Another alternative $44 Wi-Fi solution for Nikon D4

This guest post describes another (see also this post) Wi-Fi solution for Nikon D4 by Nick O'Donnell:

Like most of you I love spending a boat load of money on things I won't be using very much. Yeah, right. The Nikon D4 is one heck of a camera with seemingly every capability the could stuff into it, including the wireless networking abilities of the WT-5. I purchased my D4 the day they were released along with the WT-5 and it's a great tool but not for that price. As a working pro I will get the use out of it to make it worth the $800 investment, but I periodically book events that I would like to have 3 or more cameras transmitting images to the server computer and buying extras for a couple shoots a year isn't worth it. On the other side, photographers that might want to have fun with what it can do without putting out the cash for real thing have been looking into other options. Here's my $44.16 solution:

I've purchased the Powerlink AP2403 on a tip from my best friend and host of the amazing website Technically Lexy. They were running a few days long deal to pick one up for $22 shipped free. The AP2403 is a very small, lightweight Router/Client/Access Point that can switch between these modes, plus it has a mini USB port for power which will be crucial for getting the setup portable. For this setup I'm using it in AP mode, that's basically taking the data from the Ethernet port on the D4 and turning it into a wireless signal to send to the server.

The other item is a $22.16 eBay purchase of a GearPower USB charger. This is normally used to recharge cell phones or iPods on the go. Important thing with this is the power comes from a mini USB port so we can power the AP2403. You may be able to use several other devices, one I have on order is called a Callpod, bought that also because there is much more battery capacity so I'll let you know how it goes.

Setting this up was pretty easy too. You will need a separate Wi-Fi network to get the AP talking with the computer. I plugged the AP2403 into the wall using the provided ac adapter and used my laptop to log into it while it was in router mode. If you have a computer with Wi-Fi, it should see it as the network MP01, that was the default for mine. I connected to it and opened Internet Explorer to type in - this will open the settings. Then I changed the switch on the side of the AP2403 to "AP".  That allowed me to see 'AP Client' in the wireless settings drop-down menu, select enabled and click apply. It will look for your Wi-Fi network when you click on 'site survey' you'll get a confirmation that it's connected to your Wi-Fi. The instructions that were included seem to be translated from Chinese or something because they were hard to read, but that should be all you'll need to do.

From there you'll be using the network settings in the D4 to connect, and your hardware settings will be using the wired network connections. The D4 doesn't know the wired connection isn't actually plugged in. Again, the AP2403 is essentially taking the signal from the wire and turning into a wireless signal. Since it's powered by a mini USB connection, the battery powers it perfectly. I've used it in HTTP mode and FTP mode and it works exactly as the WT-5 does. I'm using Cerberus FTP as my server program, it works like a charm. There are several free ones out there, but currently the WT-5 is incompatible with some of the free software out there. Of course using the HTTP setting in the camera to view and download images via a web browser is pretty easy too. I prefer running a server that can do some of the work for me. If you run a server you can send only the images you want. Combining the FTP software with a program like Hotfolder Prints from Breeze Systems will allow you to instantly print images sent from the camera, or you can use similar programs to show the images on a monitor to share with clients or friends.  You can connect to your iPad or iPhone with an awesome app called ShutterSnitch, it's very user friendly and allows for rating of photos with a slick interface that lets you move between images quickly.

I've been looking at some mounting options for this setup too.  I had a special plate added to a stroboframe flash bracket to hold the WT-4, of course that thing was huge so I don't need all that. I can see a simple use of Velcro holding the AP2403 and the battery to a small bracket that will attach to the tripod mount. I used to use Nikon's SK-7 to mount the extended range antenna for the WT-2 on my D2x. Another great thing I have is a brother-in-law that installs networks for a living so he can make me a cable a few inches long, so I'm hoping to mount it right off the side where the connection is maybe right in front of the sync port. Hope some of you out there can have fun with this and open up new doors for solving problems, or at least let the geek in you have a fun weekend project!

