>
>- Original Message -----
>From: "Brendan MacRae"
>Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>
>
Why would I do that? I would just pop in another card.
-Brendan
--- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Try doing that across a dance floor.
>
> -Adam
>
> Brendan MacRae wrote:
> > I just don't get it. What's so tough about hooking
> a
> > camera to the computer via a cable?
> >
> > -Brenda
fi-enabled.
No cords or not having to remove the card.
Tom C.
>From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 10:45:50 -
The first example I saw of field photographers phoning an image in was
at the Chicago Marathon some 4-5 years ago. We were a good 15 miles
into the course and the audience along the route was sparse. A
Japanese guy (maybe two) had a laptop open on the curb with a short
cable to their cell phone
And if you've got an assistant at the dye-sub printer selling 8x10's for $25/ea
to the guests?
-Adam
Brendan MacRae wrote:
> Why would I do that? I would just pop in another card.
>
> -Brendan
> --- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Try doing that across a dance floor.
>>
>> -Adam
>>
>
Try it when you're doing hand held work in the field some day.
G
On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:07 AM, Brendan MacRae wrote:
> I just don't get it. What's so tough about hooking a
> camera to the computer via a cable?
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdm
Ok, so I pop in another card and hand the full one to
my assistant selling dye-sub prints to guests.
Then go shoot some more.
-Brendan
--- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And if you've got an assistant at the dye-sub
> printer selling 8x10's for $25/ea to the guests?
>
> -Adam
>
> Bre
er and have
> things just happen. Lazy
> yes, but nice.
>
>
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>
> >From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> >
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>>
>> I disagree. Event photographers don't just use JPEG.
>>
>>
> I was thinking the same thing. I shoot everything in RAW, even
It's all about throughput and making each second count.
Tom C.
>From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:
Being able to transfer your images directly to the laptop your assistant is
using to print and sell the images without having to stop shooting is a money
making benefit for event photographers. If you are just taking photos for
yourself it is probably only good for bragging rights.
I think thes
That's the old-fashioned way, much less efficient that an automated transfer,
and you lose shooting time doing it.
-Adam
Brendan MacRae wrote:
> Ok, so I pop in another card and hand the full one to
> my assistant selling dye-sub prints to guests.
>
> Then go shoot some more.
>
> -Brendan
>
And during the interim you just missed the best shot of the day, but don't
worry, you won't know it anyway. ;-)
Tom C.
>From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: For those who miss
--- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's the old-fashioned way, much less efficient
> that an automated transfer, and you lose shooting
> time doing it.
>
> -Adam
>
Gee, I'm not so sure. How fast is WiFi transfer?
Faster than a cable? I transfer very low res images
from my cell phone
er and have
> > things just happen. Lazy
> > yes, but nice.
> >
> >
> >
> > Tom C.
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
My tests with the K10D and a 45x card and write speed demonstrate
that it is significantly faster than the *ist DS was with a 150x card
(30% more RAW exposures in one minute and 50% more JPEG exposures in
one minute) so even if this card is a lowly 33x card, I'm sure it
would be just fine f
gt; Tom C.
>
> >From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi
> capabilities
> >Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:27:15 -0700 (PDT)
> >
--- graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Being able to transfer your images directly to the
> laptop your assistant is
> using to print and sell the images without having to
> stop shooting is a money
> making benefit for event photographers.
True enough. But whether or not there is a real
On Oct 31, 2007, at 12:16 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote:
> Gee, I'm not so sure. How fast is WiFi transfer?
> Faster than a cable? I transfer very low res images
> from my cell phone to my Mac via Bluetooth and it
> takes longer than you'd think. Also, transferring from
> a card or directly from the ca
gt;
>>
>>
>> Tom C.
>>
>>> From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi
>> capabilities
>>> Dat
; Tom C.
>>
>>> From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi
>> capabilities
>>> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:
Sure it's hypothetical... but obviously there is enough of a market for the
technology to develop it. :-)
Tom C.
>From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon&#x
--- Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Brendan,
>
> You're right: you just don't get it. I didn't either
> until I saw what
> people were doing with it and how it could be used.
> Now I get it ...
> This is quite common for technologies that incite a
> paradigm shift in
> th
The first beta model of irun.
