iPod Camera Connector Photo

[Dave00]

The idea of dumping my card onto a drive that can potentially fail gives me a stomach ache, which is the reason I do not use Microdrives. I'll probably keep on bringing my iBook with me and burn a CD straight off, or just purchase a couple of more 2GB cards since I am now addicted to having both a full-sized RAW and full-sized JPEG with each shot, which gives me 120 shots per 2GB card.

I'm not sure I'd feel all that safe with CD's, either. Data CD's don't have the redundancy of audio CD's, so get a scratch and there goes your photos. Also, if you skip verification, you can have a file error and not know it until you try to load your photo. Anyone who's ever reloaded a photo and gotten half a photo with the bottom covered in noise or just plain blank, knows what I mean.

With a hard drive, you're probably actually safer than CD's. If you're using your powerbook, you may be better off keeping the photos on the hard drive (unless you're only using the CD's as backup - obviously, having two forms of storage is the best overall).

--Dave

 

[Dave00]

My issue with the Belkin transfer device was that during a transfer, it would either lock up and not complete the transfer, or the iPod would die in the middle of a transfer. If there was a way to hook up power while also transferring, that would solve it. Maybe Apple has found a way for it to consume much less power during a transfer?

The worst part about this (which happened to me also) is that it does NOT tend to display an error message if there's only a partial transfer. I always charged the iPod fully before each transfer, real pain the arse but made for more reliability.

Dave

 

[iGary]

I'm not sure I'd feel all that safe with CD's, either. Data CD's don't have the redundancy of audio CD's, so get a scratch and there goes your photos. Also, if you skip verification, you can have a file error and not know it until you try to load your photo. Anyone who's ever reloaded a photo and gotten half a photo with the bottom covered in noise or just plain blank, knows what I mean.

With a hard drive, you're probably actually safer than CD's. If you're using your powerbook, you may be better off keeping the photos on the hard drive (unless you're only using the CD's as backup - obviously, having two forms of storage is the best overall).

--Dave

Never had a problem with one CD - ever. The reason I go to CD first is so the information cannot be changed - it's the digitial negative. I've lost HDD's, so that's debatable.

Then I back up to HDD and other formats.

 

[nemo]

RAW Download Only?

Okay, so I read a post somewhere at some point saying that the iPod Photo doesn't have RAW format support for onscreen viewing, BUT my question is, does this mean that you can't transfer RAW files off your camera onto the iPod's hard drive either? I can live without the onscreen viewing, but it'd be nice to be able to clear off my CF card.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Okay, so I read a post somewhere at some point saying that the iPod Photo doesn't have RAW format support for onscreen viewing, BUT my question is, does this mean that you can't transfer RAW files off your camera onto the iPod's hard drive either? I can live without the onscreen viewing, but it'd be nice to be able to clear off my CF card.

One can only hope that the new connector will support file transfer from the camera to the iPod. And not be tied to the JPG format only. We will have to wait for Apple to tell us more as time draws closer for release, or for real world usage.

 

[Some_Big_Spoon]

wow.. ipod photo is such a frankenstein as it is, and the photo part is so tacked on as a gimmick. This connector thing, real or not, just extends the tacked on after-thought-ness of the whole thing. until I can check my mail on them, I have no use for a new ipod. the 3 I have currently do just fine, but that's just me.

 

[Kingofthenerds]

needs work

I think this product will be useful, but since it seems like a hack won't fullfill everyones needs. Apple needs to open the ipod more for 3rd party developement.

 

[swissmann]

I was wondering how they would make it universal. Standard USB is pretty close. I am wondering if you could use this for other USB devices. I'm not sure what I would want maybe a printer or something.

 

[swissmann]

Okay, so I read a post somewhere at some point saying that the iPod Photo doesn't have RAW format support for onscreen viewing, BUT my question is, does this mean that you can't transfer RAW files off your camera onto the iPod's hard drive either? I can live without the onscreen viewing, but it'd be nice to be able to clear off my CF card.

I am wondering the same thing. I am not so interested in viewing the photos as much as just storing them on my iPod so I don't need so many CF cards. Also, do I need to have an iPod photo or can I use this or a 3rd party adapter for my current 4G iPod?

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

wow.. ipod photo is such a frankenstein as it is, and the photo part is so tacked on as a gimmick. This connector thing, real or not, just extends the tacked on after-thought-ness of the whole thing. until I can check my mail on them, I have no use for a new ipod. the 3 I have currently do just fine, but that's just me.