Feel free to leave comments if you have questions, I'll do my best to reply to them. I've also been chatting with many other users on dpreview on this topic in the D4 forums.

This entry was posted in Nikon D4 and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Blah

    Blah blah blah D400

    • D400

      Yeah I know

      • I’d be happy to learn more about the D400 if it’s got a chance of being a cheaper full frame option than the D800 line, as some have suspected. Unfortunately, I don’t think that’ll be the case.

        • it won’t folks, and please stop commenting off-topic.

    • D400

      this is certainly a welcome change from the usual “blah blah blah d800”

      • Except, at least the D800 was exciting and had a point.

  • Internet Explorer? Seriously?

    In all seriousness though, this is pretty sweet. You can get battery powered routers/switches that would combine your setup into one device, rather than relying on two.

    I am somewhat surprised though to see someone who could afford a D4 go for the cheap wifi solution. 😉

    • Calibrator

      He explains that:

      “As a working pro I will get the use out of it to make it worth the $800 investment, but I periodically book events that I would like to have 3 or more cameras transmitting images to the server computer and buying extras for a couple shoots a year isn’t worth it. ”

      Do the math.

      • Yeah….but Internet Explorer?

        • If it works with Internet Explorer, it can beat any failure.

        • Calibrator

          Yeah, true, but IE isn’t the cost factor here (there are enough equally cheap – and better – alternatives).

          • turdtaster

            What’s wrong with internet explorer. It does what all the other browsers do or wait macs must be better then pc and Canon must be better then Nikon too.. Grow up.

            • LOL.

              ..Oh wait, you’re serious? Ron named a few.

              No, it doesn’t do what all the other browsers do and what it does do, it barely eeks by.

        • B!

          Seriously? What’s wrong with Internet Explorer?

          People are so brainwashed they don’t even know why one is better than other.

          • IE doesn’t fully support the full CSS3 spec, nor has it supported any current CSS spec since CSS took hold over a decade ago.

            IE has an ancient rendering engine that introduces an astonishing number of quirks into development, and has a countless number of bugs that are well documented and at the same time completely unexplained (and unexplainable).

            IE (still) doesn’t adhere to web standards such as those laid out by the W3C, and for the majority of its life (I haven’t tested recently) IE has failed at tests like Acid2 and Acid3, where most other browsers pass with flying colors.

            Double margin bug. Peek-a-boo bug. Duplicate characters bug. Float model problem. Expanding box problem. Missing first letter bug. And on and on. These bugs aren’t just petty annoyances. They actually double typical front-end web-development.

            Yes. Double.

            This means that you can write custom markup and CSS for every other major browser, test, and launch; and then spend that much time again to work through the bugs that are unique to IE (which are even more unique to each version (i.e. IE5.5, IE6, IE7, IE8, IE9).

            Oh, and it’s the most vulnerable, insecure browser on the market. The truth is that IE is an antiquated, tired, abandoned (until recently), proprietary pile of garbage that has cost countless man-hours and millions of dollars to the world. We’re better off now that there is competition in the browser market, and ironically Microsoft is better off as well.

            Trust me, I know why IE doesn’t hold a candle to the other browsers. It’s my job.

            • Seriously, though — it was just a joke.

            • Like.

            • Duke

              No one care about your writing and your job, the fact is IE is still the most used browser. It works as it should.

            • “the fact is IE is still the most used browser”

              Barely. But times, they are a-changin’.

              Two independent, large sample sources:

              This is very good news to people like me whose job it is to make cross-browser/cross-platform content for the web. If you remember, a few short years ago IE was the king with over 2/3 usage dominance over all browsers. And a few years before that IE held a 90+ percent market share. See a trend?

              “It works as it should.”

              I’d love to hear your definition of “should”.

        • Richard

          Who knows whether there are actual software incompatibilities with other browsers? Sometimes software just says it wants to talk to IE. If that is all that is going on, it can be spoofed.