:-)
Dave
On 10/31/07, Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The first example I saw of field photographers phoning an image in was
> at the Chicago Marathon some 4-5 years ago. We were a good 15 miles
> into the course and the audience along the route was spars
Brendan MacRae wrote:
> --- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> That's the old-fashioned way, much less efficient
>> that an automated transfer, and you lose shooting
>> time doing it.
>>
>> -Adam
>>
>
> Gee, I'm not so sure. How fast is WiFi transfer?
> Faster than a cable? I transfer very
Brendan MacRae wrote:
> --- Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> Brendan,
>>
>> You're right: you just don't get it. I didn't either
>> until I saw what
>> people were doing with it and how it could be used.
>> Now I get it ...
>> This is quite common for technologies that incit
--- Paul Crovella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Congratulations on your incredible foresight. But
> keep in mind that just because you
> can't figure out out to utilize a tool doesn't mean
> the tool isn't useful.
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
I just want to know whether WiFi images transfer
really "sa
On Oct 31, 2007, at 12:50 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote:
>
> --- Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Brendan,
>>
>> You're right: you just don't get it. I didn't either
>> until I saw what
>> people were doing with it and how it could be used.
>> Now I get it ...
>> This is quite com
;
> Tom C.
>
>
>> From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:25:21 -0700 (PDT
On Oct 31, 2007, at 1:09 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
> Godfrey, like myself, is not a professional event/sports
> photographer, who are the ones that benefit the most from this
> technology (Although it can also eliminate cabling in the studio,
> making tethered shooting tether-free).
I was intrig
--- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is a paradigm shift for event and news/sports
> photographers, especially those who use remote
> cameras. You can now have the shot on the editors
> desk within seconds of it happening (rather than
> minutes/hours with lost shooting time). And remote
Brendan MacRae wrote:
> --- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> It is a paradigm shift for event and news/sports
>> photographers, especially those who use remote
>> cameras. You can now have the shot on the editors
>> desk within seconds of it happening (rather than
>> minutes/hours with
Nothing.
On the other hand, the distance between the camera and the computer is
limited by the length of the cable, and the length of the cable is limited
by the USB specifications. Further, people trip over cables, possibly
knocking your camera and/or computer to the (hard?) ground.
-
Actually, it seemed as though you were knocking the technology because YOU
don't perceive any use for it considering how you use YOUR camera. After all
your first dig at the device was, and I quote, "I just don't get it. What's
so tough about hooking a
camera to the computer via a cable?" There'
--- Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Forget it, Brendan. It's obvious you just want to
> reiterate your
> opinion, not understand the uses or possible
> advantages of the
> technology.
Not at all. In fact I found Adam's last post very
informative. The post where you mention
--- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brendan MacRae wrote:
> > --- Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> It is a paradigm shift for event and news/sports
> >> photographers, especially those who use remote
> >> cameras. You can now have the shot on the editors
> >> desk within
I'm holding out for wifi to my optic nerve with cerebral RAW adjustment
capability and a complete path to save the image back to the card. :-)
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the li
Bob Blakely wrote:
>You're like my dog. He can't find any use for my hammer either.
Har!
That reminds me: There's only two months more to fo on the 2007 PDML
quotations collection!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE fro
Ah! The Ashai Optical Cranial Implant! They plan to use cranial implant
technology currently being developed by the PCS phone market for teenage
girls.
---
"I don't mind if you don't like my manners.
I don't like them myself. They're pr
Depends! Are the teenage girls aspiring to become Stepford wifes?
---
"I don't mind if you don't like my manners.
I don't like them myself. They're pretty bad.
I grieve over them long winter evenings."
-- Philip Marlowe (Humphrey Bogart
As an enhancement or complete replacement?
Tom C.
>From: "Bob Blakely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 1
I think they aspire to be Britney Spears, which I suppose would require
the same procedure, though different firmware..
.
Bob Blakely wrote:
> Depends! Are the teenage girls aspiring to become Stepford wifes?
>
> ---
> "I don't mind if y
On 10/31/07, Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Paul Crovella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Congratulations on your incredible foresight. But
> > keep in mind that just because you
> > can't figure out out to utilize a tool doesn't mean
> > the tool isn't useful.
> >
> > Cheers,
>
...but the same wetware...
---
"I don't mind if you don't like my manners.
I don't like them myself. They're pretty bad.
I grieve over them long winter evenings."
