[Bob 256]

Wow! Thanks for that information LeeRunge. That's extremely interesting. My thoughts were with lister6520 in thinking that the proximity to the repeater might have been responsible even though their frequencies shouldn't have caused a problem. My other thought was that the forest service was deliberately jamming GPS at the site for some obscure reason. I want to return to that site again (for more photos and to check on the outage conditions) but that looks like next year at least right now. Winter is moving in and at 9000 feet it can be brutal early-on so don't want to become a mountaintop popcicle, but I do intend to get back there again.

[jumbleview]

Wow! Thanks for that information LeeRunge. That's extremely interesting. My thoughts were with lister6520 in thinking that the proximity to the repeater might have been responsible even though their frequencies shouldn't have caused a problem. My other thought was that the forest service was deliberately jamming GPS at the site for some obscure reason. I want to return to that site again (for more photos and to check on the outage conditions) but that looks like next year at least right now. Winter is moving in and at 9000 feet it can be brutal early-on so don't want to become a mountaintop popcicle, but I do intend to get back there again.

Next time can you compare camera results with with smartphone (assuming you use one)?

[cometguy]

I'm wondering how good the GPS receiver is in the camera. My car has an excellent GPS receiver that has worked flawlessly (showing my location accurately on the built-in screen map) even when I've been far from cellphone signals in deep, remote, wilderness mountain valleys -- but my car has a lot more room to host a better receiver than does a DSLR. I would think that size and quality of receiver matters when in remote locations like that.

[PDL]

I'm wondering how good the GPS receiver is in the camera. My car has an excellent GPS receiver that has worked flawlessly (showing my location accurately on the built-in screen map) even when I've been far from cellphone signals in deep, remote, wilderness mountain valleys -- but my car has a lot more room to host a better receiver than does a DSLR. I would think that size and quality of receiver matters when in remote locations like that.

Please remember that GPS is satellite based. Location based on mobile phone towers (Cell towers) is a secondary method of determining where you are. I have two old PDA's that have either GPS add-ons (Compaq iPaq) or built in GPS functionality (HP rx5915).

The GPS in Pentax cameras is based on GPS satellite data not mobile towers, which is why it works when you are out in the boonies. I have GPS tagged images from Yellowstone's NE entrance (Wyoming), the Quinault Rain Forest (Washington St.) and out in the English Channel on the Ferry. There were no cell signals in those three areas. The images were geotagged by my K-3II based on satellite's not cell phone towers. Don't confuse the two technologies.

From the Lamar Valley - Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming (Emphasis mine)
GPS Version ID : 2.3.0.0
GPS Latitude Ref : North
GPS Longitude Ref : West
GPS Altitude Ref : Above Sea Level
GPS Time Stamp : 17:04:16
GPS Satellites : 09
GPS Status : Measurement Active
GPS Measure Mode : 3-Dimensional Measurement
GPS Speed Ref : km/h
GPS Speed : 3.59
GPS Track Ref : True North
GPS Track : 99.58
GPS Img Direction Ref : True North
GPS Img Direction : 358.75
GPS Map Datum : WGS-84
GPS Processing Method : GPS
GPS Date Stamp : 2019:09:26
GPS Altitude : 1920.8 m Above Sea Level
GPS Date/Time : 2019:09:26 17:04:16Z
GPS Latitude : 44 deg 54' 45.58" N
GPS Longitude : 110 deg 23' 19.98" W
GPS Position : 44 deg 54' 45.58" N, 110 deg 23' 19.98" W

[cometguy]

Please remember that GPS is satellite based. Location based on mobile phone towers (Cell towers) is a secondary method of determining where you are. I have two old PDA's that have either GPS add-ons (Compaq iPaq) or built in GPS functionality (HP rx5915).

The GPS in Pentax cameras is based on GPS satellite data not mobile towers, which is why it works when you are out in the boonies. I have GPS tagged images from Yellowstone's NE entrance (Wyoming), the Quinault Rain Forest (Washington St.) and out in the English Channel on the Ferry. There were no cell signals in those three areas. The images were geotagged by my K-3II based on satellite's not cell phone towers. Don't confuse the two technologies.

I wasn't confusing the two technologies. I'm saying that if you have a weaker *receiver*, you may not be able to receive those satellite signals as well. My conjecture is that camera GPS satellite receivers are likely to be much smaller than those in cars, and thus not as able to receive weaker signals as cars can.

[PDL]

I'm wondering how good the GPS receiver is in the camera. My car has an excellent GPS receiver that has worked flawlessly (showing my location accurately on the built-in screen map) even when I've been far from cellphone signals in deep, remote, wilderness mountain valleys -- but my car has a lot more room to host a better receiver than does a DSLR. I would think that size and quality of receiver matters when in remote locations like that.

So, when reading the highlighted text - you understand my comment?

Also, I think when you are talking about your "receiver" you are talking about the size of the GPS antenna.

In terms of size of the antenna, the order I presume is car, camera then phone. Unless the antenna size in the camera is smaller than the one used in the phone. In my example (#9), it was the car's GPS that was - shall we say - confused. I did have more issues with GPS in the Vauxhall than I did in the Peugeot and Citron I drove with in Europe. I have found that GPS in automobiles varies more across brands than with my phones I have had over the years.

[zapp]

Phones typically use gps/glonass sensors or even additional gnss signals. Getting a position lock even in obstructed areas is easier than with gps alone. What firmware are you using? Some satellite signals should not be used for calculation of a solution. Firmware updates keep you up to date.
Besides that magnetic fields, high voltage, metal cages, objects obstructing the horizon can cause trouble. You could calculate satellite visibility for that day and place to find out more - too much work. Update your firmware and check what happens in the future.

[PDL]

Phones typically use gps/glonass sensors or even additional gnss signals. Getting a position lock even in obstructed areas is easier than with gps alone. What firmware are you using? Some satellite signals should not be used for calculation of a solution. Firmware updates keep you up to date.
Besides that magnetic fields, high voltage, metal cages, objects obstructing the horizon can cause trouble. You could calculate satellite visibility for that day and place to find out more - too much work. Update your firmware and check what happens in the future.

Are you referring to me?

I check(ed) my phones firmware daily. Part of my morning ritual as I get up, check mail, check for OS updates and look for app updates. The camera is running the latest firmware (which has not been updated for over a year before I bought mine).

As for the cars firmware, that was in 2017 and it really is not my concern to update the firmware on a rental vehicle while in a foreign country.

Meanwhile on my current phone, the company promised to upgrade the OS at least over the next two OS releases. Well, they decided that upgrading their previous years flagship model (bought unlocked from B&H) was just too difficult and they have canceled the move to Android 10. Typical..