          It would be interesting if the author were to try an experiment with Firefox using the User <a href=""Agent Switcher Addon. If that works, it should work on a Mac as well. You just change the user agent identity to Internet Explorer (whatever version).

        • On a serious note, thanks to you Nick O’Donnell for posting these alternatives. I think they do have value for those that don’t need wi-fi or don’t want to justify the extra expense of the Nikon option.

          Also, one takeaway here — at least for me — is that the WT-5 is a much smaller and convenient solution. These solutions are great for the above mentioned, but for those who want something that just works AND fits nice in the bag, the WT-5 isn’t necessarily a bad purchase.

    • What’s wrong with IE? Feel free to use whatever web browser you want, I use Firefox.

  • Slowtrekker

    Hi Nick, can you control the camera from your computer, iPad or iPhone.

    • Yup, all you need to use the HTTP side of the setup is a web browser. Any phone or device you can connect to the same network with a web browser will do it. No App needed, The functionallity is built into the D4.

  • MichelCapture

    Eye-Fi sounds good.
    Why not run this on CF cards?

    Why is a MD unit just a batterypack?
    There is enough room for wifi cards and gps.
    Even phones have this standard.
    Nikon give us variou MD units: basic is battery only, pro is battery/ wifi/ gps. It is already 2012… You may want to add a data-phone card?

    • turdtaster

      Have you tried the range on those eye-fi cards while they are inside a cf converter inside the dslr.. you get about 1-2 feet of coverage. No thanks.

    • Eyefi cards suck for large files and anything beyond a few feet. Plus there is no way to get one into a D4, it’s only Cf Slot is CF1 not 2

  • How does this compare to an Eye-Fi set up? Faster? Seems a bit complicated compared to SD card wifi? However, if it is faster I would go for your solution.

    • RK

      eye-fi won’t give you remote live view this should

    • WAAAAY faster. You don’t have to use the eyefi software either. You can send Raw files and use the HTTP functions as well. This is lightyears beyond eyefi, costs less too!

  • Rob.k

    Have you tried drawing power from the mini usb on the D4 ?

    • DvD5

      Or from pin 3 of the 10 pin connector…

    • Nick

      Yup didn’t wok, bum…

  • Landscape Photo

    Why are people trying hard to find wireless solutions. Is it too hard to take the card out and stick in the computer’s slot when the day/session is finished?

    • turdtaster

      Why are you using a computer when you could write with pencil and paper.. and buy plane tickets to visit all the shops around the world to find something you are looking for. Why bother driving a car when you could walk there.. Why shower when you could….. oh nevermind

    • Using the FTP function can help you do some of the work ahead of time. You can also send files to an Ipad or similar device for others to view while you’re shooting. I’ve had several commercial jobs that this was a life saver. instead of having the talent and the execs looking over your shoulder on a 3in monitor they can see it on their own PC or tablet.

  • Srini

    How does the wireless connect? Is this an encrypted connection? Unencrypted or WEP connections are useless.

    • I don’t use WEP but you can as far as I remember. I’m not really concerned about it. No one ever knows I’m doing it wirelessly anyways!

      • wublili

        I do know.

        Same as the thousands of people reading you saying it.

        • Joe

          … and they are going to find where he shoots, show up to a shoot, hack his wifi and…. make copies of his images?

          OH NOES!!!

          • wublili

            If someone would have the interest to do it they would do it.

            Finding him wouldn’t take that much considering that he gives more than plenty information on his website, finding shooting location wouldn’t take much more that either, “hacking” unencrypted connection would take absolutely nothing, hacking WEP would take few minutes with injecting.

            It’s never wise to ignore security just because you assume there might not be anyone trying to bypass it.

            Not that it is likely to happen… But same said people back in 90s and even 2000s with their wifis… and cried after something went wrong.

