Nikon D600 a compromise but ok

On 2012.09.19 23:22 , nospam wrote:
In article , Robert Coe
wrote:

: Canon 6D announced - same price, less photographic features, than D600
: but built-in wireless and GPS.

I admit to being confused by this. Built-in GPS is a specialty feature about
which most users will care little (sorry, Alan!), and built-in wireless is
useful only to photojournalists, most of whom will NOT buy the 6D.

gps is not a specialty feature at all and most users will find it far
more convenient than having to deal with an external gps or trying to
match tracklogs to photos. having wifi makes getting photos to the
computer much easier too.

I've spoken of GPS in these NG's many times: More DSLR's should come
with built in GPS. WiFi is another that should become pretty standard.

That said, tagging photos from a GPS log is trivial - as long as the
camera time is set accurately (within any hour). It's actually much
easier using EXIFTOOL in command line than any of the (several) apps
I've tried. I'd rather have it built in, of course.

The a99 gps feature does not record tracks. It just tags the photos.
Recording tracks is a valuable thing as well. So I'll keep bringing my
GPS recorder.

From the description of the 6D it also records tracks. One up on the
a99 - as long as it is not a battery eater.


--
"There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties were
divided – politics became a mere struggle for office."
-Sir John A. Macdonald

On 2012.09.19 21:45 , Robert Coe wrote:

I admit to being confused by this. Built-in GPS is a specialty feature about
which most users will care little (sorry, Alan!), and built-in wireless is
useful only to photojournalists, most of whom will NOT buy the 6D.

I don't think you know the mindset of "most". While some photographers
may be completely uninterested and some unaware, of that later group
many will find it to be a useful thing and embrace it. More and more
you see photos online (such as with Panoramio) that are accurately[1]
tagged with GPS.

As to WiFi it will certainly be a boon to the traveler who can abandon
more wires and adaptors for their trips and use the WiFi to offload the
images to the laptop, the cloud and even home server if set up that way.

[1] Many people don't realize the errors that GPS positions can contain
in some conditions like canyons (natural and urban), deep woods,
hillsides and so on.


--
"There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties were
divided – politics became a mere struggle for office."
-Sir John A. Macdonald

On 2012.09.20 02:06 , nospam wrote:

they can skip it in the low end models, since the target market
probably doesn't care about those features.

I disagree. There are likely a lot of people at the "lower end" who
would enjoy the GPS benefit of tagging and the WiFi benefit of quick
uploading. That would be worth a small premium in those models.

Indeed the first cameras to sport GPS widely were P&S.


--
"There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties were
divided – politics became a mere struggle for office."
-Sir John A. Macdonald

Alan Browne wrote:
On 2012.09.20 02:06 , nospam wrote:

they can skip it in the low end models, since the target market
probably doesn't care about those features.

I disagree. There are likely a lot of people at the "lower end" who
would enjoy the GPS benefit of tagging and the WiFi benefit of quick
uploading. That would be worth a small premium in those models.

Indeed the first cameras to sport GPS widely were P&S.

I tend to agree with that concept. More over, I don't
think professionals will find WIFI as useful as others
expect.

It's something that works just fine if there are only
one or two being used. But just imagine a PJ showing up
at a press conference expecting rapid transfer of
images... and discovering that there are 47 other PJ's
with wireless enabled. Oppps.

Only 3 of the channels in the 2.4Ghz band can be used at
the same time, and all it takes is one fool choosing a
channel 3, as an example, to wipe out the entire lower
half and limit it to only two channels at a time. With
30 or 40 users standing in line for packet time, data
transfers will be just exceedingly slow! A dialup modem
from a laptop would be way faster!

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

There are some problems which aren't at all obvious.
Implementing either GPS or Wifi internally requires a
significant part of the camera's internal case be
non-metal.

no it doesn't.

Don't be making absolute assertions about something
you have no knowledge of...

you don't know what knowledge i have of it, and if only you would do
the same...

When you make statements like that one, it is very clear
that you've never worked with antennas.

it doesn't matter if i have or not. what matters is that the engineers
at apple who know a lot about rf and have solved the problems you say
cannot be solved.

it just needs a radio-transparent aperture for the
antenna.

Which of course, also has to be large enough to not
cause it to be highly directional. For 2.4GHz Wifi
that's not small in relation to a camera body. For
example, a half inch wide by one inch long window at the
back of the camera simply will not radiate energy
towards the front.

put one antenna on the front and one on the back. next?

Yeah, now you've got not just one big hole in the metal
shield, you've got two!

and they're covered with plastic. big deal. i can think of some other
ways they could do it too.

You just don't understand what the problems with these
designs actually are.

nor do you, apparently.

however, apple does understand the issues and has done what you say
cannot be done. they've been doing it for over a decade and their
products are selling rather well with high customer satisfaction, so
obviously they've solved those problems rather well.

