Eye-Fi Revisited

Mon Jan 21, 2008 11:11AM EST

See Comments (3)

At this year's Last Gadget Standing event that Yahoo! Tech and I host at CES, the audience voted for the Eye-Fi, an SD card with a wireless chip that allows your camera to move photos wirelessly to your PC or a photo-sharing site. A few days later the Eye-Fi went on to win Best of Show at MacWorld. It is, in fact, a great and well executed product, but now that I've spent some real-world time living with Eye-Fi, I'm bumping into its limitations. It still gets a big thumbs up from me, but the weak spots are showing.

After a photo-rich trip to the Grand Canyon a week ago, I wrote to Eye-Fi's CEO and offered these observations. First, my camera (a Kodak V series) took a long time (nine seconds on average) to go from "completely turned off" to "on" with the Eye-Fi card installed. (You can only imagine the shots that got away.) Second, the battery on my camera drained considerably faster with the Eye-Fi card in use. (Typically my camera will run for two or three days without a charge on a trip like this. This time I was nearly out of batteries by the end of day one.)

Transferring images wirelessly is a major improvement to cables, cradles, or moving memory card, but it's also not problem-free. My camera, with its automatic timer, shuts down after a period of inactivity. I changed the automatic timer setting to the maximum allowable (10 minutes), but after a trip where you take lots of photos you'll need to transfer in batches based on your camera's timer.

My bottom line is that if you're taking lots of photos just use the Eye-Fi as a regular memory card and skip the wireless transfer. Better yet, use a non-Eye-Fi card on photo-intensive days. Also, I'd like to see a version of the card where you could turn the wireless transmitter off since it uses the camera battery for power. Having my photos moved from camera to Facebook without touching a button is cool, but flawed.

Phil Askey at DP Review noticed similar issues and gives a good summary of Eye-Fi limitations. Here are a few:

  • Only works with associated access points which have no additional "login" layer (i.e. only home/office access points, not public access points) and this can only be carried out with the Eye-Fi Manager software running on a computer.
  • Requires a good Wi-Fi signal to work properly, has less range than typical Wi-Fi devices.
  • For single images, demos, and entertaining, transmission times are acceptable; however, if you came home with a card full of images (2GB), it would take three hours to download all images (if the camera battery could last that long).
  • Requires that the camera does not power off; otherwise obviously transmission is interrupted.
  • Unknown additional impact on camera battery life.
  • Performance is made to look pretty poor in comparison to most cheap USB 2.0 card readers which can manage ~10MB/sec (some 50 times faster than the Eye-Fi card).

 

Top 5 Posts

Comments on Eye-Fi Revisited

Post a Comment

Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 1 Posted by robin_baker_uk on Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:57AM EST Report Abuse

    When my first IBM PS2 with a 20Mb hard drive arrived on my desk, people thought the messiah had arrived such was the cutting edge appeal of this machine. Eye-Fi is just the beginning and has brought us a technology only formerly available to professional photographers by attaching bulky cordless transmitter type boxes to their cameras for instant editing before the model gets goosbumps. This technology may have some flaws but it is cheap, does 99% of what it says on the tin and is just the beginning. Have we become so darn picky and demanding that when something that is actually pretty awesome lands on our desk, all we can do is find fault with it. Take it for what it is, use it for what it is and watch this space as the technology gets improved and these minor niggles get ironed out.

  • 2 Posted by ytech_robinraskin on Wed Jan 23, 2008 12:16PM EST Report Abuse

    Robin, Believe me, I'm not giving up my Eye-Fi but since it was so prominently featured in our CES coverage I wanted to give it a public second look. Despite some flaws I'm a happy camper. --Robin

  • 3 Posted by willards69 on Sun Jan 27, 2008 11:10AM EST Report Abuse

    I appreciate your stroy on the eye fi, but have some questions. You say that after a photo intensive day at the Grand Canyon the battery drained. How many photos did you take in comparison to the three day battery drain? Is there a difference in speed if you transfer to a computer rather than Facebook? The fact that the camera shuts off after 10 minutes is a limitation of the camera, not the eye fi card isn't it? What is the length of time your camera normally turns on compared to the nine seconds it took with the eye fi card? Most cameras that are not professional take some time to turn on so most non pro photographers miss some shots, too.

More Posts: First Prev 1 Next Last

Post a Comment

 

Sign In to see your profile information, saved products and more...

Register Sign In

My Favorite Gadgets

 

Recent Activity

 

Recently Viewed

on | off on | off
 

Recent Searches

on | off on | off
 
 
 

Also on Yahoo! Tech

Computers Home Office Wi-Fi & Networking Phones & PDAs Cameras & Camcorders TV & Home Theater Portable Audio
 

Question and Answer content at Yahoo! Tech is written by Yahoo! users at Yahoo! Answers. Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. For more information, read the Full Disclaimer.

Opinions expressed by the Advisors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo! receives no compensation from any manufacturer or distributor nor does it compensate any Advisor for the coverage of any product or service in any Advisor's content.