      • Srini

        I’m afraid you are wrong. Either you use an encrypted wireless connection (WPA2/Psk ideally with a long passphrase) or you don’t. An unencrypted wireless connection or using a WEP is opaque. It takes just a few minutes to hack into such unprotected networks using a $10 tool (I would include WEP into such networks).

        I strongly recommend that you do not use wireless connection without protection. You are putting yourself into bigger risks.

        You may read this:,2981.html

        or please google “securing wireless networks” You won’t regret it!!!

        Please do not browse without protecting/securing your wireless connections.

      • Srini

        Using a secured wireless network is not only important for personal use but also extremely important if you are a professional making a living out of photography.

  • Ken Elliott

    I have extensive networking experience, and I can tell you the way this is setup won’t quite work for running multiple cameras to a single laptop. Here’s why and what needs to be done.

    First, a little network jargon. Many of us use a “wireless router” at home. This device is actually a router (connects your home network to the internet), a switch (multiple wired connection ports) and a wireless access point (AP). Generally, you run a single AP for a network and it acts as a central controller that broadcasts the network name and other details needed to connect. Your wireless devices see the AP, and connect to the AP. There are many devices that have built-in wireless radios (laptop, tablet, etc.) and there are small devices that connect a wired connection to the wireless network (usually sold for X-Box users). There must be at least one AP for a wireless network to function.

    In this case, the Powerlink AP2403 operates as a simple wireless device and needs to see an AP as Nick described above. When Nick enabled the AP function, it created (in effect) a new wireless network. So far so good. But if you want to add another Powerlink AP2403, if you turn on the AP function of the second Powerlink AP2403, it will become a separate network and your laptop will only connect to one or the other. One solution is to only activate the AP on ONE Powerlink AP2403, and let the others connect to it. This might work if the cameras are close enough to each other.

    A better solution may be to buy a battery-powered AP, like the Aluratek CDM530AM, then have all the other devices connect to it. This will form a single wireless network for all cameras and the laptop and/or tablet. It also means you might get better range because you can locate the AP where it works best, rather than it being stuck next to a single camera which might be some distance from the second or third camera.

    If you have AC power, then almost any wireless AP/Router will work. Some have external antenna connections so you can extend the range by adding a high-gain antenna.

    Here’s a good write-up on Rob Galbraith’s site.

    I should point out that some devices like laptops can form a peer-to-peer network to a second wireless device without using an AP. This is called an ad-hoc network. This won’t work for a multi-camera network.

    Nick, thanks for sharing. Good job.

  • btdown

    Um..that technically lexy link goes to facebook (lame)….not a website. facebook = no credibility.

    • I’ll vouch for him, he’s the most stand up guy I know. Aside from that the site is all about being frugal, facebook is free. You kind of missed the point there…

      • turdtaster

        btdown must be a hipster who thinks some weirdo with a blog online as more credibility then a pro with a facebook account..

  • Tom

    Nikon price gouges. $800 for a $40 solution. It’s a wireless transmitter. Like all of the other ones out there at Best Buy for $30. That’s $10 in parts on the wholesale market.

  • what upsets me is not the $800 price. what upsets me is that the WT5 works on the D4 and not the D800. I bought both cameras… i don’t want to buy a Wt4 and Wt5. especially when my d800 is in the studio and probably could use the most benefit of a wireless tethered shooting experience. I wonder if a wireless USB connector would work. i don’t even want to download the pics. i just want to display it on a bigger monitor.

    • Sly Larive

      Can’t you use the D800 screen?? What’s wrong with it???
      Oh.. Wait…

      All kidding aside, the green D800 screen could very well end up being a firmware fix. I’d love to be able to preview my images on a screen without going through so many hoops… In 2012 I would’ve expected a better solution from Nikon, streamlined for all their cameras.

      I have an Eye-Fi card but geez, takes forever to get the complete file (if you want to check for details)…

    • I agree, but I got over it quickly. Get the WT-4 it works just the same and it’s half the price used.