It is also exacerbated by the fact that virtually all
Access Points use vertically oriented antennas.

actually, it varies. some of the newer base stations have internal
antennas and it's not easy to tell what the orientation is.

They're all vertical.

no, they are not all vertical.

Hence
laying an antenna along the bottom or top of a camera
doesn't work well because that alone amounts to a
roughly 30 dB signal loss due to polarity. If internal
it pretty much will have to be located on one end of the
camera, where it needs to be at least about half an inch
removed from the metal case. (Look at the Nikon WT-4 unit
mounted on a D4.)

mounted where? the wt-4 looks like it clips on your belt, and is

Typo on my part, I meant the WT-5. The WT-4 won't even
work with a D4.

i figured that.

ridiculously overpriced too. $1000??? what the hell are they smoking?
and it doesn't even support 802.11n!!
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Pro...s/25365/WT-4A-
Wireless-Transmitter.html
http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/...4-wireless-tra
nsmitter.jpg

you might be thinking of the wt-5:
http://www.dxomark.com/itext/hands-on_Nikon_D4/Nikon_D4_3.jpg
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Pro...s/27046/WT-5A-
Wireless-Transmitter.html

Of course, because that is the mating unit to the D4.

anyway, take a look at an ipod touch, there's your horizontal 1" long,
1/2" high aperture, and on one side only:
http://km.support.apple.com/library/...OS/HT1353/HT13
53_ipodtouchlate2009.jpg
http://tidbits.com/resources/2012-09/iPod-touch-colors.png

Well, that's what I said it takes! But you are not
showing something embedded in a ruggedized metal case
intended to keep RF out either. So I'm not sure what
your point is.

the point is you said such an aperture would not work properly in all
directions and that the antenna has to be apart from the metal case.

both are false, as an ipod touch shows.

not only that but this has nothing to do with ruggedness. don't move
the goalposts.

the new ipod nano is similar, with the antenna at the bottom:
http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/64/2012-ipod-nano.jpg

It can be done, and I do expect to see some models soon
enough. But it's not quite as simple as it appears.

it's not as difficult as you make it out to be.

Well apparently it is, since nobody is doing it!

that doesn't mean anything.

as i said the camera makers have not thought of wifi as being a
priority and also want people to spend insane amounts for a dongle.

i'm still stunned at that $1000 wt-4 price. seriously, wtf?

Fine for a consumer model, but not at all
easy to engineer into a ruggedized professional camera.

it's not that hard, certainly a lot easier than designing an 11 fps
shutter mechanism or a 51 point autofocus.

Well, since it isn't hard, just why is it that nobody
has yet to do it?

because camera makers have the mistaken idea that they should charge
extra for external wifi and gps attachments, and charge ridiculous
amounts too. $1000 for a wt-4 is absurd.

The WT-4 of course has been around for a few years now.
But do take a look at various the WU-1 units that Nikon
is now making for a variety of DSLR models. They cost
$60.

that doesn't explain why the wt-4 was $1000 and the wt-5 is $877. what
the hell are they smoking?

nice to see that some products are more normally priced, but from the
reviews i've seen, the wu-1 only works with one camera, the d3200, and
it's limited and buggy.

Note that "modest" alternatives in terms of the metal
casing do not allow for very effective WIFI in particular.
For example, if a half inch groove or inset along any side
of the camera is used for an antenna, it will have a strong
enough signal only on that side. If it's located on the back
side, you can't connect to an Access Point located in front
of the camera!

that might sound good on paper, but it's totally wrong.

I presume, given that comment, that you don't have much
experience with antenna design. I'm not going to go
into it, but trust that a camera body made of metal is
multiple wavelengths across, and forms a very nice RF
shield through which 2.4Ghz RF from a Wifi transmitter
simply does not pass. The effect is a *very*
directional antenna.

i presume, given that comment, that you don't have much experience with
existing products that are made of metal and have a small rf aperture,
and they work just fine. more on that below.

You still aren't showing an intelligent discussion.
There is a huge difference between an iPhone and a Nikon
D4 camera body. You should have noticed...

of course there is a difference. that's not the point.

the point is that the issues you raised have all been solved on the
iphone and other products apple makes.

not to mention that the small rf apertures are mostly in the laptops,
and they are even narrower than what you initially said was needed.

an iphone does not need to be ruggedized as a nikon d4 is, so it wasn't
a design goal to be as rugged as a d4.

you can spout all the theory you want, but existing products prove that
there are quite a few people who know a lot more about antenna design
than you do.

The *lack* of existing products similar to the designs
you say are easy proves they aren't easy.

what lack? i listed *twelve* different products and i forgot another
one, the macbook air, making that *thirteen* different products,
spanning over a decade.

that's not what i would call a lack of products.

camera makers have different products and priorities than apple and
they're *just* figuring out that wifi is useful, something apple and
other computer makers did nearly 15 years ago.

