CES 2017
- Thread starter BillyTexas
- Start date
- Status
To be honest, if I were a filmmaker, I'd be looking for a camera with interchangeable lenses which rules out both the Typhoon H range of cameras and the Phantom 4 Pro.
The point I was making is that (as you're demonstrating) this might not be aimed at your needs. There's no such thing as a 'universal drone' that magically has all the features and costs a couple of hundred bucks.
Until we've got the full specs and final prices, it's not going to be clear how much difference there will be between this camera and the alternatives.
The point I was making is that (as you're demonstrating) this might not be aimed at your needs. There's no such thing as a 'universal drone' that magically has all the features and costs a couple of hundred bucks.
Until we've got the full specs and final prices, it's not going to be clear how much difference there will be between this camera and the alternatives.
DA, have you looked at the PixAero lens for TH? Side-by-side test against the Peau and Yuneec stock are pretty impressive.
My 2 cents. It makes no sense for Yuneec to come out with a completely new drone when there are so many issues with the current drone. I'd really like to know the stats (number of drones sold to the number of drones sent in for repairs). It's a beautiful machine but there are just too many bugs that need to be worked out. Focus on making the current product great and reliable before trying to produce something new. If they could make the Typhoon H more reliable then they can apply that technology going forward. They have not done that, from everything I've read in this forum!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Granted there have been issues with the Typhoon, but not anything worse than any other drone manufacturer.
Sadly, the people that have issues are the ones that immediately go in and start telling about their bad experience on forums such as this one.
I don't come and start posting each time I have a successful flying experience, however if I do have an issue while I am out, I pull up this forum and start asking questions of others that may have had similar experiences. Some people also can get a little carried away in their posts.
I agree that Yuneec really didn't need to come out with a new drone, but I am sure there are many excited, potential Yuneec customers that can use the new features.
For me, I have always said that the copter itself was just short of perfect and would never have a reason to upgrade the bird itself.
However, with the constant improvements in technology, the camera can always get better.
Actually I was interested in them for a while and even started a thread a month or so back asking for members to post videos for comparative purposes.
The sad part is that you would have to install the PixAero lens yourself, while Peau can install and focus it for you.
Do you have links to some side by side comparisons?
Sadly, the comparisons I have seen you could tell were not shot using the same settings.
There was too much difference to be just the lens.
My only complaint with the video from the CGO3+ is the strong "smearing" or "blurring" effect when the camera is panned.
Tuna, I am a commercial UAV pilot
***
To quote Yuneec's press statement - CGO-CI's longer FOV and edge-to-edge distortion-free lens captures sharp, high-contrast imaging, which meets the needs of filmmakers and broadcast producers
From the info so far, i can't see how the CGO-CI meets the needs of filmmakers any more than the CG03+. If it's just a CG03+ with a narrower FOV...that's not really much of a benefit.
I have to agree.
I'm the commercial pilot, too, and I working mostly for stock videography.
Now, I using Q5004K and I'm looking for a potential upgrade... and it will not be H520 unfortunately.
I was in love to this platform ftom tbe very early TH announcements, but the CG0 camera is mediocre. The sensor size itself doesn't matter for aerial distance, and even interchangeable lenses would be a great bonus but not the most important point. But the basic characteristics - bitrate, dynamic range, global shutter, better ISO/noise performance, better codec and RAW ability, are crucial.
The current CGO3 and CGO3+ with terrible rollingshater, joke dynamic range and poor twilight performance is not an option for the expensive and advanced platform like TH-series. Even Phantom 4 Pro will outperform it with much lower price, not saying about Inspire RAW with provide incomparable photo and video performance with the very competitive price... TH can provide the way better platform but I see no benefits from it
And probably not only me. Even for inspection the dynamic range may me very important because you will just see nothing in a contrast scenes under the strong sunlight ;(
Maybe I'm too pessimistic and the new CGO-CI will be a piece of art, we still have no any actual specs, but it seems to be very unlikely ;(
Sent from my ASUS_Z016D using Tapatalk
I really don't understand reasoning behind Yuneec lack of commitment to a better camera. They have a somewhat solid platform (TH), it performs very well on difficult conditions. However CGO is bad by current standards, maybe 2-3 years ago it was competitive against Inspire 1 X3 but then DJI came with X5, and now with I2. It is not that hard to build a better camera, if you don't have in-house know-how, you outsource, like what they did with Tornado.
