Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More from AOL Travel:
Airline tickets,
Hotel reservations,
Car rental,
Vacation packages,
Discount cruises,
Last-Minute Deals
Travel Guides:
Las Vegas,
New York City,
Los Angeles,
Boston,
Chicago,
Washington, DC,
London,
Rome,
Paris,
Tokyo,
Minneapolis,
Phoenix,
Austin,
Charlotte,
San Diego,
Mexico City,
Copenhagen,
Sydney,
Bangkok,
Bogota,
Toronto,
Costa Rica,
Bermuda,
Puerto Rico
© 2012 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | Advertise With Us | About Our Ads
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-02-2008 @ 6:46PM
Jack DeNeut said...
I bought one of these Sony units about six months ago, and although it's a great idea, it doesn't work as well as I'd hoped.
The way it works is very simple - it records your position every 15 seconds, along with the exact time, and then the software matches up the time stamps in the GPS device with the time stamps on your photos to determine the location in which a photo was taken.
The first issue is that you have to make sure the time settings on your camera are *very* accurate, meaning less than 30 seconds of error when setting the time from a very reliable source like http://www.time.gov/
Secondly, the GPS hardware in the Sony device is not very good. The accuracy is often no better than a few hundred feet from your actual location, and the device itself must be pointed *directly* at the sky at all times (I actually duct taped it to the top of my baseball cap at one point). Half the time, it didn't record my position at all.
My recommendation would be to spend a few more bucks and buy a better GPS unit, and then use its track logs to geolocate your photos using software like Greg mentioned above. I ended up buying a Garmin 60Csx, which is very accurate (if a little expensive), and only needs the antenna peeking out of my backpack to reliably record GPS data.
Reply