There are in fact now more than a couple cameras that
have a GPS or WIFI built in, and not one of them has the
kind of metal case that a top of the line Canon or Nikon
DSLR has.

so?

a lot of cameras without gps don't have metal top cases.

it's completely meaningless.

there are a number of existing products that do exactly that and work
just fine, in any direction.

Name just one then! Mind you, inside a ruggedized metal
case, not another plastic consumer body.

why stop at just one? that would be too easy.

just about all apple products are made of metal, including:

powerbook g4 titanium (discontinued)
powerbook g4 aluminum (discontinued)
macbook pro
macbook pro with retina display (different design than macbook pro)
mac mini
mac pro
imac aluminum
iphone 2g (discontinued)
iphone 5
ipod touch
ipod nano (latest version)
ipad

Now you are just being silly.

what's silly about it? you asked for one and i gave you twelve, and as
i said above, i forgot the macbook air in that list.

it's only silly because i proved you wrong.

i'm sure you'll say none of this can work, yet it does.

They work, but not one of them presents the same
engineering problems that putting WIFI into a Nikon D4
or a Canon 1DX does.

that's because they're not cameras.

the issue is putting an antenna inside a metal container and apple has
solved that problem.

And that is exactly why neither
Canon or Nikon managed to do it.

nope. it's because canon and nikon don't think wifi was a priority.

wifi has been around for over a decade and only *now* are they starting
to build it internally.

nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:
When you make statements like that one, it is very clear
that you've never worked with antennas.

it doesn't matter if i have or not. what matters is that the engineers
at apple who know a lot about rf and have solved the problems you say
cannot be solved.

Keep trying, but yes it does matter. You can't see the
difference between a laptop and a camera, but every RF
engineer does.

put one antenna on the front and one on the back. next?

Yeah, now you've got not just one big hole in the metal
shield, you've got two!

and they're covered with plastic. big deal. i can think of some other
ways they could do it too.

You don't seem to understand why the case on high end
cameras is a fully enclosed, to the degree possible,
metal RF shield.

It isn't possible to keep RF out, have big holes for
antennas, and install transmitting devices inside the
shield.

You just don't understand what the problems with these
designs actually are.

nor do you, apparently.

As if you would know how to tell!

however, apple does understand the issues and has done what you say
cannot be done. they've been doing it for over a decade and their
products are selling rather well with high customer satisfaction, so
obviously they've solved those problems rather well.

Then just why is it that Apple doesn't produce a
professional DSLR with WIFI and GPS onboard? Canon and
Nikon haven't, and there is a reason for that.

It is also exacerbated by the fact that virtually all
Access Points use vertically oriented antennas.

actually, it varies. some of the newer base stations have internal
antennas and it's not easy to tell what the orientation is.

They're all vertical.

no, they are not all vertical.

The loss due to cross polarization is 25 to 30 dB.

Think about it...

Well, that's what I said it takes! But you are not
showing something embedded in a ruggedized metal case
intended to keep RF out either. So I'm not sure what
your point is.

the point is you said such an aperture would not work properly in all
directions and that the antenna has to be apart from the metal case.

both are false, as an ipod touch shows.

It doesn't.

not only that but this has nothing to do with ruggedness. don't move
the goalposts.

The metal case does, and I've stated the ruggedized
specification right from the start so the goal post is
not moving just because you haven't been looking.

it's not as difficult as you make it out to be.

Well apparently it is, since nobody is doing it!

that doesn't mean anything.

Damned you be so logical... NOT.

as i said the camera makers have not thought of wifi as being a
priority and also want people to spend insane amounts for a dongle.

i'm still stunned at that $1000 wt-4 price. seriously, wtf?

But look at all the recent models, with WIFI price tags
of $60.

The WT-4 of course has been around for a few years now.
But do take a look at various the WU-1 units that Nikon
is now making for a variety of DSLR models. They cost
$60.

that doesn't explain why the wt-4 was $1000 and the wt-5 is $877. what
the hell are they smoking?

The WT-5 involves a lot more than just WIFI connects.
The software and functionality are seen as a source of
profit, and that is reasonable when the target is
working pros.

nice to see that some products are more normally priced, but from the
reviews i've seen, the wu-1 only works with one camera, the d3200, and
it's limited and buggy.

You are the thing that's limited. Check again.

You still aren't showing an intelligent discussion.
There is a huge difference between an iPhone and a Nikon
D4 camera body. You should have noticed...

of course there is a difference. that's not the point.

It absolutely is the point.

the point is that the issues you raised have all been solved on the
iphone and other products apple makes.

