Rayray, here's a hidden tidbit about the teaser video and camera comparisons. Everything with the cell tower was shot with the E50. Everything were the airframe is flying and being followed was shot with the E90.Meanwhile, back to cameras.
This short short video will show you the Field of Vision difference between a CGO3+ and the E50.
Cameras were side by side.
E50 / E90
- Thread starter Photo
- Start date
PatR
Premium Pilot
OK, that's nice to know but is there some reason they don't seem to want to provide direct comparisons between all their cameras? I don't mean to come across as snarky but if they want me to give them $4k for something I feel they need to do more than tout benefits without providing proof of benefit. I'm very, very close to placing an order but until they step up with the info I'm still looking at a custom build for 4x the cost of the 520. Then again, I know exactly with the custom build will do, which means I would not have to buy something else should the unanswered question with the 520 turn into deficiencies.
I also still have problems with the battery charger in the kit either way. For what they are selling, a pro level tool, the least they could do is provide hobby level battery chargers.
I also still have problems with the battery charger in the kit either way. For what they are selling, a pro level tool, the least they could do is provide hobby level battery chargers.
I bet by the end of the week there will be a camera comparison completed between the E50 and E90.
Lol! You think?
Aren't you two just so cute, giggling like a couple of schoolgirls!
[No offense intended to any schoolgirls.]
Aren't you two just so cute, giggling like a couple of schoolgirls!
[No offense intended to any schoolgirls.]
Hey, I'm not the one with my hands on a machine I'd sure as **** be giggling if I did though
No doubt! As would I.
PatR
Premium Pilot
Perhaps the CGO3 should be added to the mix in order to quell questions from the group that is looking to buy a 520 but hoping to use the cameras from their 480's. I'm not of that group, but some of the questions indicate there are people wanting to do that. There's a significant difference from what I observed in the flight time battery video.
Ok so all three cameras compared side by side. I'll see what I can pull off.
PatR
Premium Pilot
Thanks Bob. That would answer a wealth of questions thus far unasked. If you find the current CGO3 won't adapt to the 520 that would be good to get out there as well. I haven't looked at Yuneec's FB page but for where I have looked this site has more 520 info than any other.
PatR
Premium Pilot
Meanwhile, back to cameras.
This short short video will show you the Field of Vision difference between a CGO3+ and the E50.
Cameras were side by side.
Ray,
Would you know what the camera distance from the subject was? Thanks for the comparison!
Well I just happen to have access to the airframe and cameras in question. And my daughter's take no offense...yet...Aren't you two just so cute, giggling like a couple of schoolgirls!
[No offense intended to any schoolgirls.]
PatR
Premium Pilot
SPEC Sheets
Thanks Bob!
Now if only that popular drone shop that starts with a V would correct their descriptions in their various packages. The E90 is NOT a 90mm lens; likewise the E50 is NOT a 50mm lens! (Yep, just verified again. They have the E90 as "...all glass 90mm lens..." and a similar description for the E50, even saying "long focal length". Last I heard, 23mm and 39mm are not considered "Long Focal Length".
Just sayin', since I would not want to be the person who ordered either bundle, expecting a 50mm or 90mm lens, and receiving a 39mm or 23mm respectively. Or... is it me that is missing something?
Last edited:
PatR
Premium Pilot
Weeellll, for the typical DSLR rig anything from 16mm to 28mm prime would be viewed as a standard lens, depending if mirrorless of full frame, while a 40mm would be looked at as more of a "close up" lens. For the security camera type rigs these sound pretty nice.
Since I have not been lucky and obtained any comparative imagery from the Yuneec crowd I'll be getting raw imagery from one of the dealers shortly. The information lock down is not telling us what we need to know, and provides an appearance there's issues with something.
Since I have not been lucky and obtained any comparative imagery from the Yuneec crowd I'll be getting raw imagery from one of the dealers shortly. The information lock down is not telling us what we need to know, and provides an appearance there's issues with something.
I suspect the boring explanation is that China doesn't do 'publicity material' - and leaves stuff like that to the regional distributors (so US customers get demo videos of recognisable US landmarks, not the back lot of the Chinese factory). Until machines actually leave the factory, there's just no available hardware for producing the shots we need.
Stuff is leaking out (and I'm pretty happy with what we have seen so far), but until that shipment turns up, it's going to be occasional glimpses rather than in depth tests.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2016
- Messages
- 261
- Reaction score
- 215
- Age
- 59
Just released from Yuneec Europe
E90
Full Native download
http://download.yuneec.com/E90/YUN_E90_0002.MP4
E50
Full native download
http://download.yuneec.com/E50/YUN_0002.mp4
E90
Full Native download
http://download.yuneec.com/E90/YUN_E90_0002.MP4
E50
Full native download
http://download.yuneec.com/E50/YUN_0002.mp4
PatR
Premium Pilot
Tuna,
The above is the exact opposite of what just about every other Chinese hobby product manufacturer does. In fact, many of them plaster the web with the merits and qualities of their products months before they are released, or send a steady stream of video trailers out to every customer's e-mail that has ever bought anything from them. No, I don't think that's the right thing to do either, but if you want to sell something you need to provide a reason to buy. You can easily say you are holding a diamond in your hand worth millions that you have up for sale but until people see and inspect it you'll never sell it. With the 520, a system advertised to be an inspection and mapping rig that has been fitted with new camera models, touting the merits of the geo referencing system, something available to anyone that builds an aircraft using an APM, Pixhawk, or PX4 FC without also demonstrating the qualities of the cameras is going off a little half cocked. Lest we forget, if the imagery is bunk so goes the data collected during the inspection and mapping processes.
Last edited:
Similar threads
