# POLL: What's more important, gps or wifi?



## Marsu42 (Sep 19, 2014)

It seems it has become clear why the 70d doesn't have gps: The superior 7d doesn't have wifi (supposedly because of the full-metal jacket) and we wouldn't have a inferior model to have better specs, would we  ...

So after so many threads about the benefits of built-in gps vs. an external tagger and eye-fi vs. idiosyncratic built-in wifi implementation, I think it's time for a poll! Are you the gps- or wifi type of photog?


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 19, 2014)

I shoot photo!
And although these gimmicks might be quite useful for a lot of people in some to many occasions they're not for me.
Give me best IQ, AF and other photo related functions for my money and a camera that isn't sucking out life of the battery with such things.
I know others think different but that's me.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 19, 2014)

Don't need nothing? ???

Neither GPS nor WiFi is essential, but both are handy. It all depends on the cost. Cost is not limited to money. How GPS/WiFi affects the body size, style, construction; how GPS/WiFi affects battery life are also considerations that affect the customer's decision.

Only the customer can determine if the costs are worth the utility.

IF, and that is a large if, a camera manufacturer can implement GPS/WiFi in a truly costless way then sure, I won't mind having either on my camera system. But I don't think that is possible. There will always be trade-offs and compromises. That's just the reality of technology.

My opinion: If the camera has excess power and computing capability, there are other things I would like besides GPS/WiFi.


----------



## J.R. (Sep 19, 2014)

Being a hobbyist, I've used WiFi considerably on the 6D instead of the GPS. Too many of my family and friends want their photos ASAP and the 6D with the EOS-Remote has been upto scratch for this purpose. 

The GPS has come in handy a few times I was shooting out in the wild, but WiFi has been more useful to me.


----------



## jthomson (Sep 19, 2014)

I went for the GPS. Having the photo come up on the map view in Lightroom is nice. Wi-fi would also be nice but i really don't use it that often. I prefer to tether the camera.


----------



## tomscott (Sep 19, 2014)

GPS is probably one of the most useful features of the new age DSLRs.


----------



## zim (Sep 19, 2014)

I voted wifi but the caveat is it has to actually implimented correctly and be stable!


----------



## lintoni (Sep 19, 2014)

I don't _need_ either, but both would have uses, if well implemented, in body.

As it is, I do geotag photos if I've been out hiking, which is when I do most of my photography, but I use my Android tablet to generate a GPX track, which I apply to the photos as my first stage of post processing.

If I did need to use wi-fi, there are better ways of doing it than Canon's implementation (DSLR Controller and a cheap wireless router).

So, if well implemented in body, I'd use them. If not, there are good work-arounds available which mean I am NOT going to be wasting money on one of Canon's excessively expensive toys to gain the functionality.


----------



## ScubaX (Sep 19, 2014)

jthomson said:


> I went for the GPS. Having the photo come up on the map view in Lightroom is nice. Wi-fi would also be nice but i really don't use it that often. I prefer to tether the camera.



That and you can export a file for Google Earth and have reduced versions of your trip. 

I use GPS all the time and keep a eye-fi in the camera and rarely use it. Seems faster to import via a cable to my iPad if I want to send out photos fast.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 19, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> Don't need nothing?



Just trying to get a feel for the language, and my skills are based on watching gangsta movies and series 



Maximilian said:


> and a camera that isn't sucking out life of the battery with such things.



It hasn't been mentioned here, but fyi and concerning the poll: gps on the 6d has very little power drain while wifi empties your battery in no time.


----------



## FEBS (Sep 19, 2014)

I would love to have GPS built-in on all my cameras. Soon, the 7D will be exchanged with the 7D2. I also have a GP-E2 which I mostly use in log modus to collect the position. The direction is not that important to me.
Do I need wifi? Sometimes, an then I use camranger and that's sufficient for me.


----------



## Hillsilly (Sep 19, 2014)

I can see where GPS could be interesting. But I struggle to imagine situations where I'd use Wi-Fi.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 19, 2014)

Not important factors in purchase decision. Don't mind having both if there is no extra charges, just like video feature on my 5D and 1DX.


----------



## I_Miss_Minolta (Sep 19, 2014)

Neither.

This subject reminds me of the riddle in the movie, "Roxanne":

"What can you sit on, sleep on, and brush your teeth with?"

GPS? I take a picture: instant, "...this is where I was."
Wifi? If I'm using a smart phone to UPLOAD an image, I use the smart phone to TAKE the image.

_Yeah, but what about [...insert your exception here...]?_

a) A chair, a bed, and a toothbrush.


----------



## awinphoto (Sep 19, 2014)

Since i shoot in studio a good chunk of the time, GPS means little to me... wifi, if implemented successfully, would cut my time transferring photos, hopefully...


----------



## PhotoCat (Sep 19, 2014)

When I hanged my 5D2 on the end of a 20-foot pole for a bird's eye shot, I loved to hv wifi to compose the pic
on my cell phone! My feet often ended up in the shot LOL!


