control and monitoring options why no FPV?

[DaveInspire]

I am very confused by the requirement for a second controller. Why can't this job be done with an ipad or iphone? The biggest flow is that they didn't include a POV forward (fixed) facing camera for the operator. In the videos they show one controller with a map and another with the camera view. How are you not going to hit that tree or navigate around the building you are shooting? It seems to limit any usage to line of sight, but even LOS is not suitable for getting the shots, if you can see it at 50 ft you can't judge position and depth accurately enough for close flying.

They make a 3k photographic tool aimed at prosumers and then don't include a cheap 640 forward looking camera. They have a down facing camera for postion hold.

If they had a forward facing camera and the camera operator it would be a very compelling offering (regardless how low resolution the forward camera was).

Also, for camera movement, what was up with the live stream? It seems horrible, did they really not have a camera operator? It looked like someone running a phantom 2 vision+ on their own horrible alighment and overshoots. Can't wait for the user reviews but question the utility of this over a phantom 2 with FPV and gopro. A

Actually, the FPV fixed camera is even more important as with 360 camera control you have no idea what you are about to run into. Even LOS it's a huge issue to know how far you are from the tree to fly between them or up and over (or over a ridgeline). I am so confused by this omission. Anyone have any ideas?

Also, I get they want to sell more controllers but this seems odd. A phone accelerometer would be such a great low cost tool for the camera operator to have smooth control, much smoother than sticks and app could have so many cool interfaces in software to autosmooth movements etc based on user thresholds.

 

[Adam]

Dave,

You make some interesting points, and I would have liked a front facing camera for those dual operator shots. The Inspire is for moving beyond the Phantom and branching out to a better tool.

For those shots that are not line of site and require multiple operators, it's still not a substitute for an S900/S1000 rig with DSLR, multiple cameras and video TX, etc.

The great thing we have seen with the Phantom line is that DJI adds plenty of features in firmware updates and add-ons later, who knows what is coming for the Inspire 1.

 

[macheung]

This seems like serious omission.
It isn't about being out of LOS, but about being able to carefully position the craft with respect to surroundings. You can be only 100 ft away with clear LOS, but without FPV, it may be very difficult to get the depth perception right to know whether you will go in front, behind or crash into a tree or other object.

 

[DaveInspire]

Even single operator and LOS this is important. I am very curious what camera operations they expose with a single controller. My hope was the app would have full control of pan/tilt like the vision plus gyro mode. Unfortunately this is not something they can resolve with the future software update since it physically requires a separate forward facing camera.

They must know how flight operator and camera operator teams function, which makes the omission that much more bizarre. And it's not like they need to protect the high-end because the camera is the limitation here not the controls. I mean, if you want to fly a 5dmkiii you need a s1000.

In any case that is what is making me hold out. I think if they had 2 720p previews one for flight and one for camera it would have been so much better and actually a lower data rate than the 1080p stream. Oh well, here is waiting for the inspire 2.

I am excited about the removable cameras. Imagine if a third party put A decent sensor and lens in for stills. That would be great. The stills I've seen so far were quite weak and reminded me of the vision and vision plus.

One other thing I noticed was the lens flare bouncing around in one of the videos they had. It's as if an element is moving in the lens or there's an issue with the stabilization. I've had some amazing lens flare shots with the lowly vision plus and never saw that problem. It's a very serious issue as it makes any video footage with the sun useless.

Hopefully that's a preproduction if you like the jitter when you're transforming making take off footage less than usable.

My this is sounding so negative… That's not my intention it's an incredibly amazing machine I just wish it was slightly more amazing ;-)

Dave,

You make some interesting points, and I would have liked a front facing camera for those dual operator shots. The Inspire is for moving beyond the Phantom and branching out to a better tool.

For those shots that are not line of site and require multiple operators, it's still not a substitute for an S900/S1000 rig with DSLR, multiple cameras and video TX, etc.

The great thing we have seen with the Phantom line is that DJI adds plenty of features in firmware updates and add-ons later, who knows what is coming for the Inspire 1.

 

[mem_ny]

It's clear that you need a second RC to 360 pan the camera. It is disappointing to have such a tremendous design innovation (with 360 panning) if it can only be used be used with two operators ad two RC's. So much for prosumer. I have never been critical of DJI but I think this should have been disclosed.

