Topic: 1D mk II wireless? (Read 6345 times)

Piece · « **on:** December 08, 2005, 10:34:08 pm »

I was thinking to replace memory cards I could just wirelessly transfer my images straight to my laptop in the field. Then I could shoot all I wanted and not have to change cards, while bypassing the upload process at the same time. I typically do sports stuff so it's not hard to set up. My one concern is how fast it'll transfer. I dont want my buffer tied up due to a slow transfer rate. Anyone know anything here that could help me?

Jonathan Wienke · « **Reply #1 on:** December 09, 2005, 02:52:21 pm »

Canon's wireless transfer unit uses 802.11g to transfer images from the camera to any FTP server. Images a buffered to the camera's RAM, then to the memory card, then to the FTP server. So if you are shooting fast, you won't see any slowdown in your shooting rate over normal until you fill both the camera's buffer and the memory card in the camera. That's not very likely.

jani · « **Reply #2 on:** December 12, 2005, 10:42:47 am »

When that is said, keep in mind that the maximum transfer speed with a 802.11g device is 54 Mbps, or 6.75 MBps. Because of protocol overhead, you can't expect to see this speed, either, but maybe something close if reception is superb.

So don't be disappointed if the WFT-E1 isn't blazingly fast at transferring images.

francois · « **Reply #3 on:** December 12, 2005, 11:04:48 am »

What do you think of this thing? It looks like what Pierce was looking for.

Jonathan Wienke · « **Reply #4 on:** December 12, 2005, 01:13:01 pm »

Its a Wi-Fi adapter, but doesn't allow buffering of images internally, so expect it to be much more of an impediment to rapid shooting than the Canon device, which isn't going to slow you down any more than the memory card unless you're shooting really fast for long periods of time.

Jonathan Wienke · « **Reply #5 on:** December 12, 2005, 01:15:43 pm »

Quote

When that is said, keep in mind that the maximum transfer speed with a 802.11g device is 54 Mbps, or 6.75 MBps.

That's comparable to the write speed you get with a Microdrive, so shooting wireless won't be all that different than shooting with a Microdrive, except you won't have to stop to change memory cards.

Piece · « **Reply #6 on:** December 12, 2005, 09:22:55 pm »

never shot with a microdrive...I heard that since there is a moving part that they break down in about a year. How is it comparable to a compact flash? is it closer to an 8x, 40x, or 80x card?

francois · « **Reply #7 on:** December 13, 2005, 02:50:29 am »

Quote

never shot with a microdrive...I heard that since there is a moving part that they break down in about a year. How is it comparable to a compact flash? is it closer to an 8x, 40x, or 80x card?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You can get performance of compact flash (and MD) on [a href=\"http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007]Rob Galbraith's website[/url]. On some cameras, microdrives have decent performance. As for reliability, I had one gone bad and two are still healthy.

francois · « **Reply #8 on:** December 13, 2005, 05:52:35 am »

Quote

Its a Wi-Fi adapter, but doesn't allow buffering of images internally, so expect it to be much more of an impediment to rapid shooting than the Canon device, which isn't going to slow you down any more than the memory card unless you're shooting really fast for long periods of time.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53339\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I forgot that Pierce was shooting sports! Obviously, the device will be worse than the Canon or Nikon WiFi adapters...

Jonathan Wienke · « **Reply #9 on:** December 13, 2005, 12:56:33 pm »

Quote

never shot with a microdrive...I heard that since there is a moving part that they break down in about a year. How is it comparable to a compact flash? is it closer to an 8x, 40x, or 80x card?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53404\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Microdrive vs CF performance varies from camera to camera and by CF card model. Rob Galbraith's site has the best comparison. As to Microdrive reliability, I have 6 Microdrives (3 1GB and 3 4GB) and I have shot over 110,000 frames with them and they're still going strong. The 1GB drives are about 30 months old. The only time I've lost an image was when shooting a rapid sequence on a low battery and the battery died before everything was written to the drive, which isn't the drive's fault.

Going back to the original query, the Canon wireless device in conjunction with a large, fast memory card will be highly useful for shooting sporting events.

Piece · « **Reply #10 on:** December 13, 2005, 01:52:28 pm »

am i correct in thinking that when it transfers the pictures to the laptop they are removed from the compact flash card? does anyone know how the transmitter react to laptop failure?

Jonathan Wienke · « **Reply #11 on:** December 13, 2005, 02:06:04 pm »

Here's the basic process:

1: You shoot a photo.
2: It is buffered in camera RAM.
3: The RAM buffer is written to the card.
4: The images on the card are transferred through the wireless link.
5: When an image has been successfully transferred through the wireless link, it is removed from the card.

If the wireless link is interrupted, whether by going out of range, a problem on the receiving end, or whatever, images will build up on the memory card. Once the connection is restored, image transfer will resume and the card will be gradually cleared.

Piece · « **Reply #12 on:** December 13, 2005, 10:19:29 pm »

thanks for clearing that up!

Author Topic: 1D mk II wireless? (Read 6345 times)