Equipment Nikon D90

Just admit it, OleJ, once again it is another bad implementation of an otherwise good idea (unless of course you never use flash) Kind of like 'nice try...try again' and or 'hey, at least it'll work for some ppl'

 

Right...but they didn't [do a better job], it won't [work well underneath] and its not [like Canon's wireless transfer]. 0 for 3...that's no good.

 

Indeed. Maybe in v2.0. Not that it shouldn't be built into the body anyways as others have said. GPS chips are miniscule, though it would be murder on the battery (especially seeing that the car-nav units will often take a good five minutes to lock on to signal if you power them on more than ten feet from where they last were powered off from).

 

So giving photographers choice == bad impementation.
Your reasoning pretty much equals a statement that "because I can't fit both my UWA and Tele at the same time their design is flawed".

I never use flash so the product makes fine sense to me.
If I was a wedding photographer I don't see how I could even need to use a flash and geotagging at the same time as you'll most often be inside (where you can't use GPS anyways).
If you look at who geotagging is most relevant for you'll realize it's landscape photography... Now last time I checked there was no landscape flash available... especially not that you could fit in the hot-shoe.

I have a remote trigger that hangs by the side of the camera just like that gps would if the hot-shoe is occupied by a flash... it works brilliantly.

Stop shooting stuff down because you can't apply it to your immediate situation. If it doesn't obstruct what you do yet offers other people more choice then you ought to applaud it for the innovation.

I find it to be a good idea and a well thought out implementation.

If you want me to think you less closed-minded then try phrasing your statements with "I think/believe it's a bad implementation" and then some arguments that help to alleviate your opinion perhaps.

And "hey, at least it'll work for some ppl" is the whole mantra of creating anything in this world. The most universal appliance of "working for all" in the picture business is cell phone photography

 

OleJ, a lot of landscape photogs use flash...believe it or not. If geo-tagging is going to be used, shouldn't it be available at all possible times rather than 'hey I've got some room I can use it now' or, 'eh...I'll just let it hang there'? And really...comparring this to the use of two different lenses...? c'mon--seriously? All I am saying is that if this had been a better design, like the movie function, it would come in handy a lot more often (do you disagree?). I'm sorry if you took offense, but, IMO, it doesn't look like an awesome feature based on its design and implementation. So shoot me.

Something like this would suffice: and or

Obviously it would be a lot smaller, but you get the gist.

 

Don't worry I didn't take offense But I'm trying to cut through your sometimes "rhetoric lumbering".
Your starting point seems to be that flash is a must. And considering your line of work this is pretty self explanatory but I do believe there are photographers out there who do not rely on flash for more than occasional shooting.
You may not be able to immediately perceive their existence but that doesn't negate a product directed at others than you/your line of work.
For instance my mother has a landscape architect and planning company where they do a crap-load of landscape shots without flash. To them a gps solution like this one is pure gold as it gives very precise location and elevation info. And it even wouldn't matter if it had to hang by the side of the cam or even be tied onto with a rubber band.
They do by the way use a D300 so I'll be suggesting them this solution right away. It really is great.

I do not disagree that an integrated GPS module would have been smarter in case it's power consumption could have been completely nixed and it wouldn't add any considerate amount to the end price.

The reason I disagree with you is because I don't think a company like Nikon is going to launch a product (especially not at prosumer level and above) while thinking "hey at least this solution will work for some" or "well version 2 is going to fix this".

I do respect that in your opinion it's not a killer feature. And as such I believe it's great that they made it optional.

I'd like to add that so far I've found this discussion nice and educative. And that I won't shoot you for having a different opinion But I will poke at you when I feel you're bordering trolling although very eloquent trolling

 

Listen, all I am saying is that it could have been better designed (unless it needs to be shoe'd-up, if you will) and could be a killer feature. IF it was designed like Canons wireless transfer modules it would leave the photographer with a lot more versatility and or options as it would not be taking up the hot shoe. If the GPS does not utilize the hot shoe, it really makes little sense as to why they would place it there in the first place. This discussion and my responses do not even skim on trolling (as eloquent as it may seem to you )--they are legitimate and pertain directly to the topic.

 

Now that is good criticism and argumentation And I completely agree.

 

Now you get it!? All of that and now you get it!? Bah...

 

Would that solution allow for the use of a tripod or monopod?

-monkey

 

Yes sir, it is essentially a grip. But, I was thinking of something looking more or less like a pocket wizard, only 1/3-1/4 of the size that would attach directly to the top left hand side of the body connecting like a plug into an outlet, leaving enough space beneath to still be able to utilize other inputs.

 

Look. Any idiot can say: "someone did a terrible job", "this suxxors", "it could've been better".
You might have thought those points of criticism up in your head while writing your other comments toward the gps dongle but all that came through was "it suxxors" (even though a bit more eloquent).