None of them have been solved on those products. The
products never had the same issues! They are much the
same as a consumer DSLR.

not to mention that the small rf apertures are mostly in the laptops,
and they are even narrower than what you initially said was needed.

Cite, please. (Your a fake.)

an iphone does not need to be ruggedized as a nikon d4 is, so it wasn't
a design goal to be as rugged as a d4.

Well well...

The *lack* of existing products similar to the designs
you say are easy proves they aren't easy.

what lack? i listed *twelve* different products and i forgot another
one, the macbook air, making that *thirteen* different products,
spanning over a decade.

And not a one of them is a professional quality DSLR.
And not a one of them has the same technical problems...

that's not what i would call a lack of products.

Not a lack of products, just a lack of knowledge on your
part.

a lot of cameras without gps don't have metal top cases.

it's completely meaningless.

For those who are ignorant, it appears meaningless...

This discussion is just too stupid to continue. Say
whatever you like, there's no point in trying to educate
you, so I won't.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

When you make statements like that one, it is very clear
that you've never worked with antennas.

it doesn't matter if i have or not. what matters is that the engineers
at apple who know a lot about rf and have solved the problems you say
cannot be solved.

Keep trying, but yes it does matter. You can't see the
difference between a laptop and a camera, but every RF
engineer does.

i never said there wasn't a difference between a camera and a laptop.
obviously, there is. don't twist things.

the issue is an antenna inside a metal enclosure, not whether it's a
camera, a phone or a laptop, and that's something that has been solved.

put one antenna on the front and one on the back. next?

Yeah, now you've got not just one big hole in the metal
shield, you've got two!

and they're covered with plastic. big deal. i can think of some other
ways they could do it too.

You don't seem to understand why the case on high end
cameras is a fully enclosed, to the degree possible,
metal RF shield.

what you don't understand is that you can have an rf aperture without
compromising the structural integrity of the camera.

It isn't possible to keep RF out, have big holes for
antennas, and install transmitting devices inside the
shield.

except, it is, as *numerous* products from apple shows.

You just don't understand what the problems with these
designs actually are.

nor do you, apparently.

As if you would know how to tell!

based on your comments, it's very easy to tell.

however, apple does understand the issues and has done what you say
cannot be done. they've been doing it for over a decade and their
products are selling rather well with high customer satisfaction, so
obviously they've solved those problems rather well.

Then just why is it that Apple doesn't produce a
professional DSLR with WIFI and GPS onboard?

what a stupid thing to say.

apple isn't about to make an slr and certainly not a professional one.
they're about mass market products.

apple does produce the most popular p&s camera, and it has wifi,
bluetooth and gps on board, that being the iphone.

Canon and
Nikon haven't, and there is a reason for that.

yea, because they think they can get people to pay $1000 for a wifi
transmitter.

It is also exacerbated by the fact that virtually all
Access Points use vertically oriented antennas.

actually, it varies. some of the newer base stations have internal
antennas and it's not easy to tell what the orientation is.

They're all vertical.

no, they are not all vertical.

The loss due to cross polarization is 25 to 30 dB.

Think about it...

i have thought about it. you obviously have not.

not all client devices are vertically polarized, so why should the base
stations be?

an iphone or tablet works in both portrait and landscape mode and
anywhere in between, depending on the app.

in other words the orientation of the device is unknown and
unpredictable and can change at any time.

you need to stop thinking fixed device, such as a laptop, where the
antenna is not going to move a whole lot.

Well, that's what I said it takes! But you are not
showing something embedded in a ruggedized metal case
intended to keep RF out either. So I'm not sure what
your point is.

the point is you said such an aperture would not work properly in all
directions and that the antenna has to be apart from the metal case.

both are false, as an ipod touch shows.

It doesn't.

what doesn't? an ipod touch has a metal back with an rf aperture. it
works quite well, in any orientation.

not only that but this has nothing to do with ruggedness. don't move
the goalposts.

The metal case does, and I've stated the ruggedized
specification right from the start so the goal post is
not moving just because you haven't been looking.

it's not that hard to make a rugged enclosure with an rf aperture.

it's not as difficult as you make it out to be.

Well apparently it is, since nobody is doing it!

that doesn't mean anything.

Damned you be so logical... NOT.

as i said the camera makers have not thought of wifi as being a
priority and also want people to spend insane amounts for a dongle.

i'm still stunned at that $1000 wt-4 price. seriously, wtf?

But look at all the recent models, with WIFI price tags
of $60.

a device that only works with one camera, a low end model.

why is the wt-5 $877? what *possible* justification is there for such a
ludicrous price?

if you think there's 877 dollars worth of stuff in there, you're more
delusional than i thought.

The WT-4 of course has been around for a few years now.
But do take a look at various the WU-1 units that Nikon
is now making for a variety of DSLR models. They cost
$60.

that doesn't explain why the wt-4 was $1000 and the wt-5 is $877. what
the hell are they smoking?