Current marching order with reasonable portability and video quality would be. Inspire 2, Inspire 1, Phantom 4, Karma, Mavic, Walkera 4 (Maybe), Typhoon H.
Yeah. Think about that for a while. While battery, flight time, performance and reliability are very important they don't matter much if I can't get decent image/video from drone.
They now have three cameras for TH, why not fourth with changeable optics and larger sensor. TH surely can carry extra weight.
Unfortunately next drone for me is not going to be Yuneec any more if they keep forgetting current customers.
Current marching order with reasonable portability and video quality would be. Inspire 2, Inspire 1, Phantom 4, Karma, Mavic, Walkera 4 (Maybe), Typhoon H.
Yeah. Think about that for a while. While battery, flight time, performance and reliability are very important they don't matter much if I can't get decent image/video from drone.
They now have three cameras for TH, why not fourth with changeable optics and larger sensor. TH surely can carry extra weight.
Unfortunately next drone for me is not going to be Yuneec any more if they keep forgetting current customers.
Last edited:
Not sure if any of you guys watched this video, but take a closer look at what he said at 1:22 where he talks about cameras.
He said that standard CGO3+ camera is upgraded with NEW LENS !
He said that standard CGO3+ camera is upgraded with NEW LENS !
Ok, we;re heading into the territory of misinformation and lies. Funnily enough that happened when they launched the Typhoon H last year - it was found that a certain other competitor was paying its employees to post on the internet claiming they'd bought a Typhoon and it had crashed. Unfortunately some of that deception still hangs around..
Check the forums for tales of fly aways and crashes and you'll find that these days there are relatively few reports, especially considering how many people are flying Typhoons professionally and for fun. More importantly, remember that Yuneec have announced a full one year guarantee, which applies retrospectively to all models. That's not the actions of a company with unreliable machines. I was at the UK service center late last year and they had one machine in that day - a H-920. They get consistently good reviews of the quality of service - so either way you're covered.
I don't know where you get your information from, but the CGO3+ is a very different camera from the CGO3. You can check the independent reviews by FPV Guy and Captain Drone on YouTube. They've done plenty of back to back tests, and FPV Guy has put a lot of effort into calculating sharpness and dynamic range. The results? The Typhoon H is within half a stop of the Phantom and Mavic's dynamic range. It produces good night videos and the resolving power of a current CGO3+ is as good as any machine from last year. If you want significantly better figures, you need to buy a drone costing noticeably more.
The important point here is that (after the fighting over brands died down) the models from last year were a good match for any other brand of drone. Now we have a new model, and don't actually know what the specs of the new camera are - so rather than making odd claims about older products, why not wait and see what the actual price and specs are before deciding if this is the machine for you?
Check the forums for tales of fly aways and crashes and you'll find that these days there are relatively few reports, especially considering how many people are flying Typhoons professionally and for fun. More importantly, remember that Yuneec have announced a full one year guarantee, which applies retrospectively to all models. That's not the actions of a company with unreliable machines. I was at the UK service center late last year and they had one machine in that day - a H-920. They get consistently good reviews of the quality of service - so either way you're covered.
I don't know where you get your information from, but the CGO3+ is a very different camera from the CGO3. You can check the independent reviews by FPV Guy and Captain Drone on YouTube. They've done plenty of back to back tests, and FPV Guy has put a lot of effort into calculating sharpness and dynamic range. The results? The Typhoon H is within half a stop of the Phantom and Mavic's dynamic range. It produces good night videos and the resolving power of a current CGO3+ is as good as any machine from last year. If you want significantly better figures, you need to buy a drone costing noticeably more.
The important point here is that (after the fighting over brands died down) the models from last year were a good match for any other brand of drone. Now we have a new model, and don't actually know what the specs of the new camera are - so rather than making odd claims about older products, why not wait and see what the actual price and specs are before deciding if this is the machine for you?
