Skip to content

Comment on The dumbest ad ever.parent

Comments

But what would be the point?

Pro cameras - where you shoot in RAW mode, and do post-processing later at home on your gorgeous widescreen IPS display, curate it, and then upload to your favourite hobbyist sharing site (Flickr, SmugMug, etc). That doesn't really lend itself to requiring a wireless modem.

I can see integration of GPSes into DSLRs - geocoding is a hotly requested feature particularly by hobbyists, but modems?

The absolute top-end Canon cameras have WiFi dongles that can wireless upload photos as they are shot to a storage unit. This is really to facilitate quick review in a studio setting - you aren't tethered by a wire, but can review the photo on a big screen very quickly after a picture without popping the memory card.

But while you're out and about? It seems pointless. The uses of a pro camera do not include "hey guys I'm at a pizza place. Look at the size of this sucker!", which is really where a 3G modem seems useful.

A 3G modem for backup would be pretty useful: I'd feel more secure while traveling to know that all my photos were wirelessly synced with my desktop PC or the cloud, so that if I lost or damaged a memory card I wouldn't lose anything. And as you say, avoiding the need for a cable to sync photos would be very useful.

But I agree, this isn't a huge deal.

Except for device and carrier restrictions, there seems, to me, no reason you couldn't come up with a bluetooth-or-similar-based standard protocol to piggyback onto your cellphone and do some pre-defined things with your photos on the web.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.