Support for CF cards to cater for D-SLR users

[JJWonder]

I hope Eye Fi Owners are reading these forums!

They need to:

1. Bring out Direct Mode ASAP before other companies start to fill this niche and steal their customers!
2. Start making CF X2 Pro cards for all the Pro DSLR users who's Full Frame Sensor cameras only have CF slots!

[24Peter]

I haven't read this entire thread so maybe someone else already posted this, but this is the CF>SD adapter that works with the X2Pro card:

http://www.amazon.com/High-Speed-Extrem ... NBXHNBMO5B

I've been using it with a 5DII for a couple of months and it works fine. Range and transfer speeds are slightly less than the same X2Pro card in my 60D (sans adapter of course). Would a native CF card option be better? Maybe. But there's not a huge difference between range/transfer speeds using this adapter in my 5DII and just the SD card in my 60D. It's not perfect but very workable. So I'm not sure what all the whinning is about. It doesn't look like Eye-Fi is coming out with a CF version of it's products any time soon, but for $16 you could be using this solution today.

[BillTracy]

Thanks 24Peter, but that is a CF Type II adaptor that will not work in my Nikon D700 I need a CF Type I adaptor. I called up B&H, Unique Photo and a few other places asking if they sold a SD to CF Type I adaptor, and they all told me there's no such thing. So it's hopeless unless a miracle happens and the people here at Eye Fi actually start to pay attention to these requests, lol

[huskyte]

Add me as well to the potential CF card buyers. Hell, saying CF is a niche market is like saying a decent Merc does not earn money. Sorry, but are you nuts? (just kidding). Put the direct transfer mode into a 16 GB card eye-fi CF card and develop a reasonable ipad app and this will be a no brainer.

Think about the impact, it would be a unique business model. Well, clearly, SD card are probably selling 100:1, BUT which group is willing to pay more? Those with the kindergartencams are probably spending 150$ on their whole gear, thats what a professional or serious photographer is spending each month. Hell, I am spending 2000$ on a lens without even thinking about it. I even buy stuff in duplicate just to have redundancy and not thinking about it too much. And here is the deal, my equipment is CF only.

Canon on the other hand, although I appreciate their work, simply do not have a clue about convenience. They simply shouldn't produce anything beside optics. So there is a market for eye-fi and would eventually being supported by canon. Look at their WFT: This piece is so out dated. Look at geotagging. Well, my Jobo PhotGPSs do perfectly fine. And again, looking at the 5D for example... USB 1.1 in 2006? Are they kidding?

So, please, the eye-fi team has done a great job in the past and I have been following you ever since. The progress is a good one, so get going...

PS: And don't commit the same error as Apple with CF. It is NOT a niche market and there is money to be harvested as the CF related users are suffering on slow update cycles on usually getting outdated hardware.

[BillTracy]

Very well said huskyte! But I have my doubts that thee people will listen, no matter how well you put your argument together. I feel like we're beating a brain dead horse here.

[huskyte]

I am just hoping we are on something here. Canon has already implemented some technology from eye-fi in their newest gear. Maybe we will see professional CF cameras with a built in eye-fi soon. Maybe the 5D MKIII. Never give up any hope. Surely they wouldn't announce it now. My feeling is that eye-fi already became quite a standard within the market. It just needs to be extended.

Anyway, that does not help those with older models. What I would like to see as alternative might not be far off for the eye-fi team. Why not leave it as it is and sell SDHC cards and build a decent CF-adapter then instead? That would be the cheapest option. An even better one would be to built a CF adapter with eye-fi build in to add any SDHC. Not that I am really into SDHC, but it would be acceptable. I just fear that eye-fi is earning quite some money from selling flash themselves, so their motivation might be modest. And as a third alternative, building their own WFT with the now existent technology would be orders of magnitude better than anything Canon can come up with.

But, thinking about the situation if you are a Canon user. Quite a lot of models use/used CF. If one wants to stick to a full frame body, what is the cheaper option? A 1D with eye-fi or a 5D with WFT? The first option is quite expensive if you don't need a 1D for your work.

I personally will probably just join eye-fi if my DSLR gear supports it. I won't have my crappy point and shoot upgraded to eye-fi till then.

By the way, how comes direct wifi with apple will be possible? Seems as some major players are teaming up. So the announcement will therefore be delayed till WWDC? And another side remark, CF is a niche market and ipads not? C'mon, IMHO there are more CF owners than iPad owners.

[petrichor]

Revolutionary product. I've got one Eye-Fi card and I plan to get another and to give several as gifts.

But, I also have a Nikon D700, which requires a "compact flash" (CF) card.