----------



## DominoDude (Sep 19, 2014)

I'm the kind of customer that's perfectly happy without any of those thingymebobs.


----------



## mackguyver (Sep 19, 2014)

I find GPS most useful, but WiFi would also be nice. Adding a EyeFi card is a lot cheaper than adding a GPS module, too, so that's why I voted for GPS.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 19, 2014)

Although there is a limited money making use for GPS, and its fun, its not my highest priority. Wi-Fi, on the other hand can save time and labor, so its a money making advantage.

I use a eye-fi card on my 5D MK III for internet shots, but would like to tether using Wi-Fi.

Neither one is a deal breaker, since there are work arounds, even if not ideal.


----------



## dppaskewitz (Sep 19, 2014)

I use the GPS on my 6D all the time (I never don't turn it on, unless I forget). I haven't yet figured out how to use the built in Wifi (but it's only been a year and a half since I bought the camera, so there is still time). I wouldn't upload photos using Wifi (shooting Raw and generally in the boondocks, as someone else mentioned). But it might be useful for remote control from a cell phone or tablet. I have seen other posts where folks have mentioned that use (something about bugs and a car, if I recall correctly). One of these days, I'll figure it out...........


----------



## noncho (Sep 19, 2014)

WiFi for the great remote control options.


----------



## 2n10 (Sep 19, 2014)

Neither. But I do see the advantages of both if my style changes. GPS would be the most likely for me since I mostly shoot wildlife.


----------



## Taemobig (Sep 19, 2014)

Wifi seems more useful for me. Being able to control and see liveview wirelessly from the camera is something pros can actually use. I had a job where I was given a 20 ft. crane jib to use for a music video, it would have been so much easier to use if I could focus, start recording, and see liveview with the camera up 20 feet in the air.


----------



## Valvebounce (Sep 19, 2014)

Hi Marsu. 
I would like to say don't need either, but it have tried that many times to tag images using a GPX tag, both apple and droid, different time zones on devices (read forgot to sync), daylight savings different (read forgot to sync). 
Trouble is even when I didn't forget to sync the locations came out wrong, I guess it was something to do with operator error with the software. 

Cheers, Graham.


----------



## LDS (Sep 19, 2014)

Bluetooth... LOL!

(this way you could use your smartphone both for GPS and WiFi) 

Jokes aside, it all depends on what kind of photos you do more. You may need one, both or none.

And I've yet to see a Canon camera supporting WiFi Enterprise (pre-shared keys are not secure).


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 19, 2014)

Having GPS allows government snooping  If you have GPS, *NSA* will always know where you and your camera are located  I know, I know privacy is a thing from the past and will never be seen again 

Using WiFi to communicate with a client's iPad, etc is a money maker


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 19, 2014)

c.d.embrey said:


> Having GPS allows government snooping  If you have GPS, *NSA* will always know where you and your camera are located  I know, I know privacy is a thing from the past and will never be seen again



Um, how is that? I'm very privacy aware, but it's just a *passive* gps *receiver* and you don't need to export the gps tags from your postprocessing software when uploading to the net. The real gouvernment spy device is in your mobile phone because it's easy to triangulate your position using cell phone masts or your login data from public wifi.



Jackson_Bill said:


> Not that I worry about govt snooping on my GPS but that reminds me of a question - how hard would the Canon wifi systems be to hack? Could some malicious hacker format your card?



The way the wifi firmware works, it looks like Canon bought a software part from a 3rd party and glued it to their firmware. Unless there are dedicated backdoors, I'd say it's as safe as it gets if you don't chose "passw0rd" as your password, the wifi uses that latest encryption and authentication standard.

Btw here are the most popular iCloud passwords from the recent hack - is your's included ? ... https://raw.githubusercontent.com/hackappcom/ibrute/master/passlist.txt


----------



## dgatwood (Sep 19, 2014)

Easy. GPS. Wi-Fi is easy to replace by carrying a little more gear, whereas GPS isn't.

It's a pain in the backside to geotag photos without in-body GPS. If you use an external receiver, that's one more piece of gear that has to be continuously attached to your camera. If you use track logs, that's one more battery to keep charged.

Also, the precision of geotagging is likely to be better with in-camera GPS, because the camera knows when you pressed the shutter, and can get coordinates at that exact moment instead of on a ten second interval or whatever.

By contrast, it's not that hard to carry around an SD card adapter for my phone (to replace one of my uses for Wi-Fi) and a radio remote (to replace the other one). The batteries in a remote last for months, so they're a non-issue. And although radio remotes do require a device to be attached to your camera, you probably won't need to have it attached for every shot for days on end, unlike your GPS receiver.

Also, the alternatives to Wi-Fi work a bit better than Canon's Wi-Fi implementation, IMO, albeit at a cost in terms of the amount of extra gear you're carrying around. In particular, the EOS Remote app doesn't appear to support continuous shooting, unless I'm misusing it somehow. And because it operates in live view mode, focusing is slow, effectively giving you a huge shutter lag. With that said, it is still better than a timer.


