Saturday Shout: Are Wi-Fi Cameras Sheer Genius or White Elephants?

This week’s Saturday Shout considers the recent addition of Wi-Fi technology to digital cameras. Would you buy a 4 megapixel camera for £400? Probably not. Would you buy a 4 megapixel camera with WiFi capability for £400? Hmmmm. That’s exactly what Kodak are selling in the form of the new (and much-delayed) EasyShare One digital camera. The EasyShare One does have some other impressive features, including a 3 inch touch-screen LCD, but Kodak are mainly promoting the Wi-Fi aspect to help justify the high price. Nikon and more recently Canon have also launched Wi-Fi cameras, so it seems to be something of a growing trend. But is it a feature that consumers really want, or merely a marketing tool to help differentiate a camera in what is an incredibly crowded market-place?

So what do you think? Is Wi-Fi in a camera just a gimmick, or a must-have feature? Have you bought one, and how often do you use the Wi-Fi? Will Wi-Fi become the defacto standard for transferring files from cameras to computers? Shout out now…

Published: Saturday, December 03, 2005

Reader Comments

1. I read that the one weakness of Wi-Fi is the battery drain.
   
   I haven't had time to confirm this.
   
   I would like this feature on my next camera a couple of years from now.

   Nicholas at 12:46pm on Saturday, December 03, 2005

2. Sure, why not - so long as you can turn it off to save power.
   
   What I'd prefer to have though is GPS so that my EXIF info has location info in it.

   Rick B at 01:56pm on Saturday, December 03, 2005

3. I fully agree with "RickB"! A built-in GPS module with record to EXIF would be much more useful. I hoped that upcoming Siemens phone (SXG75) with 2MPix photo and integrated GPS module will be a perfect every day camera at least for web photos, but it looks there will be no GPS record in EXIF and also the integrated camera is not the best one :(

   Pavel K. at 02:18pm on Saturday, December 03, 2005

4. I've been shooting a lot of theater and dance performances and I would love the ability to have the images sent to the laptop by Wi-Fi. I could get the Wi-Fi module for my 20D, but it's much too expensive. If one could be had for about $100 or so, then I'd consider it, but until then I'll just wait for a lull in the action and run to the laptop to switch CF cards.

   Dave T at 02:29pm on Saturday, December 03, 2005

5. Funny a couple of weeks ago I met a man who was taking a photo of a shop with the camera on his mobile phone and sending it to his girlfriend in London so I think there is a market but maybe not with tons of megapixels.
   fredyr

   Fredy Ross at 03:29pm on Saturday, December 03, 2005

6. I think it is an excellent idea once it's implemented properly. On a pro-level I could imagine the benefits of setting up a mini-network and have my images transmit to a laptop eliminating the need to change flash cards.
   
   Or even better than that a system where no set-up is needed in which the images are automatically transmitted to one or more storage unit(s) such as an Epson P-2000.
   
   Of course, this will be completely worthless if proper security is not implemented. WEP is not security and can be easily broken. WPA is a requirement.

   Dan at 07:31pm on Saturday, December 03, 2005

7. Does this all mean that besides driving down my neighbor hood street and tapping into various "Hot Spots" with my Sony Laptop with it's Dell "True Mobile" I'll be getting neighbor's family pictures TOO?
   Or is it set up on a line of sight infrared beam like wth the wireless transmitter on my old Sony camera?

   nick in japan at 05:58am on Sunday, December 04, 2005

8. It's coming! a camera with a couple Gig of internal memory with the ability to Wi Fi images on the fly if you want....Patience!

   nick in japan at 06:01am on Sunday, December 04, 2005

9. The WiFi Yes but not at this price.
   The more important, I think, is the quality of resolution and the possibilities.

   Jean at 12:34pm on Sunday, December 04, 2005

10. The WiFi Yes but not at this price.
    The more important, I think, is the quality of resolution and the possibilities.
    Jean, http://www.artvideo.free.fr

    Jean at 12:35pm on Sunday, December 04, 2005

11. I was at a park in Florida recently (Silver Springs) where they had the wi-fi cameras to take pics of the customers and the customer could then go pick it up at the photo booth.
    
    That seemed to be a pretty good use of the technology.

    Scott McDonald at 01:52am on Monday, December 05, 2005

12. WiFi in digital point and shoots has (currently) a very limited application. The biggest consumers of this technology is (and should be) events planners and locations (parks, play areas, etc) that have dedicated wifi for their companies use.
    
    The average consumer, however, gains nothing with this technology except more headaches, more expense, and more wasted time.
    
    If WiFi becomes more wide-spread and the technology in the camera allows you to take advantage of free and/or open hot-spots then it would be more useful.

    phule at 04:13pm on Monday, December 05, 2005

13. It's about time that cameras are finally upgrading to Hi-Fi. It's a long
    overdue improvement. Even iPods offer Hi-Fi, so why shouldn't our
    cameras do the same.
    
    What that? It's "Wi"-Fi, not "Hi"-Fi. Well, that's a very different story.
    
    ... Never mind.

    GARY POGODA at 06:48pm on Monday, December 05, 2005

14. Software is the key. WiFi in camera would be a great feature if the camera could upload photos directly to Flickr, your blog, a FTP server or the like. Or even continuous always-on sync to automatically offload pictures whenever you are in range of a free hotspot.
    
    Unfortunately, all the current WiFi cameras can do is upload to the manufacturer's proprietary software that needs to run on a PC nearby. It doesn't look like there is any drive towards standardization of such basic functionality. Without some kind of standards, the cameras' software will remain of limited functionality, generality and utility.

    Fazal Majid at 03:28am on Tuesday, December 06, 2005

15. Indeed, Fazal (comment #14) has an excellent point. I personally own two Kodak EasyShare cameras - but stopped using their software to work with my pictures in favor of Google's superior Picasa program ( http://www.picasa.com ). It imports my images, the interface is faster, and I can send images directly to my blog, email, and even to a printing company (If I send it to snapfish.com - I can pick it up at my local Walgreens).
    
    If I can pick where I want it to go, the security is in place, battery life is good, then I would probably pay about half what they are charging. Wi-fi technology is not that expensive.
    
    As far as usefulness is concerned - if your out in the wilderness taking photos, you can have your laptop tucked securely in your nice warm car, drawing power from it, while you're out taking photos until your battery runs out (or your hard drive fills up). Proprietary software or not, for the right consumer, it's priceless.

    Gabriel at 07:12pm on Friday, December 09, 2005

16. I don't think it will really take off worldwide. Maybe in the States and a few countries that have good wifi networks, but why pay extra for something you can already do via existing technology much chaeper. Oh how we have to have everything "instantly" available these days.
    I keep bringing mine home selecting and editing them, then sending them through my internet conection. That's plenty convenient for me.
    Just more new gadgets and gimicks.
    Look through your cupboards. How many gadgets you thought would be indespensible are just sitting collecting dust?

    Paul at 09:37am on Thursday, March 09, 2006

17. At Disney World Orlando, the photo people at Disney use Nikons connected via USB to PDAs that were programmed to connect to their wifi network to transmit the photos back to the shops to sell. I talked to one of the managers, and they told me they had the software designed for them to do that.
    
    When I was looking into it, the Canon WFT-E1A I believe that it uses wifi and (WEP only) and transmits to FTP. 1000$ though
    
    I do a lot of stage work, where it's low/no light, no flash, and it would be nice to transmit back to a laptop where someone could radio me to adjust settings if I was getting poor shots.
    
    The need is out there. I don't think uploading to the internet is a wide need, but uploading to a wifi laptop would be a larger need.

    John at 09:28pm on Sunday, October 29, 2006