Do-it-yourself wireless tethering for your DSLR
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted May 18th 2009 10:53AM
posted May 18th 2009 10:53AM
You know what kinds of projects we especially love? The kind that save you seven hundred bucks, for starters. That was photographer and bon vivant Pete Tsai's inspiration when he bought a $40 wireless USB dongle, a AA battery pack, and an angled USB adapter, with the idea of using it to tether his Nikon D300 to his laptop. According to the modster, Nikon's Camera Control 2 software doesn't seem to have any problem with the device, and the whole setup offers "very fast" transfers (about four seconds for a fine Jpeg, or eight seconds for RAW+ fine). Apparently this bad boy more than does the job of a Nikon's WT-4a wireless transmitter, which sells at around $800. Are you a photographer on a budget? Hit that read link for all the red hot details.
[Via Wired]
[Via Wired]
it's not wifi tethering, it's wireless usb
If you're using Camera Control 2 to control the settings and fire the shutter, and you get live view, how is that not wifi tethering?
The article clearly states he's using "Cables Unlimited Wireless USB Adapter Kit" for wireless USB tethering, so it's not wifi - which uses a different protocol for communication.
from the source: " The device I chose to implement my "homebrew" wireless tether was the Cables Unlimited Wireless USB Adapter Kit."
wireless usb and wifi are different things. if this was wifi, he'd just use a eyefi and be done w/ it.
the article never said it was wifi
I apologize the article and post do not refer to it as wifi tethering, I should have used "wireless tethering" I simply repeated the wording of the previous comment. I was assuming the previous commenter was taking issue with the word "tethering" not "wifi" which I did not see in the article so it didn't make sense.
Hmm, if that would work with Aperture 2 then that would be pretty useful for me. Given the pretty low cost of entry this one might be worth just having a try. If it doesn't work then it's no great financial loss but if it works then it will make studio shooting better.
Hmm, the wireless USB devices are not Mac compatible (yet). Rats. Still, an article worth bookmarking until a supporting product appears.
You have a studio, or have the need to use one, and you're concerned over the matter of a few hundred dollars? Must be a great studio. I'm sure a hacked up USB set up, and electrical tape will fit right in.
Seriously, you spend well over a grand on a decent camera body, another $1500-$2000 on lenses, $3000 on studio lighting, a laptop/computer 2000-3000, and this WiFi tether... $40. home made. Oh yea.
@Agent .25i: More expensive is not necessarily better. From TFA "To do this I looked at Nikons WT-4a, a very nice solution with a not so nice price somewhere north of $700. I can't justify that as a non-full time photographer." My bet is that he does weddings, anniversaries, and the occasional studio shot. The $700 he saved is enough to buy a good lens which, for the hobby photographer is well justified.
@Agent .25i
Hmm, when I said "studio shooting" you don't have to interpret that as meaning a custom room or building for photography. In this case it refers to the spare room in our apartment but it could equally apply to just renting a studio for a day. I am not a professional photographer so I don't have money to burn and anything that does the job for a fraction of the price gets my vote. Heck, up until a few days ago my camera was a D40X so make of that what you will.
On a side note, people will like you more if you don't have the attitude of a pretentious wanker.
@Kelmon
What, people like you? No thanks. Id rather sit around and not toot my horn as though I have a studio, or the need to use one, and have people hate me.
@Andrew Jones. You are right, Mr. Jones. (best German accent)
I got a laugh out of someone claiming studio use, and crying about cost. When I think of studio, it's not the emptied out hallway closet. I suppose for his uses this would fit right in.
It's just me though, I'm a wanker like that... it's how I roll.
Well Agent .25, when you grow up, you'll realize that the successful photographers with a real live studio are exactly those who wouldn't burn $700 for something they could make themselves that is even better for $40.
Having a lot of money doesn't necessarily mean you part with it easily, in fact, it's quite the opposite. Just like that guy down the street with two Mercedes in his driveway - he's broke and in debt up to his eyeballs.
http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/16/vanna-white-loves-slingbox-on-her-iphone-if-only-she-could-fi/
And I quote:
Agent .25i @ May 17th 2009 11:45AM
"Those that can afford better, have better. " - Steveorevo
See now, you are assuming that because something costs more, it's better. Whatever side of the fence you are on, you're an idiot.