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Sep 19, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> Unless there are dedicated backdoors, I'd say it's as safe as it gets if you don't chose "passw0rd" as your password,



Who would be dumb enough to do that? 

I mean, come on, it's spelled wrong. That's a zero, not a letter O. Geez. Some people. :


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 21, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > and a camera that isn't sucking out life of the battery with such things.
> ...


Thanks for that information.
Hopefully Canon and any other camera manufacturer is implementing the possibility to switch those gimmicks OFF.
Of course they might be handy by time, but I would like to decide when. And still I don't _need _them.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 21, 2014)

Maximilian said:


> Hopefully Canon and any other camera manufacturer is implementing the possibility to switch those gimmicks OFF.



Of course you can switch off wifi & gps (the 6d has even a wifi indicator on the top lcd which is a complete waste of space). The catch with the 6d and probably 7d2 is just that gps stays on on camera off to continue the track log - so you have to remember to switch it on/off manually each time (or use Magic Lantern).


----------



## bholliman (Sep 21, 2014)

I occasionally use wifi but have never used GPS. As long as I can turn them off to save battery life, I don't care if they are there or not.


----------



## Badger (Sep 21, 2014)

I will say, I use GPS with just about all my pictures. I like having that information and using the Maps feature on LR is cool. I almost never use the WiFi feature but when I have needed it, it has been invaluable. I use the WiFi feature primarily to share pictures while on the go. Yes, I shoot RAW also but the combination of the Canon remote software and DropBox have worked out great when I needed it. I would probably give up WiFi first just because I don't use it that often, but I wouldn't give up GPS.


----------



## weixing (Sep 21, 2014)

Hi,
It's good to have, but ok if don't have. But I'll prefer a reliable GPS over a wifi.

The 6D had both wifi and GPS, but the GPS take very long to get a lock on the GPS, so I use a Garmin eTrex 30 to produce a gpx file for tagging. So I hope the 7D2 GPS implementation is better and more reliable than 6D... Also, happy that 7D2 had a digital compass... may be Canon can add a map function in the camera... ha ha ha 

Have a nice day.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 21, 2014)

In 2014 I only consider Canon cameras with all 4 radio modules built-in. No excuse tolerated. 

* WiFi (b/g/n and ac)
* GPS
* NFC
* RT-EX radio flash commander 

Since Canon is not willing and/or able to .. I will not buy anything from them. It's that simple.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 21, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> * RT-EX radio flash commander
> Since Canon is not willing and/or able to .. I will not buy anything from them. It's that simple.



This is really one thing I'm disappointed about, probably they have the same transmission problems as with wifi in a metal body (5d3/5d4/7d2) and just for product policy's sake won't have the lesser plastic models (6d,70d) have a built-in rt controller either :-o


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Sep 21, 2014)

Neither is important for photography. Either could be important to someone, but as near as I can tell neither affects image quality. Call me a Luddite, but the fewer electronic features, the less there is to go wrong. Now
for a minimum featured FD mount DSLR......


----------



## tbadowski (Sep 21, 2014)

I could really use WIFI with my 5D mk III for several reasons-
* Product Photography for my wife's Ebay - the "studio" is on another floor, and to have the photos uploaded automatically would be very helpful

* Remote control / IPAD - 

Given that it may not fit in the body or drain power too much, I would suggest a Mega "Grip" with:
>Extra Batteries
>WIFI
> GPS
> ST-R3 remote flash controller


----------



## dgatwood (Sep 22, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > Hopefully Canon and any other camera manufacturer is implementing the possibility to switch those gimmicks OFF.
> ...



AFAIK, the camera doesn't actually save a track log unless you tell it to do so. But it does continue to have the GPS hardware update its position on a regular interval, in part because the GPS ephemeris data is only valid for a certain period of time (typically four hours), and if it gets stale, reacquiring a GPS lock takes much, much longer. And, in part, because actually acquiring a GPS position, even in hot start mode, would unnecessarily delay writing photos out to flash (by 1–5 seconds, depending on hardware), and they probably don't want to bother going back and rewriting the images after GPS data becomes available (even though they really should).


----------



## dgatwood (Sep 22, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> In 2014 I only consider Canon cameras with all 4 radio modules built-in. No excuse tolerated.
> 
> * WiFi (b/g/n and ac)
> * GPS
> ...



Agreed. I'm more than a bit fed up with Canon's absurd little game of haphazardly putting different random subsets of features in each of their cameras. It can't be expensive enough for this approach to make sense. Just put all the radios in every device already, and declare yourselves to be the first camera company to have GPS, Wi-Fi, and RF flash control in all your cameras.

(I don't particularly care about NFC. All that does is make it slightly easier to pair the camera with some cellular phones.)


----------



## Daniel Flather (Sep 22, 2014)

I voted for _Don't need nothing_ —whatever that means.


