Smartphone DSLR monitor

No, I tried it with my GR but going through the extra hoop just seems dumb

>>3108470
Works gloriously straight out of the box on my sony, awesome for selfies, wildlife, macro, timelapse, etc.

>>3108470
Sure when it's convenient, like group shots with family or friends. I usually use just a delay with macro shots. Works well on my fuji stuff.

Do you already have dual pixel af?

I wouldn't use my smartphone if the 6D had a flippy tilty screen. I still control the camera via its dials, just sometimes enjoy having live view where the camera rests pressed against my waist or sternal. WiFi transfer rate doesn't suffice and an hdmi screen is more expensive, so I've also chosen your setup.

Man, I'd enjoy a native ef mount ovf camera. This, however, was only rumour with the 6D2.

jesus christ whoever thinks its more convenient to control your camera through touch controls can you please end your disgusting life asap.

>>3108507
So when you want to be in the picture yourself with your buddies, you setup your camera on a tripod and then run back and forth doing adjustments and setting up delayed triggers and annoying everyone instead of doing those things remotely on your seat or whatever?

>>3108507
Just imagine looking through the view finder while adjusting the focus point with a touch panel. That's not only neat, it's an improvement over any joystick or button.

>>3108509
That's gimmicky for group shots as you are not the guy making settings only, which you've best done before anyway. You are the moderator and should stand in front of the buddies to give orders and bring them to laugh! You only finally hop in and be part of.
Remote shutter is a valid option though

>>3108470
Do you do this to see what the high resolution image will look like before shooting?

i tried this with my phone and my tablet but they're both shitty and old and don't have drivers to act as a usb host and it didn't work

>>3108509
just like back in the day and get funny shots?

>>3108470
Sometimes I use the flucard in my Pentax as a tethering device. Not much though, but sure beats having no flippy screen. Actually it is better than a flippy screen.

>>3108470
I'm quite regularly using my smartphone as a remote trigger or basic editing / sharing device with my Sony MILC using the stock app, yes.

I'm not using it as you depict it in your photo.

>>3108515
That's what I'm thinking. The LCD on the built-in viewfinder just isn't good enough.
Sometimes I'll take a photo and it'll look good on the viewfinder, but then I copy it to a PC and it turns out to be shit.

I just tried connecting my 7D Mark II to my smartphone.
My phone only does USB 2.0, but the performance seemed OK. It would probably be better if I were to upgrade my smartphone to one with USB 3.0.

But when I have it connected and controlled by the smartphone, the physical buttons are disabled. I want to be able to use the physical buttons and basically just use the smartphone as a viewfinder, or just as an alternate way of changing settings.
Do I have to use the HDMI output for that?

>>3109051
>using a wire to connect phone to camera

Fuck off grandad

>>3109051
When live view on your phone is running, press the live view button on your camera to swap control from your smartphone to the camera

>>3109062
Try wifi and you'll use cable too, kid. Wifi is good for occasions, not if little delay is important

>>3109069
Wifi works superb on my sony, and I can use it from more than 2m away, with silent shutter my a9 makes for a perfect voyeur setup.

>tfw blackmagic will probably never allow this
Why go on living?

>>3109086
Noticeable delays are not avoidable with Wifi. The question is whether one is satisfied with this.

>>3109102
If you're using a 7D Mark II, the answer is probably no.

>>3109581
Your answer would still be yes, since yes was also the advertisements claim. And then it must also be perfect or at least better. Even if not, and we all know that this case is never going to happen, just let's pretend. :^)

>>3109086
Whats your setup for that do you use a bag cam?

>>3109102
> Noticeable delays are not avoidable with Wifi.
Of course they are avoidable. A signal can be sent to a receiver over WLAN in around 1ms. You pretty much can't notice that.

>>3109619
For the purpose of naysaying sony over having an evf & wifi, apparently human eyes can now see 1000fps.

File: unnamed.png (44KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 300x300px

>2017
>not having Sony PlayMemories on your camera

>>3109619
For a simple ping, 1ms is a good value, for cable it is 0.5ms. For video its worse and you do ever see delay:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVFgpCT4-Is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxM6yV6dTK0

Btw., also on both systems, since video is taking bandwidth, there's a latency of 1s to update settings remotely. Settings like aperture, shutter and selected focus fields, but also shutter release.

>>3109673
For idealizing Sony, everything else may seem like naysaying. I agree, that you've also had to exaggerate

>>3109705
> For a simple ping, 1ms is a good value, for cable it is 0.5ms.
Yea, so "trigger shutter" can be well below 5ms, and essentially imperceptible.

> For video its worse and you do ever see delay:
Probably actually mostl the decoder stream buffer or something. Has little to do with WLAN, which really generally should only add a few ms.

PS: The process of grabbing this data and running it through a fast encoder and then a decoder on smartphone-like hardware also is only very few ms.