The WT-5 involves a lot more than just WIFI connects.
The software and functionality are seen as a source of
profit, and that is reasonable when the target is
working pros.

oh please, the software is not that complicated.

there is *far* more complex software sold for iphones and android
phones that cost a few dollars per app.

it's gouging. nothing more.

nice to see that some products are more normally priced, but from the
reviews i've seen, the wu-1 only works with one camera, the d3200, and
it's limited and buggy.

You are the thing that's limited. Check again.

if you insist.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/09/n...obile-adapter-
d3200-review-android/
Just so we're crystal clear, the WU-1a is only compatible with a
single Nikon DSLR. That DSLR is the D3200, a lower-end unit that's
selling for around $700 with an 18-55mm kit lens.
....
But the other half of the app -- the wireless triggering -- is
dreadfully implemented. You can't change any of the camera's settings
from the app itself, you can't adjust the size of the live view
preview being beamed over, and you can't adjust the size of the
inexplicably small on-screen shutter button. It also ignores the
camera's "Release Mode" settings -- a crucial oversight in every
sense of the word -- and wouldn't respond to our settings while the
D3200 was in Manual mode.

You still aren't showing an intelligent discussion.
There is a huge difference between an iPhone and a Nikon
D4 camera body. You should have noticed...

of course there is a difference. that's not the point.

It absolutely is the point.

no it is not.

the point is whether an antenna can be inside a metal enclosure and
apple has shown that it can.

making it rugged is separate and not particularly difficult, it just
doesn't happen to be needed for iphones and macbooks.

the point is that the issues you raised have all been solved on the
iphone and other products apple makes.

None of them have been solved on those products. The
products never had the same issues! They are much the
same as a consumer DSLR.

once again, an antenna inside a metal box has been solved, no matter
how much you try to deny it.

not to mention that the small rf apertures are mostly in the laptops,
and they are even narrower than what you initially said was needed.

Cite, please. (Your a fake.)

see my previous post where i posted photos of the various products.

the slots on the first powerbook g4 were a couple of millimeters wide.
on later models they were a little wider, but still *much* less than
the half inch that you said was needed.

an iphone does not need to be ruggedized as a nikon d4 is, so it wasn't
a design goal to be as rugged as a d4.

Well well...

The *lack* of existing products similar to the designs
you say are easy proves they aren't easy.

what lack? i listed *twelve* different products and i forgot another
one, the macbook air, making that *thirteen* different products,
spanning over a decade.

And not a one of them is a professional quality DSLR.
And not a one of them has the same technical problems...

so what? once again, the antenna is inside a metal box and works.

that's not what i would call a lack of products.

Not a lack of products, just a lack of knowledge on your
part.

no, just arrogance on your part.

you previously said you don't give a **** about apple which explains
your unfamiliarity with their products, and when they're laid out in
front of you, all you do is insult.

a lot of cameras without gps don't have metal top cases.

it's completely meaningless.

For those who are ignorant, it appears meaningless...

This discussion is just too stupid to continue. Say
whatever you like, there's no point in trying to educate
you, so I won't.

you just can't admit you're ever wrong, can you?

On 2012-09-21 08:46:58 -0700, nospam said:

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

When you make statements like that one, it is very clear
that you've never worked with antennas.

it doesn't matter if i have or not. what matters is that the engineers
at apple who know a lot about rf and have solved the problems you say
cannot be solved.

Keep trying, but yes it does matter. You can't see the
difference between a laptop and a camera, but every RF
engineer does.

i never said there wasn't a difference between a camera and a laptop.
obviously, there is. don't twist things.

the issue is an antenna inside a metal enclosure, not whether it's a
camera, a phone or a laptop, and that's something that has been solved.

put one antenna on the front and one on the back. next?

Yeah, now you've got not just one big hole in the metal
shield, you've got two!

and they're covered with plastic. big deal. i can think of some other
ways they could do it too.

You don't seem to understand why the case on high end
cameras is a fully enclosed, to the degree possible,
metal RF shield.

what you don't understand is that you can have an rf aperture without
compromising the structural integrity of the camera.

It isn't possible to keep RF out, have big holes for
antennas, and install transmitting devices inside the
shield.

except, it is, as *numerous* products from apple shows.

You just don't understand what the problems with these
designs actually are.

nor do you, apparently.

As if you would know how to tell!

based on your comments, it's very easy to tell.

however, apple does understand the issues and has done what you say
cannot be done. they've been doing it for over a decade and their
products are selling rather well with high customer satisfaction, so
obviously they've solved those problems rather well.