I have TH with CGO+ and used and graded a lot of Inspire X3 material. And I have to say that even without CGO+ focus issues, X3 is better. And no, CGO+ doesn't produce good night video footage, i have flown plenty it in night time. You can get pretty stills with ~1600 ISO and 1 sec exposure.
Are you talking about PH4 or PH4 Pro? In only the light of specs, Phantom 4 Pro is much better than CGO+. PH4Pro has much bigger sensor, better bitrate and codec. Difference is night and day.
So Yuneec released new camera and they are basically not telling any specs of new gear and it looks almost identical to CGO+. Of course we have right to criticize them, there isn't any conspiracy behind this.
ps. CGO+ with new lens doesn't cut it.
Last edited:
I am also in this commercially and as such I have to look at the best tool for the job ( I own the H which I purchased a couple of months ago and it does produce very smooth video and is very good in high winds). While it is nice to be able to shop by brand ( I hate DJI) , it doesn't make logical or financial sense. So here is what I look at. I'm comparing the H520 and the Inspire 2 since they are about the same price point
1. Redundancy: The FAA is considering lifting the wavier for flight over people for UAS's that have certain safety features. They are not saying what those are yet, but I think DJI has some inside information there. The FAA Has limited information on drones, but tons of safety data on manned aircraft so that info is going to factor into their decision. Even a small single engine plane today has redundancy on the electronics, but not the engine. So if you look at that, The H wins with motor redundancy. The Inspire2 however, has dual heated batteries, dual IMU, dual barometers. and dual electronic pathways to the motors.
I have a large hex that had a Zero UAV flight controller on it with redundancy built in for the motors and it crashed because it had a single IMU and it failed.
If the FAA were to pick one as safe in their eyes which do you think they would pick?
2. Obstacle avoidance: Both the Inspire2 and the H with realsense are close here and both have sonar for indoor flight. Outdoors the Inspire2 has height maintaining sonar and above obstacle avoidance. I would think that the sonar on the H could be used for terrain following, but its not, it relies on the wand in follow mode which is not practical in many situations.
3 Camera: There is no comparison here Inspire wins hands down. Even my Solo with a Ribcage mod on my Gopro 4 Black is superior ( I have 4 lenses for it).
4. Software: Again there is no comparison. If I recall even my Phantom 2 had a map view and my Solo can be setup to take a series of photos automatically with the grid flight set up by the software for Ag mapping. Even with Solo one of the first things they did was to make an SDK available. I can't understand why Yuneec hasn't already released one as they must have it for developing software and why wait until Q2 to release it as it takes time to develop software. This may be to little to late.
5. Future Growth: Inspire2 can have a sim card added in for long range control (if I read that correctly). and the Pixhawk2 flight controller has the capability of adding an Itel processor with wifi and bluetooth built in. These are things that will be useful when it FAA considers exceptions to BVLOS which is third on their list.
So all this being said would I buy the H520? What does it have to offer me commercially? Orange is of no use and in my opinion makes it look more like a toy. Larger motors and props are not needed, the ones it has now work fine. So as a commercial operator which makes more sense. I'm not saying that as a hobby aircraft it's not any good,because it is very good and in time may be great, but commercially I have to address now, not what might be and much as I love my H I would return it if I could and invest in something else.
Sorry for the long winded message , but some have accused me of being a hatter of the H and It's not the case. I'm just trying to be objective and I plan to send a copy of the to Yuneec attn Trent and hope it gets there
1. Redundancy: The FAA is considering lifting the wavier for flight over people for UAS's that have certain safety features. They are not saying what those are yet, but I think DJI has some inside information there. The FAA Has limited information on drones, but tons of safety data on manned aircraft so that info is going to factor into their decision. Even a small single engine plane today has redundancy on the electronics, but not the engine. So if you look at that, The H wins with motor redundancy. The Inspire2 however, has dual heated batteries, dual IMU, dual barometers. and dual electronic pathways to the motors.
I have a large hex that had a Zero UAV flight controller on it with redundancy built in for the motors and it crashed because it had a single IMU and it failed.
