September 30, 2014, 07:22:07 AM

Poll

Is the GPS receiver for the 5D3 worth the money, and trouble?

I AM getting or will get the GP-E2 GPS unit.
I am NOT get the GP-E2 GPS unit.
I would pay an additional $30 for a camera if the GPS unit was built in.
GPS is metadata is worthless.

Author Topic: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!  (Read 3605 times)

prestonpalmer

  • Guest
Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« on: March 31, 2012, 03:33:19 PM »
As a professional photographer, many of my travels take me overseas to remote and often desolate 3rd world countries.  Places where GPS data in the metadata would be very, VERY nice. 

Since I started shooting with my first Canon DSLR, the 10D, I thought with each revision, THIS TIME, canon will put the GPS receiver IN the camera, rather than a hot she mount that is big, expensive, cumbersome and not realistic to keep on the camera device.  So here we are, a dozen cameras later, at the 5D3, and the best we have is a $270 GPS receiver?

My thoughts... GPS Receivers are wicked small, incredibly efficient, and present in just about every single handheld device we carry.  From a financial and business perspective, I cant imagine that Canon actually sells too many of these external GPS units.  Who wants to pay for this cumbersome thing?  Instead, Canon should put this modern GPS technology directly into the camera body itself.  Marketing a new DSLR with "GPS Receiver built in!!!" would be far more attractive to buyers, and end up selling far more camera bodies, and ultimately make more money that trying to sell an external unit.  Even if they were to mark the cost of each body up by $5 (the cost of a VERY good GPS unit, the kind we find in iPhone4) They would make more money than trying to sell this GP-E2! 

I am a little frustrated that we are this far with technology with no Built in GPS. Id like your opinions!
« Last Edit: March 31, 2012, 03:38:26 PM by prestonpalmer »

canon rumors FORUM

Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« on: March 31, 2012, 03:33:19 PM »

Daniel Flather

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 861
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver. WHY?
« Reply #1 on: March 31, 2012, 03:39:14 PM »
I'd like it in camera. The current one looks like it begging to be knocked off and damaged. 
| 5D3 | 8-15L | 24L II | 35L | 50L | 85L II | 100/2.8 | 200/2L | EOS M | 22 STM |

Tcapp

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 510
    • View Profile
    • Timothy Capp Photography
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #2 on: March 31, 2012, 03:42:28 PM »
As a professional photographer, many of my travels take me overseas to remote and often desolate 3rd world countries.  Places where GPS data in the metadata would be very, VERY nice. 

Since I started shooting with my first Canon DSLR, the 10D, I thought with each revision, THIS TIME, canon will put the GPS receiver IN the camera, rather than a hot she mount that is big, expensive, cumbersome and not realistic to keep on the camera device.  So here we are, a dozen cameras later, at the 5D3, and the best we have is a $270 GPS receiver?

My thoughts... GPS Receivers are wicked small, incredibly efficient, and present in just about every single handheld device we carry.  From a financial and business perspective, I cant imagine that Canon actually sells too many of these external GPS units.  Who wants to pay for this cumbersome thing?  Instead, Canon should put this modern GPS technology directly into the camera body itself.  Marketing a new DSLR with "GPS Receiver built in!!!" would be far more attractive to buyers, and end up selling far more camera bodies, and ultimately make more money that trying to sell an external unit.  Even if they were to mark the cost of each body up by $5 (the cost of a VERY good GPS unit, the kind we find in iPhone4) They would make more money than trying to sell this GP-E2! 

I am a little frustrated that we are this far with technology with no Built in GPS. Id like your opinions!

I agree, but its not a highly demanded feature by most users. As a wedding photographer, I wouldn't use it. No need. But it would have been nice to have one thing to hold over the heads of D800 users and tell them to suck it!