----------



## davidson (Sep 22, 2014)

i like using wifi on my 6d, its helps as a remote trigger for those shots where vibration reduction is crucial. it can also help when i have the camera in a weird position and can't quite see the screen to compose properly, but i mainly use it after a shoot with my tab to let the client see what the initial pics look like, and they can give their opinion on which ones they hate and which ones they like, saves a bit of work even before i get to the computer to edit. i have literally NEVER turned on my gps. so i prefer wifi, but i cant say that any is better then the other, different strokes for different horses....or something like that


----------



## serendipidy (Sep 22, 2014)

I_Miss_Minolta said:


> This subject reminds me of the riddle in the movie, "Roxanne":
> 
> "What can you sit on, sleep on, and brush your teeth with?"
> 
> a) A chair, a bed, and a toothbrush.



My guess was water 8)


----------



## Zv (Sep 22, 2014)

GPS not that important for me but WiFi would be as I could shoot remotely using my phone. Also the ability to review images on your phone while the camera is in your bag is a nice feature while your traveling around. I think everything should have some kind of wireless connectivity. There really was no excuse for excluding it on the 7DII.


----------



## Valvebounce (Sep 22, 2014)

Hi Daniel. 
I believe it means you do need something, but you don't know what!  - - = + 

Cheers, Graham. 



Daniel Flather said:


> I voted for _Don't need nothing_ —whatever that means.


----------



## funkboy (Sep 22, 2014)

when I saw "cannot decide" as a poll option I read

"Canon decides"


----------



## pato (Sep 22, 2014)

In my 6D I use both features, depending on the scene. 
Let's assume I go hiking, in that case I have the GPS turned on.
Let's assume I picture night sky, in that case I sit inside while I release the shutter via WiFi (to not freeze outside and reduce vibrations).

It also seems that we are nearly at 50:50 regarding importance and I think it's best to have both features. The more features the more possibilities to use the camera. I think this is also one reason why mobile phones take a huge part of the photography market share, they offer stuff like simple upload, quick post progressing, sending photos to your friends, convenience, ...

pato


----------



## funkboy (Sep 22, 2014)

You know what I'd really like in terms of radio options built in to a camera:

- GPS with an intelligent power function connected to the inertia/orientation sensors already in the camera so that it switches off the radio when the camera isn't moving. It should also have an option to switch off the whole GPS unit when the camera goes to sleep.

- Bluetooth 4.0 LE radio, with apps to take full control of the camera from a computer or smartphone. The bluetooth radio is a dual-mode radio that also supports "classic" Bluetooth & will need to be paired in this mode before it can be used as a remote viewfinder (which requires more bandwidth than Bluetooth LE but should work just fine with regular bluetooth 4 if the "viewfinder" video stream is sufficiently compressed).


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 22, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> It can't be expensive enough for this approach to make sense. Just put all the radios in every device already, and declare yourselves to be the first camera company to have GPS, Wi-Fi, and RF flash control in all your cameras.



Which will result in more profit for Canon?

1. Putting all of that stuff in one camera
2. or continuing to sell the StE3Rt (or like models)?


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 22, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> Agreed. I'm more than a bit fed up with Canon's absurd little game of haphazardly putting different random subsets of features in each of their cameras.



Cannot will agree to this 

If they had it their way, it would be like in the good ol' times just xxxd (joe sixpack) - xxd (enthusiast) - 1dx (sports) + 1ds (studio). Given this alternative, I'm rather happy with Canon's feature juggling because that's the only way they dared to produce a ff 6d I can afford :-o


----------



## dgatwood (Sep 23, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > Agreed. I'm more than a bit fed up with Canon's absurd little game of haphazardly putting different random subsets of features in each of their cameras.
> ...



You know, it is possible to differentiate based on features without being haphazard about it—to put everything in the high-end bodies, and fewer and fewer features in the cheaper ones—you know, like every other hardware manufacturer in the universe does.... 

Instead, Canon stuck most of the wireless toys in the 6D—right in the middle of their lineup—and there's fewer features in everything else, whether it costs more (5D Mark III, 1DX), less (70D), or about the same (7D Mark II). It's like somebody pulled out a dartboard, taped features to it, and threw darts to see what would go where. It really makes no sense.

I guess to be fair, the 5D Mark III and 1DX are a bit older, so if they add GPS and Wi-Fi in the next update to those bodies, their lineup will seem a little less random and more sensible, but right now... it's just bizarre, particularly with the 7D Mark II leaving out Wi-Fi.


----------



## David Hull (Sep 23, 2014)

You missed another option: Don't give a damn about either of them.

I have GPS in my Car and My phone why do I need another one in my camera. What's next one in my shoes?

WiFi Not sure why I need that in a camera either.


----------



## Aswah (Sep 23, 2014)

maybe this shows my ignorance but I don't want either. I do not think that smart phone have taken away from the market share anyone serious about photography because they offer either or both of those features. I have yet to see a shot from a cell phone that compares in quality. Any serious about photography will continue to buy real cameras... I know I will


----------



## weixing (Sep 23, 2014)

David Hull said:


> You missed another option: Don't give a damn about either of them.
> 
> I have GPS in my Car and My phone why do I need another one in my camera. What's next one in my shoes?
> 
> WiFi Not sure why I need that in a camera either.