-- Philip Marlowe (Humphrey Bogart)
- Original Message -
From:
- Original Message -
From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi"
Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
> I was intrigued with the use of wireless image transfer in the
> portrait photography endeavor. Watching what the photographer in that
> session di
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
> >I actually have some misgivings about that. I can imagine how distracting
> >a
>>monitor showing the pictures as they are being taken as a real impedim
>I actually have some misgivings about that. I can imagine how distracting a
>monitor showing the pictures as they are being taken as a real impediment
>to
>developing any kind of flow in the session.
>
>William Robb
I have some misgivings about a monitor showing people how many crappy
pictures
At 02:07 AM 1/11/2007, Brendan MacRae wrote:
>I just don't get it. What's so tough about hooking a
>camera to the computer via a cable?
Reduced mobility.
Cheers,
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, p
Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi
>> capabilities
>>> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:27:15 -0700 (PDT)
>>>
>>>
&g
On Oct 31, 2007, at 4:39 PM, William Robb wrote:
>> I was intrigued with the use of wireless image transfer in the
>> portrait photography endeavor. Watching what the photographer in that
>> session did and how it brought the portrait session to life in a
>> different way inspired me to consider
Mark!
Tom C.
>From: Stan Halpin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Event photography is like making love - position is important but
>timing is everything.
>
>stan
>
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit th
- Original Message -
From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi"
Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>
>> I actually have some misgivings about that. I can imagine how
>> distracting a
>> monitor showing the pictures as they are be
On Oct 31, 2007, at 6:23 PM, William Robb wrote:
>>> I actually have some misgivings about that. I can imagine how
>>> distracting a
>>> monitor showing the pictures as they are being taken as a real
>>> impediment to
>>> developing any kind of flow in the session.
>>
>> I didn't make a recording
via a video tap on the camera. But actors never get to see it.
Unless, as I said, there is a situation where it might prove fruitful.
Paul
On Oct 31, 2007, at 9:23 PM, William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi"
> Subject: Re: For those who
>
> From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2007/10/31 Wed PM 06:34:03 GMT
> To: pdml@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>
> And during the interim you just missed the best shot of the day, but don't
&g
On 10/31/07, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I
> Unless, as I said, there is a situation where it might prove fruitful.
> Paul
Like comparing apples and oranges.:-)
Dave
> On Oct 31, 2007, at 9:23 PM, William Robb wrote:
>
> >
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http:/
David J Brooks wrote:
>Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I Unless, as I said, there is a situation where it might prove
>> fruitful.
>
>Like comparing apples and oranges.:-)
I think it's just a case of sour grapes.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/ma
-- Original message --
From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> David J Brooks wrote:
>
> >Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I Unless, as I said, there is a situation where it might prove
> >> fruitful.
> >
> >Like comparing apples and oranges.:-)
>
> > David J Brooks wrote:
> >
> > >Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> I Unless, as I said, there is a situation where it might prove
> > >> fruitful.
> > >
> > >Like comparing apples and oranges.:-)
> >
> > I think it's just a case of sour grapes.
> >
>
>The right ingredients for a b
--- Stan Halpin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Event photography is like making love - position is
> important but
> timing is everything.
>
> stan
>
Well said!
-Brendan
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
; wrote:
>>
>>> And during the interim you just missed the best shot
>>> of the day, but don't
>>> worry, you won't know it anyway. ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tom C.
>>>
>>>> From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL P
From: Brendan MacRae
> Ok, so I pop in another card and hand the full one to
> my assistant selling dye-sub prints to guests.
>
> Then go shoot some more.
I'd get me a runner to handle the cards. That assistant needs to stay
there at the printer.
You could miss a lot of sales while he's going
John Sessoms wrote:
> From: Brendan MacRae
>
>> Ok, so I pop in another card and hand the full one to
>> my assistant selling dye-sub prints to guests.
>>
>> Then go shoot some more.
>
> I'd get me a runner to handle the cards. That assistant needs to stay
> there at the printer.
>
> You could
Tom C wrote:
>> > David J Brooks wrote:
>> >
>> > >Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >> I Unless, as I said, there is a situation where it might prove
>> > >> fruitful.
>> > >
>> > >Like comparing apples and oranges.:-)
>> >
>> > I think it's just a case of sour grapes.
>>
>>The righ
-- Original message --
From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Tom C wrote:
>
> >> > David J Brooks wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > >> I Unless, as I said, there is a situation where it might prove
> >> > >> fruitful.