But I think the new version of lightroom has a geo-tagging feature so you might not really even need the gps. The gps will just drain your battery a little faster.
5DIII, 5DII, 7D, 50 1.4, 85 1.4, 70-200 2.8 IS L, 70-200 2.8 IS L II, 2x TC III, 15 Fisheye 2.8, 100 Macro 2.8, 24 1.4 L
http://www.TimothyCapp.com
Follow me on facebook! https://www.facebook.com/pages/Timothy-Capp-Photography/94664798952

Bosman

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 879
    • View Profile
    • Bosman Photography
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #3 on: March 31, 2012, 03:44:07 PM »
As a professional photographer, many of my travels take me overseas to remote and often desolate 3rd world countries.  Places where GPS data in the metadata would be very, VERY nice. 

Since I started shooting with my first Canon DSLR, the 10D, I thought with each revision, THIS TIME, canon will put the GPS receiver IN the camera, rather than a hot she mount that is big, expensive, cumbersome and not realistic to keep on the camera device.  So here we are, a dozen cameras later, at the 5D3, and the best we have is a $270 GPS receiver?

My thoughts... GPS Receivers are wicked small, incredibly efficient, and present in just about every single handheld device we carry.  From a financial and business perspective, I cant imagine that Canon actually sells too many of these external GPS units.  Who wants to pay for this cumbersome thing?  Instead, Canon should put this modern GPS technology directly into the camera body itself.  Marketing a new DSLR with "GPS Receiver built in!!!" would be far more attractive to buyers, and end up selling far more camera bodies, and ultimately make more money that trying to sell an external unit.  Even if they were to mark the cost of each body up by $5 (the cost of a VERY good GPS unit, the kind we find in iPhone4) They would make more money than trying to sell this GP-E2! 

I am a little frustrated that we are this far with technology with no Built in GPS. Id like your opinions!
they want more sales so they seem to add all these little add on's rather than offer more. Nikon will do it first then Canon will. LOL
Bosman Photography www.bosmanphotography.com, Fast Photo Pro www.fastphotopro.com
Follow Bosman Photography on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/Bosman.Photography
Sports Photography  Follow Fast Photo Pro on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/Fast.Photo.Pr

prestonpalmer

  • Guest
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #4 on: March 31, 2012, 03:51:21 PM »
I agree, but its not a highly demanded feature by most users. As a wedding photographer, I wouldn't use it. No need. But it would have been nice to have one thing to hold over the heads of D800 users and tell them to suck it!

But I think the new version of lightroom has a geo-tagging feature so you might not really even need the gps. The gps will just drain your battery a little faster.

Tcapp.  I completely agree.  I am a professional wedding photographer as well, and the GPS serves no purpose for wedding photos.  The question is still valid.  Would you have flinched at paying an additional $30 for the camera knowing the GPS unit was built in?  Of course you would have the option of turning it off to conserve battery on shoots like weddings.

Tcapp

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 510
    • View Profile
    • Timothy Capp Photography
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #5 on: March 31, 2012, 03:59:05 PM »
I agree, but its not a highly demanded feature by most users. As a wedding photographer, I wouldn't use it. No need. But it would have been nice to have one thing to hold over the heads of D800 users and tell them to suck it!

But I think the new version of lightroom has a geo-tagging feature so you might not really even need the gps. The gps will just drain your battery a little faster.

Tcapp.  I completely agree.  I am a professional wedding photographer as well, and the GPS serves no purpose for wedding photos.  The question is still valid.  Would you have flinched at paying an additional $30 for the camera knowing the GPS unit was built in?  Of course you would have the option of turning it off to conserve battery on shoots like weddings.

I would have been happy to pay even an extra $50 for it. Even though I doubt I would use it. I like having it just in case i decide to play with it. Sure, my camera is a professional tool, but its still a toy (big boy toy). I like to be able to play with all the silly little features (cough cough HDR mode, cough cough).
5DIII, 5DII, 7D, 50 1.4, 85 1.4, 70-200 2.8 IS L, 70-200 2.8 IS L II, 2x TC III, 15 Fisheye 2.8, 100 Macro 2.8, 24 1.4 L
http://www.TimothyCapp.com
Follow me on facebook! https://www.facebook.com/pages/Timothy-Capp-Photography/94664798952

Sharp

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 11
  • Sharp says m00!
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #6 on: March 31, 2012, 03:59:37 PM »
I agree it would be nice to have a "built-in" GPS. However a real "GPS chip" is a bit bigger that what we see in phones. Most of the phones (i work in the telco industry) do not carry a "real" GPS, but rather an assisted-GPS which requires a cell tower to position the phone.

