Wi-Fi in cameras: the inevitable step into the future and the lack of functions in the present

Although cameras with an integrated Wi-Fi module appeared on the market relatively recently, the technology itself was available on many camera models and much earlier, through external modules or Eye-Fi cards . Nevertheless, it cannot be said that the presence of a Wi-Fi module in the camera somehow deliberately fascinated photographers. It looks strange, because cell phones with a wireless interface, for example, caused a real wave of excitement at the first appearance on the market. The then reviews of fashionable gadgets were teeming with phrases like “Unremarkable modelka, but she has attention! “THERE IS WI-FI!”, Forcing users to swallow saliva and save money. But with the cameras nothing like this happened.

The answer to the question “Why?” Lies on the surface; A smartphone or laptop for most is a device for extracting ready-made information, while a camera is a tool for creating it (or rather, transforming it into a form that is required by human perception). And as you want more often and more diversely than to grow food, so devices for providing access to information should be freer from being tied to specific conditions than equipment for making content. Using the previous analogy, it is easier to carry around a spoon, fork and glass than a hoe, a row crop cultivator and, in particular, a cow shed, although both of these groups of objects have a very unequivocal relationship to a delicious dinner.

Nevertheless, the Wi-Fi interface in cameras step by step advances its position towards the requirements of the camp of wide user masses. There are several reasons for this: the universal “wifiing”, the emergence of applications that allow you to control the camera via a smartphone or tablet with a large screen, and the increasing desire for convenience when copying files from the camera, and even the growing popularity of social networks and instant messaging services. The mirrorless camera boom, which I wrote about earlier, also plays a beneficial role in the process of spreading Wi-Fi technologies, as the camera becomes less and less a mechanical device, and more and more a computer , with the typical requirements of modernity to this class of devices.

I would like to say a few words in this article about the diverse use of Wi-Fi when working with modern cameras. I would like to. And it will turn out - an attempt to answer, including myself, to the question of why we don’t break into the store for “wired” cameras, and disconnect the available Wi-Fi module in 75% of cases with a squeamish mine: it doesn’t have a relationship to the photo, and in general, the mechanical "Lake" and the C-41 process are our everything, and well, you and your digital photo ... We say so. And what do we really think about Wi-Fi? And most importantly - why do we think so?
')

Remote control path

The idea to use the screen of a smartphone and, especially, a tablet as a control screen of a modern camera is quite attractive. However, a person has only two hands, and both of them are required to work with any of these devices. Consequently, a camera controlled from a tablet should stand on something or, at least, be in the hands of the photographer’s partner (in 99 cases out of a hundred, the partner behaves like the dumbest partner ever to defile the Earth with his presence) . It does not take a lot of imagination to imagine the inconvenience caused by this situation.

Another thing is professional video when the camera, screen and a bunch of other devices are mounted on a tripod or, in the worst case, on a special body kit, fastened on the shoulders around the place that videographers consider to be a waist. With this kit, you can collect a steep filming location, no worse than the Hollywood operators. However, the benefits of Wi-Fi connection here immediately becomes very conditional, since the devices are close enough to each other to fasten them with wires and not vykobenivatsya.

Another application - shooting from an ambush, from a prepared position, and similar entertainment. This borders on militarism, but it makes Wi-Fi control very applicable in practice, especially if you also have a tripod that can be controlled by a separate widget at the same time as the camera (I heard that there are such tripods, but I did not see them on sale) nor even in reviews).

I will not consider the specific use of Wi-Fi control circuits, such as launching drones with wireless-controlled television cameras. At best, this occupation is far enough away from the field of artistic and even documentary photography. The appearance of radio-controlled probes is undesirable in most places where, for one reason or another, there is nothing to do to a living photographer.

Remote backup

Once we were on an ichthyological expedition in Southeast Asia, and my friend's camera with a beautiful collection of expedition shots was suddenly eaten by wild buffalo. It was overly curious, rather polite and completely non-aggressive buffalo, but, nevertheless, forgotten on the grass, the Nikon P5000 disappeared into her stomach. It is not joke; such stories are not so rare. A unique collection of pictures of the biotope of rare fish - spherichtis - disappeared forever inside a damned, stupid cow, which still half an hour sat moaning at its gluttony and stupidity.

Until now, recalling this incident, I think that if we had Wi-Fi, everything could be different. If the camera, which fell into the scar of a buffalo, was not damaged by anything, we could access the images using any handheld device. Moreover, we would have previously dumped these pictures daily in the remote storage, not really worrying about the presence of the Internet in the jungle. Transfusing the pictures on the laptop via the wired interface was a very difficult task, and there is nothing to say that in the middle of the expedition, when the rain and mosquitoes were the very essence of our being, we did not always have time to do it. Since then, getting into such conditions, I always think about a dust-proof camera with a good Wi-Fi module, and I’d also like GPS. (Yes, I know about the Canon 6D. Thank you. I have a Nikon.)