Hi,
Sometime, I also wonder this when I wear my watch... my phone got clock, my camera got clock, my GPS unit got clock and even my bluetooth earpiece also got clock, so why am I wearing the watch??? Ha ha ha ;D ;D ;D Hmm... May be the only reason I can think of why I wear my watch is that the battery life of my watch outlast all the above device as the watch had auto solar cell charging (basically will last as long as the watch is working), so if one day I forgot to charge all the above device, I still had my watch... ha ha ha 

Have a nice day.


----------



## Zv (Sep 23, 2014)

weixing said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > You missed another option: Don't give a damn about either of them.
> ...



The watch is just a quick glance away compared to other devices such as your phone which could be in a pocket. Though i think habit has a lot to do with it. Even with my phone in my hand, sitting on a train, I always instinctvely glance at my watch to check the time so I don't miss my stop.


----------



## funkboy (Sep 23, 2014)

Zv said:


> The watch is just a quick glance away compared to other devices such as your phone which could be in a pocket. Though i think habit has a lot to do with it. Even with my phone in my hand, sitting on a train, I always instinctvely glance at my watch to check the time so I don't miss my stop.



Agree wholeheartedly. I began wearing a watch again when I started cycling to work. Try pulling a phone out of your pocket on a bike just to check the time...


----------



## stefsan (Sep 23, 2014)

I shoot mostly landscapes and some wildlife. For my shooting purposes, I prefer to have GPS data in the EXIF. Taking out the CF card and putting it into a card reader to download my pics to my computer is no problem for me, therefore I don't miss Wifi.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 23, 2014)

weixing said:


> Hi,
> Sometime, I also wonder this when I wear my watch... my phone got clock, my camera got clock, my GPS unit got clock and even my bluetooth earpiece also got clock, so why am I wearing the watch??? Ha ha ha ;D ;D ;D Hmm... May be the only reason I can think of why I wear my watch is that the battery life of my watch outlast all the above device as the watch had auto solar cell charging (basically will last as long as the watch is working), so if one day I forgot to charge all the above device, I still had my watch... ha ha ha
> 
> Have a nice day.



I do see a lot of younger people who eschew wearing a watch. That would drive me nuts. I even sleep with my watch on my wrist. It is probably a generational thing. 

So camera manufacturers worry about cell phones taking the place of cameras. I wonder if watch manufacturers are experiencing the same thing?


----------



## J.R. (Sep 23, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> I do see a lot of younger people who eschew wearing a watch. That would drive me nuts. I even sleep with my watch on my wrist. It is probably a generational thing.
> 
> So camera manufacturers worry about cell phones taking the place of cameras. I wonder if watch manufacturers are experiencing the same thing?



Younger is a relative term. I've worn a watch since childhood only to stop wearing it about 4 years back. I've been checking time on the cellphone ever since. Times change 

Nevertheless, cellphones have eaten up a large chunk of the P&S sales. To the generation that is "younger" to me, it's all about pushing the output on the internet. Even if the images look like they have suffered radiation damage are posted on FB and other social networking sites. A P&S doesn't make sense for a large part of the crowd.


----------



## David Hull (Sep 23, 2014)

weixing said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > You missed another option: Don't give a damn about either of them.
> ...


Sometimes I have thought that same thing. I think that the reason is that for some 50 years I have gotten used to looking at the device on my wrist for the time. I suppose I could get used to looking at my phone for the time (I know that some people have) but I just haven't bothered.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Sep 23, 2014)

Maximilian said:


> I shoot photo!
> And although these gimmicks might be quite useful for a lot of people in some to many occasions they're not for me.
> Give me best IQ, AF and other photo related functions for my money and a camera that isn't sucking out life of the battery with such things.
> I know others think different but that's me.



I agree and relate to this statement as a photographer. K.I.S.S. principle is a good one.

But I'm also an IT guy so I see a lot of uses and potential for WiFi. Wireless tethering, remote control, etc. So I answered #2 on the poll. (I can figure out the location based on my own notes.)


----------



## IWLP (Sep 23, 2014)

While I shoot photos, too, wi-fi has become an integral part of my workflow. For my style of shooting, getting a shot to the right person at the right time can be just as, or in some cases, even more important than getting a great-looking image. Wi-fi allows me to send images to my phone so I can transmit from there.

Canon's downfall at the moment in this area is their app. The wi-fi is only as functional as the app, and Canon's is in sore need of an update. I need to be able to specify size and quality of the transferred image, easily rate and sort photos (I can do this on the current app, but sometimes when I'm trying to rate, I end up with buttons written in what appears to be Chinese), and I'd like an iPad-native app. I'd also like to be able to change and load camera settings like GoPro's connect and control function.

