Nikon D300 and D3 GPS enabled cameras

Lost Cause · Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:36 pm Post subject:

Exactly, too many features already - so make it an option. What use GPS if you`re buying a D3 for a studio ?

And moreover, what point integrating GPS/Bluetooth/WiFi (with the later`s associated certification costs for all territories) when one can simply sit back and charge 50 quid for a lead instead ?

Viking9 · Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:40 pm Post subject:

wdaehn · Occasional Visitor Joined: May 03, 2008 Posts: 1

I was thinking along the same lines but then decided to give it a try and enabled the D300 with bluetooth GPS. Details see here: http://wdaehn.blogspot.com/2008/04/after-thinking-about-it-for-longer-time.html

1. Why GPS data? Well, for the same reasons as you have all the other EXIF data. Except that with the information about flash yes/no, focal length etc you can't do much. But rightclicking an image and say "Where was it taken?" and getting the location shown in google maps is very neat.

2. Folks use that GPS data to tag images for better search. "Search for all pictures taken at home last summer". Isn't such a search a nice feature?

3. Had been on a trip with the kids. Was really nice to show others where we have been (GPS Logger functionality of the device) and the pictures.

4. Personally I am not a feature-person myself, rather make the existing things solid. But bluetooth would enable a lot of things. GPS obviously. Remote shutter release from the cell phone? Remote operate the camera via the cell phone similar to a stripped down version of Capture Control?

5. Would not build in GPS, but bluetooth only. GPS devices get better, are dependent on where they are located (jamming). And GPS takes not much but still enough power compared to a Class 2 bluetooth chip. So better have it external with its own battery.

My summary: GPS is not something you need but once you have it, it is really really nice and you don't want to miss it again.

	PocketGPS
	Web