Then just why is it that Apple doesn't produce a
professional DSLR with WIFI and GPS onboard?

what a stupid thing to say.

apple isn't about to make an slr and certainly not a professional one.
they're about mass market products.

apple does produce the most popular p&s camera, and it has wifi,
bluetooth and gps on board, that being the iphone.

Canon and
Nikon haven't, and there is a reason for that.

yea, because they think they can get people to pay $1000 for a wifi
transmitter.

It is also exacerbated by the fact that virtually all
Access Points use vertically oriented antennas.

actually, it varies. some of the newer base stations have internal
antennas and it's not easy to tell what the orientation is.

They're all vertical.

no, they are not all vertical.

The loss due to cross polarization is 25 to 30 dB.

Think about it...

i have thought about it. you obviously have not.

not all client devices are vertically polarized, so why should the base
stations be?

an iphone or tablet works in both portrait and landscape mode and
anywhere in between, depending on the app.

in other words the orientation of the device is unknown and
unpredictable and can change at any time.

you need to stop thinking fixed device, such as a laptop, where the
antenna is not going to move a whole lot.

Well, that's what I said it takes! But you are not
showing something embedded in a ruggedized metal case
intended to keep RF out either. So I'm not sure what
your point is.

the point is you said such an aperture would not work properly in all
directions and that the antenna has to be apart from the metal case.

both are false, as an ipod touch shows.

It doesn't.

what doesn't? an ipod touch has a metal back with an rf aperture. it
works quite well, in any orientation.

not only that but this has nothing to do with ruggedness. don't move
the goalposts.

The metal case does, and I've stated the ruggedized
specification right from the start so the goal post is
not moving just because you haven't been looking.

it's not that hard to make a rugged enclosure with an rf aperture.

it's not as difficult as you make it out to be.

Well apparently it is, since nobody is doing it!

that doesn't mean anything.

Damned you be so logical... NOT.

as i said the camera makers have not thought of wifi as being a
priority and also want people to spend insane amounts for a dongle.

i'm still stunned at that $1000 wt-4 price. seriously, wtf?

But look at all the recent models, with WIFI price tags
of $60.

a device that only works with one camera, a low end model.

why is the wt-5 $877? what *possible* justification is there for such a
ludicrous price?

if you think there's 877 dollars worth of stuff in there, you're more
delusional than i thought.

The WT-4 of course has been around for a few years now.
But do take a look at various the WU-1 units that Nikon
is now making for a variety of DSLR models. They cost
$60.

that doesn't explain why the wt-4 was $1000 and the wt-5 is $877. what
the hell are they smoking?

The WT-5 involves a lot more than just WIFI connects.
The software and functionality are seen as a source of
profit, and that is reasonable when the target is
working pros.

oh please, the software is not that complicated.

there is *far* more complex software sold for iphones and android
phones that cost a few dollars per app.

it's gouging. nothing more.

nice to see that some products are more normally priced, but from the
reviews i've seen, the wu-1 only works with one camera, the d3200, and
it's limited and buggy.

You are the thing that's limited. Check again.

if you insist.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/09/n...obile-adapter-
d3200-review-android/
Just so we're crystal clear, the WU-1a is only compatible with a
single Nikon DSLR. That DSLR is the D3200, a lower-end unit that's
selling for around $700 with an 18-55mm kit lens.
...
But the other half of the app -- the wireless triggering -- is
dreadfully implemented. You can't change any of the camera's settings
from the app itself, you can't adjust the size of the live view
preview being beamed over, and you can't adjust the size of the
inexplicably small on-screen shutter button. It also ignores the
camera's "Release Mode" settings -- a crucial oversight in every
sense of the word -- and wouldn't respond to our settings while the
D3200 was in Manual mode.

You still aren't showing an intelligent discussion.
There is a huge difference between an iPhone and a Nikon
D4 camera body. You should have noticed...

of course there is a difference. that's not the point.

It absolutely is the point.

no it is not.

the point is whether an antenna can be inside a metal enclosure and
apple has shown that it can.

making it rugged is separate and not particularly difficult, it just
doesn't happen to be needed for iphones and macbooks.

the point is that the issues you raised have all been solved on the
iphone and other products apple makes.

None of them have been solved on those products. The
products never had the same issues! They are much the
same as a consumer DSLR.

once again, an antenna inside a metal box has been solved, no matter
how much you try to deny it.

not to mention that the small rf apertures are mostly in the laptops,
and they are even narrower than what you initially said was needed.

Cite, please. (Your a fake.)

see my previous post where i posted photos of the various products.

the slots on the first powerbook g4 were a couple of millimeters wide.
on later models they were a little wider, but still *much* less than
the half inch that you said was needed.

an iphone does not need to be ruggedized as a nikon d4 is, so it wasn't
a design goal to be as rugged as a d4.

Well well...

