[derekkite]

The fundamental design flaw of this card for file transfers is that it operates as an access point. When your portable device connects to it, you are disconnected from your regular network (being a local one or the internet). Even if you are able to transfer your files, they must be stored locally on the portable device since you cannot map another drive in your regular network while connected to the camera. Unless you are using a laptop with real storage, your smartphone or tablet will have limited, if any, capacity to be worthwhile. You will have to transfer your files once more from the portable device (once disconnected from the camera) to your regular storage system being on your PC or on the cloud.


For all practical purposes it appears that this a WiFi remote control with live view with limited functionality as compared to using the camera in live view on its own. Any benefit of incorporating a smart device in the workflow (like accessing a web site for DOF) is negated once connected to the camera. Without an internet connection, your smart device is not that smart any longer.


The fact also that the embedded web server in the card does not support IE is mind boggling to me.

Your assumption is that the design is wrong from a laptop tethering standpoint, and I'd agree. If you start from the assumption that it is a mobile device tethering solution, it all makes good sense.

My use so far has been far away from my home or office network, and I'm certain I'll be using it in the next while in places where the cell networks don't reach. I will be able to place my camera on a tripod either close but awkward, or a ways away, and it will work just fine. I'll be able to peruse the shots I took, and then my usual workflow of plugging in my USB cable, saving the raw files on my raid array, and processing them will apply.

There is one shortcoming that I find unfortunate, that I can only shoot one shot at a time, separated by the thumbnail transfer time.

[awaldram]

Its strange to me that a device functionality is suddenly a toy if we lose connection to the internet?

Seems to me no 'Pro' would be stupid enough to try and transfer raw files over WiFi so they can 'work' on them

I cant think of any 'workflow' like that during a shoot whilst the model was available that would do anything but make you look incompetent never mind 'pro'

However being able to display and flick through images whilst discussing creativity with the client that is 'professional' oh wait it does that.

As to 'connectivity' I have twin wifi setup on my laptop with natting so I can take image with O-FC1 transfer to PC and the flick it up to any store/social media I fancy from local SAN to storage silos out in the cloud.

A £2 dongle of ebay will allow anyone with a modicum of tech savvy (which if you think you can drive the O-FC1 as a tool in a pro process you should have ) to achieve the same.

So I see it a powerful creative tool and those who call it a toy are perhaps suffering a lack of imagination themselves or didn't understand what the product was for?

[pgamble]

Hi guys


I agree that it would be nice if file transfer would be faster and the software a little more elegant ... It would be good to select several files for transfer and kick off. With apps like Pirawnha for iPAD ... for DNG (supports K3) viewing and editing ... it would also be nice to handle the DNG files more simply rather than messing about with URLs.


Having said that ... I do like the remote control ... I think I mainly bought this as a bit of a toy that could also provide remote control for tripod shots ... I might be in the study with the camera on a tripod in the Orangery pointing at the bird table ...


I would like to know if that daft buzzing when initiating the wifi can be silenced ... If you have the wifi on all the time (not sure if most people are using that way to speed up start up) ... the buzz is a real irritation ... you could be somewhere where you must be silent and therefore not able to turn the camera on.


Anyone have any thoughts on that ?


Paul.

[panoguy]

I would like to know if that daft buzzing when initiating the wifi can be silenced ... If you have the wifi on all the time (not sure if most people are using that way to speed up start up) ... the buzz is a real irritation ... you could be somewhere where you must be silent and therefore not able to turn the camera on.


Anyone have any thoughts on that?

Hey Paul, I have managed to "trick" the card into turning off the buzzing/beeping when starting up the wi-fi after falling asleep, but it only lasts until you turn the camera off. It isn't a permanent change... and I got it from reading the output of these developer apps: :::: Flucard pro :::: so not exactly an easy fix for the average joe!

[monochrome]

The number of people who expected the tool to be something it was never intended to be and are then inclined to complain that it isn't what they mistakenly expected is somewhat puzzling to me. I never expected the card to be used for WiFi file transfer. I never transfer RAW files by WiFi whether on my network or operating away via cellular. I transfer files by cable or card slot.

On a Q / Q7 I have used an Eye-Fi card to upload in-camera jpegs to social media sites a few times, but that is busman's holiday stuff. I never upload to Cloud storage. I don't want my property in the Cloud.

I expected the card to be used for remote camera control on a tablet. From what I read it does at least a decent, if not a very good job executing its design function.

I have to wonder, is the disconnect between purpose and expectations a fault of Pentax or a fault of the users not researching what they were buying?

[GoremanX]

Its strange to me that a device functionality is suddenly a toy if we lose connection to the internet?

Seems to me no 'Pro' would be stupid enough to try and transfer raw files over WiFi so they can 'work' on them

You are completely incorrect. And I take offense at being called stupid. However I won't retaliate by also calling you insulting names. I'll just tell you about how deeply wrong and uninformed you are.

(there, was THAT better, dearest moderators?)

A professional Nikon shooter can take a picture, have the RAW file show up on a laptop within seconds, and have an assistant process the file for immediate printing, thereby resulting in an on-the-spot sale. No shuttling of SD cards between devices, no hooking up a USB cable between shots...

Or, on assignment, a photographer can take a picture, have the RAW file show up on a tablet, do basic editing, and send it off to an editor across the continent for immediate approval.

