This post also appears in sUAS News ‘The Market‘.
---
I think it’s futuristic – the drone that is. The camera, on the other hand, is another story.
The drone
For a guy like me who not only follows the commercial market for drones but is also an avid photography and multirotor enthusiast, the new DJI Inspire 1 is, well, inspiring. It’s chock full of features I wish I had four years ago when I first started mounting GoPro cameras on quadcopter kits -- things like ease of use, a simple interface, controller ergonomics, telemetry, a 3D-axis gimbal, integrated HD video downlink, optical flow for indoor flying (how cool is that!?).
Much has already been written on the Inspire 1 T600 (like here and here) so I won’t repeat it. The question for this post is: Did DJI hit the mark for the target market? For that answer, we need to go beyond the drone itself and look at how professional photographers and videographers use drones and cameras.
Read more here: http://droneanalyst.com/2014/11/16/dji-new-drone-hit-target-market/
Comments
@Guiseppe
After your video is gone, it really doesnt matter if your control still works, you better just hope for the autopilot to handle the return trip.
I cant comment on the different distance capabilities but there are LB vids showing it do a few kms which isnt that different to analog on 5.8. If you go behind trees or in a valley out of direct LOS you will lose your video with both.
The Lightbridge is very appealing.
But he uses all the Wifi bandwidth for the video also including the RC flight controls.
A standard radio rc uses advanced techniques to overcome interference.
How does the Lightbridge to do the same.
is as safe as a standard radio?
They write in the manual that should not be close to other wifi. Otherwise interference penalty.
I can admit to having trouble on the video signal not on the controls!
I would use an analog video link for safety, even at the expense of quality.
$850 Phantom 2 with 3-axis zenmuse gimbal
$500 GoPro Hero4 Black (4K)
$1400 Lightbridge
= $2750
Price of Inspire1 = $2900
So yes it is priced accordingly.
The new DJI weighs almost 3kg to bring a video camera that weighs 70gr
and certainly will not be comparable to the GoPro 4.
The new regulation (Canada / Australia / Italy and many others) are going to simplify the rules for aircraft weighing under 2kg.
Why should I use a drone 3kg to bring a not professional 70g video camera ?
The autonomy of 18 minutes is less than the phantom with a GoPro4 and he costs is about 3 times a phantom.
An excess of complication for nothing.
The linked article makes the excellent point that for photographers it's the camera that counts, regardless of what carries it. The camera is an unknown for now. I don't need DJI telling me what camera to use as I already know that. I think this copter will appeal more to the prosumer than professionals.
I applaud their designers for thinking outside the box. But their solution to getting the camera a free 360 view is complex and clunky. It's a solution looking for a problem that doesn't exist. Retracts work fine and I don't see any advantages at all to this implementation.
mP1
I think DJI usually uses more affordable visual design than 250
Their implicit motto - "Drone is beautiful" =)
Actually INSPIRE 1 positioning like lux class cars in automotive industry
One market i think DJI has missed is the mini market. A naza2 with gps and everything else is hard to fit inside a 250, the connectors are just too big.
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next