New Nikon D500 firmware update coming at the end of March to address Snapbridge issues with iOS 10.2.1

After the latest SnapBridge update, Nikon released the corresponding firmware updates only for the D3400 and D5600 cameras but not for the D500. The D500 firmware update should be released at the end of March according to this email response from Nikon tech support email (the latest version of Snapbridge is reportedly not working with the D500 and iOS 10.2.1):

Yes, a new firmware update for the D500 is in the works and should be released by the end of March to address the connection issues users were having with iOS versions 10 and above. We have the new, updated version of Snapbridge to address the issue as well.

This entry was posted in Nikon D500 and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • gggsnqqq

    how come snapbridge cannot pair more than one camera at the same time?

    • Sawyerspadre

      Can Bluetooth pair to more than one device at a time? The Bluetooth in the phone would need to do that.

      • MB

        Actually there is Bluetooth multipoint feature …

        • KnightPhoto

          Like to know more, I have two D500… (Android BlackBerry).

          Also has anybody got their Android behaviour improved with last weeks Android SnapBridge update?

          • MB

            Unfortunately Bluetooth multipoint isn’t implemented by Nikon …

            • KnightPhoto

              Thank you

            • Sawyerspadre

              Also, it seems Multipoint is mostly implemented for having a Bluetooth device, like your car infotainment system paired to two phones.

              Maybe Nikon should focus on making one camera and one mobile device work together flawlessly.

              Job one is to make Snapbridge do what they are already marketing, in a reliable and intuitive way.

      • gggsnqqq

        Wifi then, my point is some users use two cameras at the same time and if nikon is serious about snapbridge they should let snapbridge sync photos at the same time…….. no?

  • manattan

    How about electronic first curtain shutter available in Qc mode?
    How about D5-style continuously lightening up focus points in use during shooting?
    How about just putting out a better explanations of new features like the metering and AF systems then making everyone experiment to find what works for them?
    How about soliciting feedback from D500 users on what other improvements they would like to see?

    • Troy Phillips

      Yes Nikon start listening to the users and what your Nikon products owners want. New Nikon motto should be : “Be like Fuji ” or better . Maybe “be better than Fuji”

  • gggsnqqq

    BTW what nikon should do

    1. Phone (collaboration with another mid-tier Android maker, perhaps HTC?)
    2. 2 mirrorless (one low-end, one high-end looks like small DSLR to replace the D3xxx line)
    3. 2 DX (D7300 & D500)
    4. 3 FX (D7xx, D8xx, D5)

    That’s it

    • Allen_Wentz

      Why do you recommend Nikon to enter an intensely competitive new field (phones) that has hundreds of existing competitors and few (if any) of the vendors using free unsupported Android making money? A field that focuses on what Nikon does most poorly (consumer software interaction)?

      • RC Jenkins

        And that’s just bullet point #1. πŸ™‚

        I don’t get #2 (a high-end mirrorless to replace the low-end D3xxx line…?) They’d be better served with a photo-centric & a video-centric mirrorless, and concentrate on establishing a mirrorless lens ecosystem. Get some real photographers & build the brand before trying to replace the entry-level D3xxx line. D3xxx users are probably the least likely to hop to a mirrorless Nikon. They buy D3xxx specifically because they’re DSLRs.

        And we also don’t need a new D500, D5, or D7xx this year. Maybe not even a D7300. Some quality DX lenses would improve IQ & push sales more than a new camera; and the D5 & D7xx are fine as they are for now.

        With limited resources, Nikon needs to concentrate on:
        -producing a winning mirrorless syste
        -producing a high resolution, low base ISO D810 replacement
        -maintaining it’s lens ecosystem, particularly DX lenses to help the D500 and others. Fast (F/2.8 or better) DX lenses that are smaller & cost significantly less than FX.

        • Max

          Who are D3xxx users?
          They are mostly people buying a first dslr or maybe they had a d3100 or d40 and are still buying the same line. The second scenario is rapidly shrinking.
          The most likely place they are “hopping to” is not buying a camera at all again, unless there’s something they find really neat and cool and interesting at $700.
          Mirrorless cameras typically have longer feature lists that may appeal to them and get them to buy (4k, 20fps, focus peaking, more modern (or retro) styling etc.
          I’m speaking from what I hear around me every day.

          • RC Jenkins

            “High end” mirrorless cameras are typically in the $1500 price range (give or take $500) and would also use a new mount (ie. new lenses).