This is the functionality I was expecting. Essentially the kind of functionality other camera manufacturers have provided for many years now. That first example was something I was planning on setting up this summer at a classic car show for people who want portraits with their cars. I've seen other photographers do it before, and it's very efficient and profitable. I was really hoping Pentax was finally catching up in this regard, but now I'll have to kludge up some other solution instead.

This is not a "pro" product. It is an expensive toy.

[monochrome]

A professional Nikon shooter can take a picture, have the RAW file show up on a laptop within seconds, and have an assistant process the file for immediate printing, thereby resulting in an on-the-spot sale. No shuttling of SD cards between devices, no hooking up a USB cable between shots...

There's nothing wrong with using Nikon instead of Pentax if this feature is so high on your priority list.

---

Last edited by Parallax; 03-07-2014 at 12:38 PM.

[GoremanX]

I can understand if there is no interface yet for Lightroom, but if I can't in some way (even if only through proprietary software link EyeFi) take it on a job to not only control my camera but more importantly to get files onto the computer in some fashion to start working on the photos, it is NOT a "Pro" device.
Its a nice toy, but that isn't really any more tethering than the EyeFi. Just that each has only one half of the solution.

No, you hit the nail on the head. The EyeFi is half the solution, and the OFC-1 is the other half. But the two can't be used together. So what we've got from Ricoh is a product that gives us half what pros need.

The product announcement 5+ months ago promised wireless tethering and file transfer. Instead we have wireless tethering and a really kludgy, manual, one-at-a-time JPG transfer... kinda. This is not a professional product.

Excuse me, everyone, for expecting the product to live up to expectations. My sincere apologies for not blindly shaking my pom poms hard enough along with the rest of you.

The toy has been packed up and sent back to Adorama for a refund.

[Parry]

Love it.

Works great now on the Galaxy Note 3. I love this thing for M42 glass manual focus using focus peaking. Using a financially crippling tripod and head has also worked wonders.

Transfer speed is good enough for me although bumping up the transfer resolution or whatever you call it would be great, but not essential. With over 350 ppi this 'phablet' affair is smokin' hot for viewing pics.

[GoremanX]

There's nothing wrong with using Nikon instead of Pentax if this feature is so high on your priority list.

There's nothing wrong with wishing I could use all my Pentax gear more efficiently. I don't have to love everything Pentax/Ricoh does. I can also look longingly at ONE feature that other manufacturers do better without being told to change manufacturers.

[demp10]

A ‘Pro’ usually does not wary about equipment; this is in the ‘enthusiast’ domain.

Was the expectation of this product to replace and hopefully improve the USB tethering software from the K10D era?

[GoremanX]

I think with the technology available at this time, to both tether your camera for control as well as allow fast transfer of large RAW files you would want a USB 3.0 cabled solution.

You DO realize that this card runs at least 54mbps WiFi, right? And that these RAW files are only 35MB or less? That's a puny 5 seconds per file! How can you possibly leap to USB3 requirement? There's no logic whatsoever behind it. Even if it took 10 seconds for the RAW file to get to my assistant's laptop, that would still be acceptable.



---------- Post added 03-07-14 at 04:20 PM ----------

A ‘Pro’ usually does not wary about equipment; this is in the ‘enthusiast’ domain.

Spoken like a true enthusiast.

Besides, we're not talking about equipment here, we're talking about the tethering functionality that Pentax decided was good enough for professionals.

[panoguy]

You DO realize that this card runs at least 54mbps WiFi, right? And that these RAW files are only 35MB or less? That's a puny 5 seconds per file! How can you possibly leap to USB3 requirement? There's no logic whatsoever behind it.

Why don't you try this?

1) Right-click the full size image in the FluCard Image View window
2) Choose "Copy Link" or "Copy URL" or whatever is closest in the dropdown
3) Paste that link into a new window or tab
4) Change the end of the URL from ".JPG" to ".PEF" or ".DNG" (depending on what you're using in your K-3)
5) Time how long it *actually* takes to download the raw file in your wi-fi environment, and from as far as you expect your assistant to be away from you.

It might be a puny 5 seconds, or surprisingly more. I'd like to know what you get in practice... not theoretics.

[GoremanX]

Why don't you try this?

1) Right-click the full size image in the FluCard Image View window
2) Choose "Copy Link" or "Copy URL" or whatever is closest in the dropdown
3) Paste that link into a new window or tab
4) Change the end of the URL from ".JPG" to ".PEF" or ".DNG" (depending on what you're using in your K-3)
5) Time how long it *actually* takes to download the raw file in your wi-fi environment, and from as far as you expect your assistant to be away from you.

It might be a puny 5 seconds, or surprisingly more. I'd like to know what you get in practice... not theoretics.

Can't, it's gone now, sent back for a refund. But displaying a full size JPG while live view was enabled typically took about 4 seconds, and those files are around 12-15MB. That includes the overhead for initiating the transfer AND displaying the image in the browser.

[panoguy]

Can't, it's gone now, sent back for a refund. But displaying a full size JPG while live view was enabled typically took about 4 seconds, and those files are around 12-15MB. That includes the overhead for initiating the transfer AND displaying the image in the browser.

Ah, so it's all theoretical now. Got it...