So, my "feature request" is: CF, please!

[pgcolorado]

PLEASE release a CF Version. I was stunned when I discovered that I could not use this. Such a huge market void that you can fill.

The other option would be for you to either release a CF adapter or recommend one that you've tested that you know works.

[tomms]

you can put me on the list of buyers if you release a CF eye.fi Card

[DaDane]

I have Canon DSLR that takes CF card.

If there was an Eye-Fi CF card I would be very interested.

[irrbloss@gmail.com]

I wish I could use my Nikon D700 with a Eye-fi-card. It would be perfect for studio photography. So, please consider release a CF-card!

[huskyte]

hmm, it has been 6 1/2 month since an eye-fi representative has responded to the requests. Is this group already on the ignore list or are working on a solution?

I wish I could give an update on statistics regarding professional Canon DSLRs data card preference, but Canon isn't any more responsive Would be nice to know if the 5D III will incorporate a dual slot (if not it is CF for sure).

[sRagnar]

i am kind of surprised.

two main things.
First, it is amazing to me to read this thread. The only response from the moderators here is argumentative, degrading and rude. not a single valuable piece of information for the lack of support of cf card users. who cares about the definition of "pro" ? if you want to buy an awesome camera it will have a cf card slot or some even with dual cf card slots. I have 2 cameras that have a cf only and one body with sd.
this bladent unwillingness to assist is a reason in it self to seek other solutions to wireless advantages.

the second, Make a cf card eyefi or why not make an adapter that works even go way out of your way and make a recommendation for a usable adapter. how hard can that be? light weight wireframe composite or aluminum, open-sided for ventilation and range usability that cant be any worse than sd card plugged in to a camera body?

I would like to be able to show clients photos on a separate screen or iPad while shooting. No high speed writing or long distance just a nice touch for clients. I can do this with wires but would be nice to have it wireless.

for me main thing is service and service minded attitude and this forum admins are far from friendly. what if there are other issues? I am going to hold of on purchasing and eye-fi card. There must be other ways, Nikon has this option. More costly but looks like service issues and general attitude comes with a hefty price tag these days

[alandyck]

I started watching Eye-fi when it was first announced and knew that any day the developers would understand the value of making a CF version of the card. Here it is years later and still no product that would work with CF. I am disappointed. As a professional photographer this would be such a useful tool. If I was a hobby photographer I can't imagine why I would spend the money for a wireless card but as a professional this just makes so much sense.

As a professional it is so important to get things perfect for the client. The ability to preview the images is so helpful in making the client happy. It would be a much appreciated tool if the developers would create this product for the professional. There may be more SD cameras sold but the ratio of photographers who would buy this product would be much higher in the professional arena. We all have bundles of cameras and would probably need one for most of the cameras we carry.

Since the CF card is so much larger it would seem like it would be an easier task to put the electronics in the larger space.

As a wedding and portrait photographer it would be wonderful to be able to show the client their images as they are being created. I do now but on the back of the camera. I'm hoping to be able to use the ipad2 for this in the future. But as a Nikon user it sounds like this might be a while off.

I have resisted buying any camera that uses SD cards because they are too small. They are easier to lose and break. I actually made the mistake of buying a DSLR that used SD cards when I was purchasing one for the Govt. As soon as I realized my mistake I returned the camera. I really do not ever want to use an SD card. As a professional they just don't cut the mustard.

Dear Development team please consider the return on your investment. I believe the development of this tool would be highly profitable. And you would make a whole lot of us very happy.

Thanks for listening

[BillTracy]

I think everyone is wasting their time trying to reason with these people.

[berend]

I think everyone is wasting their time trying to reason with these people.

Sigh. I'll take the bait and respond against all of my good judgment...

That someone doesn't agree with you should not have to mean that they are not reasonable. We have explained numerous times that by our assessment, for our business, despite all the "me, too!" posts in this thread and other places, the portion of the CF market that we can address without disappointing on various axes of performance measurement such as card write performance, wireless transfer speed and complexities compatibility with the all different flavors of CF (polled, IDE, UDMA, etc.), does not justify the development of a truly native CF solution. The cost of from-scratch chip development is simply not likely to be favorably amortized over the volumes that we predict for such a product, for our business, all the while forcing us into a market segment that is far pickier (justifiably so) in their performance and compatibility demands, likely increasing our support and engineering burden non-linearly.

