Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: IQ260 WiFi... anyone seen it in action  (Read 16975 times)
JoeKitchen
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 722



« Reply #100 on: April 29, 2013, 12:52:05 PM »
ReplyReply

In my opinion, many more people will be buying those less expensive WiFi gadgets.  Fred, I believe that the amount of people you could save would be greatly increased by preaching to those unsuspecting uninformed buyers.  

And to think, such great companies like Canon, or Sumsung, or possibly Nikon (soon) will be putting so many people at great risk.  
Logged

Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
"Try not to be just better than your rivals and contemporaries, try to be better than yourself."  William Faulkner
Don Libby
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 729


Iron Creek Photography


WWW
« Reply #101 on: April 29, 2013, 01:21:04 PM »
ReplyReply

It's a wonder we don't have pages of complaints of undue eye strain caused by the LCDs.

Wait - that'll be coming soon......
Logged

kdphotography
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


WWW
« Reply #102 on: April 29, 2013, 01:26:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Oh goodie!  I can't wait to see what revelations from Google are forthcoming!   Shocked   Roll Eyes

I'll check back later.  Gotta go to Costco and get some economy-sized rolls of Reynold's Heavy Duty Aluminum Foil...Since reading this thread we just go through rolls of the stuff...  You can never be too sure. 

 Wink  ken

Logged

JoeKitchen
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 722



« Reply #103 on: April 29, 2013, 01:28:47 PM »
ReplyReply

It's a wonder we don't have pages of complaints of undue eye strain caused by the LCDs.

Wait - that'll be coming soon......

How about carpal tunnel from handling these things?  I think that should be considered as well.  These damn Copal shutters are going to be the death of my left hand. 
Logged

Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
"Try not to be just better than your rivals and contemporaries, try to be better than yourself."  William Faulkner
JV
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 643


« Reply #104 on: April 29, 2013, 01:46:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Same old pattern. Attack with insults and sarcasm.

Interesting comment coming from somebody who called Nick-T a dick and fredjeang2 homophobic....
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #105 on: April 29, 2013, 02:30:27 PM »
ReplyReply

What about all these?

http://gizmodo.com/5903007/the-best-inexpensive-point+and+shoot-camera-with-wi+fi


Is there any such discussion on the other LL camera discussion forums? No? Oh, surprise.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

Not a relevant example at all for various reasons.

First they are not pro or high end cameras intended for occupational use where they would be used for many hours at a time.

Second and most importantly neither of them have an eye piece viewfinder that would require them being used held up against the face.

Both these cameras are designed to be used held at quite some distance away from the face and it's practically impossible to
see the screen if you hold them too close.

This is from the Samsung WB150f manual:

Quote
This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the
following two conditions: (1) This device may not cause harmful interference, and
(2) this device must accept any interference received, including interference that
may cause undesired operation.
RF exposure statements:
This device is for handheld operation only. The antenna(s) used for this
transmitter must be installed to provide a separation distance of at least 20 cm
from all persons and must not be co-located or operating in conjunction with any
other antenna or transmitter.







No face or eyes near the camera when shooting



The face is normally about a foot away if not further. Different camera model, but same type of screen and no eyepiece
« Last Edit: April 29, 2013, 03:23:32 PM by FredBGG » Logged
Steve Hendrix
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1132


WWW
« Reply #106 on: April 29, 2013, 03:28:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Not a relevant example at all for various reasons.

First they are not pro or high end cameras intended for occupational use where they would be used for many hours at a time.

Second and most importantly neither of them have an eye piece viewfinder that would require them being used held up against the face.

Both these cameras are designed to be used held at quite some distance away from the face and it's practically impossible to
see the screen if you hold them too close.





No face or eyes near the camera when shooting



The face is normally about a foot away if not further. Different camera model, but same type of screen and no eyepiece




I think it is quite possible these may be used for as many or more hours than a professional photographer would use them for. I don't think the manufacturers of these products would create a potentially harmful product banking on their customers not using their products that much. It's probably the opposite - they imagine people using these constantly.

It's true the face would not normally be as close, but that wouldn't mean these are without risk. Or what I mean, is that they wouldn't be manufactured with the risk, banking on the notion no one would use these near their face. There are also wifi enabled cameras that have EVF viewfinders.

And what kind of chassis material are these made of - plastic? As opposed to aerospace grade alloy for the IQ series? Which is more likely to leak out contamination? I guess what I am saying is that if this is a real concern of yours, you should be spending more of your time looking into these plastic wifi cameras that are going to impact millions and millions rather than a few thousand...

Failing to do so would seem to place your integrity and motives in a curious light.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
Logged

Steve Hendrix
Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
MFDB: Phase One/Leaf-Mamiya/Hasselblad/Leica/Sinar
TechCam: Alpa/Cambo/Arca Swiss/Sinar
Direct: 404.543.8475
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #107 on: April 29, 2013, 08:21:52 PM »
ReplyReply


I think it is quite possible these may be used for as many or more hours than a professional photographer would use them for. I don't think the manufacturers of these products would create a potentially harmful product banking on their customers not using their products that much. It's probably the opposite - they imagine people using these constantly.

It's true the face would not normally be as close, but that wouldn't mean these are without risk. Or what I mean, is that they wouldn't be manufactured with the risk, banking on the notion no one would use these near their face. There are also wifi enabled cameras that have EVF viewfinders.

