3 ms·

If you do anything with photography, you are carrying around a camera, batteries, and lenses anyway. Just buy a 12$ card reader and put it into your camera bag

If you do anything with photography, you are carrying around a camera, batteries, and lenses anyway. Just buy a 12$ card reader and put it into your camera bag with all your other expensive stuff. It surprises me that people who buy high-dollar computers are so reluctant to buy an extra cable. TB3 natively supports DP at faster speeds than HDMI 2.0b can push. You can buy a TB3 to DP1.4 cable online for $15. Even the most expensive cable for this purpose sold on Apple's web store costs $50. I suppose you can ask your office manager to buy a couple for the meeting rooms, in order to accommodate Mac users.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
dognotdog 6y ago
Maybe consider that it’s more nuanced in real life. That $12 card reader, even expensive USB-3 card readers, are often a lot slower than that builtin one. They get lost and broken, not even considering that when you’re on the go, many photographers will absolutely try to shed as much unnecessary weight as possible, as not many people are built like the hulk or have an entourage of assistants doing the heavy lifting. I use my laptop a lot outside of an office, and having that multitude of builtin ports is an absolute must, as dongles are quite difficult to deal with in situations when I don’t have a flat surface to put the laptop on. That TB/Ethernet dongle I regularly do have to use has been a great source of frustration.
- tjr 6y ago
  I bought a new MacBook Air last year, and a USB A/C adapter with it. I somehow lost the adapter. Bought another one. Then bought a dual A/C USB thumb drive. I'm getting along, but would appreciate at least one USB-A port. I am also a photographer, and miss the SD port. But I realize that's kinda niche, and can understand it going away. I wouldn't be surprised to see cameras move away from SD cards eventually anyway.
- totalZero 6y ago
  The speed of the SD is far more limiting than the speed of the card reader itself, even for USB2.0. As for whether I consider the nuances of "real life," I traveled by land across several countries with a DSLR, and took hundreds of photos a week. My DSLR has a CF slot and an SD slot; I used the SD slot for a wifi chip, and saved all photos to CF. My CF reader hasn't gotten lost or broken, and I didn't have "an entourage of assistants doing the heavy lifting" (whatever that means when talking about a card reader). In real life, you can just use an external card reader. It's not a big limitation, just like it's not a big limitation that laptops these days don't have optical drives.
  - dognotdog 6y ago
    USB 2.0 tops out at a theoretical 60MB/s, and in reality it is much slower, far below the read speeds of fast SD cards. I appreciate that it’s good enough under some circumstances, but not always. Certainly not when taking several cards worth of photos a day, with only very limited time to do transfer, selection, and editing.
skohan 6y ago
It's not about the cost, it's about UX. If I just did a full day of shooting photos, and I am in the hotel room looking at the photos, I don't want to dig through my bag and pull out the card reader, or to have a dongle hanging off of my laptop when I'm doing it. If I can just get the card out of the camera and throw it in the laptop it's so much nicer

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

dognotdog 6y ago

Maybe consider that it’s more nuanced in real life. That $12 card reader, even expensive USB-3 card readers, are often a lot slower than that builtin one. They get lost and broken, not even considering that when you’re on the go, many photographers will absolutely try to shed as much unnecessary weight as possible, as not many people are built like the hulk or have an entourage of assistants doing the heavy lifting. I use my laptop a lot outside of an office, and having that multitude of builtin ports is an absolute must, as dongles are quite difficult to deal with in situations when I don’t have a flat surface to put the laptop on. That TB/Ethernet dongle I regularly do have to use has been a great source of frustration.

tjr 6y ago
I bought a new MacBook Air last year, and a USB A/C adapter with it. I somehow lost the adapter. Bought another one. Then bought a dual A/C USB thumb drive. I'm getting along, but would appreciate at least one USB-A port. I am also a photographer, and miss the SD port. But I realize that's kinda niche, and can understand it going away. I wouldn't be surprised to see cameras move away from SD cards eventually anyway.
totalZero 6y ago
The speed of the SD is far more limiting than the speed of the card reader itself, even for USB2.0. As for whether I consider the nuances of "real life," I traveled by land across several countries with a DSLR, and took hundreds of photos a week. My DSLR has a CF slot and an SD slot; I used the SD slot for a wifi chip, and saved all photos to CF. My CF reader hasn't gotten lost or broken, and I didn't have "an entourage of assistants doing the heavy lifting" (whatever that means when talking about a card reader). In real life, you can just use an external card reader. It's not a big limitation, just like it's not a big limitation that laptops these days don't have optical drives.
- dognotdog 6y ago
  USB 2.0 tops out at a theoretical 60MB/s, and in reality it is much slower, far below the read speeds of fast SD cards. I appreciate that it’s good enough under some circumstances, but not always. Certainly not when taking several cards worth of photos a day, with only very limited time to do transfer, selection, and editing.

skohan 6y ago

It's not about the cost, it's about UX. If I just did a full day of shooting photos, and I am in the hotel room looking at the photos, I don't want to dig through my bag and pull out the card reader, or to have a dongle hanging off of my laptop when I'm doing it. If I can just get the card out of the camera and throw it in the laptop it's so much nicer