Anyone knows of a device that can send an HDMI signal to the ground. Most up to date DSLR cameras now have a HDMI output and not an AV output anymore. One can use a converter to change the HDMI to AV but that adds another 220 grams of weight and the AV signal is not very good.

Views: 15272

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

some things are possible and some are not....your client(or director) will have to be satisfyed with not so good picture in live transmission and after you land(that will be max 15min flight anway) you will show him something better...HDMI is not a must ,go pro with sunex will be ok for preview as second camera....or something like this guy did...

Which set up?

Em Bu

Let me explain, you will be very lucky to get more than 4 to 6 minutes in the air with what we are talking about (Octocopter with Red Scarlet or Sony FS100). When one edits a film a 4 to 20 second shot is more than enough. But that is besides the point, the point is to see a very clear picture on the ground while the aircraft is in the air. Because the flight time is so short you need to take a good shot.

This is a steep learning curve for all of us.

May I make a suggestion so it helps everyone. If you are a novice on the specific subject give yourself a rating of 1 out of 10. If ten (10) you think you know a lot about the subject and if one (1) you know very little. Nothing to be shy about.

Then if you have found a product that works for you and you think it is the best on the market give it another rating out of ten (ten the highest and one the lowest), slowly but surely as a forum with a common interest we shall find the best solution for all of us.

This is what a forum is all about to help each other and find the less expensive way.

i get you :) if there's "big bucks" then i'd say teradek is your best choice.. important things to keep in mind - if you're getting "normal" wifi then you might have interference with your 2,4g radio tx/rx, so be careful.. they have dual band wifi option cube, too (i have one like that), so if you'd be using higher 5g frequence you shouldn't have any issues..


Hello again, from one of my work and studies is the film and tv
worked 3 years in the making of special effects in a company in my country bolivar of my goals is to find long-distance video quality. we have achieved with this systemon a private network to transmit television programs to more than 50 km. with excellentquality. teams mentioned are inexpensive and very easy acquisition, a imajen Dijital cantransform high definition, very easy really only need a high definition camera, and receiver alike. Transmit the medium can be wired or wireless, the most important is thecamera, I could see on my tv high dfinicion Wifi images from the camera and looksexcellent.

Depending on the watt, or distance varies the price.

Axis Communications AXIS M7001 Video Encoder                                    270,44 usd

Ubiquiti Bullet M5 HP 5GHz High Power 802.11N Outdoor Radio System      79,00 usd

Ubiquiti NanoStation5 NS5 5GHz 14dB 250mW                                              89,00 usd

a very good solution for high quality wireless video.

WOW...that is something completly different....thanks for sharing with us


how do you receive the video on your "far end", behind wifi "receiver"? i'm not sure i understand it..


Receive the signal directly to my lapto or pc. use a free program, then edit with ulead media studio pro, recorded on DVD or directly to the composite video output.

vision in real time directly on the lapto, if I use the HMD (Head-Mounted Displays) a video ip converter to video  analog.

WiFi, thus it has high and variable latency. The encoder will be adding a bit more.

For some purposes this doesn't matter, for FPV and framing shots remotely it may not be suitable.

I would want to measure the latency in both 'good' and 'bad' conditions before committing.

- The Axis Communications AXIS M7001 Video Encoder encoder is also an SD device, if you're happy with that you might as well use a 5.8GHz analog sender and avoid the compression artefacts and latency inherent in a compressed WiFi stream.

To be honest, by far the best solution is the one suggested right at the top - record in HD, send a SD version of it to the ground over a normal link.

You only need to frame the shots remotely, you're not transmitting live.

I installed in a town five PTZ cameras, to help monitor the streets. I used 5.8 ghz wiffi links, creating a private network, and the quality is excellent.
however in photography systems, and recording of movies in 35mm or digital hd in these vehicles is better to use a camera assistant and an additional operator for the camera.and as you mentioned is better to record directly into the camera for later editing.

Reply to Discussion


© 2020   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service