Haven't tried the iPod Photo yet, so I'll take your word on it.

though I agree with where you are going with the future of the iPod. With the announcement of the Olympus M:Robe I see somethings that would make a new iPod the must have for me, greater PDA functionality. Checking emails would be great. Surfing the web a nicety. Think Newton meets iPod meets the Epson P-2000 meets the cell phone. Adding a camera would be nice, but rather have more choice in that end.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

I think this product will be useful, but since it seems like a hack won't fullfill everyones needs. Apple needs to open the ipod more for 3rd party developement.

Or maybe spin off the iPod group so they can be their won company and focus on what consumers are dreaming and wanting out of future iPods?

The problem for Apple and others is how much do they develop on their own verses third parties. For if they allow third parties to take the development, there could be integration issues down the road. Lock-out the the third parties and they will have fewer companies developing items that help sell the basic product.

Belkin as an example can't be too happy with the announcement of this new connector.

 

[c0nsumer]

I know that feeling too. I had a shoot last month where I couldn't get the images off the 1gb CF i had! An 80x Lexar pro card too!

I ended up buying a piece of $29 software that I would highly recommend-- but it's on my office machine, and i'm at my one client's for the day.

Did you know that the Lexar Pro cards come with data recovery software on them? Just copy it off before you format them for the first time... Personally, I like Lexar's ImageRescue2 software (the stuff that comes with the card) much more than any of the others that I've used, and it's (essentially) free!

-Steve

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Did you know that the Lexar Pro cards come with data recovery software on them? Just copy it off before you format them for the first time... Personally, I like Lexar's ImageRescue2 software (the stuff that comes with the card) much more than any of the others that I've used, and it's (essentially) free!

-Steve

I'll have to do some research; but off the cuff the new stock of Lexar cards is not coming with ImageRescue, but a trial version of some sort of Photo Mechanic. Not sure if Photo Mechanic allows for data rescue. Speaking as an employee of a reseller of Lexar cards.

 

[CalfCanuck]

I'd expect decent speeds!

OK so the only question I now have is what kind of real world transfer rate can we expect?

The initial Apple press release from last week (the only people who really know what its does) stated that that the connector requires a Mac or Win computer WITH USB 2.0. And that it the adaptor would work with an option Firewire cable.

So if they "require" a USB 2.0 or FW cable, we should expect to see some solid transfer speeds.

Rob Galbraith has up to date tests of CF to computer speeds - the fastest are now topping out at almost 13 MB per second! So those nonsense Belkin connectors, while OK as a hack in their day, should be toasted by this new Apple connector!

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-6133

 

[Coleco]

Why not make a camera attachment?

So, if the iPod can take photos off a camera, why can't it just be the camera? It seems like an iTrip-like attachment to clip a camera on the iPod would be a cool little add-on... not a pro solution, but smaller and potentially cheaper than a camera on its own since no storage or LCD would need to be built in. I'm sure someone could mock this up easily. The question is, would Apple enable photo shooting in iPod software?
Obviously the same idea could be carried over to video attachments like iSight for iPod. Talk about a multi-media machine...

 

[CalfCanuck]

So, if the iPod can take photos off a camera, why can't it just be the camera? It seems like an iTrip-like attachment to clip a camera on the iPod would be a cool little add-on... not a pro solution, but smaller and potentially cheaper than a camera on its own since no storage or LCD would need to be built in. I'm sure someone could mock this up easily. The question is, would Apple enable photo shooting in iPod software?
Obviously the same idea could be carried over to video attachments like iSight for iPod. Talk about a multi-media machine...

One would needs a lens to resolve the pixels, a device to calculate exposure, a sensor to collect the data, etc.

Cell phone cameras are pretty cheap - why imitate them?

If Apple can't even come up with a high quality audio recording adaptor for the iPod (a thousand times simpler), why do you expect them to come up with a camera device?

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

One would needs a lens to resolve the pixels, a device to calculate exposure, a sensor to collect the data, etc.

Cell phone cameras are pretty cheap - why imitate them?

If Apple can't even come up with a high quality audio recording adaptor for the iPod (a thousand times simpler), why do you expect them to come up with a camera device?

Good point. After the announcement of M:Robe, Apple is missing the boat if in the next year or so they don't try and do something with that market. The problem for Apple is that there is no unified cellphone network to make a cellphone camera system work for the iPod. And the general lack of excitement from the consumer over the M:Robe, seems to indicate that there is not enough mass market appeal at this point to bring the two together.

