upvote

points

by jeffbee8 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby mrheosuper7 hours ago|
next
[-]
Sadly after 22 years, it's still considered a "high-end" feature. Even on $1600 Fujifilm x100vi, there is still single SD slot.
reply
upvoteby dsego5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I also have the same fuji. Digital cameras are still in the stone ages. I think Tony Northrup covered it well. Nothing has changed since digital cameras came to market, the workflow is still the same, copy files from a card to PC. They aren't connected to the internet, they don't have automatic syncing to cloud for backups or sharing, fuji doesn't even have a gps chip built in to store the location (only works if connected to a smartphone), they can't be locked via fingerprint scanner. It's all tech from 25 years ago.
reply
upvoteby podocarp5 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
In some senses it's good. That feature list just says "use a smartphone then". No thank you. It's everything that a camera should not be.

GPS is useful, but not wifi. I don't need my camera becoming another IOT always online telemetry device. They're one of the few electronic devices built to last. Imagine needing fingerprint unlock on a camera, and for what? Prevent others from viewing your photos? Changing your settings? Also copy from card to pc is the best possible workflow. Imagine cameras like smartphone with no expandable storage.

Stop giving these people ideas! I am now very afraid they will listen to this guy since he actually has a follower base.

reply
upvoteby justsomehnguy2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> Also copy from card to pc is the best possible workflow

So turn off the camera, open the memory card slot cover which is flimsy 1mm prong, eject the card, insert it in the reader (if you have SD reader) or fiddle the microSD first from the convertor and then insert, copy, (insert microSD to SD convertor), open up slot cover, insert the card.

Surely beats just connecting the camera to the WiFi (which it does have anyway) and downloading through SMB. Suuure.

S9900 from 15 years ago had a built-in GPS receiver (and absolutely unneeded and never updated POI system). P1100 needs a smartphone for GPS for whatever reason - and app doesn't work 5 times from 5. But the latter is on me, I knew what I would get when I bought Nikon.

reply
upvoteby iririririr1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
why do you assume a functionality will obligatory be abused against the client?

pro camera manufacturers are not google or apple. Have we became that defeatist?

reply
upvoteby Gigachad1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Cameras had gps for a moment but they all dropped it because it sucks. GPS takes a long time to get a fix so unless you want to turn the camera on and sit for 5 minutes before taking the photo, it doesn’t work. Meanwhile an app on your phone can ping the current location to the camera for free. Your phone always has a location lock and it’s super power efficient at getting it.

And the rest of it is essentially features for a market that doesn’t exist. People buying cameras today don’t want to send straight to Facebook. They want to sort through raws, edit in Lightroom and then post from a laptop. The market for the features you want all moves to phones long ago.

Sony also has a bunch of the features you are asking for. It can connect to the internet and live sync files to an ftp server. It can even upload proxy videos so your editors can start work before you get back to copy the master copy over. Cameras are sold to prosumers and actual professionals now so the featureset reflects it.

reply
upvoteby mrheosuper1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> People buying cameras today don’t want to send straight to Facebook.

Pretty sure that's the main point of Fuji camera, the output and built it filter is decent enough that you can upload to Social network without any editing.

reply
upvoteby t0bia_s4 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Windows OS is also stone age. There is no simple way to list all user data, or user edited system data for simple backup in readable format.

Btw X100F has Wi-Fi and automated file transfer to PC. But it is faster to transfer it via SD card.

reply
upvoteby jimmaswell7 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
I would hope they have some feature for automatic backup to your phone over bluetooth or such today.
reply
upvoteby mrheosuper3 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Bluetooth is slow. The transport is 3Mbps at max, if you subtract all the headers from different layers, you may have like 1.5-2Mbps practical transfer speed.
reply
upvoteby Dylan168072 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Sounds like the "or such" wins, but even with bluetooth speeds that means you're backing up 1-5 photos per minute and that helps a lot.
reply
upvoteby mrheosuper1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
And harm a lot too, you phone can't deep sleep since it has to wake up periodically to process data from bluetooth stack. Combined with slow transfer speed, that gonna eat your battery like nothing.
reply
upvoteby Dylan168076 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
Playing audio over bluetooth also wakes things periodically, but it uses almost no power. With a similarly competent design photo transfer should be very battery efficient.
reply
upvoteby dsego5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
They do transfer, but it's not automatic.
reply
upvoteby robmccoll5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
My Nikon ZF transfers to my phone through Nikon's SnapBridge app automatically.
reply
upvoteby dsego5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Oh, that's cool, kudos to Nikon, could be a good reason to switch over from Fuji.
reply
upvoteby jeffbee7 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
WiFi is a little faster I guess? In the primitive days people used the EyeFi.
reply
upvoteby jimmaswell6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
You would often not have wifi available, and you wouldn't want to have to type in wifi passwords to your camera all the time. But your phone will almost always be nearby and persistent bluetooth is easy.
reply
upvoteby toast05 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Wifi between your camera and the phone. Or your camera and a laptop in your bag or whatever...
reply
upvoteby Gigachad1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Problem is they have to disconnect from the current wifi ap to connect to the cameras ap which is inconvenient and means there can’t be a constant connection.

Wifi NAN could be used to solve this problem but I’ve not seen anything using it. Apple only just added support last year though.

reply