However, I can see cases/reasons why Canon has not done that. The first that come in my mind is when I go to Cuba. Cuba does not allow GPS device in their country. In that case, I would be so sad to leave my DLSR home when I go there. So I see more a legal issue then anything else.

Does it make sense?
Canon 5DIII + GPS, 16-35L, 40 f2.8, 50 f1.8, 85L, 70-200L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #6 on: March 31, 2012, 03:59:37 PM »

Daniel Flather

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 861
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #7 on: March 31, 2012, 04:01:51 PM »
Nice site Preston.
| 5D3 | 8-15L | 24L II | 35L | 50L | 85L II | 100/2.8 | 200/2L | EOS M | 22 STM |

Daniel Flather

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 861
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2012, 04:06:20 PM »
The first that come in my mind is when I go to Cuba. Cuba does not allow GPS device in their country.


Yes!!  I had my GPS unit in my bag the last time I went to Cuba.  They kept it at the airport when I arrived, and I picked it up on my way home.  But wow, the red tape was crazy!  I had to fill out lots a paper work and pay an fee that was about $8 CAD when I claimed it back.  The Cubans were most interested in the device than anything.  I showed them how it worked and the were utterly amazed when it showed our location on its map.

Cuba is an amazing place, go if you can.


| 5D3 | 8-15L | 24L II | 35L | 50L | 85L II | 100/2.8 | 200/2L | EOS M | 22 STM |

Tcapp

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 510
    • View Profile
    • Timothy Capp Photography
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2012, 04:08:20 PM »
I agree it would be nice to have a "built-in" GPS. However a real "GPS chip" is a bit bigger that what we see in phones. Most of the phones (i work in the telco industry) do not carry a "real" GPS, but rather an assisted-GPS which requires a cell tower to position the phone.

However, I can see cases/reasons why Canon has not done that. The first that come in my mind is when I go to Cuba. Cuba does not allow GPS device in their country. In that case, I would be so sad to leave my DLSR home when I go there. So I see more a legal issue then anything else.

Does it make sense?

Makes sense to me. But would Cuban customs know enough about cameras to know which has a GPS and which doesnt? Who is going to look at a camera and think it has a gps if they arent a photographer?
5DIII, 5DII, 7D, 50 1.4, 85 1.4, 70-200 2.8 IS L, 70-200 2.8 IS L II, 2x TC III, 15 Fisheye 2.8, 100 Macro 2.8, 24 1.4 L
http://www.TimothyCapp.com
Follow me on facebook! https://www.facebook.com/pages/Timothy-Capp-Photography/94664798952

prestonpalmer

  • Guest
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2012, 04:31:08 PM »
I agree it would be nice to have a "built-in" GPS. However a real "GPS chip" is a bit bigger that what we see in phones. Most of the phones (i work in the telco industry) do not carry a "real" GPS, but rather an assisted-GPS which requires a cell tower to position the phone.

However, I can see cases/reasons why Canon has not done that. The first that come in my mind is when I go to Cuba. Cuba does not allow GPS device in their country. In that case, I would be so sad to leave my DLSR home when I go there. So I see more a legal issue then anything else.

Does it make sense?


The Cuba issue is valid.  However, I would argue with you on the size of the GPS unit. I am a pilot, and both my iPad 2 and iPhone 4 have fully functioning GPS units that don't need any sort of cell reception to deliver a perfect GPS signal.  I know this because there is positively no cellular coverage in my cockpit at 14'000 feet.  Yet my iPad an iPhone grab a GPS signal in seconds and deliver results every bit as accurate as the $15,000 GPS on my dashboard.  If they can fit one that good in the iPhone, they can fit one in a 5D body.