If the FAA were to pick one as safe in their eyes which do you think they would pick?
2. Obstacle avoidance: Both the Inspire2 and the H with realsense are close here and both have sonar for indoor flight. Outdoors the Inspire2 has height maintaining sonar and above obstacle avoidance. I would think that the sonar on the H could be used for terrain following, but its not, it relies on the wand in follow mode which is not practical in many situations.
3 Camera: There is no comparison here Inspire wins hands down. Even my Solo with a Ribcage mod on my Gopro 4 Black is superior ( I have 4 lenses for it).
4. Software: Again there is no comparison. If I recall even my Phantom 2 had a map view and my Solo can be setup to take a series of photos automatically with the grid flight set up by the software for Ag mapping. Even with Solo one of the first things they did was to make an SDK available. I can't understand why Yuneec hasn't already released one as they must have it for developing software and why wait until Q2 to release it as it takes time to develop software. This may be to little to late.
5. Future Growth: Inspire2 can have a sim card added in for long range control (if I read that correctly). and the Pixhawk2 flight controller has the capability of adding an Itel processor with wifi and bluetooth built in. These are things that will be useful when it FAA considers exceptions to BVLOS which is third on their list.
So all this being said would I buy the H520? What does it have to offer me commercially? Orange is of no use and in my opinion makes it look more like a toy. Larger motors and props are not needed, the ones it has now work fine. So as a commercial operator which makes more sense. I'm not saying that as a hobby aircraft it's not any good,because it is very good and in time may be great, but commercially I have to address now, not what might be and much as I love my H I would return it if I could and invest in something else.
Sorry for the long winded message , but some have accused me of being a hatter of the H and It's not the case. I'm just trying to be objective and I plan to send a copy of the to Yuneec attn Trent and hope it gets there
This is not an "upgrade", you can do it yourself with Peu or AirPixel ... but it will not affecting the basic problems.
Regarding the quality, the global shutter and 10bit log codec with a real bitrate (at least 100Mb for 4K) will bump the quality, but instead we have the "upgraded lens", it's a joke.
Take a look into a specs for Inspire RAW, or Phantom 4 pro+ then compare the price, and you will understand what I mean
Sent from my ASUS_Z016D using Tapatalk
CraigCam
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2016
- Messages
- 1,520
- Reaction score
- 663
- Age
- 64
Wow. A hobby class drone sucks because it's not pro enough for everyone. All your solutions exist if you build yourself but that costs $$$. Oh why can't Yuneec build my dream drone for cheap? I'm going to stop learning how it works and just complain it's not an inspire. Holy crap. Objective analysis is gone on this forum. Yup my Toyota isn't a Lexus but Toyota should put all those Lexus features in there for me because otherwise Toyota sucks. This thread is so non productive going over all the same old complaints.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
David, Carolina Dronz will do an install for you on the PixAero... mine is being done this week.
Also in regards to the "smearing effect" when panning... the couple of times Ive tried it, you will get
better results by slowing down the pan speed in shooting, and then if necessary, speed back up in post
(as opposed to trying to slow down a too fast pan later in post)
I was thinking the same thing yesterday. There should be a category in here that talks about all the good experiences they've had with their Typhoon H. I agree this does seem like the place to go to when something bad happens and it would be a good idea to give the forum a difference perspective.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
The problem is: Typhoon H is not a "hobby drone" not by price nor by philosophy and positioning. Q500 is the hobby machine, which I purchased for some commercial usage and I considered the price with features to be appropriate for my needs (temporary). But TH? It's really good platform for many usage, but Yuneec claimed it like the "drone designed for aerial photography", and it is the big fail. This is the PRO-positioned bird which is worst, regarding the final produce's quality, in comparison even with much cheaper Phantom 4 pro+ which is definitely "advanced hobby" drone, not spoken about the more-less same priced Inspire RAW...
Sent from my ASUS_Z016D using Tapatalk
Craig
I thought I was objective comparing what we know about the H520 (which is advertised as a commercial and industrial hex) to the Inspire2.
- Status
Similar threads