            Do you think the D3xxx users (either new or existing) are going to be the first pioneers & major purchasers of these cameras in this price range, to be followed by pros & enthusiasts?

            Or do you think that the enthusiast & above would be the first major purchasers?

            You may be speaking from experience, but those cameras already exist and are relatively established: Micro four thirds, Sony alphas, etc. Those people you hear around you every day should have already bought a camera if they needed one. I did. If/when Nikon releases a high end mirrorless that matches what I need, I’ll consider it.

            As a reminder, Nikon has already released mirrorless cameras comparable to the D3x00 series (and better in some respects) that have on-sensor PDAF, 60fps, retro styling, etc. So Nikon already has this offering.

            • Max

              No, replacing D3xxx with a high-end mirrorless doesn’t make sense (and I confess I didn’t notice the OP said that).
              I think replacing it with something like and EOS M5 makes sense.

              About D3xxx users being the first to purchase these cameras, yes in a big way they will. The technology will get better and then the pros using D5’s will use mirrorless when it is responsive enough, big enough lens selection and when it gets the ergonomics treatment from Nikon and Canon as per their current pro layouts.

              The trick for this market is still either in marketing the products and designing them in a way that people want them in spite of their smartphones.

            • RC Jenkins

              I do still disagree with you to an extent, but I also think that your argument here makes perfect sense. The whole market is a bit up in the air, and the only “right answer” will be a 20/20 retrospect of what actually worked after the fact. So we won’t know until then. πŸ™‚

              As a side-note: The Canon M5 costs $1000 (body only).

              And the mirrorless cameras I was referring to were the Nikon 1’s. πŸ™‚ These were mirrorless cameras that did the whole ‘consumer’ and ‘prosumer’ thing with the J1 & V1. There’s no reason Nikon couldn’t continue this line to (continue to) meet the needs of the ‘D3xxx’ consumer within the same price range. They could do great with great lenses that take advantage of their size to reduce price and weight. But these lenses don’t exist today. Nobody wants a 1″ sensor with an F/3.5-5.6 lens when they could just buy a Sony RX100.

              From my perspective, compacts like the Sony RX100, Panasonic GF7 (micro four thirds), Sony a6000, Sony NEX series, etc. are formidable competition in this (declining & crowded) ‘consumer’ space.

              More advanced or ‘graduated’ users want a larger sensor, which only offers advantages over Nikon 1 if the consumer gets faster lenses–which means more money & weight that the ‘entry level’ consumer often go for. A larger sensor with slower glass offers no real benefits over a smaller sensor with faster glass.

              But these cameras are much more rare today. There aren’t really any great mirrorless full-frame 4k video cameras; nor are there many advanced, mirrorless full-frame still cameras. If full-frame has a mirrorless future, it will be among enthusiasts & pro’s who spend the money, get the fast lenses, and build the reputation like the Sony A7 series has been doing. Just my 2 cents.

            • manattan

              Nikon does not need mirrorless to the extent that other manufacturers do, as their top end DSLRs are amazing. What Nikon should focus on is what a mirrorless camera can do better than a DSLR. I was watching golf on TV and my mind immediately went to a mirrorless camera. Where is the D5M that is useful for these shots? IMHO Nikon should just keep a DSLR body and make a mirrorless offshoot that highlights mirrorless advantages like video via the EVF, silent shooting for golf, etc. but keeps the F mount. That is the correct market move for Nikon, but it remains to be seen if they are smart enough to accomplish this,

            • KnightPhoto

              Not disputing your main point to which I agree, just adding that the D4, D4S, and D5 all have a silent mode that shoots high frame rates (20 or 30fps depending on model). A number of conditions apply – it’s LiveView and therefore CDAF, is best used with a Hoodman, jpeg only, and small res 2mp D4/D4S and 5 megapixel D5 but it does work. Liked it a lot on my D4, like to see it on additional cameras and with OSPDAF and NEF someday.

            • RC Jenkins

              The Nikon 1’s do 60 FPS NEF with OSPDAF (20FPS in AF-C). πŸ™‚

              But according to their falling market share, Nikon may need mirrorless more than other manufacturers. I’m not disputing that the top end DSLR’s are amazing–I think most of Nikon’s cameras are great (which is why I own & love my multiple Nikon DSLR’s).

              But Nikon now has only half of the DSLR market share that Canon has (60% vs. 30%). Just 2 years ago, it was 55% & 40%. And Nikon also dropped to 3rd in lenses sold, behind Canon & Sigma.