The *lack* of existing products similar to the designs
you say are easy proves they aren't easy.

what lack? i listed *twelve* different products and i forgot another
one, the macbook air, making that *thirteen* different products,
spanning over a decade.

And not a one of them is a professional quality DSLR.
And not a one of them has the same technical problems...

so what? once again, the antenna is inside a metal box and works.

that's not what i would call a lack of products.

Not a lack of products, just a lack of knowledge on your
part.

no, just arrogance on your part.

you previously said you don't give a **** about apple which explains
your unfamiliarity with their products, and when they're laid out in
front of you, all you do is insult.

a lot of cameras without gps don't have metal top cases.

it's completely meaningless.

For those who are ignorant, it appears meaningless...

This discussion is just too stupid to continue. Say
whatever you like, there's no point in trying to educate
you, so I won't.

you just can't admit you're ever wrong, can you?

Oh Hell!
I might as well in throw my $0.02.

There is always EyeFi. It will function with the following Nikon metal
bodied DSLR with SD slots; D300S, D800/D800E, (& probably the D600).
For metal bodied Nikons, EyeFi adds this note:
"Eye-Fi has determined that the metal body and frame of the Nikon D300s
affects the range of an Eye-Fi card's Direct Mode network. The
effective usable range of a Direct Mode network is typically less than
6 feet (2 m). It is best to keep the camera and iOS or Android device
as close as possible when using a Nikon D300s with Direct Mode for best
possible results."

http://www.eye.fi/products/prox2

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:46:58 -0700, nospam
wrote:

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

When you make statements like that one, it is very clear
that you've never worked with antennas.

it doesn't matter if i have or not. what matters is that the engineers
at apple who know a lot about rf and have solved the problems you say
cannot be solved.

Keep trying, but yes it does matter. You can't see the
difference between a laptop and a camera, but every RF
engineer does.

i never said there wasn't a difference between a camera and a laptop.
obviously, there is. don't twist things.

the issue is an antenna inside a metal enclosure, not whether it's a
camera, a phone or a laptop, and that's something that has been solved.

put one antenna on the front and one on the back. next?

Yeah, now you've got not just one big hole in the metal
shield, you've got two!

and they're covered with plastic. big deal. i can think of some other
ways they could do it too.

You don't seem to understand why the case on high end
cameras is a fully enclosed, to the degree possible,
metal RF shield.

what you don't understand is that you can have an rf aperture without
compromising the structural integrity of the camera.

It isn't possible to keep RF out, have big holes for
antennas, and install transmitting devices inside the
shield.

except, it is, as *numerous* products from apple shows.

You just don't understand what the problems with these
designs actually are.

nor do you, apparently.

As if you would know how to tell!

based on your comments, it's very easy to tell.

however, apple does understand the issues and has done what you say
cannot be done. they've been doing it for over a decade and their
products are selling rather well with high customer satisfaction, so
obviously they've solved those problems rather well.

Then just why is it that Apple doesn't produce a
professional DSLR with WIFI and GPS onboard?

what a stupid thing to say.

apple isn't about to make an slr and certainly not a professional one.
they're about mass market products.

apple does produce the most popular p&s camera, and it has wifi,
bluetooth and gps on board, that being the iphone.

Canon and
Nikon haven't, and there is a reason for that.

yea, because they think they can get people to pay $1000 for a wifi
transmitter.

It is also exacerbated by the fact that virtually all
Access Points use vertically oriented antennas.

actually, it varies. some of the newer base stations have internal
antennas and it's not easy to tell what the orientation is.

They're all vertical.

no, they are not all vertical.

The loss due to cross polarization is 25 to 30 dB.

Think about it...

i have thought about it. you obviously have not.

not all client devices are vertically polarized, so why should the base
stations be?

an iphone or tablet works in both portrait and landscape mode and
anywhere in between, depending on the app.

in other words the orientation of the device is unknown and
unpredictable and can change at any time.

you need to stop thinking fixed device, such as a laptop, where the
antenna is not going to move a whole lot.

Well, that's what I said it takes! But you are not
showing something embedded in a ruggedized metal case
intended to keep RF out either. So I'm not sure what
your point is.

the point is you said such an aperture would not work properly in all
directions and that the antenna has to be apart from the metal case.

both are false, as an ipod touch shows.

It doesn't.

what doesn't? an ipod touch has a metal back with an rf aperture. it
works quite well, in any orientation.

not only that but this has nothing to do with ruggedness. don't move
the goalposts.

The metal case does, and I've stated the ruggedized
specification right from the start so the goal post is
not moving just because you haven't been looking.

it's not that hard to make a rugged enclosure with an rf aperture.

it's not as difficult as you make it out to be.

Well apparently it is, since nobody is doing it!

that doesn't mean anything.