> >> >
From: graywolf
> Being able to transfer your images directly to the laptop your
> assistant is using to print and sell the images without having to stop
> shooting is a money making benefit for event photographers. If you are
> just taking photos for yourself it is probably only good for bragging
John Sessoms wrote:
> From: graywolf
>
>> Being able to transfer your images directly to the laptop your
>> assistant is using to print and sell the images without having to stop
>> shooting is a money making benefit for event photographers. If you are
>> just taking photos for yourself it is prob
John Sessoms wrote:
> From: "Tom C"
>
>> Sure it's hypothetical... but obviously there is enough of a market
>> for the technology to develop it. :-)
>
> Unless it's like the LASER ... spent the first 15 - 20 years after it
> was invented as "a solution in search of a problem." A lot of modern
From: "Tom C"
> Sure it's hypothetical... but obviously there is enough of a market
> for the technology to develop it. :-)
Unless it's like the LASER ... spent the first 15 - 20 years after it
was invented as "a solution in search of a problem." A lot of modern
technology seems to be that way
memory card. That
would require the camera to be smart enough to receive a returned
sucessful/fail status from the network or receiving PC.
Tom C.
>From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: For
> >
> >> Sure it's hypothetical... but obviously there is enough of a
market
> >> for the technology to develop it. :-)
> >
> > Unless it's like the LASER ... spent the first 15 - 20
> years after it
> > was invented as "a solution in search of a problem." A lot
> of modern
> > technology se
Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:28:21 -0700 (PDT)
>>
>>
>> --- graywolf <[EMAI
o that one has a 'never full' memory card. That
> > would require the camera to be smart enough to receive a returned
> > sucessful/fail status from the network or receiving PC.
> >
> > Tom C.
> >
> >
> >> From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTE
The WIFI is built into the card. Tnat's why (according to the article) the
CAMERA with eye-fi card has to be near a WIFI access point!
---
"I don't mind if you don't like my manners.
I don't like them myself. They're pretty bad.
I grieve
I only need to be called a dumb *** once Bob, OK? :-)
Tom C.
>From: "Bob Blakely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>Date: Thu,
Sorry. Didn't mean you were dumb. Just thought you didn't catch it.
---
"I don't mind if you don't like my manners.
I don't like them myself. They're pretty bad.
I grieve over them long winter evenings."
-- Philip Marlowe (Humphrey Boga
Adam Maas wrote:
> The reader is only necessary to configure the WiFi card, it
> does upload automatically from inside the camera. You do need
> to configure the card for each individual wirelessnetwork and
> it doesn't support any user authentication (so most
> metropolitan-area wifi networks are
I know. FWIW, I am dumb quite frequently. More oblivous as opposed to
outright stupidity in my case. :-)
Tom C.
>From: "Bob Blakely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
>Subject: Re: For those who miss
Well, I went and looked it up to see what it can do ...
Here's what I noticed:
Those two "teenage" girls didn't look *that* much closer to their teens
than I am. But if it's aimed at the teenage-girl-with-a-digital-camera
market, it needs automatic red-eye removal somewhere in the software,
tu
would require the camera to be smart enough to receive a returned
> sucessful/fail status from the network or receiving PC.
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>> From: Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss M
The "normal" 95/45 feet is based on standard WiFi access point antennas -
about 3 dBi omni gain. One can obtain 9 dBi omni antennas thereby obtaining
a 6 dB boost. I have directional 18 dBi antennas (for an increase of 15 dB).
This increases range considerably, perhaps up to several thousand fee
- Original Message -
From: "Adam Maas"
Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>
> WiFi is a lot cheaper than a runner, buy once instead of pay every time.
>
Probably more reliable too.
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
; From: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>> Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 16:35:25 -0400
>>
>> Tom,
>>
>> The reader is only
utter, etc-- with a wired remote.
On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:39 PM, William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi"
> Subject: Re: For those who miss CaNikon's Wifi capabilities
>
>
>
>> I was intrigued with the use of wireless im
What you need and what's fun are two different things...
Tom C wrote:
> I only need to be called a dumb *** once Bob, OK? :-)
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>
>> From: "Bob Blakely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> To: "
Doug Franklin wrote:
> mike wilson wrote:
>
>>> Well, maybe I'm being overly paranoid, but that lets it out for me. I'm
>>> not going to have a user that gets in without authentication and has
>>> write privileges to /any/ part of my system. Not even with WEP.
>> If it's assigning a MAC addres
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