 

[ibjoshua]

USB card readers

I guess you could plug a USB 2 card reader into the adapter - that way you wouldn't be reliant on the cameras speed and you wouldn't need to lug the cable around with you. Anyone see any problems with that?

I have to chime in and agree that not supporting older grayscale ipods for dumping seems pretty mean. Maybe someone will do a little firmware hack?

i_b_joshua

 

[gmed]

Unless this is compliant with FW, I dont see how this is going to be practical. Almost all cameras have USB 1.1, and the Pros have FW. MY camera has FW and I dont see how I can transfer 4 gigs of RAW using USB 1.1. It must be compatible with FW.

Last week I spoke to an Apple sales person, he told me it will be possible to transfer RAW bit you wont be able to view them. I hope he wasnt just assuming this and he knew what he was talking about.

G

 

[CalfCanuck]

I have to chime in and agree that not supporting older grayscale ipods for dumping seems pretty mean. Maybe someone will do a little firmware hack?

I think it's more than a software issue.

When the iPod photo first came out months ago, there were (of course) a number of threads on it running here at MR. In one of them a spokesman from a third party company was taking about licensing some components to Apple.

It could well be that this download option utilizes BOTH a special component on the circuit board and a special component inside the iPod Camera Connector.

 

[Moxiemike]

Unless this is compliant with FW, I dont see how this is going to be practical. Almost all cameras have USB 1.1, and the Pros have FW. MY camera has FW and I dont see how I can transfer 4 gigs of RAW using USB 1.1. It must be compatible with FW.

Last week I spoke to an Apple sales person, he told me it will be possible to transfer RAW bit you wont be able to view them. I hope he wasnt just assuming this and he knew what he was talking about.

G

Survery Says? Not all the pros have FW. My D2h and soon to be D2x will have USB 2.0. And it's pretty spry.

 

[CalfCanuck]

Unless this is compliant with FW, I dont see how this is going to be practical. Almost all cameras have USB 1.1, and the Pros have FW. MY camera has FW and I dont see how I can transfer 4 gigs of RAW using USB 1.1. It must be compatible with FW.

Last week I spoke to an Apple sales person, he told me it will be possible to transfer RAW bit you wont be able to view them. I hope he wasnt just assuming this and he knew what he was talking about.

G

My Canon EOS 20D has USB 2.0.

And as I have noted 3 or 4 times, it stated on the press release that the connector would work with Firewire with the purchase of an optional cable.

Apple has to look to the future - USB 1.1 is not worth supporting. Transferring GB of data was NOT was it was originally spec'ed out to do!

 

[puckhead193]

So, if the iPod can take photos off a camera, why can't it just be the camera? It seems like an iTrip-like attachment to clip a camera on the iPod would be a cool little add-on... not a pro solution, but smaller and potentially cheaper than a camera on its own since no storage or LCD would need to be built in. I'm sure someone could mock this up easily. The question is, would Apple enable photo shooting in iPod software?
Obviously the same idea could be carried over to video attachments like iSight for iPod. Talk about a multi-media machine...

I agree, Alot of teens would buy it for their ipod.

 

[gmed]

Lucky you, but imagine transfering 4 gigs using USB 1.1? I guess you can just leave it there and let it do its thing for an hour. I still hope it has support for all the raw formats.

G

 

[Moxiemike]

Lucky you, but imagine transfering 4 gigs using USB 1.1? I guess you can just leave it there and let it do its thing for an hour. I still hope it has support for all the raw formats.

G

Well, first off, i'm the type of pro who doesn't believe in using 4gb cards! So i'd transfer smaller cards and use my D2x or D100 while the D2h downloads, and vice versa.

I know i'm in the way minority (most don't even own a DSLR, i'll be on my third) but for me, when i'm driving between gigs, i can sit the ol' D2h on the seat (seatbelted in of course) and plug her into the ipod, which i'll have hard wired into my car soon enough, and i'll be able to DL my images in between events.

I was shocked at how quickly I can clear a 1gb card from the D2h to the iMac i use a the marketing consultancy I'm currently working on. I won't be surprised if the xfer times are the same.

Sorry you're stuck with USB 1.1, but that's the nature of the beast. That said, i heard a rumor of a FW adapter, which should solve some of your woes.

m