Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

I own a GFX50S II and would like to transfer pictures from my camera to my PC using a wireless connection (Wi-Fi).

It seems that the PC application PC Autosave could do the job, I can't have it working...

Is this app really compatible with GFX50S II?

Is there any alternative?

Thanks in advance for your replies.

Ayapos

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all,

I have worked on this topic, it turns out that:
- One can transfer JPG files to any smarphone/Tablet running with Adnroid,
- It is then possible to set an FTP server on the smartphone/tablet accessible by any PC.

Drawbacks: only JPG and NO RAW can be transfered.
It needs a double wi-fi connection , one for the camera, one for the PC.

Furthermore, I have discovered that the Fujifilm GFX50S II has only a 63 Mbps Wi-fi link, hence a veeeeery slow transfer of the pictures.

It really is a pain in the ***!

Once again, if someone can give me any advices to directly download RAW files to a PC, I'd be very glad.

Thanks in advance 4 ur reply.

Regards,

- Ayapos

 

Edited by Ayapos
Link to post
Share on other sites

Raw files are considerably larger than jpeg, it would take forever and a week to transfer a batch of them over to your computer using wifi. Although sometimes less convenient, using a card reader or a USB cable connected to your computer, to off-load them will work.

Unless you can coax Fujifilm into building an adapter to use the FT-XH file transmitter with your camera.

Edited by jerryy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Jerryy,

Thanks for your reply!

You're right, RAW files are roughly 100 MB while the associated JPEG only weighs 12 MB.
If I've asked my question it's because the USB connector cap on the body is attached to this body with two thin pieces of rubber (or plastic?) and seem very fragile. Furthermore, the body USB connector has a low insersion/extraction lifetime (100 to 200) . Therefore, the less I use the USB port, the longer the mechanical elements will last.

Back to my proposal - transfering from body to smartphone via Wi-Fi has only a 63 Mbps speed: it means that the transter time would be 1.5 s for each JPEG file which is totally acceptable. The drawback is that only JPEG can be transfered.. Hence my frustation.

Has anyone have other ideas to thransfert RAW files to smartpone or PC via Wi-Fi?

Ayapos

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue is that unless you find some way to attach a high speed reader driving a super fast wifi chip, you are stuck using the built-in wifi, which is too slooooooow, (to transfer those large files, you really need wifi-6 or the upcoming wifi-7 to have something that is practical).

Using the numbers you've provided, if the built-in wifi were used, it would take about 15 seconds for each raw file, which might be okay for just one or two files, but when you are looking to move several hundred files, that is a lot of time, a whole lot of dead batteries and also is assuming the transfers do not have any troubles -- any noise coming from other electrical equipment such as your or the neighbors wifi and cell phones are noise troubles that slow down transfers.

But the really big problem, to top things off, your camera might cook itself to death from the heat that is generated and kept going though a transfer, that is, assuming the camera's thermal safety routines do not kick in and shut the camera off to save itself.

I am curious, where did you find the numbers for the USB insertion/extraction lifetimes? 100 to 200 seems rather low.

Edited by jerryy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, a lot of places put the number of cycles at 10,000 (ten thousand):

https://www.anandtech.com/show/8377/usb-typec-connector-specifications-finalized

https://www.content.molex.com/dxdam/c9/c924179b-a897-4f79-a5ae-cfdc94fc73cb/987651-4081.pdf

https://www.cablestogo.com/tech/usb-c

which woul make sense, otherwise all of the various camera manufacturers would have a lot of warranty work on their hands.

Card Readers for now!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Jerryy,

I understand your point of view, nevertheless manufacturer of reseller can not say their product are limited in time or usage. It is not their interest. Once again I speak with a +30 years background in electronics design.

On the other hand, as you say, camera manufacturer have - I think - studied the pros and cons regarding their technical proposals, and their products.

In any case, I still hope s.o. can help with what I consider as an issue 😉

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts and opinion.

Ayapos

 

Edited by Ayapos
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have slightly mis-interpreted what I wrote. The camera manufacturers are using connectors that last a long time.

If they did not, then the cameras would break after a few days or weeks or months of use. The manufacturers would then be forced to take back all of the essentially brand new cameras they just shipped out to dealers and fix or replace them. No manufacturer can afford to do that, they would go bankrupt quickly.

You can use USB-C connectors in the Fujifilm cameras and expect them to last a good long while, and use card readers for the major transfers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
    • First post here but long time fuji shorter. I use the XT2 with the 23mm f2 / 35mm 1.4 / 16-80mm f4 I'm considering the 23mm f1.4 r (Non-WR) About me: - I shoot black and white only. - I like macro details to wide open landscapes and everything in-between. - I shoot mostly for art, intrigue and creativity of the image. My question - is the 23mm f1.4 going to offer me any meaningful difference over the f2 for the above scenarios Thanks and sorry for bringing it up again...
×
×
  • Create New...