Actually this is my 7th trip to Alaska. If I traveled to Australia or something then I would bring a charger.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Transferring photos/videos wirelessly
- Thread starter jwolf6589
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've been known to not pack a charger for a weekend trip, but my main cameras these days all use the same battery and I have a bunch of them, so I feel okay with a spare fully charged battery or two. It gets to a point, though, where it's lighter to just pack a charger than a bunch of spares.
I generally don't PP on a trip, and instead just make sure I have a wallet full of cards. Still, though, I normally carry a card reader.
I don't really use SD cards(unless the camera I'm carrying is my Df, which does happen sometimes) other than as a secondary card in my cameras that rarely gets removed, but the mini dock I always pack with my computer has an SD slot in it. At this point, I'd guess anyone with a USB-C Mac has some sort of mini dock like that.
TBH, I have found Snapbridge, which is Nikon's wireless transfer, basically useless. On my D500, the only way it will transfer photos is if I do a direct WiFi network to my phone, and the little 2mp images will trickle over. It can be handy if I want a photo quickly to share, but that's about it. Snapbridge is far more valuable to me connected via Bluetooth to use my phone's GPS for geotagging.
Why I'm getting sucked into this, I don't know, but I can't imagine not capturing everything in full RAW, and even my lowest resolution camera I regularly use is far higher resolution than the OP's camera.
I expose my RAW files for maximum detail, and by detail I don't mean resolution but rather dynamic range. CMOS sensors have so much tolerance for underexposure that I tend to expose for the brightest part I want to retain detail in(exposure philosophy familiar I'm sure to most called Expose to the Right, or ETTR) and then adjust in post. My out of the camera files look terrible, but I probably couldn't get the same results shooting any format JPEG. I'm not a fan of throwing information away when storage is so cheap now.
I generally don't PP on a trip, and instead just make sure I have a wallet full of cards. Still, though, I normally carry a card reader.
I don't really use SD cards(unless the camera I'm carrying is my Df, which does happen sometimes) other than as a secondary card in my cameras that rarely gets removed, but the mini dock I always pack with my computer has an SD slot in it. At this point, I'd guess anyone with a USB-C Mac has some sort of mini dock like that.
TBH, I have found Snapbridge, which is Nikon's wireless transfer, basically useless. On my D500, the only way it will transfer photos is if I do a direct WiFi network to my phone, and the little 2mp images will trickle over. It can be handy if I want a photo quickly to share, but that's about it. Snapbridge is far more valuable to me connected via Bluetooth to use my phone's GPS for geotagging.
Why I'm getting sucked into this, I don't know, but I can't imagine not capturing everything in full RAW, and even my lowest resolution camera I regularly use is far higher resolution than the OP's camera.
I expose my RAW files for maximum detail, and by detail I don't mean resolution but rather dynamic range. CMOS sensors have so much tolerance for underexposure that I tend to expose for the brightest part I want to retain detail in(exposure philosophy familiar I'm sure to most called Expose to the Right, or ETTR) and then adjust in post. My out of the camera files look terrible, but I probably couldn't get the same results shooting any format JPEG. I'm not a fan of throwing information away when storage is so cheap now.
I use Snapbridge all the time for moving full res jpegs for the some of the corporate journalism I do (White House cabinet, Bezos, Gates type closed door meetings), have made many a client happy with that slick tool. Of course they are jpegs but it is easy to just pull from that card (raw+jpeg) and I almost always get it right in camera so I dont hesitate to do a lot of work in jpeg if it is newsworthy type imagery, a product of still shooting film to this day.
I guess there really is just an enormous divide now between professionals and enthusiasts, how they think, how they operate and leverage every tool possible or not. I have been shooting digital for 27 years of my 33 year career and much of the wireless tools we now have are fantastic for moving selects to art directors, editors and end use clients.
Great tools out there folks, don't blame the tool or call it bunk if you can't figure out how to make it really work for you.
Snapbridge works much better these days from its dodgy early incarnations. For people who need that capability, it’s very helpful. I use it more for camera control and being proudly and firmly in the enthusiasts camp, I’m rarely needing to share something with my adoring fans (thanks mom!) quickly.
Most wireless tools from camera manufacturers I use seem to be on par, the transfers will only ever be so fast but reasonably reliable and fulfill a function. Good for the toolbox.
Most wireless tools from camera manufacturers I use seem to be on par, the transfers will only ever be so fast but reasonably reliable and fulfill a function. Good for the toolbox.
Perhaps I owe Snapbridge another try, although at the end of the day I suppose the bottom line is it doesn't make sense for me and the way I work as I'd rather take my time to look at and edit images at home.
BTW, I shoot film as well and consider myself a relatively competent transparency shooter whether I'm using a Nikon F6 or a Hasselblad 500C or my Calumet monorail.
With that said, again with digital I'd rather look at it at home. That means, to me, optimizing my in-camera work for the most flexibility in post processing. It's still "getting it right in the camera", but just another form of "getting it right."
In that sense, it's no different from me deciding that a sheet(or roll) of Tri-X or FP4+ is going to benefit from being overexposed and then given reduced development along those same lines.
BTW, I shoot film as well and consider myself a relatively competent transparency shooter whether I'm using a Nikon F6 or a Hasselblad 500C or my Calumet monorail.
With that said, again with digital I'd rather look at it at home. That means, to me, optimizing my in-camera work for the most flexibility in post processing. It's still "getting it right in the camera", but just another form of "getting it right."
In that sense, it's no different from me deciding that a sheet(or roll) of Tri-X or FP4+ is going to benefit from being overexposed and then given reduced development along those same lines.
Many decades ago I worked at a major retail store and we had a department that offered film processing. A customer comes in to pick up his processed film and prints from a vacation trip, and comments about the high price - "next time I just take a sketchbook"Do you take a pencil sharpener as well?
Don’t think I will need them and I don’t use a card reader I use a USB cable. I have 87 mins left in my camcorder.
I only buy 128 or 256GB cards now. I have some old 64s I still use.
Gotta love how everybody shoots differently.On a related note, I do have one 512GB card and it isn't big enough - but that's for a specific project. I want to try a 1TB card in that camera but I'm not sure it will be able to access it. So far the prices are too high for me to buy one just to test.
I mostly use a camcorder for video with a 64GB card. Got more than 7 hours left.I only buy 128 or 256GB cards now. I have some old 64s I still use.
On a related note, I do have one 512GB card and it isn't big enough - but that's for a specific project. I want to try a 1TB card in that camera but I'm not sure it will be able to access it. So far the prices are too high for me to buy one just to test.
Medium setting resolution. Videos are razor sharp. Much better than the old mini DV cards.
The only thing that affects the resolution is the sensor. Not the media it’s recorded on. I can shoot high quality 1080p 60 on the same card as 480i SD. The only difference is the amount of space I’m using on the card.