  • simpleguy

    could it be used as a field monitor for video as well ?

  • Michael FirstLight

    Still, this alternative wi-fi solution is only 1/4 the transfer speed of a wireless USB 2.0 dongle pair solution that costs only $50 and doesn’t require a network.

    • Would a USB dongle solution work?

    • USB has a rather clunky battery setup, if you’ve got a more slick setup for using the HTTP and FTP functions I’d love to hear about it.

    • Anthony

      Don’t miss the fact that *you* acquiring both of these devices *today* will in fact cost you >$80.*

      The article is hard to follow, but it sounds as though the author didn’t actually come up with practical way of using this Goldberg contraption. Mention is made of paying someone to modify a flash bracket — which is then described as too bulky. Mention is made of hanging it off a tripod, which would mean that you’re effectively tethered to the tripod, which doesn’t seem to hold any advantage over just using a copper Ethernet connection to a laptop.

      Velcroing it to the side of an already-large camera also sounds like an awkward and failure-prone strategy.

      • Nick

        Anthony, while i’m certainly no english professor I assure you I know what I’m talking about. Do a search on Amazon or ebay for the model numbers of the devices and you’ll find similar prices. There are other alternatives, feel free to search out what you want.

        Using this allows me to be wherever I want not within 5 ft of the computer. Attaching it to a bracket attaches it to the camera so I can roam around rooms I’m shooting in. If I had a session I was shooting with a tripod, say with a ringlight or something, I could send the images into the office while my assistant edits the images to provide to the client minutes after theyre shot. You’re really missing the point of what I’m doing and why I wrote this article. I wrote it to help others, if you don’t care for what’s written here write your own article. And let us all know when you do, I’m sure we’ll head over there and leave pleasant comments.

        Being rude to others is a failure-prone strategy.

  • Tom Powers

    One could use wireless HDMI but those solutions are expensive too.

  • Sean Schult

    I’ve been using a solution like this for years with my D300. Someone mentioned that the range of the eye-fi while in a CF adapter is terrible, and this is true. My solution to this was to get a D-Link travel router (DWL-G730AP) and couple it to a USB battery in similar manner to the article. They are rubber banded together, connected with a 6″ cable, and live on my belt, together just slightly larger than a pack of cigarettes. This makes me a walking access point. The distance between the access point and the eye-fi is always the length of my arm, so it always works good. The distance between the access point and the computer actually receiving the files is subject to the normal wifi spec of 300ft.

    For the non-networking folks, this means the purpose of the belt pack is to “bounce” the weaker eye-fi signal to the more distant laptop. It gets about 3.5 hours of service per battery.

  • Nice idea. I love high tec on the cheap.

    • Nick


  • Esh

    Why purchase and wear an Armani suit but buy the tie, belt and shoes from JC Penny?

    • Nick

      A black suit can be worn with any color shirt and tie, the suit makes the man not the tie. The D4 makes amazing files, if this solution does the same as an $800 version I’d like to keep the money.

    • Don

      I’m sorry, but this is not a good anology. It’s like saying, I bought a super computer and, by God, I’m going to spend a lot of money on the LAN cable. A normal CAT5 or CAT6 is not good enough for me. THey are selling the same cable for $1000 and it works great and I’m a professional, so, I’m not going to buy a $20 cable. No sirree. I’m buying the $1000 cable. People, wake up. It’s really not that much difference.
      Nikon, and I’m a hugh fan, is playing off your ignorance.

      • Don

        Please don’t misunderstand me. I am NOT saying the Eye-Fi connection is the same. I AM saying if you use a wireless interface off the Ethernet connection, it’s the same!

  • Hendog

    What about a cheap WiFi solution for the D800?

    • Nick

      You can use the Eyefi cards since it has an SD slot. The key thing with the D4 that allows me to do this setup is the ethernet port.

  • Vagabond mini and wifi router? Like $350 total and use it for other things too.