              There are plenty of benefits of mirrorless cameras beyond EVF and on-sensor PDAF (both of which can cleverly be done in a DSLR in live-view mode). And I think it would be great if Nikon added these to a DSLR in live-view. Problem solved, and Nikon would continue to offer an amazing, next generation DSLR.

              But I also think it’s time for a mirrorless that actually takes advantage of mirrorless benefits like thinner & shorter bodies, and simpler / less expensive design. Get rid of the:
              -Giant cavity for the mirror
              -Pentaprism & large hump
              -Focusing screen
              -Dedicated PDAF & exposure modules and bottom bulge.

              That’s significant parts & manufacturing savings. Adapting F-mount lenses (or any other DSLR lenses) would be trivial. Nikon could throw in an adapter for free for promotion. Give it a selectable rangefinder style OVF / EVF like the Fuji X-Pro’s so that the sensor isn’t always on. Full Frame. Get rid of menus & add some analog knobs.

              All that, and you’d be left with a great Fuji & Leica competitor. A full-frame, $1000-, smaller, analog, rangefinder-style Nikon. Without the Fuji RAW complications or the Leica price-tag. With a few inexpensive fast primes (24, 35/40, 50/58, 100), since they’re easier to design due to a larger throat diameter.

              That’s different, and it’s back to something interesting: involved photography. I’d buy that in a heartbeat for street shooting and portraits.

              And use that same mount to make something for the video crowd.

            • gggsnqqq

              the low-end mirrorless is to stop bleeding in that market segment (people want something better than their phone but not willing to pay much more, e.g. d3xxx, d5xxx buyers), the high-end mirrorless is to entice those willing to buy DL.

              if nikon can do that by refreshing the “1” line, good, otherwise, just go with something totally fresh is also ok and maybe good in terms of marketing.

              a lot of people only judge base on anecdotes and personal experience, i’m speaking in terms of the board market on how Nikon would survive AND THRIVE in the long-term.

              but we may all agree that there’s a serious lack of DX lens (from Nikon, 3rd parties are coming with quite interesting offers) and the KM should be dropped like a hot coal.

            • Max

              I knew you spoke of the Nikon 1 line and yes, pros wouldn’t go with a 1″ sensor, but it would’ve been interesting to see peoples reaction (and the results) if Nikon took a chance and made a pro quality 10-25 f/1.8 lens and also a similar quality 30-70 f1.8.

            • RC Jenkins

              I agree, I’d love to see them….
              …but they’d need to price them appropriately, and it could be too late now unless they ‘relaunch’ the 1.

              The only lens I own on my Nikon 1 is the ‘normal prime’ $200 (list) 18.5mm F/1.8. This costs the same as a ‘normal prime’ full frame 50mm F/1.8! That’s incredibly steep for this lens.

              I somehow couldn’t justify spending the $900 32mm F/1.2 portrait lens that puts out a tiny 1″ image circle…I could just throw on a $200 35mm F/1.8 DX for cheaper. What was Nikon thinking?

              On my Panasonic GM1 (micro four thirds), I have several F/1.7 lenses, including a stabilized 42.5mm F/1.7 (portrait lens) that cost less than half the Nikon 1 equivalent. Look this camera up: this camera & its lenses are smaller, thinner, & cheaper than the Nikon 1…and it has a sensor that’s twice as big as the Nikon 1!

            • Thom Hogan

              You mean like the now cancelled DL models ;~).

            • Thom Hogan

              Well, we can wait for the market to finally figure out the answer, or we can actually use brains, training, experience, and data to figure out the right product now.

              As I’ve tried to point out, the camera makers thought they just made sophisticated boxes based on past product that they just kept added features (and pixels) to. That’s not what those producing the most images wanted.

              Remember, smartphone users are about where compact cameras were in the 90’s. Small sensor produces noise that becomes unignorable in certain situations, the lens(es) is limited, etc. The whole (original) Instagram thing was to use heavy-handed post processing to create something other than a poor, restricted image.

              Smartphones have gotten better, for sure, but there’s still a long gap between what they can do image wise and that of a dedicated camera. There should be plenty of opportunity for camera makers to sell products to the billions of smartphone users, but…

              Thinking that you just offer them what you’ve been doing is not the correct approach. As I’ve tried to point out both the in-camera and post-camera workflow is atrocious and hasn’t been updated to the modern era.

            • RC Jenkins

              Yeah. People don’t want to carry a camera unless there’s a compelling reason to do so.