While the wi-fi is usable at the moment, it's far from great due to the app. 

GPS would be OK, but for my style of shooting, location information is more of a "oh, that's cool" feature, but it doesn't make my life easier like wi-fi does.


----------



## lescrane (Sep 23, 2014)

no excuse for canon not to have both. what games they play. How much could it cost if even the cheapest cellphone's have it? Canon seems to be dedicated to holding back on the customers on features..putting some in some cameras, not in others. They let the non-essential but useful features trickle out, and thus help promote built in obsolescence, getting suckers like me to buy a new camera every two years. Really now, IQ hasn't changed much in years to they promote "bells and whistles"...bigger screen, articulating screen, WiFi, GPS, electronic level.

I'm one step away from moving to SONY which seems to be ahead of the curve not behind it.


----------



## ERHP (Sep 23, 2014)

Personally, neither. GPS is a nice to have but unless you really need an accurate location/date/time stamp for every picture, it is rather limited. Likewise, Wi-Fi, maybe if I was shooting tethered but then I have additional power requirements. I would rather see the time and effort for these somewhat frivolous things be instead spent on image/video quality, AF speed and accuracy.


----------



## TeT (Sep 23, 2014)

I use WIFI tethered to my tablet to view images when checking functions and testing lenses... very handy. I havent found a use for me personally that requires GPS yet...


----------



## LookingThroughMyLens81 (Sep 23, 2014)

I don't want or need WiFi but I understand the use for it so I won't begrudge anyone who wants it. As for GPS, I'd want that but we've all seen how poor Canon's GPS implementation has always been. Craptastic at best. What I'd really like to see is Direct transfer of files via USB to my smartphone. Phones can get 128GB of MicroSD storage and have beefy quad-core CPUs, so why not? It would certainly be faster than WiFi. Another option would be USB2Go drives that could plug into a Canon camera and the camera would transfer the files to the flash drive.


----------



## Zv (Sep 23, 2014)

LookingThroughMyLens81 said:


> I don't want or need WiFi but I understand the use for it so I won't begrudge anyone who wants it. As for GPS, I'd want that but we've all seen how poor Canon's GPS implementation has always been. Craptastic at best. What I'd really like to see is Direct transfer of files via USB to my smartphone. Phones can get 128GB of MicroSD storage and have beefy quad-core CPUs, so why not? It would certainly be faster than WiFi. Another option would be USB2Go drives that could plug into a Canon camera and the camera would transfer the files to the flash drive.



You can transfer from camera to iPad using the USB connector cable but it's really slow when transferring full size RAW files. I haven't tried WiFi (my cameras sadly don't have WiFi) to compare. Maybe someone else can quote times. I'd imagine a phone to be just as slow via cable if it were possible. I use Sandisk Extreme Pro SD cards so not sure where the slowdown is occuring. 

I guess having the option to send images via cable to a phone direct would be nice. Surely some Android phones can do this, no?


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 23, 2014)

lescrane said:


> I'm one step away from moving to SONY which seems to be ahead of the curve not behind it.


Because you can always rely on Sony to pour out an unending stream of bells & whistles and gimmicks.

When you find that your Sony's camera mount is already obsolete and superseded after a comparatively tiny amount of time, please remember:


> what games they play.


----------



## dgatwood (Sep 23, 2014)

LookingThroughMyLens81 said:


> I don't want or need WiFi but I understand the use for it so I won't begrudge anyone who wants it. As for GPS, I'd want that but we've all seen how poor Canon's GPS implementation has always been. Craptastic at best.



Really? GPS on my 6D works pretty darn well, from what I've seen. Their Wi-Fi implementation, on the other hand... is craptastic.




LookingThroughMyLens81 said:


> What I'd really like to see is Direct transfer of files via USB to my smartphone. Phones can get 128GB of MicroSD storage and have beefy quad-core CPUs, so why not?



You can do that with an iPhone right now. You'll just need a Camera Connector Kit and a USB cable. The reason some of us like Wi-Fi is that all you have to do is turn it on, wait for your phone to find it, and suck the images across, without carrying extra stuff with you.




LookingThroughMyLens81 said:


> It would certainly be faster than WiFi. Another option would be USB2Go drives that could plug into a Canon camera and the camera would transfer the files to the flash drive.



That would be easy enough for Canon to add, given that I'm pretty sure they already have a USB host controller inside the device. With that said, I'd be curious how many people would take advantage of it—again, it's another piece of hardware to carry around.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 24, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> LookingThroughMyLens81 said:
> 
> 
> > As for GPS, I'd want that but we've all seen how poor Canon's GPS implementation has always been. Craptastic at best.
> ...



It depends what the comparison is - the gps on the 6d works ok, but is way less precise than an external dedicated tracker and is missing almost every functionality except bare logging (for example no electronic compass, no way to input cords for waypoints).


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 24, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> ....is missing almost every functionality except bare logging (for example no electronic compass, no way to input cords for waypoints).



