3 ms·
I don't want android on my camera. I just want it to be able to send all data that it's curating to my android device (which has an actually useful screen size
by TheRealPomax 9y ago
I don't want android on my camera. I just want it to be able to send all data that it's curating to my android device (which has an actually useful screen size and powerful enough cpu/gpu to do real editing) in a browsable fashion where I can see what's on the camera, and pick what to transfer. Kind of like, say... FTP over bluetooth/wifi? (or sFTP, of course).
And of course, a full input mapping for all "buttons" on the camera so that I can "press" any of them from my android device. Don't even bother labeling them appropriately, just have a button signal protocol that says "the following numbers will work, and have the following N-step granularity" and then simply supply the relevant profile both on-camera (it's a USB device after all) and as download for each camera model that can be used to resolve "number" to "name of actual button on the camera".
In fact why stop there: I want that standard to be so open that any windows, linux, osx, raspi, android, iphone, etc. user can communicate with any camera. Got a Sony and a Nikon? Why would you care, just switch profile, done.
While Android on the camera itself would be a terrible idea (it would only be useful in such a stripped down config that user apps would be pretty much impossible), seemless interoperability backed by at least two open standards would be fantastic.
I guess we'll see how long it takes IKEA to make a good camera. None of these things are new, they've all been around for decades, camera makers just can't be bothered to make cameras for people. They purely make them for money.
- NegativeLatency 9y agoBluetooth might not be great. The max transfer rate is something like 24 Mbit/s (3 MB/s), and say a single RAW file is 20 MB, then you'd be looking at about 7 seconds of transfer time for each photo. With high quality jpegs ~5MB it would be closer to 2 seconds per picture. I think you'd need some kind of direct cabled connection for good perf for professional photographers. Not to mention getting all the camera and app providers to standardize on a protocol and set of features.
- wingworks 9y agoI wouldn't mind using a cable if it was fast and went somewhere useful on my phone. e.g. not get stuck in a shitty Canon app. My Canon 6D "has" WiFi but it's so slow and terrible to use it may as well not be there.
- photojosh 9y agoWiFi, 802.11ac, direct connection between devices. Would be screaming fast.