              I think one good example Nikon can learn from is the m4/3 Panny GF7. It’s pocketable, got a tilty, selfie screen, Wifi, etc. Most people will shoot with this & share via phone. That means the only lenses people will buy for this are tiny, fast ones. They want shallow DoF and low light performance better than their phones, but they don’t want to carry a DSLR.

              I have a similar (but smaller) Panny GM1 that’s far better than my Nikon 1. I take it everywhere and share ‘flat’ pictures with friends immediately so that they can edit on their phones. They love it, and a few have asked me about buying one. The camera is smaller than my phone and about as thick as my (thin) wallet. πŸ™‚

              So casually today, my phone has become my connected hub & portable image editor (because it will always be ahead of cameras in software), and my GM1 is my flat, RAW image capturing device. The differentiator is shallow DoF, focal length, and low light. If Nikon designed & marketing for this workflow and these features, they may make some progress.

            • Tony Beach

              It recently occurred to me that the way to drive iteration sales is to reverse the current approach. Instead of giving away cheap zooms with new cameras, give away cheap cameras with new lenses. Keep the kit around $500, and a couple of times a year come out with a new interesting lens that will come with a camera for an extra $100 for a limited time (after that just keep selling the lens).

            • Thom Hogan

              To some degree, that’s correct. The constant iteration of the low end model from the D50 to the current D3400 has built a pretty incredible camera, but the camera features aren’t really the thing that people are looking at. It’s mostly image quality and lens capability. So the “simple box” approach is probably correct. Indeed, if we go back to the whole start of the SLR craze, that’s what sold (remember the simple Pentax Spotmatic?).

            • ZoetMB

              For a number of reasons already discussed here many times, the Nikon1 line was a failure. Maybe it was because of the small sensor (it should have been DX, IMO, because it was overpriced, because the accessories weren’t compatible with the DSLR line, because the video wasn’t great or because there was better competition. But it certainly appears that Nikon is done with that line.

              I think Nikon does need a mirrorless, but no matter what they do, there are going to be complaints, which is probably why they haven’t done it. If they keep the F-mount, it’s not going to be small, which also means it’s not going to be light. And if they keep the F-mount, they need a whole new line of F-mount lenses that are smaller and lighter, but are still relatively fast. If they don’t keep the F-mount, there will be complaints about the lack of compatibility: “Nikon is crazy, I’m not buying new lenses”.

              I will say this: I’d love a lighter kit. I was shooting a show yesterday and my 1 body, 4 lens kit with monopod, flash, bracket and a bunch of other accessories was killer in weight, even though I took one lens and a few other things out of the bag. I’m going to Sweden in May and even though I always prefer everything with me, I just might have to bite the bullet and take one body, just two lenses and nothing else.

            • Thom Hogan

              The M5 is still a US$1000 camera. That’s not going to work for a D3400 replacement that’s mirrorless.

          • gggsnqqq

            you get it somewhat, the market is going mirrorless to replace low-end dslr, some old people still buy dslr because that’s the thing they know, with a little marketing nikon can push them towards the mirrorless market..

            mirrorless no need to be new, nikon can refresh the nikon 1 line.

            the point of mirrorless line is, with the reduced material cost, nikon can put in more gimmick features e.g. 60fps, 4k video, which cannot be done with low-end dslr.

            anyhow, between d3xxx or d5xxx, nikon should keep absolutely only one going forward.

            • Max

              That’s exactly what I meant

          • Thom Hogan

            Well yes, but.

            Camera companies need something that’s compelling to folk that want to try something beyond their smartphone. It has to be smallish, highly competent in image quality, give a full range of lens options, and it must be priced affordably for millennials. It also needs to tie into their social networking decently, likely through their smartphone (e.g. SnapBridge).

            But watering the entry camera down and throwing training wheels on it is probably the wrong choice (e.g. D3400). Moreover, Nikon has clearly run out of ideas going that route, anyway, so the upgraders really have no reason to upgrade.

            A mirrorless entry that replaces the D3400 is likely to resonate with both audiences IF (that’s a big IF) Nikon manages to think this through correctly. Canon seems more attuned in the camera sense (e.g. M5, though it’s priced too high). Nikon’s SnapBridge approach was more promising for the social aspect, but totally botched in first release.

            There’s still plenty of opportunity in the entry ILC market. Everyone’s been randomly targeting niche audiences in weird ways. There was the “Asia Chase,” the “Camera for the Ladies” approach, the “Let’s Make it Red” idea, and a whole host of other failed niching going on.

            The entry ILC is NOT a niche camera. It’s an entry product into more sophisticated possibilities. It should be a basic, functional, engaging, simple product that leaves the user eventually wanting more, but does the job at hand well. It does not need 4K video, it does not need 20 fps, it does not need a feature set that scrolls for pages. It needs to take stills and videos highly competently, and do so for US$500. In a small and light package that can work with your smartphone. With plenty of lens options to hook you into the system.

            • manattan

              So basically a DXO One then

            • Thom Hogan

              Well, no. The DxO One certainly has the lens/sensor combo, but everything else about it is pretty much bulloxed. I was thinking more along the lines of an FM2 type of approach: simple, not feature cluttered, direct control.

        • SteveWithAnS

          With a $1000 price tag for a Nikon 10-16mm F/2.8 for a DX body, I’d just buy the Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8 for $425 again…but mine still works just fine on my D500. I don’t get the huge emphasis on F/2.8 for an ultrawide lens unless you were shooting astrophotography in which case it seems like the D750 would be a much better choice anyway.

          • RC Jenkins

            I can understand and appreciate that–and I own (and have owned for years) the Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8 as well πŸ™‚

            My thought process behind the 10-16 for $1000 is to offer similar advanced quality to the 14-24mm F/2.8 FX lens. They can improve resolution, distortion, corners, etc. when compared to the Tokina. The Tokina is great, but it has plenty of limits. That budget would give Nikon more room to get high technical IQ in the corners. Ultra-wides should be technically sharp corner-to-corner with a lot of elements, while this isn’t as important in a portrait lens, for example.

            People will make the choice on whether or not it’s worth it, just like they do between that $2000 14-24 and the $250 Samyang 14mm f/2.8 (both of which are very highly regarded).

            And I’d guess that they could make a few sales of that and the other lenses I listed.

            I think that’s a key issue with their DX line. What’s the point of the format if the only lenses for it are either slow or expensive&heavy FX lenses? What benefits does a DX with an F/3.5 lens offer over a 1″ with an F/1.8 lens?

            All of those lenses should be significantly smaller and cheaper (about half price) than the FX counterparts while closing the gap between the formats. And I’d think & hope that would be welcome by consumers.

            • SteveWithAnS

              Sure they could make a much superior lens to the Tokina 11-16mm, but I think people that really get a hardon for landscapes would probably want to buy a D810/820 and the Nikon 14-24mm or 16-35mm F/4. I think that most DX users are probably content with a kit lens at 18mm for wide angle shots. I think a lot of DX users would just rather use a phone to take pictures if they have to start thinking about $1,000 lenses and that they wouldn’t sell well and that is why Nikon doesn’t make them. I agree the option would be nice, but I don’t think it’s likely to happen.

          • The sharpness of the 11-16 is still just astounding to me. I sold my first one, but eventually came back and bought a new one again.

      • Nikon has some very good mojo that could be applied to the signal chain of cameras with sensors/lenses designed by something else. That’s how they use “Sony” sensors. They could be licensing this tech, and if it works well, it would increase the stature of the both Nikon and whoever they collaborate with. And maybe they could get some decent phone software in trade?

        • gggsnqqq


      • gggsnqqq

        it’s mainly not for profit making but brand recognition and hopefully some synergy. just like Leica for Huawei and Carl Zeiss for Sony.

        • Allen_Wentz

          Nikon has GREAT brand recognition. IMO denigrating the brand by involving with some midlevel Android junk is much more likely than adding “brand recognition.”

          • Allan


  • sickheadache

    This hurts my head…it makes u wonder if Nikon actually tested CrapBridge…in real world testing…better yet Nikonions…don’t use it..if u don’t need major headaches…lol

  • Will this make it so my damn D500 will actually connect via wifi with Android Nougat? I haven’t been able to successfully connect either of my phones running Nougat with anything but bluetooth. Which means no live view, and slow as mole asses transfers.

  • I guess we wont live up to see AF-C D9 option in upgrade just like the D5 users got…

  • gorji

    I doubt this will fix it. NIkon is very weak in the software. VERY weak.

  • Semaphore

    Using wifi to transfer photos is just an inherently glitchy idea because of the way phones handle wifi connections. Nikon doesn’t have the software prowess to bring them under control.

    Frankly I think they are better off making a custom interface adapter that plugs into phones and emulate a thumb drive.

    Or just use a cable.

  • Sakaphoto Graphics

    By the time they fix it for 10.2.1, 10.3 will be out.

    • Andreas Vesper

      And if not, it will be only in a couple of days after it. Do we have to experience new compatility notes from Nikon, again? Months later? If I’m comparing the timeslines of Snapbridge and iOS Versions, Snapbridge has been compatible with the respective current iOS Version for exactly 13 days, from August, 31st to September, 13th, 2016.

      • Sakaphoto Graphics

        It’s always been interesting to me to see when the iOS beta is available and how long it takes many developers to start testing with it. Many don’t test at all until the production version arrives.

  • Skinny Pete

    Firmware? Ok, how about fully enabling/implementing the touch screen….menu and all? Not just pinch zoom on playback. Please give us full touchscreen functionality.

    Thank you!


      • KnightPhoto

        Like the D5500/5600.

        • Wait–they have AF point selection with the screen in mirror down mode?!

    • Bruno

      The D500 has touch focus and I don’t know
      About that as the touch menu of the D5600
      Is a bit difficult to use due to the small menu
      Settings so it’s easy to press the wrong settings
      And for a Pro camera that shouldn’t happen

  • Andreas Vesper

    Actually, Nikon should give up trying to develop Snapbridge for advanced cameras like the D500 that can shoot 40 images in 4 seconds while the transfer of those 40 images using full size mode from the camera to the phones takes 2,5 hours or 9000 seconds.
    The use case for Snapbridge is the entry-level product segment with cameras like the D3400 that are only capable using the slow Bluetooth LE protocol for low res Images.
    Of couse, it would be better, if the camera could connect to two or more devices or if two or more cameras could connect to the phone.
    For any advanced camera, the community expects from Nikon, they should simply integrate the matured WT-4/5/6/7 Technology to the Body and some users would be lucky enough about this connectivity.

    • KnightPhoto

      I know you’ve been leading the way in understanding SnapBridge capability. However for most people for social media purposes we don’t need anything bigger than the current SnapBridge image size. I just need that 2mp image sharing to work seamlessly and reliably. I need to test out the latest Android update from last week, not sure if we are there yet.

      When I get home and my home WiFi is available, then yes I need automatic smart wireless sharing to my desktop as Thom has described. But I don’t need those full size images shared to my smart-device.

      • Andreas Vesper

        Thank you. Maybe you’re right and most people really just need that 2 mp images. If you’re using one of the supported Android versions and smartphones, Snapbridge should work for you, provided you increased the timer settings. My experience with the unsupported iOS 10.3 public beta versions is that Bluetooth pairing then works very reliable.

        I’m not only a potential customer of the WT-7, I’m owning such a device. In fact, the price for device is somewhat a little too high, as this is matured and good(!) technology that has been built by Nikon for years.

        There was also an article here let November: that demonstrated a workaround using WMU or other apps by using Snapbridge only as ‘on-switch’ for Wifi, but Nikon cancelled that option explicitly in the new version 1.2.0 and documented it: It reads: ‘- Keep the app displayed while using Wi-Fi to download selected pictures. Pictures cannot be downloaded while the app is running in the background.’ I didn’t find such a hint in the Google Play store.

        • Allen_Wentz

          I agree with Knight. 2 MP is ideal, about what an iPhone uses. Even 1 MP works for me, because mostly it is composition, focus and (GPS very important) metadata that I want wirelessly in approx. real time.

          Never do I expect to want to transfer a ~28 MB 21 MP NEF file wirelessly.

  • Andreas Vesper

    This is exactly true. The iOS 10 beta has been released in early July 2016 and even the public beta was out on July, 07th or 08th. More than 4 months later to that and more than 2 months after the initial release of iOS 10 Nikon released a version that was compatible with IOS 10. At this time November 21st, 2016 iOS 10.1 was the current version and iOS 10.2 in the beta test phase. But it took Nikon again nearly 2 months to recognize this and release a service note on January, 11th 2017:

    Nikon should have the resources to keep up with release cycles of Apple that are really not new to the industry as a global player for such a strategic product like Snapbridge?

  • Jonathan

    Will they ever fix the memory card problems? With more than a semi-workaround?

    • ZoetMB

      What memory card problems? I’ve never had a memory card problem with my D70, D200 or D800. I’ve never lost a single image. But I do reformat the card every time I put it back in the camera.

    • Allen_Wentz

      I agree with ZoetMB. What memory card problems?

      I’ve never had a memory card problem with my D2x, D3, D5100 or D500. I’ve never lost a single image. But I do buy only top cards, reformat the card every time I put it back in the camera and never use a computer to erase card images.

      I do hate SD cards however. Nikon DSLRs should all be XQD.

  • Back to top