    • Nick

      I’m sure that would work, you’ll need the wifi router and the AP2403 to make this setup work.

  • D700guy

    “I purchased my D4 the day they were released along with the WT-5 and it’s a great tool…”

    I purchased mine the day they were released too, and I’m still waiting for it to be shipped.

  • Joaquim Prado

    Peter, any hint on this stock problem from Nikon? Digitalrev still have th D800 in stock but at a absurd price and also have the D4 at 7.5k! all US dealer still out of stock yet?


  • jeff

    All this shows is how Nikon is gouging on the price of their solution. What makes this worse is that, the parts shown here are available to you and I at these prices. Nikon, who presumably buys cheaper since they buy more in a day then any of us will in twenty lifetimes. The bottom line is, this shows that the technology is neither cutting edge nor expensive. If we can do it for less than $50, they could (some might argue should) have included it in the price of the D4. And don’t even start using the excuse of the different standards. Many devices work in more than one country. They simply require a change of a setting and you are good to go.

    Incidentally, while I understand the psychology of charging 99 cents for a product instead of a dollar, I really have to laugh at the D4’s $5999.99 price tag in the US. Anyone spending that much cash knows that they are paying $6000. Nobody is fooled. So why bother? It seems childish to me.

  • R!

    Just wanted to say hi!!!!!

  • Kraaaazyyy

    I would never attach a $50 device to a $6000 camera for the same reason I don’t put cheap tires on my Ferrari or sleep with cheap hookers – it’s simply embarrassing.

  • Eric Palmer

    If you want to have an even cheaper router do a search on ebay for
    “Mini Wireless Pocket Router” There is one there for 18$ with free worldwide freight..
    I’m having a go at it as i live in Sweden and i cant get the Powerlink here, mail me and ill keep you updated if it works! percypalmer(a)

  • Don

    The inexpensive alternatives are almost endless. When you come out of that ethernet connection it really doesn’t matter if is a wire or wireless. The camera doesn’t give a rats patudy. You are bound only by the speed of the wireless interface you choose, and there are plenty of fast ones.

    • Mohit

      Has anyone tried the Sapido MB-1132 3G/4G Mobile Hotspot w/ High Capacity Built-in Rechargeable Batteries. The benefit of this one is it has a 6 hr battery built in.

      • JerryPHcom

        I bought one a year ago.. yes it works a charm! Do a youtube search for Sapido and JerryPHcom to see the video of one in action.

  • Thanks, Nick, for the write-up.

    “I’ve used it in HTTP mode and FTP mode and it works exactly as the WT-5 does.”

    In HTTP mode, the D4 allows the photographer to ‘(u)sing a web browser via computer or iPhone, show thumbnails of images stored in the camera’s memory cards, or … view images’ [from

    How speedy is the process? Let’s say you’ve just shot 20 images followed by another 10, how quickly can you view the full set, using HTTP mode?

    Is the viewing process constrained solely by the D4 buffer clearing & CF card writing? Or is it constrained by 100Base-T?

    How large are the thumbnails?

    No need to buy a speedy router, yes? Any speed over 100Base-T will work as well as a faster router, yes?

  • de Paula FJ

    The main point in this post is not if this Nick’s wi-fi solution is the best or the worst one, but, for show us that have many others possibilities to obtain one wi-fi connection, in the future, with a low price. The Nikon WT-5 for $800 certainty is overpriced and needs to be update.
    If you accept this price then pay for this, but remember: the world change with ideas not with our money.

    • Nick

      Thank you! Someone gets it! I want to open up possibilities for others, that’s why I wrote it

  • In Europe (at least here in the Netherlands) there’s an alternative that’s quite easy to get as hotspot around €20-€25, which is the TP-link TL-WR702N. Here’s the URL
    Hope this is not the same quality as the TP in Beavis & Butthead 😉

    As for a simple USB charger/back-up battery there’s a lot of choice here, so it all depends on how hungry the hotspot is as to how long the juice keeps flowing. I’d 3M Velcro the two to eachother and then use one of these retractable UTP cables to get the connection to any of the Nikon camera’s that’s supposed to support it.

