If you have a smart phone try GPS4CAM, if not consider Eye-Fi each has limitations and learning curves. Of the two GPS4Cam is the cheapest by far and works away from WiFi networks used to triangulate location. My Eye-Fi works well in Plano and Dallas, out in the boonies not so much.
The GPS4Cam requires you take a photo with the camera/cameras used then desktop software tags the photo. Of the two I prefer the smartphone based.
Eye-fi works only with Wi-Fi networks, so will not be of much use and precision in many places.
I have used the GT600 from Product Information - MobileAction with great success, and it is cheap, but there are many other equivalent products.
Contrary to the GPS in your phone, these things can run for days at a time; but they do not have a screen, and you will need a more elaborate GPS if you also want to use it to know where you are.
If you have a smartphone with Android, the Google app "My tracks" works very well too.
Tip : when importing a GPX track into Lightroom, it seems you have to close LR between the import of the photos and re-open to import the GPX and start associating it to your photos.
Gwendal, thanks for the tip on the GT-600. For serious geotagging, the capacity of that device looks very attractive. When doing it the hard way - with a handheld GPS - battery and track point management become serious issues. Wish their software ran on Mac, but I can work around that.
The GT600 is built around a real GPS. Eye-Fi, on the other hand, is based on using cell towers and known Internet access points to give you coordinates. Accuracy is much poorer using the Eye-Fi, and it's pretty much useless out in the country where there are few cell towers and access points. I like the Eye-Fi, but not for real geotagging.
4Thanks
Gps for omd?