But do you want all those other functionalities on your camera. I don't think Canon is claiming that their camera based GPS can take the place of a full function GPS from Garmen.

For a camera based GPS, what else do you need other than logging in where the camera was when the shutter button was pushed?

An electronic compass I could see, but waypoints?


----------



## mackguyver (Sep 24, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > ....is missing almost every functionality except bare logging (for example no electronic compass, no way to input cords for waypoints).
> ...


I'd like turn-by-turn directions with a pleasant voice telling me where to find the best photo locations


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 24, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> I'd like turn-by-turn directions with a pleasant voice telling me where to find the best photo locations



That could be a cool functionality. ;D

"move 5 meters to your right"
"Turn to your left"
"You have arrived at your photo destination, you may release the shutter"

;D


----------



## Canon1 (Sep 24, 2014)

I don't need either. In fact, I'd rather my camera not have GPS or wifi.


----------



## NancyP (Sep 24, 2014)

When I get around to learning about remote triggering, I may investigate the wifi on the 6D. I just haven't had situations where I need that, I am happy if I can get out at all to take a photo.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 24, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> An electronic compass I could see, but waypoints?



It's simply the fact that's it would be darn easy to implement, they added the functionality to play mp3 audio along the slideshow, why not add an input for gps cords and a display mode "direction thisandthat xyz m"... The 6d is marketed for tourism, isn't it? The only reason why it isn't added by Magic Lantern is that because all their devs have 5d3 cameras w/o gps.

But I admit I get easily frustrated because of the unused potential a capable embedded computer like an eos camera has :-o



mackguyver said:


> I'd like turn-by-turn directions with a pleasant voice telling me where to find the best photo locations



I'm close to that - when looking for abandoned soviet military installations, I get the gps cords from google maps and then let the tracker guide me ... I'd never find small bunker entrances in the middle of the woods otherwise.


----------



## hsbn (Sep 24, 2014)

They're both valuable in some case IF they're working right. I have the 6D and both GPS and Wifi are so horrible. The GPS is not reliable. I stood at one place, took about 20 photos, and they got tagged all over the place within 2-3 miles of each other. This was outdoor but under a tree. And Wifi signal drops repeatedly, and the range is not great.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 24, 2014)

hsbn said:


> I stood at one place, took about 20 photos, and they got tagged all over the place within 2-3 miles of each other.



Yikes, that stynks. Did you get the GPS checked out by Canon? Sumptin ain't right.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 24, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> Did you get the GPS checked out by Canon? Sumptin ain't right.



These issues have the problem of being hard to reproduce - how would a Canon tech do it from his/her desk? Unless it's completely broken, they're unlikely to simply replace all connected part just for good measure :-o


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 24, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> AcutancePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > Did you get the GPS checked out by Canon? Sumptin ain't right.
> ...



Would they not do just what you did? Take several pictures without moving the camera and if the GPS tags show 2-3 miles difference; there's the evidence of a problem. 

There has to be some quality metric for GPS that Canon uses.


----------



## IgotGASbadDude (Sep 24, 2014)

Maximilian said:


> I shoot photo! And although these gimmicks might be quite useful for a lot of people in some to many occasions they're not for me.
> 
> Give me best IQ, AF and other photo related functions for my money and a camera that isn't sucking out life of the battery with such things. I know others think different but that's me.



Well stated. With you 100% 8)


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 24, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> Would they not do just what you did? Take several pictures without moving the camera and if the GPS tags show 2-3 miles difference; there's the evidence of a problem.



Good thinking there, in the back of my mind I never think of digital data as "proof", but of course just an indication to support the description could be enough. I hope we hear if it was enough for Canon as gps receivers of this type are inherently dodgy given sub-optimal receiving circumstances.

The reason for my general critical attitude in these cases is one support case of mine, the local Canon service told me that they have to be able to reproduce the problem (themselves), just me saying it occurs from time to time isn't enough for a warranty replacement of parts.


----------



## hsbn (Sep 24, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> hsbn said:
> 
> 
> > I stood at one place, took about 20 photos, and they got tagged all over the place within 2-3 miles of each other.
> ...


My warranty is up. So I just drag those images when i'm at home on Lightroom map module. At least, there is GPS let me know where to start and using Google Map, I can drag them to the correct location. Still it's annoying.


----------



## insidiator (Sep 25, 2014)

Potential uses of wifi (that I can think of; there are probably more):
1) Put your SLR on a sturdy pole and take above-crowd pictures using the EOS app to see what you're looking at and focusing on (I imagine there are other solutions, but I suspect they are expensive).

2) Set up a remote wildlife photography station in your back yard or even the middle of nowhere (as long as the wifi function is like that of a Go Pro and lets you set up an ad-hoc network). You could even build a remote-controlled vehicle to take pictures of skittish/dangerous subjects (e.g. rattlesnakes, various birds) and you could change the framing and focusing from afar!

3) Remote time-lapse (if time intervalometer settings were available and changeable)

Potential uses of GPS
1) Identify exact location so that duplicate framing could be achieved later for a before-after/seasonal thing (would actually be pretty cool).

