Nikon D2H: Digital Camera + 802.11b Option
k_stamour writes "Wow, the Holy Grail of Digital Cameras! -- the Nikon D2H. Considering the ever-dropping cost of 802.11b gear, it may not be too long before WiFi is found in lower-end Digi-Cameras. The remaining cost would be to get decent performance out of a small embedded Wifi antenna.
This Nikon is Geared for Sport/Action/News Shots. Think about it: a photographer can be on a scene of a newsworthy event, and over the hours of attending, the publisher could already be printing/posting the photographer's pics before he removes the camera strap from his neck! With this cam, a WiFi access point, and Internet access, they could post their pics in real time on the web from anywhere in the world. Of course, the above conditions would need to be meet every time for real time uploads." The 802.11 access is through an optional external transceiver module, model WT-1.
802.11b takes up a lot of power (for a small device, anyway). The camera would either have to have some monster batteries or not be able to take very many pictures at all. Also, are CompactFlash cards able to read/write to different files at once? It seems like writing pictures would be hard if someone was trying to read one at the same time.
I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
Not sure about this one...
I find myself imagining coming home from my holidays to discover my camera's been hacked and I've got someone else's holiday photos...spooky.
Back when "Internet Appliances" were the buzz, you'd get naysayers posting on here ridiculing the idea. And in the media. They'd sneer, "Great, now I can surf the internet from my stove, or find out what is in my fridge over the web."
But this camera is an example of what most people with some foresight were thinking of when they talked about internet appliances... normally unconnected devices that get net access and gain cool features.
Now bring on the powered WiFi speakers that play streamed digital music in any room from a personal media device (TiVo-like entertainment center combined with WiFi) or home computer.
And yes, I still want a good, cheap touch-screen webpad with wifi for net access from my couch, bathroom, kitchen table, hammock outside, etc...
The camera's 802.11b thing plugs into the camera in two places, one to the USB port and the other to the power source. It then has the ability to transmit the photos to an ftp server.
No mention of WEP or any other type of net xfer.
Seems to me you'd want to set up an upload only account on the ftp server. Just in case someone gets some bright idea to start grabbing ftp accounts.
Don't know why it requires two plugs (later hack more than likely), but this thing looks like it takes up quite a bit space and it doesn't look like you can keep the camera on the trripod when it's plugged in.
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
When will they start putting GPS receivers in digital cameras?
I want to know the exact location of where I've been taking pictures!
-- four
Talk about your flawed logic. You say you don't think you should have to spend more than the cost of a good PC for a digital camera. Is then a Rolls Royce overpriced because it costs more than your average house. You probably think I'm crazy then for blowing $1000 on my film camera setup (Nikon N80/50mm fixed lens/24-85 zoom)What about audio? I can get a pair of binaural microphones for $65 but I still lust after the $450 Sonic Studios (and the $250 headband-mounted accessory, and their $1000 preamp). The reverse is true; if you really wanted a bitchin' setup, I'll bet you could have spent a lot more than you did on your computer. I'd love a G5 with a huge flat panel and I think I priced that at over $4000 (maybe over $5000 or even $6000, but I don't remember). I'd even love to stick with PC and get a top of the line Athlon with 4GB of RAM and half a terabyte of HD with the newest and highest end ATI Radeon.
You're comparing apples to oranges. You cannot say that product X should always be cheaper than product Y, because their price and quality are not related to each other.
Chris
The Nikon D2H is a camera specifically targeted to sport photographers. You don't need 8 frames per second if you're in the studio or even out covering events. Instead, this camera shines when used to capture fast action like sports.
Here's where wireless is a GOOD thing: one wireless access point can be placed on the mid-field sideline and allow the newspapers and magazines to grab images while the photographer shoots. This is a major advantage on nightly deadlines. Even when shooting just regular digital and using a laptop with wireless, newspapers are limited to getting the photographs at the end of each half because photographers can't risk missing a critical piece of action.
Battery life doesn't matter as much in sporting events. The game is pretty much a set length and an appropriate number of batteries can be brought and traded out at the end of each half/quarter/etc.
As someone who has worked at a daily newspaper that has used both film and digital and where football is a front page event, this is a great announcement. We used to have to send someone to night games to pickup and develop the film at halftime. Now pictures can be downloaded, selected and corrected for newspaper use in realtime. Newspaper staff never complain about finishing earlier rather than later!
That said, I think wireless makes sense in THIS camera. I'm not sure I'd want it in the field or even in a consumer camera to take pictures on vacation and on holidays. In those situations, I would take the longer battery life any day.
Unfortunatly, this isn't the holy grail of digital camera. I'm not even sure what the holy grail would be, to be honest.
It's a very specific camera aimed at sports/news/action photographers. The Wifi addition is also a niche product, mainly for photographers in large agencies like the AP
It probably wouldn't suit anybody else, especially since most people complain about the 4mp resolution.
Anyway, here are some links to other previews:
Handson Preview:k on/slr/D2H_UK1.html
http://www.letsgodigital.be/webpages/firstlook/ni
Preview:
http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/NikonD2H.shtml
Nikon expert spec analysis:
http://www.bythom.com/d2h.htm
Personally, I'm excited because this is the first Nikon DSLR to do 8fps, plus they have a new TTL flash system, and the 2.5inch LCD on the back is the biggest yet (great for "chimping", a term for gaping at your images instead of watching the action)
I've been shooting with DSLR gear for 3 years now, and I've tried a bunch of high-end cameras including the Nikon D1X and Canon 1DS.
My analysis of this new Nikon based only on the dpreview article, is that it seems fine for sports and news photography where framerates matter, but outside of that market it is difficult to see the how the improved features addresses the things that have been missing on the Nikon family of DSLR's.
The big thing that's been missing is a full-frame sensor. Why is this important? Well, all Nikon DSLRs to date, including this one, have used an imager that is 1.5 times smaller than a normal 35mm film frame. This means the sensor only sees the middle part of what would have been exposed on a normal film frame, which in turn means the camera suffers from slight myopia. All attached lenses have a virtual magnification factor of 1.5x over stated spec. As such, a nice 20mm wideangle lens becomes a dull 30mm lens, which produces a constricted view. Landscape and indoor photography generally suffers from this lack of wideangle support.
Canon addressed this problem with their (very expensive) 1DS camera which has a full-sized imager chip, but this doesn't help photographers with a gear bag full of Nikon lenses - they don't fit on a Canon. I think many photographers would have liked to see Nikon come up with a full-sized imager on their D2 series.
There are far cheaper DSLR's with high-rez sensors. Take the very affordable Fujifilm Finepix S2, for example - a handsome 6 megapixel sensor and fully Nikon lens compatible. Same magnification factor as the D2H, at 1/4 the price. Some photographers would probably find the flimsy Fujifilm body and awkward ergonomics unsuitable for pro work, but I know many photographers who'd rather save their money and buy one of those, or an old battered D1X, and then wait for Nikon to come out with the full-frame unit they have been waiting for.
It's also disappointing to see that Nikon apparently have dropped IEEE1394 and GPS support. USB2 is cheaper, dumber, slower and less reliable than firewire, and the GPS thing was a neat 'gimmick' that could have had many useful applications. The beautiful photos on the California Coastal Records Project were all shot on a D1X with a GPS attached - this permitted the photographers an exact shooting record of where the pictures were taken.
The rest of the improved features just don't justify the cost unless those 8fps are crucial to your line of business. The wi-fi stuff looks like a gimmick - consider the limited range of 802.11b - but it is conceivable to imagine an assistant photoshopping the pics you shoot from a nearby laptop. Nothing I'd pay extra for, though.