    Does anyone have experience with this solution with for instance the D300s?

    • Nick

      That looks to be a router only. You need a router and the AP, the only way this works is attaching your AP to the D4. The D300 and all other Nikon cameras are USB for data transfer, the D4 has Ethernet also which makes this setup work.

      • lock

        No, this is thingie is AP (standard mode), Client, Router, Repeater and Bridge, all at the size of a flat matchbox.

        • Nick

          If it is, then go for it and let us know how it goes! I didn’t see the AP spec when I glanced at it.

          • Nick

            LOL! I did look at it before! but I couldnt read it so I missed where it said AP. Yeah it looks to be the same kind of device as the AP2403. Do let us know if it works, would be great to know for our friends across the pond!

  • ACon


    Thanks for posting this. I love alternative options like this. I have a quick question that I hope is not too stupid. Can you use your setup to remote control the camera and select focus points? I would love to setup my D4 so I can move the focus point (remotely) and trigger the shutter for wildlife photography. Right now, I use a pocketwizard setup and have to pre-select my focus area, and then fire the D4 via my PW when my subject matter appears. However, my success rate would significantly increase if I could move the focus point off an iPad or iPhone and then fire the camera.

    • Nick

      Good news is yeah I’m pretty sure you can. You will be able to do most of the stuff you would like it’s in live view. I have used it and I know I focused it, but I think the points are setup a tad differently. Like the autofocus that’s used in video mode. Bad news is you’ll need to be in wifi range. so if you plan to be out in the woods you’ll need a battery powered router to travel out there. Of course if it’s your back yard that might be pretty easy to setup. Maybe just put the wifi router on the back porch. Good luck!

      • ACon

        Yeah, about that requirement to be in range of a WiFi network….
        Is there a way to use something like a battery powered MiFi (if they make one with an ethernet connection) to do this? That way you could be anywhere outdoors (within cell phone signal), pull down a 3G or 4G signal, and the MiFi could link to the D4 and bridge to an iPhone or tablet. Is this possible?

        BTW, does the Nikon WT-5 also require a WiFi network or can it communicate directly with an iPhone/tablet without a network for camera control purposes (not uploading photos)?

        • Nick

          I don’t see why the mifi things wouldnt work. They are a wifi netowrk right? it just needs the network to give the signal to so it can be sent to the pc, just needs it to do the transfer thats all. Plus it’s a lot easier to do than an Adhoc connection. The wt-5 can do adhoc (without the wifi network) to a pc, but again, with the options for a very small router for $20-30 that’s gong to sit next to your pc its worth not having the headaches. It can’t do a connection directly to the ipad/iphone to control within the HTTP functions. you have to have the Ipad/phone on the network with the camera…

  • SirInnesPort

    Hey Nick,

    Sorry if someone has already asked this but I didn’t read all 83 comments in detail. Do you always need to be in range of another wi-fi network for this setup to work? I read in your post that you need to initially have another wi-fi network for setup purposes, but I’m a little confused if you always need it there. I would love the freedom of using this setup in the field.


    • Nick

      Hey Tucker, Yup you’ll need a wifi network. The AP2403 talks to the router and it sends the info to the server on the computer. You may be able to do an adhoc network but I don’t know how to do that. What are you looking to do? if you’re outside and have battery power for the computer it might be easier to just tether to the computer. You can also run the router on a battery, and there are several that have batteries built in. Soome good info is on Rob Galbraith’s site DPI.

      Here’s a link:

      He mentions one that takes a NP something or other battery and those are really cheap and easy to get, a few of those would last a long shoot for me.

      • SirInnesPort

        Thanks for the info!

        I do a lot of on location shoots where I’ll be moving around enough that a wired tether would be a pain in the ass, unless I hire an assistant to ravel/unravel a wire like the guys you see at NFL games lol. I’ll figure something out with the info you supplied, thanks again!