But, in principle, and in the most urban environments, wireless transfer of images to the storage is cool! First of all, you never know what will happen with the card (it’s not without reason that they put 2 card slots into the most “serious” camera models and provide configuration options for very diverse recording schemes, such as organizing a RAID1 array). Secondly, it is always nice to get a picture, and immediately process it, or even dump it on Instagram, to the delight of familiar hipsters. Thirdly ... but what am I saying here? I am not a marketer, but the amount of advertising Wi-Fi modules promoted in the market gradually begins to go off scale even in the most serious magazines. But we are talking about serious everyday tasks, and not about marketing advantages sucked from the finger!

Naturally, wireless communication with the purpose of pumping data can help out in thousands of situations, but the main one is the ability to quickly drop data to a safe place before a technological failure occurs, a visit of security guards with a ban on shooting or some other unpleasant event. Do not forget about the backup images as such; In particular, if the developers of the highly respected Handy Backup by me fulfill their recent promise and soon update the client for Android, the connection between the smartphone and the Wi-Fi camera can be a very useful tool for me. Distributing and sending pictures to backup storage right in the process of shooting - the beauty of this opportunity will be appreciated by anyone who knows the essence of the expression "shooting day."

Social networks and publications

I have already touched on the topic of promptly uploading the taken photos to social networks and various messaging services, since these operations can be considered as a form of backing up snapshots. But there is another aspect to this phenomenon: instant publication.

I didn’t work as a photojournalist in the literal sense of the word, but more than once I heard and read that in this lesson the seconds often decide everything during which a news agency (or independent blogger) throws out the freshly revealed Great Revelation of the Season onto its website. Things like the new Kate Moss blouse or the ball scored by Brazilians from the corner feed into the throat of the Argentinean goalkeeper simply cannot keep the public waiting! And here begins the race with shaking hands: a photograph - a memory card - a laptop - a call to the editor - a publication - copyright ... Having Wi-Fi connectivity does not relieve the horrors of this process, but significantly optimizes it (like in-camera JPEG of decent quality, for example) .

At the same time, social networks are not so demanding on speed, but nevertheless many users just need to be able to urgently publish from any place in the world just captured photos in their cozy diary, providing them with appropriate comments in the style of “Katya, Seryoga, we already we are sitting by the fire, the kebab is roasted, come to us! ”(By the way, the GPS / GLONASS module doesn’t hurt, so that Katya and Seryoga did not accidentally get lost.) In other words, this is not about speed, but about comfort and reliability communication organization. Some companies, such as Samsung, are already building right into their cameras the ability to merge unprocessed images to cloud storage and / or social networks for photographers.

In short, for gadgets, casual and lovers to keep up with the times, having a gadget in his pocket, another, Wi-Fi becomes, as advertisers say, an actual trend. But, in contrast to the two applications described earlier, which were, in fact, an intimate affair of manufacturers and users of cameras, the “domestic” use of the integrated Wi-Fi requires a developed infrastructure. Social networks should be adapted to receive photo content streams, their interface should even more meet the requirements of touch control, and the cameras themselves ...

What do we expect from cameras with Wi-Fi (instead of conclusion)

It should be noted honestly that the functionality of the Wi-Fi interface in the camera is much more dependent on the software “set” than on the fact of the presence of a wireless module in the camera.

In this sense, the giants of the computer industry are again ahead of the monsters of the photographic industry. Canon and Nikon are still “swinging”, although they have Wi-Fi devices in their systems for a very long time, and Sony and Samsung, it seems, have not yet attached to their wireless protocol only the connection with the chip embedded directly into the photographer’s brain.

And yet, Wi-Fi remains among us, photographers, unpopular function. So what are we, in the most literal sense, waiting to master this technology at the everyday level, as smartphones, digital players, set-top boxes, and, indeed, cameras with a digital sensor have mastered?

At a minimum, cameras must learn to save battery when working with Wi-Fi; modern compact (in the sense of size, and not a class of cameras) and without that allow standard to take about 300-400 images with one charge, or even less. The connected Wi-Fi module reduces this value by one and a half to two times. It would be nice to also improve the interface for selecting and transferring images; Touchscreens that appear on many cameras are still quite small and dark, and it takes a habit to turn and press the wheels.

A bigger dream - an accessible controlled turret for a camera, which allows you to turn a distance-mounted camera into a radio-controlled module. Such a turret should, in an amicable way, be controlled from the same application as the camera itself. However, when such devices appear on the wide market, I foresee a surge of paranoia, especially among the employees of private security firms, owners of trade kiosks, as well as various celebrities who have reason to fear arrogant paparazzi. (The scandal with a photo of "Max Fry" has not yet been erased from the memory of generations, oh, not erased!)

Well, at the present level Wi-Fi in the camera is rather a toy, rather than a serious addition to the functionality of the camera. However, this has already been the case with many things, from a 35 mm film to contrasting autofocus. And all this has become mainstream. Most likely, the same thing is waiting for Wi-Fi, because the camera is a computer, and computers, like all communication technologies, are developing in our unsettled society so far in the “wireless” direction. Well, wait and see!