Damned you be so logical... NOT.

as i said the camera makers have not thought of wifi as being a
priority and also want people to spend insane amounts for a dongle.

i'm still stunned at that $1000 wt-4 price. seriously, wtf?

But look at all the recent models, with WIFI price tags
of $60.

a device that only works with one camera, a low end model.

why is the wt-5 $877? what *possible* justification is there for such a
ludicrous price?

if you think there's 877 dollars worth of stuff in there, you're more
delusional than i thought.

The WT-4 of course has been around for a few years now.
But do take a look at various the WU-1 units that Nikon
is now making for a variety of DSLR models. They cost
$60.

that doesn't explain why the wt-4 was $1000 and the wt-5 is $877. what
the hell are they smoking?

The WT-5 involves a lot more than just WIFI connects.
The software and functionality are seen as a source of
profit, and that is reasonable when the target is
working pros.

oh please, the software is not that complicated.

there is *far* more complex software sold for iphones and android
phones that cost a few dollars per app.

it's gouging. nothing more.

nice to see that some products are more normally priced, but from the
reviews i've seen, the wu-1 only works with one camera, the d3200, and
it's limited and buggy.

You are the thing that's limited. Check again.

if you insist.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/09/n...obile-adapter-
d3200-review-android/
Just so we're crystal clear, the WU-1a is only compatible with a
single Nikon DSLR. That DSLR is the D3200, a lower-end unit that's
selling for around $700 with an 18-55mm kit lens.
...
But the other half of the app -- the wireless triggering -- is
dreadfully implemented. You can't change any of the camera's settings
from the app itself, you can't adjust the size of the live view
preview being beamed over, and you can't adjust the size of the
inexplicably small on-screen shutter button. It also ignores the
camera's "Release Mode" settings -- a crucial oversight in every
sense of the word -- and wouldn't respond to our settings while the
D3200 was in Manual mode.

You still aren't showing an intelligent discussion.
There is a huge difference between an iPhone and a Nikon
D4 camera body. You should have noticed...

of course there is a difference. that's not the point.

It absolutely is the point.

no it is not.

the point is whether an antenna can be inside a metal enclosure and
apple has shown that it can.

making it rugged is separate and not particularly difficult, it just
doesn't happen to be needed for iphones and macbooks.

the point is that the issues you raised have all been solved on the
iphone and other products apple makes.

None of them have been solved on those products. The
products never had the same issues! They are much the
same as a consumer DSLR.

once again, an antenna inside a metal box has been solved, no matter
how much you try to deny it.

not to mention that the small rf apertures are mostly in the laptops,
and they are even narrower than what you initially said was needed.

Cite, please. (Your a fake.)

see my previous post where i posted photos of the various products.

the slots on the first powerbook g4 were a couple of millimeters wide.
on later models they were a little wider, but still *much* less than
the half inch that you said was needed.

an iphone does not need to be ruggedized as a nikon d4 is, so it wasn't
a design goal to be as rugged as a d4.

Well well...

The *lack* of existing products similar to the designs
you say are easy proves they aren't easy.

what lack? i listed *twelve* different products and i forgot another
one, the macbook air, making that *thirteen* different products,
spanning over a decade.

And not a one of them is a professional quality DSLR.
And not a one of them has the same technical problems...

so what? once again, the antenna is inside a metal box and works.

that's not what i would call a lack of products.

Not a lack of products, just a lack of knowledge on your
part.

no, just arrogance on your part.

you previously said you don't give a **** about apple which explains
your unfamiliarity with their products, and when they're laid out in
front of you, all you do is insult.

a lot of cameras without gps don't have metal top cases.

it's completely meaningless.

For those who are ignorant, it appears meaningless...

This discussion is just too stupid to continue. Say
whatever you like, there's no point in trying to educate
you, so I won't.

you just can't admit you're ever wrong, can you?

Heck of a lot more noise than signal here!

Nobody really gives a **** about who is right or wrong in this
back-and-forth between you guys.

But we appreciate useful information rather than attacks on people!

Wally

In article 2012092110405480278-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

Oh Hell!
I might as well in throw my $0.02.

There is always EyeFi. It will function with the following Nikon metal
bodied DSLR with SD slots; D300S, D800/D800E, (& probably the D600).
For metal bodied Nikons, EyeFi adds this note:
"Eye-Fi has determined that the metal body and frame of the Nikon D300s
affects the range of an Eye-Fi card's Direct Mode network. The
effective usable range of a Direct Mode network is typically less than
6 feet (2 m). It is best to keep the camera and iOS or Android device
as close as possible when using a Nikon D300s with Direct Mode for best
possible results."

http://www.eye.fi/products/prox2

true, and that's because it's inside a camera that wasn't designed to
have an antenna inside it. imagine how well it would work if the camera
was designed for it.

it's actually rather impressive that an eye-fi works at all inside a
camera.