[Not a Number]

The EU is strongly against supplying cables with electronic devices. They want standard connectors and ala carte cable sales for Green reasons.

I can understand the reasoning behind that (kicking a pile of USB cables still in the packaging from various devices).

[monochrome]

I can understand the reasoning behind that (kicking a pile of USB cables still in the packaging from various devices).

Between us my wife and I have 9 digital cameras. Not one cable is out of the plastic. Between us only two AC-in cables (to the charger plates) need to be out. We have 5 Li-68 charger plates and 4 Li-90 charger plates. We do charge multiple batteries at one time so all the charger cables are out, but that's an unusual use case.

[Adam]

Adam, can you confirm the WiFi is only G - I thought the specs mentioned N, which is closer to USB 2 speeds, depending on the hardware implementation (number of aerials/data streams).

(From Specifications | PENTAX K-1 | RICOH IMAGING Wireless LAN Standards IEEE 802.11b/g/n)

Regards,

Chris

You are right, according to the specs N is supported. I don't remember if this was the case for the K-S2, which was faster than the flucard but still a bit too slow for large file transfers. Hopefully the K-1's speeds are improved.

[KDAFA]

... Also saving wear & tear on the card slot connections.

This worries me, too.

For that reason I've been reluctant to use a card reader, and hv been using the USB cable.

[ogl]

Here is the answer.

K-1 vs K-3

[dicks]

Surprising because of the much larger file size that the K-1 produces. On the other hand, most will probably remove the SD card and pop it into the computer vs. cable transfer via USB?

[Mikesul]

I was very excited about the USB 3 on the K-3. But once I had the camera I found that I almost never used it. Swapping cards is just so much easier. Since the K-1 will be able to use the 645 teathering software the transfer rate over USB 2 must be adequate. These ports never reach their published capacity anyway so it may just be that they have sped up the internal processing and bus to get fast enough output with USB 2.

[taz840209]

What am I missing? Remove the SD card and use a USB3 card reader. They are not expensive. But you must have a computer with USB3 ports. If not it's irrelevant. Why would you use the USB port on the camera and run your battery down?

Like I said unless I'm missing something.

[stevebrot]

I too found the move back to USB 2 strange. I personally find that USB 2 connectors easier to use (hate the one on my phone), but given that the K-1 supports wired tethering the slower transfer rates will likely be burdensome when using that feature.

FWIW, I have only used my USB 3 cable once with my K-3. It is in the bag, but seldom have a use case.


Steve

[stevebrot]

Like I said unless I'm missing something.

Wired tethering with external power supply. That use case is fairly common for things like semi-unattended astrophotography, interval movies, and similar where near immediate off-load of full resolution files is desirable.


Steve

[stevebrot]

I thought the specs mentioned N, which is closer to USB 2 speeds, depending on the hardware implementation (number of aerials/data streams).

I think you are correct regarding wireless N support, though throughput on a single antenna system is about 72 Mbps as opposed to USB 2 transfers at about 480 Mbps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11n-2009#Data_rates

In the real world, neither system delivers its maximum bandwidth due to host I/O limitations.


Steve

[virusn3t]

Here is the answer.

K-1 vs K-3

I been owned a k3 for nearly (or maybe more than) 5 months and honestly i havent looked what is behind that little plastic... Not even curiosity to open that tab....

Back on topic, the USB3 is royalty free? I remember reading about the HDMI port being proprietary and a fee must be paid for every hdmi port, that was the reason my TV only have 2 of those and not 3 or 4 like the most expensive screens, that could be a reason?

[Igor123]

What am I missing? Remove the SD card and use a USB3 card reader. They are not expensive. But you must have a computer with USB3 ports. If not it's irrelevant. Why would you use the USB port on the camera and run your battery down?

Like I said unless I'm missing something.

The point is the amount of work required and/or time spent moving the images to the computer (and to a small degree the one-time effort of also spending some time and some money to find and buy a good reader). With two cards, two swaps are required, which also leads to time loss unless you stay there and monitor the transfer to swap just when the first card is finished etc, and even then it's more work than using a cable attached to the computer.

I keep the usb cable in the computer at all times so just hooking it up versus ejecting a card, finding the reader, putting the card in the reader and the reader in the computer, then taking it out when done, repeat the process for the next card....just connecting a cable, that also could have faster transfer speeds, would/could be both faster and easier.

Regarding battery, after a shoot the battery needs charging anyway, might as well use it a couple of minutes more if it's more convenient than fiddling with cards and readers.

It isn't a big deal, but it is a deal when we're talking a few $ more expensive part on a $2k camera. Just my opinion ofc, but but as people have said elsewhere, just because it's no deal in your workflow doesn't mean it's useless.

[hangman43]

The point is the amount of work required and/or time spent moving the images to the computer (and to a small degree the one-time effort of also spending some time and some money to find and buy a good reader). With two cards, two swaps are required, which also leads to time loss unless you stay there and monitor the transfer to swap just when the first card is finished etc, and even then it's more work than using a cable attached to the computer.

I keep the usb cable in the computer at all times so just hooking it up versus ejecting a card, finding the reader, putting the card in the reader and the reader in the computer, then taking it out when done, repeat the process for the next card....just connecting a cable, that also could have faster transfer speeds, would/could be both faster and easier.

Regarding battery, after a shoot the battery needs charging anyway, might as well use it a couple of minutes more if it's more convenient than fiddling with cards and readers.

It isn't a big deal, but it is a deal when we're talking a few $ more expensive part on a $2k camera. Just my opinion ofc, but but as people have said elsewhere, just because it's no deal in your workflow doesn't mean it's useless.

I seriously doubt they left it out to save a couple of dollars there has to be other reasons if it was possible I am sure they would have used it. My computer still is USBII so does not matter to me and it does not take long with USB cable even if it is just USBII

[jatrax]

They stated in the interview that usb2 was already in the design from a long time back. They did not want to change the design to accommodate usb3. Why? Who knows.