So back to the Cuba question, do they not allow cell phones in the country then?  Evey cell phone now days has a built in GPS.  Very curious about this one...

BillyBean

  • Guest
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #11 on: March 31, 2012, 04:39:11 PM »
I too would like GPS built in. But there are some real challenges to this which some posters don't seem to realise. This is not a plastic bodied iPhone with a big glass screen - this is an almost totally wrap-around magnesium alloy body. The GPS receiver *must* have line of sight radio visibility to the satellites, which means NO METAL in the way.

You can have a metal body, or you can have built in GPS, but not both.

I'm sure that a strong, professional composite body could in theory be developed, but you really think most people are going to accept that it's stronger than alloy? People like to *feel* the money they just spent...

It's a pain, I agree.

Tcapp

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 510
    • View Profile
    • Timothy Capp Photography
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2012, 04:48:17 PM »
I too would like GPS built in. But there are some real challenges to this which some posters don't seem to realise. This is not a plastic bodied iPhone with a big glass screen - this is an almost totally wrap-around magnesium alloy body. The GPS receiver *must* have line of sight radio visibility to the satellites, which means NO METAL in the way.

You can have a metal body, or you can have built in GPS, but not both.

I'm sure that a strong, professional composite body could in theory be developed, but you really think most people are going to accept that it's stronger than alloy? People like to *feel* the money they just spent...

It's a pain, I agree.

Maybe just leave a small opening in the alloy shell, to allow the signal to pass through. I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard.
5DIII, 5DII, 7D, 50 1.4, 85 1.4, 70-200 2.8 IS L, 70-200 2.8 IS L II, 2x TC III, 15 Fisheye 2.8, 100 Macro 2.8, 24 1.4 L
http://www.TimothyCapp.com
Follow me on facebook! https://www.facebook.com/pages/Timothy-Capp-Photography/94664798952

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2012, 04:48:17 PM »

prestonpalmer

  • Guest
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2012, 04:50:44 PM »
I too would like GPS built in. But there are some real challenges to this which some posters don't seem to realise. This is not a plastic bodied iPhone with a big glass screen - this is an almost totally wrap-around magnesium alloy body. The GPS receiver *must* have line of sight radio visibility to the satellites, which means NO METAL in the way.

You can have a metal body, or you can have built in GPS, but not both.

I'm sure that a strong, professional composite body could in theory be developed, but you really think most people are going to accept that it's stronger than alloy? People like to *feel* the money they just spent...

It's a pain, I agree.

BillyBean, You are absolutely right. GPS needs line of sight.  However, this is not a difficult engineering problem to solve.  With modern GPS technology, you can actually USE a part of the Magnesium Allow body as the GPS receiver/antenna.  This could be done with the camera in the portrait or landscape position so it gets signal in either orientation.  There are other solutions as well, like adding an insulated antenna on the outside of the body.  Neither scenarios compromise the integrity or weather proofing of the body. 

BillyBean

  • Guest
Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2012, 04:59:37 PM »

BillyBean, You are absolutely right. GPS needs line of sight.  However, this is not a difficult engineering problem to solve.  With modern GPS technology, you can actually USE a part of the Magnesium Allow body as the GPS receiver/antenna.  This could be done with the camera in the portrait or landscape position so it gets signal in either orientation.  There are other solutions as well, like adding an insulated antenna on the outside of the body.  Neither scenarios compromise the integrity or weather proofing of the body.

Perhaps - though remember that if this were easy, Apple, with much larger resources, would not have screwed up the iPhone 4 antenna.... But for sure it is easier for Canon not to bother, and make a few hundred quid extra. It's just another of those little annoyances with the 5D3 - no USB3, no SD-UHS, etc. Nothing that would actually stop me buying the thing, but just annoying.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 5D3+GPS Receiver? VOTE!
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2012, 04:59:37 PM »