| Moderated by: chrisbet, | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6   |
|
|||||||
| Nikon P900 - not a DSLR but you do get a 2000mm (equiv 35mm) lens - Page 5 | |
| Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Fri Aug 18th, 2017 19:21 |
|
41st Post |
novicius
|
jk wrote:Most GPS inits that are sold commercially state an accuracy range. I think a good one is currently 1-10m accuracy. Thanks JK... The one I found for the D3s/X only states Altitude / Longitude / Latitude / Time... The smartphone Mentiones the Place , which is actually what I need most..as in " San Felipe / Panama City / Panama / date / time " ... Is there one for the D3 that does that...is there an Easy work-around...or do I need to use the " Robert - Technique" ..  Advise Appreciated..
____________________ Back in Danmark I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sat Aug 19th, 2017 04:50 |
|
42nd Post |
Robert
|
JK, Is it possible to split this GPS thread from the original, it isn't really related or relevant to the OP but may be of interest to visitors? I seem to remember you told me how to do it but I don't have the confidence to meddle! LOL GPS units have obviously improved over time since their introduction. My first one worked with an early USB era Mac Laptop and is magnetic, clamping to the car roof like a little black limpet, worked with a USB Lead. I don't seem to be able to get software that's compatible with my current gear so it's hanging on a cabinet nearby, unused. Have tried a variety of different units but the most accurate one I have is my Garmin 'GPSmap 60CSx' which I reckon is accurate to about half a Metre, but dependant on a clear sky. GPS works by comparing the times received from multiple satellites around the world and computing the location based on the comparison between the tiny differences in the times received from each satellite and a lot of mathematics. To get great accuracy, top quality components in the receiver and the calculator are a essential and expensive. Cloud cover and trees/buildings do affect the accuracy. Some now also tap into the cellular phone mast network to improve accuracy I believe. I know JK has tested a variety of 'on camera' units but I think for most purposes a cheap tracker GPS creating a time log combined with the images is a pretty good method to set the GPS. I think Lightroom can ingest the tracker log to combine with the images to generate the locations. In my experience toe EXACT location of each image isn't needed because a glance at the image should give that... What's needed in practice is a grouping of all images at a given general location, in my opinion having a lot of images each with a slightly different (and possibly slightly inaccurate) location isn't helpful. You will get a snail-trail effect around a site when all you really need is a central locator on the site.
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sat Aug 19th, 2017 04:57 |
|
43rd Post |
Robert
|
novicius wrote:
The software adds the named location as the image is displayed/listed on your computer or smartphone. All a GPS does is add the Lat-Long ref to the EXIF, which your smartphone or computer looks up and tell you the name. What we are discussing is how the Lat/Longitude data gets into the EXIF. either directly as the image data is created or later by various methods.
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sat Aug 19th, 2017 16:59 |
|
44th Post |
jk
|
Not now Robert. Once we go past a moment the splitting of a thread in a coherent fashion is difficult.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sat Aug 19th, 2017 18:09 |
|
45th Post |
Robert
|
Thanks JK, I wasn't sure. Perhaps if there are any other GPS Related posts they could be put in a new thread, we seem to have completely hijacked this one.
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sun Aug 20th, 2017 01:41 |
|
46th Post |
novicius
|
Robert wrote:Thanks JK, I wasn't sure. Sorry about that Gents....my Sincere Apologies to the O P
____________________ Back in Danmark I do not use my equipment to make photo`s .. I take photo`s to use my equipment The better I become at photography,the better my camera gets. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sun Aug 20th, 2017 10:15 |
|
47th Post |
jk
|
We will get back on topic .... eventually. P900 is the original topic!
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Aug 21st, 2017 07:53 |
|
48th Post |
Judith
|
Greetings fellow snappers.  I haven't been here for ages! Life sometimes gets in the way of the good stuff like taking photos. Grr... So, to get this thread back on topic...  Jan, those pics are impressive. I could be tempted to get a P900 as my new holiday camera. I'm currently using a Fuji with a 1000mm equivalent zoom and have been well impressed with it but I fear it's been overused and is about to flake out on me so I've been considering getting a D3300 but going cross eyed at the thought of having to drag different lenses around with me. However, yours look like great quality. The Fuji's pics tend to be a little fuzzy looking when you look closely at them but considering it only cost me £130, I can't complain. Not sure I want to spend £450 but ohhh...the tempatation of a 2000mm zoom, especially when I'm going to South Africa next year.  These were taken at 1000mm in South America last year. Attachment: DSCF7216web.jpg (Downloaded 26 times)
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Aug 21st, 2017 07:55 |
|
49th Post |
Judith
|
. Attachment: DSCF7203web.jpg (Downloaded 26 times)
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Mon Aug 21st, 2017 12:04 |
|
50th Post |
Eric
|
Hello stranger.......what happened to the D800?
____________________ Eric |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| This is topic ID = 1439 Current time is 14:37 | Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |
| Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Cameras > Nikon P900 - not a DSLR but you do get a 2000mm (equiv 35mm) lens | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
||
Current theme is Modern editor
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you. |
Hosted by Octarine Services
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0656 seconds (73% database + 27% PHP). 83 queries executed.
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0656 seconds (73% database + 27% PHP). 83 queries executed.