A Special Wireless-Free Nikon Camera Is Publicly Available for the First Time

Post by klausa » Fri, Jul 03, 2026, 9:21 AM UTC

fredoralive wrote: post #31

throwaway81523 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't claim to NEED the feature (I'm not a 3 letter agency or anything) but I'd like to have it on general principle, and I'd pay extra for it, though probably not $400 extra. This never gets old: https://biggaybunny.tumblr.com/post/166787080920/tech-enthus... Will someone really pay me $1000 to remove the camera module from an 2020 iPhone SE? Are there some huge obstacles to that? I've disassembled the 2016 model…

Looking at pictures, it appears cameraless iPhones tend to have backs without camera holes / lumps, so some custom work is involved beyond just removing the module. Though there’s going to be a degree of “the government can afford it” in the pricing. Drilling has some obvious issues, most notable if you go too deep you’re going to hit the screen.

Post by someonebaggy » Fri, Jul 03, 2026, 9:33 AM UTC

ryukoposting wrote: post #26

aleksejs wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The camera (even the regular model) does not have its own GPS receiver at all. It relies on a smartphone to transmit GPS coordinates over Bluetooth. This is pretty common in modern cameras, presumably because most photographers expect to be able to turn their cameras on and off very rapidly, and it would be difficult to maintain a GPS fix with that usage pattern.

I don't think it's impossible. We aren't talking RTK here, you should be able to get a usable fix quickly. You also have some other advantages. For starters, the GPS coordinate doesn't need to be taken at the exact instant the photo is taken. If it takes a second to get the coordinate, that can be done in the background while the photographer continues to do their thing. Another advantage is that people never hold th…

Post by piltdownman » Fri, Jul 03, 2026, 9:44 AM UTC

ButlerianJihad wrote: post #22

Seven years ago, I landed a fairly trivial job with a temp agency, and we were tasked with plowing through document archives and collating them all for the scanning team. Our client was a huge company, and though none of us were sworn to secrecy or anything formal, I figured I would do them a solid, and refrain from bringing in any device with a camera, microphone, or transmitter. At the time, this was possible becau…

Post by RobotToaster » Fri, Jul 03, 2026, 10:25 AM UTC

i_am_proteus wrote: post #11

walrus01 wrote: post #4

I understand it's probably because the GPS functionality is integrated into the same RF chipset that's handling wifi/bluetooth, but it would be possible to make a "no transmit capability" camera that still has GPS metadata functionality, with GPS receiver chip and an antenna tuned for 1400-1600 MHz, since ordinary consumer grade GPS is a receive-only technology. But that would still possibly present a problem for ser…

>Can't have an antenna of any form in it. All wires are antennas...

Post by RobotToaster » Fri, Jul 03, 2026, 10:28 AM UTC

someonebaggy wrote: post #43

ryukoposting wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's impossible. We aren't talking RTK here, you should be able to get a usable fix quickly. You also have some other advantages. For starters, the GPS coordinate doesn't need to be taken at the exact instant the photo is taken. If it takes a second to get the coordinate, that can be done in the background while the photographer continues to do their thing. Another advantage is that people never hold th…

Getting a GPS fix from the satellites alone with no internet connection or stored data takes a few hours, not seconds. First you have to listen to the very slow data channel that tells you where the satellites are that takes a few hours to transmit the complete set before repeating.