We've looked at various adapter solutions and, quite frankly, they all suck. They're made by fly-by-night Southeast Asian companies with absolutely no focus on broad-based testing and compatibility, and no matter how closely we've tried to work with one or two of them, we cannot get behind their solutions because the problems that are encountered with our cards, as well as SanDisk and other major brand cards, span everything from minor issues during format to outright data loss. Given that building our of CF-to-SD silicon gets us into the business of developing a chip solely for the CF market, the concerns in the first paragraph still apply.

Finally, we also always say very explicitly that we don't ever comment on future product developments in any absolute sense because business conditions change continually and what's not viable today, may become viable or relevant tomorrow. So, once again, I can't say anything more than confirming the fact that we neither have our own CF solution, nor do we condone any specific CF adapter solution. That doesn't mean we don't hear you, or listen to you, but you'll have to give us the benefit of the doubt that we have more complete picture (no pun intended) of our business than may be apparent in a forum thread.

Respectfully yours,

Berend

[sRagnar]

I think everyone is wasting their time trying to reason with these people.

Sigh. I'll take the bait and respond against all of my good judgment...

again you amaze me. as a business you should embrase the opportunity to communicate with your potential customers. Most companies have to spend a fortune to get their customers to participate and provide feedback on their business and product.

take the bait???? this is a discussion forum where you are ment to communicate with your customers and potential customers. if you would have made some kind of a stance in the beginning of the post you would have won major points for service and understanding. 17866 people have experienced your inadequate communication and I am sure that I am not the only one that has changed his mind about your company and products. if you dont want to communicate write a blog. get your ideas out there without having any connection to your customer and very soon you will see that "running a successful business" will end up being only arguing with your coworkers about why you failed.

but then again I am not sure if you really care what any of us has to say since we have not established a "pro" status with you.

Out of the first 103 posts you posted 4, mostly off subject.And 23% not a big difference, I cant believe you chose that for your argument. As a point to your boss, your salary cut by 23% should not be an issue then. [/quote] 23%. Does that really translate to "much much faster" [/quote] and how can you cut this gentleman's opinion like that, "constantly waiting on the card to shoot?" this can be a huge issue for someone trying to produce the best possible product and for someone that their livelihood can stand and fall with the right capture.

At this point I would rather draw a photo on my screen than purchase your product or be in anyway associated with you. I am sure that there are good people in your company and they need to take over the social media operation since you are really hurting the company you work for. When those people start carrying out your service department I would love to explore your product since I think that you have an awesome opportunity to provide a really good product concept. You might be an awesome programmer, photographer, designer or what ever else that you do there but customer contact should be left to people that enjoy and welcome interaction with people.

Siggi

[berend]

again you amaze me. as a business you should embrase the opportunity to communicate with your potential customers. Most companies have to spend a fortune to get their customers to participate and provide feedback on their business and product.

I think you meant "embrace", but you're also barking up the wrong tree, as the saying goes... You'll find very few other forum contributors who takes as much time to discuss issues, be they nuts and bolts technical issues, hypothetical feature requests or outright "philosophical" topics than myself, be it day, night, weekend or weeknight. I absolutely welcome feedback and contribute as much as I do to if only make sure such feedback is nurtured and rewarded with fruitful outcomes.

take the bait???? this is a discussion forum where you are ment to communicate with your customers and potential customers.

Unless you're really going out of your way to misunderstand, it should be abundantly clear that the comment was pointed at Bill's "wasting time trying to reason with these people" comment. If you believe that's a civilized way to engage in a conversation (for the record, this is not the first colorful comment that Bill has sprinkled), then I'm not sure if you and I see eye to eye.

17866 people have experienced your inadequate communication

That's actually the number of views, not the number of unique people visiting the thread. Given its polarizing nature, many people revisit and view the thread numerous times, so you may want to consider the inflating effect that has on the number of views. That aside, there's no argument from anyone that this is a relevant topic of importance to folks, but that one side doesn't just say "yes, we absolutely will do a CF card tomorrow!" should not require that side to be cast in a villified light. People must learn to disagree in cordial fashion. It is the cornerstone of a civilized society.

but then again I am not sure if you really care what any of us has to say since we have not established a "pro" status with you.

Again, I would beg you to review this thread and other threads like it. The elitist "pro" designation and the assertion that "all pros shoot with CF" has been presented not by us, but various folks trying to justify the need for a CF product with various angles. What we've presented is that the line between "pro" and "pro-sumer" is far more blurry these days and the number of folks using SD-based cameras in "professional" capacity is actually quite large, and that they need not be xenophobic in slapping the "pro" designation. If anything, we're being far more inclusive in accepting folks from all backgrounds and needs in serving "professional" needs.