It is also makes we wonder about the functionality of having the camera fix on an object (POI) while you fly around it, and equally important, the future functionality of the promised "follow me." Will these too require 2 controllers and 2 operators?

Does anyone have any insight on these features?

Makes we wonder what else I'm missing. Maybe I should have waited before ordering.

 

[DaveInspire]

It's clear that you need a second RC to 360 pan the camera. It is disappointing to have such a tremendous design innovation (with 360 panning) if it can only be used be used with two operators ad two RC's. So much for prosumer. I have never been critical of DJI but I think this should have been disclosed.

It is also makes we wonder about the functionality of having the camera fix on an object (POI) while you fly around it, and equally important, the future functionality of the promised "follow me." Will these too require 2 controllers and 2 operators?

Does anyone have any insight on these features?

Makes we wonder what else I'm missing. Maybe I should have waited before ordering.

Can't speak to those features but for camera operation a simple solution would to be have a configurable toggle that switched between camera control and flight control similar to switching gps to atti. In this way you could get a stable position then control the camera but better would be to give pan/tilt on the remote if they were going to redesign and add a tilt wheel why not a stick to handle both.

For poi I assume you can control tilt and the craft stays orientated towards the poi. This does not involve camera rotation but craft orientation.

Two controllers seems like a waste when you need one long distance data pipe and just a simple input. It would be like having multiple wireless routers at home; one for each device. The vision system of local wifi for camera control makes more sense for this product.

I am more concerned about gimble jitter or lense element movement. Look at the sunflare in this video and compare to a phantom. Phantom flare is as steady as everything else in frame. This is a bouncing everywhere!

 

[DaveInspire]

Can't speak to those features but for camera operation a simple solution would to be have a configurable toggle that switched between camera control and flight control similar to switching gps to atti. In this way you could get a stable position then control the camera but better would be to give pan/tilt on the remote if they were going to redesign and add a tilt wheel why not a stick to handle both.

For poi I assume you can control tilt and the craft stays orientated towards the poi. This does not involve camera rotation but craft orientation.

Two controllers seems like a waste when you need one long distance data pipe and just a simple input. It would be like having multiple wireless routers at home; one for each device. The vision system of local wifi for camera control makes more sense for this product.

I am more concerned about gimble jitter or lense element movement. Look at the sunflare in this video and compare to a phantom. Phantom flare is as steady as everything else in frame. This is a bouncing everywhere!

Sorry, link to unedited video http://visual-aerials.com/dji-inspire-1.html and compare to attached vision+ (Forum did not accept upload sorry) but lens flare is not moving or bouncing no jitter.

 

[mede8er]

They make a 3k photographic tool aimed at prosumers and then don't include a cheap 640 forward looking camera. They have a down facing camera for postion hold.

If they had a forward facing camera and the camera operator it would be a very compelling offering (regardless how low resolution the forward camera was).

.

Yep....I use the camera switch feature between the forward facing 640 and the GoPro on my Disco Pro quite extensively.....couldn't fly without it....

 

[DaveInspire]

Yep....I use the camera switch feature between the forward facing 640 and the GoPro on my Disco Pro quite extensively.....couldn't fly without it....

I hope people don't have to add their own downlinks and fob cameras. What a mess it would be to have light bridge for control and camera display then another separate system for fpv.

My view is you have 1 pipe, light bridge, and control, camera and fpv should all transmit and receive over it. Also, there should be no need to duplicate this in a secondary controller which could just be a simple input that communicates with the dji app running on the phone / tablet. I hope they will get there eventually but that seems like a cash grab aimed at more professional users who have separate flight and camera operators.

 

[enterprise1]

My camera from the drug store takes 36 great pictures. Then I just toss it . So now you know my photographic skills. I use my Vision for exploring in the mountains and desert. FPV is important to me. I hate super wide angle lenses. From what the Inspire camera specs. read it has a 94 degree FOV and a 21mm lens. Lightbridge has 720p FPV monitoring. I have a few questions some of you maybe can answer for me.

1. The stand alone lightbrige claims FPV 1080p hd monitor viewing. Is the Inspire FPV 720p lightbridge hd monitor viewing much better then the Vision FPV 640x480/15 monitor view?

2. Is the Inspire 94 degree FOV just a narrow picture of a 130 degree FOV like the Vision when using the narrow option?

3. Hows does the Inspire 21mm lens compare to the Vision lens size?

Hope these questions make sense. lol.