  • Bruce McFarland

    Hi was checking out this device and wanted to see if my still-back-ordered D800 had an Ethernet port as the author claims about the D4.
    I couldn’t find any Ethernet port on the D800, so I went to see it on the the D4, and couldn’t find it there either.
    Is there an Ethernet Port on the D4?
    Why doesn’t it state it on

    • I have a D4. Yes, there is an Ethernet port. I’ve seen photos of the Ethernet port on the D800. My D800E is on order.
      I bought an IOGear GWU627 wifi bridge, a USB power device, and a wifi access point, and I can shoot into my laptop with it, but my phone can’t find the IOGear device. Does anyone have a wifi bridge that their phone recognizes?

  • Nick

    Nikons only camera with Ethernet is the D4 the 800 is without.

  • Hello,

    I highly recommend a mission critial Cradlepoint ( brand router to connect any number of cameras, or Wi-Fi devices, to the web while on the go. I constantly use a CTR-500 which has both Ethernet, USB and PCIex ports for 3G/4G, supporting load balancing or connection failover and supporting 256 Ethernet connections or 32 via Wi-Fi. Most important these mobile routers are super secure and are standard across multiple businesses, good example been the banking industry (majority of small ATM’s have these routers inside).

    How to connected your camera? If it has SD reader, use a Eye-Fi card. If it has compact flash, get a SD to CF converter and use the Eye-Fi. Set it up to connect to the router. If you use any of the suggested Wi-Fi devices, do the same: Connect them to the web via a Cradlepoint. Again, it can handle 32 simultaneous Wi-Fi connections. More than enough for you and friends or a small office or on the go event.

    There are other more limited and less secure hotspots like the popular MiFi2200, but that only allows for 5 Wi-Fi simultaneous connections. Hope this helps and enjoy!

  • philip

    didnt work for me —–

    tew 654tr didnt do it — nikon d4 mac firefox didnt do it — nada — sucks —

  • Dan at Vigorotaku

    I use a Netgear WNCE2001 and Mophie Powerstation Gen 2 which works quite well.
    D4 Wireless Tethering,

  • Aditya Kapoor

    I just got an Asus WL 330 NUL and for the life of me cannot seem to figure out how to use it. Asus says that this is an all in one device that can work as in acces point mode, but I cannot seem to find a way to start access point mode, and dont know how to set it up! I have tried more or less all possible settings. If I leave the D4 to obtain IP address automatically, the address it takes is with a mask of
    I cannot log into this IP address form any browser on my iPad or on my laptop.

    Any advice?

  • Zach Goodyear

    I ordered a Powerlink adapter and couldn’t get it to work, I think the Powerlink device I received may have been a dud – the switch was very flimsy.

    I was able to get the same results for about the same cost ($43.49) with a similarly sized (slightly shorter, but slightly wider and a tad thicker) IOGEAR GWU627 Universal WiFi Adapter. For me, the IOGEAR was MUCH easier to setup than the Powerlink and had very easy instructions included that were written in clear English complete with photos and screen shots. The Powerlink never did work for me and I spent a couple hours fiddling with it. The IOGEAR was setup in about 90 seconds. I bought the IOGEAR GWU627 for $32.50 on Amazon.

    To configure it to my existing WiFi network, I just turned the WiFi off on my computer, connected the IOGEAR GWU627 to my computer via the included ethernet cable, made a couple of temporary adjustments to my network settings (all easily laid out in the included instructions) and then disconnected, returned my computer’s network settings to normal and hooked it up to my Nikon D4s and when I typed in the network IP address shown on my D4s, it worked flawlessly.

    I also bought an Innogie PPM 220 battery (3200mAh capacity) to go with it. It’s a bit heavier than other batteries I have, but with 3200mAh, I expect it should last a day of shooting with no problem. $10.99 on Amazon.

  • Back to top