Out of the first 103 posts you posted 4, mostly off subject.And 23% not a big difference, I cant believe you chose that for your argument. As a point to your boss, your salary cut by 23% should not be an issue then.

Huh?

23%. Does that really translate to "much much faster"

and how can you cut this gentleman's opinion like that, "constantly waiting on the card to shoot?" this can be a huge issue for someone trying to produce the best possible product and for someone that their livelihood can stand and fall with the right capture.

Very nice editing job. Why don't we include my next paragraph?

"Please understand that my intent is not to change your (or anyone else's) mind about CF - I understand completely the desire for and the importance of investment-protection in CF-only camera bodies, but I do believe the practical speed difference between CF and SD (class 6) cards is often overstated."

I actually chose to bring quantitative data into the discussion, while being respectful of the gentlemen's implicit needs. Discussing subjective and biased opinions without any data behind them doesn't get anyone anywhere, as it has been demonstrated numerous times in this thread. The point that I was trying to make then, and will try to make again, is that SD cards are perfectly capable of delivering performance that is useful to a vast majority of the photography market, be it consumer, prosumer or "pro," and the remaining echelon that is seeking 40+ MB/s write speeds from their CF cards will never be satisfied with a solution that we can provide, despite vigorously waving their hand in a "me, too!" gesture at this abstract point in discussion .

At this point I would rather draw a photo on my screen than purchase your product or be in anyway associated with you. I am sure that there are good people in your company and they need to take over the social media operation since you are really hurting the company you work for.

That is of course your prerogative, but I do suggest you use a dry erase marker to draw on your screen. As far as whether I hurt, or try to constructively contribute to many of the discussions here on the forum, I leave to others to judge.

Have a nice day,

Berend

[sRagnar]

again totally off subject of the cf card and just continuing to instigate further arguments.

and again your choice of arguments is nothing short of stunning!
If you want to cut down on my grammar and spelling you have to make sure that your spelling is perfect, absolutely perfect!
"cast in a villified light" guess you wanted to say "vilified"

English is my 3rd language of 5 so Ill take the liberty to be less than perfect.
I would have found a forum on the english language and grammar if that was what I was looking for.

[berend]

again totally off subject of the cf card and just continuing to instigate further arguments.

I rest my case, then.

If you want to cut down on my grammar and spelling you have to make sure that your spelling is perfect, absolutely perfect!

That wasn't my goal at all - I wasn't sure if you meant "embarrassed" or "embraced" and went with the latter, which seemed to fit more, but wanted to make it clear what I was responding to.

For the record, English is not my native language either, so thank you for correcting my spelling mistake.

Berend

[BillTracy]

Just another thing to consider. I would think that for every person who posts on this forum wanting a CF version, there are hundreds more who would also want one. Simply because not everyone in the world knows about this forum and posts about it.

[ttphoto]

I'm a professional photographer and would also like to have CF card support. My Nikon D700 does not support the SD card format. I'm sure there would be a good Market for this amongst other pros.

[berend]

Just another thing to consider. I would think that for every person who posts on this forum wanting a CF version, there are hundreds more who would also want one. Simply because not everyone in the world knows about this forum and posts about it.

Bill,

Of course! We also have data from our camera partners (Nikon, Canon, etc.) and retail partners (B&H Photo, Best Buy, Amazon, etc.). We have had discussions on this topic literally dozens of times in the lifetime of the company and while there certainly are differences of opinion, we simply have not seen overwhelming enough data, within the parameters of our business today, that proves to us that a CF card with the specifications of roughly a class 6 SD card and ~15 Mbps network throughput would find enough market support to justify engineering an entirely new semiconductor platform, and acquiring the tooling and licensing for building CF cards.

And, as unbelievable as sRagnar and others may find it, it is very hard to "make a recommendation for a usable adapter" as we have mentioned many many times over. Many of them work properly only in one corner (UDMA), but fall over horribly in other circumstances. They have Type-I vs Type-II physical constraints that fragment the addressability of the market even further. It really is not as simple as it seems at first blush...

Let me ask, somewhat tongue in cheek, do you guys really believe we wouldn't do this on purpose if it were that easy? Do you really think we're that dim?

Berend

[BillTracy]

And, as unbelievable as sRagnar and others may find it, it is very hard to "make a recommendation for a usable adapter" as we have mentioned many many times over. Many of them work properly only in one corner (UDMA), but fall over horribly in other circumstances. They have Type-I vs Type-II physical constraints that fragment the addressability of the market even further. It really is not as simple as it seems at first blush...

So why not try and make an adaptor yourselves?

Let me ask, somewhat tongue in cheek, do you guys really believe we wouldn't do this on purpose if it were that easy? Do you really think we're that dim?