And what kind of chassis material are these made of - plastic? As opposed to aerospace grade alloy for the IQ series? Which is more likely to leak out contamination? I guess what I am saying is that if this is a real concern of yours, you should be spending more of your time looking into these plastic wifi cameras that are going to impact millions and millions rather than a few thousand...

Failing to do so would seem to place your integrity and motives in a curious light.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

The important point here is proximity.
The cameras you gave as an example are used about a foot away from the eyes.
The IQ2 with WiFi when used on the Phase One DF body is about an inch from the eye and dual antennas.
Exposure dramatically goes down with increased distance.
"The energy or intensity decreases (divided by 4) as the distance r is doubled; measured in dB it would decrease by 6.02 dB per doubling of distance."

It's the inverse square law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law





IF we have a value of 100 at 1 inch this is what things would look like:

1in      100
2ins       25
4ins         6.25
8ins         3.125

That is a huge difference.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2013, 09:21:02 PM by FredBGG » Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #108 on: April 29, 2013, 08:36:57 PM »
ReplyReply


And what kind of chassis material are these made of - plastic? As opposed to aerospace grade alloy for the IQ series? Which is more likely to leak out contamination?

Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

What are you trying to say with this?

Arn't the WiFi antennas placed outside of the aerospace grade alloy chassis of the IQ2 backs?



Also there's a gapping big hole in the aerospace grade alloy chassis on the back:



By your logic would there not be a risk of contamination coming out of there? None would be getting out the other way..... or what?

What "contamination" are you talking about. Radio signals travel down a screened cable to the antenna for various reasons.

Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #109 on: April 29, 2013, 08:46:41 PM »
ReplyReply

And what kind of chassis material are these made of - plastic? As opposed to aerospace grade alloy for the IQ series? Which is more likely to leak out contamination? I guess what I am saying is that if this is a real concern of yours, you should be spending more of your time looking into these plastic wifi cameras that are going to impact millions and millions rather than a few thousand...

Failing to do so would seem to place your integrity and motives in a curious light.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

Actually I called more than one camera maker asking some questions.

A WiFi CF card maker asking why the tests on the FCC website were done in a card reader and in a camera.

I asked another why no SAR testing was done when the camera is a pocket sized camera and it would most likely still be transmitting when placed back in the pocket after taking
a set of shots. It does take a while to transmit images.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #110 on: April 29, 2013, 09:34:11 PM »
ReplyReply

In my opinion, many more people will be buying those less expensive WiFi gadgets.  Fred, I believe that the amount of people you could save would be greatly increased by preaching to those unsuspecting uninformed buyers.  

And to think, such great companies like Canon, or Sumsung, or possibly Nikon (soon) will be putting so many people at great risk.  

WiFi for D800 is available and because it connects to the USB it can be positioned further from the eye, even though the on camera position is already farther from the eyes.
It also offer ehternet connection.

There is also the camranger. It to connects via usb, so it too can be positioned at a convenient distance.

A system that is internal is more elegant and the ideal would be an internal system with the option of an external antenna.
Logged
Steve Hendrix
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1132


WWW
« Reply #111 on: April 30, 2013, 02:27:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Actually I called more than one camera maker asking some questions.

A WiFi CF card maker asking why the tests on the FCC website were done in a card reader and in a camera.

I asked another why no SAR testing was done when the camera is a pocket sized camera and it would most likely still be transmitting when placed back in the pocket after taking
a set of shots. It does take a while to transmit images.



Well I'm glad you're making the effort.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
Logged

Steve Hendrix
Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
MFDB: Phase One/Leaf-Mamiya/Hasselblad/Leica/Sinar
TechCam: Alpa/Cambo/Arca Swiss/Sinar
Direct: 404.543.8475
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #112 on: May 01, 2013, 02:47:11 PM »
ReplyReply

For those that may think that the regulatory bodies "looking out for consumers" regulating wireless
are impartial and keeping the public safe....

Look at who is being stated to head the FCC.

The leading Wireless industry lobbiest.

Quote
Wheeler previously served as president of lobbyist group the National Cable Television Association (NCTA)
and then as CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA).
He's currently managing director at investment firm Core Capital Partners.

Core Capital Partners a venture capital company is heavily invested in wireless and cloud companies.
One of them:

Quote
PureWave Networks develops high performance, compact outdoor base stations for the 4G marketplace.
PureWave Networks is the only company that utilizes smart antenna technology to achieve the coverage
and capacity of a macro base station in a small form factor that can be deployed anywhere.
Our solutions are versatile enough to be deployed for small cell urban coverage or for macro base station rural coverage.

The PureWave Quantum Base Station family offers an open end-to-end solution that allows customers to
build their networks using any component available in the vibrant WiMAX ecosystem.
 All solutions are designed for any type of operator, from small WISPs to large mobile service providers.

This is an example of what is behind regulatory bodies.
FCC run by venture capital CEO that was also CEO of the largest wireless lobbying group in the world.

CTIA calls itself the wireless association.

So all these companies got there guy to head the very body that is supposed to regulate them!!!

http://www.ctia.org/membership/ctia_members/

and just for fun here is a graphic from the CTIA Show website. (buzz graphic for CTIA's MobilCON convention.)





« Last Edit: May 01, 2013, 02:55:48 PM by FredBGG » Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad