BMaz: yes, it supports the 40GB iPod Photo. it works for mine.

Posted by m23wong on April 1, 2005 at 12:37 PM (PDT) Comment 21

I guess it's all relative. If you don't care much for what such a device *should* be able to do given current state of technology OR feel it's good enough for the $30 price tag, then the B+ grade might be fair enough.

Personally, it seems to me that this entire photo gimmick that Apple dished out from the beginning is pretty lame and deserve a C grade overall at best. The very poorly executed design/implementation of the overall photo feature PLUS the closed nature of Apple's philosophy (not making it easy for 3rd party development of better solutions) is what leads one to be willing to accept such mediocre performance for a B+ grade. It's slightly better than the tired *old* alternative Belkin solutions, so it gets a slightly better grade than they did. Nevermind that digital photography technologies have made huge advances in the last few years.

Grades like this certainly won't encourage Apple to do better nor help inform people that Apple *should* do better.

Posted by LightOfTheWorld on April 1, 2005 at 12:54 PM (PDT) Comment 22

I bought a 30GB iPod Photo a week ago to use mainly for music but also in anticipation of this device so I could download photos to free up my CF cards if necessary. It sounds as if it will do the job, except for one issue I have been having with my iPod.

I run Windows XP and on two occasions I have used the iPods mass storage feature. Copying files on and off the iPod is fast and works well. However, as soon as I have accessed the mass storage device I am totally unable to eject the iPod. Clearly some piece of software is holding the device open and I can't even shut the machine down. It logs off and goes right down to the plain blue screen with just a mouse pointer visible, that immediately precedes shut down, but then it hangs there. The iPod still indicates that it should not be disconnected but I have to unplug the USB cable to get control of the iPod and physically reboot the computer to regain control of it. If I can't resolve this then using the iPod to transfer photos will prove to be very tedious.

Posted by Steve Crane on April 1, 2005 at 1:23 PM (PDT) Comment 23

Try the "restore" in the iPod software update. That should help. make sure you back up.

Posted by louispavlo on April 1, 2005 at 2:09 PM (PDT) Comment 24

BMaz: It works with all iPod photos - 30/40/60.

Louis: Full-sized versions of pictures are stored in the iPod's folders.

Light: Our B grades indicate "not right for everyone," recommendable to specific audiences. The cheap price and better-than-DCL utility of the Camera Connector scored it a B+ - the same grade as the Media Reader Belkin released in 2003. In other words, it's overall about equally as good overall as that device, and unfortunately, there is no A-caliber photo product yet for any iPod.

We don't have to give something a C in order for the message to be clear that it's not as good as it could have been. We stated as much in as many words at the end of the article.

Posted by Jeremy Horwitz on April 1, 2005 at 2:17 PM (PDT) Comment 25

The iPod Photo is meant for SHOWING photos just like it's for PLAYING music. Anything else--like this adapter--is gravy.

Posted by Nagromme on April 1, 2005 at 9:27 PM (PDT) Comment 26

I have just uploaded the latest software update to my 40 G ipod and there is now a "photo import" on the main menu that I am sure wasn't there before. Could this mean that it would work with the camera connector ? - had the older ipods you tested recieved the most recent software update prior to testing?

Posted by jim13 on April 1, 2005 at 10:44 PM (PDT) Comment 27


Most photographers will not require the ability to view the photos on the iPod as they can be viewed on the camera anyway.

Therefore there should have been an option to disable the conversion of files during transfer, to speed up transfers and therefore save battery life.

Was a test done between USB 1 and USB 2 card readers? Looking at the results so far I seriously DOUBT this thing supports USB 2.

It's better for most people to just use multiple memory cards.

I'm gutted.

Posted by charlie12 on April 2, 2005 at 7:04 AM (PDT) Comment 28

This review is missing some info -

Is the IOGear Universal Memory Bank USB 1 or 2? What about the cameras tested?

What speed memory cards were used?

These factors obviously have a great influence on transfer speed.

Posted by charlie12 on April 2, 2005 at 7:09 AM (PDT) Comment 29

Could Someone Please Tell Me How...

Once you've transferred your pics to your iPod - you then get them into iPhoto?

When you sync your iPod to your Mac is it recognised by iPhoto in the same way camera's / cards are now?...

Posted by Parb on April 2, 2005 at 7:12 AM (PDT) Comment 30


I think you should perform more tests with high speed memory cards, a selection of USB 2.0 card readers and USB 2.0 cameras.

How can you conclude that this thing has slow transfer speeds when you haven't really tested it properly?

Posted by charlie12 on April 2, 2005 at 7:14 AM (PDT) Comment 31

This makes me want a iPod photo.

Anyone want to buy my 40gb 4G? :D

Posted by bigmouse64 on April 2, 2005 at 11:12 AM (PDT) Comment 32

thanks for the review. for $30 USD or $50 AUD, i can live with slow data transfer. It is just an adaptor that does a much needed thing for people with an iPod photo and a USB camera.

most photographers are out on the road in a car, so just buy a griffin power pod to avoid low battery issues. yay, i'm definately not complaining.


now, if my camera charged via USB, i'd be really happy.

Posted by dirtymouse on April 2, 2005 at 3:43 PM (PDT) Comment 33


The review's figures sound about right from other user reports I've seen on The fastest transfer speeds I've seen come out to ~400KB/s using a Nikon D2H (full USB 2.0) and fast cards. Most report somewhere between 200-400KB/s as shown in the review.

Unfortunately, my Nikon D70 has USB 2.0 w/ only the lower 1.1 speed -- yep, apparently, USB 2.0 spec does not require fulll USB 2.0 speed. :-( So if Jeremy's review is correct, I can probably expect very slow transfer rates. I'm looking forward to 1-to-2-hour transfer times for the 512MB-1GB that I would probably want to transfer each time -- that's assuming the battery on either iPod or camera doesn't die first. hmmm

I agree that Apple should've given the option to turn off the file conversion needed for showing pics on the iPod itself. But not sure it really helps that much because a couple of D2H users were only transfering RAW files and still only got ~400KB/s speed.

I think if I use this thing, I will have to get a fast compatible card reader for it.

The Epson P2000 keeps looking better everyday now. The only downside to me is the Epson doesn't support a lossless audio format. :-( I'm not convinced yet that MP3 is good enough for classical music.

Posted by LightOfTheWorld on April 2, 2005 at 5:28 PM (PDT) Comment 34

Actually, there probably isn't any compatible card reader worth lugging along for this since it'll need to be a powered reader. At that point, might as well just buy the Belkin solution instead.

Posted by LightOfTheWorld on April 2, 2005 at 5:32 PM (PDT) Comment 35

I really kinda bummed about the battery drain. It basically will chew through a full charge downloading 1 full 1GB card. I have a USB camera and I'm using SanDisk Ultra II cards. I have a great solution the apple forgot to add, another dock connection input so you don't have to rely on the iPod battery when you are transfering image while in your car or hotel room. That way you could actually download cards larger than 1GB, and you wouldn't have to recharge after every tranfer. Patent Pending wink

Posted by boombashi on April 2, 2005 at 6:46 PM (PDT) Comment 36

I have a Kodak SLR/c which uses firewire as it's transfer protocol. Am I reading this right that I could use an IOGear CF card reader to transfer to my iPod Photo?

Posted by wuntrikpony on April 2, 2005 at 7:36 PM (PDT) Comment 37

Thanks for the info LightOfTheWorld.

It's a big shame because Apple could have made this a wonderful accessory for photographers. I guess they should stick to what they do best, they have no idea of even our most basic requirements.

boombashi - I agree, an auxilliary (I think that's the term!) power source would have been an excellent feature.

This device could have been so much more, I for one will not be buying one now, I'm sure most photographers won't bother.

Pure gimmick material smile

Posted by charlie12 on April 3, 2005 at 6:15 AM (PDT) Comment 38

'...they have no idea of even our most basic requirements...'

I get the feeling they probably know that serious pro photographers wouldnt put a days work onto a multi purpose device (especially one that is a mp3 player). i would never go out on a shoot for a client - and then download those shots to my ipod which will then get used for the journey back to my studio to listen to music. Whilst it rattles around in my pocket...

Thats madness. Critical work gets downloaded to a laptop and then immediately burnt to disk on location.

'On the road' a 12" powerbook and a couple of blank dvds takes up less room than the bag my camera / lenses take up.

i get the feeling they've made it for the average Joe. Who has a digital camera but still takes their film based camera on their long weekend breaks etc. This now allows those consumers the chance to free their memory cards on a daily basis whilst away - at a very low cost. Then get home and download all those shots into iPhoto.

Every device / car / peice of equipment etc ever made could have been 'so much more' in a million different ways to a million different people. Simply because it doesn't satisfy the needs of the minority - doesn't make the device a 'gimmick'.

Just take it for what it is. A cheap, simple method of getting pictures off your memory card so you can take more tourist pics the next day...

Posted by Parb on April 4, 2005 at 12:26 AM (PDT) Comment 39


Yeah I totally agree, I mean, I'm no pro in photography but I've done work in the Multi-media industry and I can relate to the issues of security/safety of data, and the iPod photo/cam connector is no "on the spot solution", even though they are an excellent entertainment and back up devise.

Posted by Jpod-Josh on April 4, 2005 at 5:00 AM (PDT) Comment 40

Has anybody tried this with a genuine USB 2.0 camera like a Canon 20D and can tell me what the speed is like?

Posted by togo on April 4, 2005 at 6:17 AM (PDT) Comment 41

Charlie: Thanks for your comment - "I think you should perform more tests with high speed memory cards, a selection of USB 2.0 card readers and USB 2.0 cameras.

How can you conclude that this thing has slow transfer speeds when you haven't really tested it properly?"

Seriously, how can you conclude that we "haven't really tested it properly" without making some assumptions (incorrect ones, as it turns out) about our testing methodology?

We could get into the nitty gritty of every single component we've used. We could choke our average reader to death with the details. Or we could just provide the details we felt were relevant to most of our readers.

We tested using a variety of different memory cards, ranging from unrated to 8x to 80X Pro speeds. And as noted in the review, we tested with three different cameras, ranging in spec from the very new prosumer Coolpix 8800 to the older, lower-end Powershot and the higher-end DSLR 10D - a wider swath of cameras than anyone else has tested for review with the Camera Connector.

And both of the media readers we tested were USB 2.0 readers. (Incidentally, neither was externally powered, and the IOGear one worked.) Apple's own site doesn't even show compatible media readers as of this posting.

We aim for comprehensiveness and accuracy, but that said, no reviewer in their right mind would sit down with 80 different cameras and 30 different media card readers to write the review. If your expectations of a product review are truly of that nature, my advice would be for you to skip the Camera Connector, because there is no way in the world it could possibly satisfy whatever expectations you may have for that.

Posted by Jeremy Horwitz on April 4, 2005 at 8:00 AM (PDT) Comment 42

I disagree with your assessment of reviewing technique. The "choking" you're talking about could be taken care of with a simple chart showing the camera/reader details on one axis and memory card info on the other axis with speed and memory drain for the iPod where they cross. People could quickly interpret the results or disregard the chart all together.
I now have the camera connector, and using a PNY USB 1 card reader, I obtained faster speeds than you're listing using an Extreme Sandisk 512 MB card. I can empty the card in 30 minutes while using a little over half of the iPods battery.
Every review has been sorely lacking in detail. Apple has been criticized, and rightly so, for their lack of thoroughness in their compatibiltiy list. They must have conducted tests, so they should show all the tests and a "Yes" or "No" to show whether the device was compatible or not. That or they should have a complete list of everything that IS compatible. In this case, people like me may have to go to a forum to supply the detail that people are looking for.

