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
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.
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.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next