Show Posts
46
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark ii with WiFi/GPS or Without?
« on: February 21, 2013, 12:44:08 AM »Ah, I didn't know that, but it makes sense. On the other hand, you are still depending on being within range of a 3G network. At least a couple of years ago the A-GPS was not very accurate whereas the regular GPS was within a couple of meters. It's a lot better now but still varies alot.+1I think the GPS is a useless addon, provided you have a smartphone + an inexpensive appli like GPS4cam. It offers IMO the same benefits of an integrated GPS. I'd rather like Canon focus on photographic specs rather than these useless peripheral specs, that cost a lot for a very weak added value. The smartphones HAVE a GPS, we have a smartphone always with us, bar.Disagree
About the WIFI, this could be differerent, but there is too a dedicated grip... So ? I really do prefer high iso performances for less MP, weather sealing, and a lower price... I'm maybe old fashioned ?
I do not belive that an in camera GPS is going to add a lot of cost to the camera. I'd rather have it in camera than pulling out the smart phone, capture the GPS coordinates, identify the image to add the coordinates in post process sounds like too much of a hassle. I subscribe to the idea of have everything but give the users the option to turn them on/off.
please correct me if I'm wrong on this one, but the camera will have a 'true' GPS, meaning a GPS that will function on its own, whereas a smart phone only has the aGPS meaning assisted GPS where it will need a Wifi connection or 3G connection to be able to obtain its position. + the extra hassle of having to connect it to the phone and all that annoying stuff that won't work properly anyway, no I'm not a fan of having to rely on my phone and in this case some home cooked app too much.
The problem with GPS without A-GPS is how long a cold start takes. The transfer rate from a satellite is extremely slow, and even though it's only a couple kB it can take quite a while, and only then can it attempt to acquire a lock. A-GPS has the benefits of being able to download that data from a faster source, and having a rough estimate of current location so it can determine where it is way faster.
A-GPS is sort of an extension of GPS, and is just as accurate (given the same receiver, etc), just faster to start. I know exactly what you're thinking of though, early cell phones that had GPS... Their inaccuracy was mainly a function of cheap GPS modules with a limited number of channels. You technically only need 4 channels to be able to see 4 satellites and get a full 3D lock, but what good is it on a mobile device to have to sit in exactly the same spot for 12 minutes to get the most accurate position? The more channels you have, the more satellites you can search for concurrently, and in general, the quicker you will achieve an acceptably accurate lock, and the better it can maintain the lock as you move and satellites come in and out of "view".
) features that I don't think I'll use, unless it impacts the features currently present in a line (i.e., ruggedness or weather sealing in this case). I don't buy the argument of cost increases for most features, like GPS or WiFi, because I know the components themselves are dirt cheap, and most of the development is already complete once they have the first model with those features (6D). And for features like video, which I don't care about either; I believe the increased market and subsequent production, makes for a camera that is a net gain for consumers, possibly even cheaper.