Posted by howyroark on April 4, 2005 at 8:26 AM (PDT) Comment 43


Thanks for the info. And I agree w/ you about the "choking" thing as well.

Hmmm... Then there's some hope for me if an unpowered USB 1.0 card reader can do that. It certainly borders the threshold of useability for me, but at least that sounds ok enough for the occasional times on vacation.


I wouldn't go so far as to say pro photogs won't want to use a music playing PSD for storing their work.

There are plenty of working photogs who seem to be using some sort of PSDs anyway, so it's not so far fetched to want one that also plays music. And not every pro photog will have the same preferences and requirements either. But to suggest that one shouldn't want something that should be easily doable is a bit of backwards thinking, no?

For instance, Epson's P2000 might hold some appeal to some working photogs as it allows viewing of the embedded JPEG in RAW files and offers an awesome LCD display for this. And there's also the GigaVu Pro device (running Linux underneath) that even displays RAW files w/ its own RAW converter, not just showing embedded JPEGs, w/ histogram, etc. And yes, despite the fact that they are infinitely better photo storage/display devices than the iPod Photo, they also play MP3's *and* MPEG4 video, etc.

Now, I'm not saying the iPod Photo should have to be just as good as those alternatives to be useful to most photogs, but come on, Apple should at least give us modest transfer speeds that should be very doable.

IMHO, it actually seems quite probable that Apple is intentionally placing a serious limit on transfer speeds to help minimize piracy. It certainly does not seem to have much to do w/ any true technical limitations.

Posted by LightOfTheWorld on April 4, 2005 at 9:48 AM (PDT) Comment 44


Posted by EQUINOX341095 on April 4, 2005 at 10:49 AM (PDT) Comment 45
 1 2 3 >  Last »
related reviews

Report: Apple ‘tentatively’ plans mid-September iPhone event
Apple faces class action suit in California for labor violations
Apple, AT&T now sending $40 checks to some iPad 3G owners
Apple denies iOS “back door” access in new report
Notes from Apple’s Q3 2014 earnings call
Apple Q3 2014: 35.2M iPhones, 13.3M iPads, 2.9M iPods, $37.4B revenue
Simpsons World, FXNOW coming to Apple TV?
WSJ: Apple asking suppliers to make 70-80M new iPhones this year
Apple ‘iTime’ patent includes wristband sensors
Tips app debuts in iOS 8 beta 4

related reviews

Incipio offGRID Smart Bluetooth Low Energy-Enabled Portable 6000mAh Backup Battery
Divoom Voombox Travel Rugged Portable Wireless Speaker
Logitech protection+ for iPhone 5/5s and +trip
Beats Powerbeats2 Wireless
Incipio Steno Ultra-Thin Bluetooth Keyboard Folio for iPad Air
OtterBox Resurgence Power Case for iPhone 5/5s
Gumdrop Cases FoamTech Case for iPad Air
Ztylus Camera Case + RV-2 Revolver Lens for iPhone 5/5s
JBL Synchros Reflect In-Ear Sport Headphones
JBL Synchros E50BT Over-Ear Headphones

related reviews

iLounge Picks: Five Great Summer Party Speakers
Editorial: Endings And Beginnings
Live From CE Week 2014: Brand New iPad, iPhone + Mac Accessories!
What’s New In iOS 8 For iPad, iPhone + iPod touch
iLounge Multi-Editorial: WWDC 2014’s iOS 8, OS X Yosemite + More
The Complete Guide to Apple TV Channels
iHistory: From iPod + iTunes to iPhone, Apple TV + iPad, 2001 to 2010
iHistory: From iPod + iTunes to iPhone, Apple TV + iPad: 2011 to Today
Viewing only downloaded iTunes Match tracks
Splitting purchased content between two iPads