Do you get it? I thought you would have from my previous post but refrained from noting on it as I thought you would have picked up on it. You may well be incredibly intelligent and knowing but when you don't reason your criticism it just falls flat to the ground like "it suxxors". A snide remark such as "unless you want to use flash" as a comment to someone saying something sounds good is just utter BS if you don't support it with reasoning. Or trolling if you prefer. What it comes out as is you stating that you certainly know better and I should just eat the cupcake and shut it. While it probably never was intended that way you should at least be aware that this is how it will sound to some.
Apparently you were easily able to support your opinion and even get it through in a good way in the end. Why not do that from the start? I for one can't read your mind.

I keep going back to the same "saying" when I consider what to write so I'll jot it down. "If you don't have anything constructive or positive to add then don't". It's not so much saying one shouldn't disagree with things as it's saying that by outlining how things could be better or exactly what is wrong you get a lot further than by simply stating something is wrong or bad. I hope you understand the difference.

Of course I could have just given a hoot about whatever you commented to my adoration of the gps feature but then where would the world be? Hopefully you can see difference between your first rather steep approach and your final argumentation. I can. Which is why I agreed with you in the end. I agree that it could have been done better but not that it's useless if you want to use flash.

And who says "bah" nowadays? Just teasing. I love "bah, humbug". It's such a funny expression.

 

First, what does it matter if I explain how it could be better or not...in the end its still a bad implementation of the unit, IMO...is it not? Second, I had explained it, in fact I even posted images and examples of how it could work--all prior to you having to cut through my "sometimes 'rhetoric lumbering'". Hell, my first issue with it was the inability to use a flash/wireless unit, that wasn't enough for you? FWIW, I am no camera engineer, but just looking at how the GPS unit is mounted looks all wrong to me functionally speaking--if it doesn't need the hot shoe, it just wastes the function all together. OTOH I am not totally sure the GPS utilizes the hot shoe so its hard to say if Nikon was forced into the specific implementation...we'll see.

 

Well more interesting reading. I think that it is actually implemented reasonable well...

Its seems more like a Nikon vs Canon battle to me. I prefer Nikon, but still think Canon makes a superb product. Anyways, the grip idea makes it way too bulky IMO especially on a D3 (or Canon equiv) that already has a perfectly ergonomic grip....why screw with that? Also, it is so small it does not need to be mounted in the hot shoe, and I think that was their intent. Funny thing is that I think the whole GPS exif data is silly anyways....but thats just me.



So, yeah....

Nick

 

But it has not been incorporated. Video = pointless gimmick (poor storage capacity, wrong lens, battery drain). Geotagging = actually useful for the semi-professional photographer.

 

Nick, this has absolutely nothing to do with Nikon v. Canon, in fact if Canon had produced the very same product I'd be much harder on them. I am by no means a fan boi. As for it being small and able to fit anywhere...where in the hell else could it be mounted? The only other place is beneath the camera...which would be a PIA if you had to use a tripod and or monopod or any other pod for that matter. As for the grip idea, it was just an example--I further explained it to Monkey after he inquired about it--besides a grip (for many) is extremely helpful in every day shooting. I agree with you that it sounds "silly" but for a lot of photogs the feature will be extremely useful.

 

Vers:
Oh, sorry, I totally agree w/ you about the grip if it is a 5D, D300, etc. I just meant for the ones that already have the grip which are usually the pro camera which is probably where this product may be used most (speculating). And, yes in fact, I can see you being hard on Canon. I just meant that I think it may be SEEMED like you were attacking Nikon (but I do not think you were). I should have been more clear. I know I am sometimes overly defensive of Nikon from time to time.

Nick

 

They weren't using on-camera audio. They sync'd it with a separate device that recorded the audio.

And while pop-up flashes aren't as flexible or good as flashguns, they are useful in triggering my flashguns wirelessly. So they are technically useful, just not in the sense that you probably meant.

EDIT: Come to think of it, cinema photographers always had a separate device used to capture audio, then they would sync the two streams together.

 

I can only sort of agree there. GPS sucks down battery very quickly as does video, so unless that little receiver has its own battery in it (I doubt it; it's the same size as the ebay wireless triggers which just have a watch battery-sized thing in them - that wouldn't hold any significant charge for GPS use), it's pulling off the main battery. Once you've got a signal it's not too bad, but it sucks a LOT of power during the original lock-on phase.

I'd personally get more out of video than geotagging, though I'd consider both a 'unnecssary but nice to have'. Perhaps PJs would get more out of it than myself, but for all the press geotagging gets, I don't think I've ever seen it used in a particularly useful manner. Largely a software issue, but an issue nonetheless.

 

Seems like RED is seeing the potential that Nikon did.

Red Forums

"...and another camera aimed squarely at the DSLR market."

If RED could change the cinema world, I'm curious to see what they will do with the photography world.