@ Agent .25i
No everyone hates you obviously, you sad little oink !
@Agent .25i
Clearly you are in need of a lesson in the English language:
studio |ˈstjuːdɪəʊ|
noun ( pl. -os)
1 a room where an artist, photographer, sculptor, etc., works.
• a place where performers, esp. dancers, practice and exercise.
• a room where musical or sound recordings can be made.
• a room from which television or radio programs are broadcast, or in which they are recorded.
• a place where movies are made or produced.
2 a film or television production company.
3 a studio apartment.
ORIGIN early 19th cent.: from Italian, from Latin studium (see study ).
Basically, the word "studio" implies nothing about the size or facilities required in a space that an artist works in. Why you assume that using the term is "tooting [a] horn" is quite beyond me. Every photographer effectively has a studio, even if that space is only a small area where they review their pictures. In my case it's a blank wall, a desk and a few table lights for basic portraits and still-life images.
$800 for a wireless transmitter?!!?!?! Is that fleecing or is that fleecing?
Welcome to the DSLR market
Looks like a neat project but I didn't really understand the instructions...
Um... why not just use an EyeFi memory card? Takes care of that for you and possibly cheaper than the DIY method. Certainly more compact/elegant.
Clearly you didn't read the article. He said he played with the eyefi but didn't like the speed of it. So tahts why he did this. To send them over in a few secs. Pretty neat, but not practical for field work. Unless you want to take your computer along.
no RAW support for one.
no ad-hoc networking for two.
Eye-Fi is not a good solution for for semi or part time pros...
Does anybody know if this would work with a canon dslr?
Should do - Depends which one though - I know my 400d doesn't support tethered shooting, but some higher range ones do.
I am thinking it should work. All you are doing is removing the USB cable from the mix. The software that comes with the Canon - DPP (http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=386) I believe has tethering/live view capabilities.
I use live view on the back of the Canon camera to take pictures like these:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ryfter/3484278079/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ryfter/3484698391/
It would be really nice, to hook the Canon up with USB and the laptop in the field, to help compose shots better. I think it could be used to really see if the shot is tack sharp on a large display, rather than the 3" lcd.
Try connecting your Canon camera to your computer, using the included USB cable and the DPP software. If that works, then this hack should work, as well. All you are doing is turning the cable, wireless.
I have the Canon 450d/XSi, and you can do tethering: http://www.flickr.com/groups/canon450d/discuss/72157616892139731/
But, I think (on the low-end cameras) only XSi/T1i (and PROBABLY the XS) have this capability. I believe it works with Live View, which the 450d/XSi was the first of the entry-level line to have.
I believe you can connect the 400d and lower via a tether, but it won't auto-focus/show what is "live". I don't have one, so I can't test this to confirm. I do know you can use the USB cable to download the pictures as you take them, across the tether, and see the results in near real time.
Is it really worth it for 30 meters of cordlessness?
$40 for one less cable, particularly one that is probably attached to the 2 most expensive bits of kit in your arsenal (posh lenses excepting) and therefore guaranteed to be of interest to the Fuck-Up Fairy? Heck, yes, it is worth the money.
This looks very promising, but it's sort of unwieldy in it's current state - especially if you plan to use it on a full body camera like a 1d/s or a D3. If i were to make this contraption, I would consolidate all the pieces into one self-contained unit which can then be attached to the camera's neck strap.
Ditching the right angle connector and instead opting for a 6ft extension cable ($1 at monoprice) should solve that particular problem. Keep it on a beltloop, neckstrap, backpack, or wherever else.
Or, for real photographers who want to get the laptop out of the middle...
http://www.cradlepoint.com/files/uploads/NYT_WH_Photographer_DougMills.pdf
:D
Haha if i ever get my new vaio i'lll be rooting my g1 for tethering, setting up my camera for this... Oh man, gotta love wireless! Wheeee!
Hi guys, PeteTsai here Thanks for all the comments.
Just a note I updated my blog with more detailed info, the original blog was created just to show people the idea and what I came up against, not a tutorial. This new post has alot more detail that will answer the questions people have been asking.
PeteTsai