2) Showing other people where you took they picture so that they can take a crack at it.

Given this (admittedly limited) list, I would go with wifi hands down. GPS provides context (which can be valuable creatively), but wifi (if implemented correctly) could open up entirely new avenues for creative photography!


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 25, 2014)

insidiator said:


> 2) Set up a remote wildlife photography station in your back yard or even the middle of nowhere (as long as the wifi function is like that of a Go Pro and lets you set up an ad-hoc network).



I'd really like to see examples of the results of this, if you've got any please do open a thread in the pictures section! One problem is wifi battery power, so a battery grip is in order or you could lug a car battery around an try to build a power converter for the dslr(?). But the main problem is...



insidiator said:


> You could even build a remote-controlled vehicle to take pictures of skittish/dangerous subjects (e.g. rattlesnakes, various birds) and you could change the framing and focusing from afar!



... is the only way I can imagine you can get reasonable results, w/o re-framing you have pre-set the scene and this only allows for "squirrel feeding on nuts I've put there myself" scenes.

At some point when I get hold of a smartphone with eos remote, I'll probably try to shoot lizards lying in the sun in the same spot again and again, but my imagination ends right there. Unless it's a dangerous/deadly animal (and we don't have them where I live, lucky me) it's much easier to simply slowly crawl up to the animal.

Edit: I've just requested *remote wildlife wifi shots* here, please post if you've got some...
*http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=22956*


----------



## Old Sarge (Sep 25, 2014)

Although I, personally, consider GPS a more important feature than Wi-fi, I can certainly see the usefulness of both. Which has caused my old brain to start wondering why nobody has reverse engineered the WFT-E7A and produced a cheaper model. There are off-brand battery grips, selling for a fraction of the cost of a Canon. Surely it wouldn't be too difficult to manufacture a wi-fi unit which sold in the $300.00 range....or perhaps it is too difficult which is why I'm never heard of one.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 25, 2014)

Old Sarge said:


> Which has caused my old brain to start wondering why nobody has reverse engineered the WFT-E7A and produced a cheaper model. There are off-brand battery grips, selling for a fraction of the cost of a Canon. Surely it wouldn't be too difficult to manufacture a wi-fi unit which sold in the $300.00 range....or perhaps it is too difficult which is why I'm never heard of one.



I assume the latter - look at the disastrous performance of Yn's rt flash transmitter clone which obviously made them delay their whole line of announced rt flashes.

It's true that wifi is standardized and it should be easier to implement, but sub-par radio performance is annoying and will make a lot of people buy the more expensive, but working model. With battery grips it doesn't matter as much for non-critical shooting if you can buy 3x-4x clones for the price of 1x original.


----------



## jthomson (Sep 25, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> Old Sarge said:
> 
> 
> > Which has caused my old brain to start wondering why nobody has reverse engineered the WFT-E7A and produced a cheaper model. There are off-brand battery grips, selling for a fraction of the cost of a Canon. Surely it wouldn't be too difficult to manufacture a wi-fi unit which sold in the $300.00 range....or perhaps it is too difficult which is why I'm never heard of one.
> ...



I don't think it is a technical problem. DSLRcontroller and the TL- MR3040 work well on the android system and the cost is about $50. Camranger does the same at a higher price point. No one has cloned the canon unit because it just isn't that good.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 25, 2014)

hsbn said:


> My warranty is up. So I just drag those images when i'm at home on Lightroom map module. At least, there is GPS let me know where to start and using Google Map, I can drag them to the correct location. Still it's annoying.



Sorry to hear that. The good news is that a dodgy GPS won't affect the quality of the images you got.


----------



## Old Sarge (Sep 25, 2014)

jthomson said:


> I don't think it is a technical problem. DSLRcontroller and the TL- MR3040 work well on the android system and the cost is about $50. Camranger does the same at a higher price point. No one has cloned the canon unit because it just isn't that good.


I believe I looked at the TL-MR3040 for use when traveling in a couple of specific situations. I assume (as dangerous as that is) that you connect to the camera through the USB port on the TL-MR3040 and that allows a wi-fi connection to the android device using DSLR Controller (which I think I have on my Nexus). Is that correct? Interesting idea. I have also considered the Camranger but haven't delved into it deeply since I would use this type of connection so rarely.

Thanks for your input. I think one reason nobody has "cloned" the Canon unit is that the market is so small compared to battery grips or RT flash units, etc.


----------



## Reiep (Sep 25, 2014)

GPS data can be added in post and it also drains a lot of battery so that's good to have but not critical. However the tethering via phone is a blessing IMHO !


----------



## Nethawk (Sep 25, 2014)

I voted GPS. I do a lot of mushroom and wild edible foraging and take photos for both art and education. The added metadata is great for finding the same spot year after year.


----------



## skoobey (Sep 27, 2014)

In photography what is more important? Having a camera, or having a subject?

It's not either or. Completely different features.


----------