Yes! - LOL!!

[brett maxwell]

Thank you Berend for the very honest and reasonable explanation, and please do not be discouraged by those who take things so personally.

Yes, I am disappointed that I can't use the Eye-fi in my D700, and I'm disappointed that if I upgrade my D3 to a D3S I will lose Eye-fi compatibility. (D700 and D3S only have Type 1 CF)

However, I totally recognize and respect the rights and responsibility of your company to carefully consider ROI for a new product. As a professional photographer I occasionally get asked to shoot things outside the areas I've chosen to focus on, and when I make the business decision to decline, people sometimes get mad. But it's my business, it puts food on the table for me, my wife, and my baby. It's my responsibility to do what's best for my business, and "best" usually involves profit, and always involves ROI.

The one part that surprises me (though only a little) is that no company has been willing and able to work with you to create a good Type 1 CF adapter (or even Type 2). I imagine such an adapter could sell quite readily for $100, and like crazy for $50. With the way technology is constantly shrinking, I would also think the electronics could easily fit into the smaller Type 1 package. I hope this is an avenue Eye-Fi continues to investigate, and I wish you the best in finding a manufacturer/vendor relationship that would be mutually beneficial.

[berend]

So why not try and make an adaptor yourselves?

Because it requires developing a custom semiconductor chip (that is, after all, what "speaks" CF on one side and SD on the other) and if we were to take on developing and fabricating another chip, it would be for making a version of our "X2 Engine" controller that speaks native CF, not a CF-to-SD convertor chip that serves an even more limited market. The part that other "off the shelf" makers of adapters don't seem to get right is exactly that part, the semiconductor at the heart of the adapter.

Do you really think we're that dim?

Yes! - LOL!!

Well, then! Say no more!

Berend

[berend]

Thank you Berend for the very honest and reasonable explanation, and please do not be discouraged by those who take things so personally.

The one part that surprises me (though only a little) is that no company has been willing and able to work with you to create a good Type 1 CF adapter (or even Type 2). I imagine such an adapter could sell quite readily for $100, and like crazy for $50.

Goodness knows we've tried this angle... These guys seem to think that an adapter that works in three cameras, doesn't work at all in one, and totally corrupts photos in yet another two to be "perfectly acceptable" and want to call their designs "done" and ship it.

Berend

[brett maxwell]

Goodness knows we've tried this angle... These guys seem to think that an adapter that works in three cameras, doesn't work at all in one, and totally corrupts photos in yet another two to be "perfectly acceptable" and want to call their designs "done" and ship it.

Berend

Was there any discussion of Type 1 CF specifically? If they could get the chip right, is there any hope for it fitting in a Type 1 adapter?

[huskyte]

Well, obviously I am not in your business, so I cannot judge the development cost of such a type of card. I guess you have done several surveys considering the following thought as well. I just want to point out to all the posters that a CF card by eye-fi doesn't have to pay for itself. Why is that? Well, the unique marketing position eye-fi owns at the moment seems to be so comfortable that they aren't in the need to claim the whole market segment for themselves. One way or the other some company will pop up and gather the rest of the segment for themselves. Or am I wrong?

Let's think about an alternative future. Eye-fi provides a service that fully covers digital photography, including each type of card (well, probably not the Sony MS). Eye-fi would be the leader and each and everyone trying to gain a piece of the cake was just a copycat. Eye-Fi would then be a synonym for a technique rather than a product. Sounds to much like sci-fi? Hmm, thought about it a long time, but actually most popular cash cows went rather this route than the more profitable, specific one (ie the apple ecosystems is a good example... noone needed an iPod-ecosystem vs a profitable MS Zune).

Back to reality, eye-fi seems to be one of the few alternatives. Sooner or later a company will pop up with a solution for us CF card users (if this isn't already the case with the Canon WFTs). By that we, that includes eye-fi and us, will loose our 'eye-fi ecosystem', it will be just a name in the game. No standard anymore, which also keeps potential SD customers away. Just imagine being able to choose between 5 or more WIFI enabled SD cards.

These are just my thoughts about it. I appreciate Berend to post a reply every while and then, although understandably no definitive or positive answer is posted. Frankly, I tried to figure out some sales numbers, but I could not find any (eye-fi, SD cards or CF enabled camera models). Maybe eye-fi could help us out here. It would at least greatly enhance reasoning. Btw it might be the case that sales figures already indicate a total switch to SD, but at least from my perspective I cannot see that coming.

[BillTracy]

It would be cool to see Eye-Fi go the same route like Scotch tape and Band-Aids has - lol