H Camera Test (now with video!!!)

[Tuna]

I sincerely hope that as an employee of Yuneec You are not involved in consumer service, maybe your here off your own bat?

I'm not a Yuneec employee. They're nothing to do with me at all. I bought my Typhoon H after the reviews came out in June.

You're absolutely right about the lens. It's clearly causing a lot of problems and there should be no reason at all for people having to switch to third party lenses, particularly when the camera has only just come out. I'm hoping Yuneec will do the 'right thing' and swap out customer lenses as soon as they have a quality replacement.

There are also definitely issues with the encoder for 120fps video. There's no question that this must be fixed - hopefully with a firmware upgrade. At the same time I'd also like to see some tweaks to the white balance, camera profiles and the camera controls on the ST-16.

All of these are legitimate criticisms against the camera. Until they're fixed though, the bitrate is a red herring. It seems to me that before people reject the CGO3+, Yuneec need to address the known issues and tune the firmware the best they can. It's a huge shame the H seems to have come out before the development was complete, but I'd like to see what it's like once the known bugs are fixed before throwing my toys out of the pram.

 

[banned user]

I'm not a Yuneec employee. They're nothing to do with me at all. I bought my Typhoon H after the reviews came out in June.

You're absolutely right about the lens. It's clearly causing a lot of problems and there should be no reason at all for people having to switch to third party lenses, particularly when the camera has only just come out. I'm hoping Yuneec will do the 'right thing' and swap out customer lenses as soon as they have a quality replacement.

There are also definitely issues with the encoder for 120fps video. There's no question that this must be fixed - hopefully with a firmware upgrade. At the same time I'd also like to see some tweaks to the white balance, camera profiles and the camera controls on the ST-16.

All of these are legitimate criticisms against the camera. Until they're fixed though, the bitrate is a red herring. It seems to me that before people reject the CGO3+, Yuneec need to address the known issues and tune the firmware the best they can. It's a huge shame the H seems to have come out before the development was complete, but I'd like to see what it's like once the known bugs are fixed before throwing my toys out of the pram.

I read your post a bit too quickly and only re-read it after posting that reply- which I deleted instantly on realising my mistake ----apologies....yes, I don't want to part with my H but I have only a small window left where I am by law entitled to a full refund, so I am panicking a little that I could be stuck with a lemon of a camera.

 

[Tuna]

EXACTLY. People like tuna, trying to deflect and apologize don't help. The bottom line is that Yuneec isn't delivering on what they promised. But apparently according to a few we are supposed to be okay with that

I suggest you re-read my post above. I've made it clear that the lens issues and encoding are problems that Yuneec must fix. No apologies, and as best an explanation as I can give for what I understand to be the problem. If you think that's "cut and paste", I challenge you to find that text anywhere on the web - it was written off the top of my head. I can do that sort of thing because describing technical specs of software is part of my job.

On the other hand, you posted a whole thread on the CGO3's image quality based on your own misunderstanding of white balance. When it was pointed out that the CGO3 adjusts white balance in raw profile, rather than correcting your accusations, you huffed about it being a strange interpretation of raw. I've got news for you - GoPro behave exactly the same way. The Raw/ProTune *profiles* (not data modes, you know the difference) both adjust the video according to white balance.

Then there was the thread where you posted about the 120fps problems being due to rolling shutter problems with the scaler. When it was pointed out that 120fps uses sampling, not scaling, again instead of accepting you may have got the two mixed up, you helpfully linked to data charts for $30,000 professional cameras.

Then there's the bitrate discussion that will not die. You blamed the white balance on bitrate. Then you blamed the 120fps issues on bitrate. Then you blamed the sharpness on bitrate. You didn't seem to understand how variable bit rates work and nor do you appear to understand how the different codecs and sharpening that GoPro do will make it very hard to compare bitrates between the two systems. It's true that Yuneec's claim of 100Mbps makes it sound as though the CGO3+ is 'twice as good' as a GoPro at 50Mbps - but as a professional you know that's not how these things work.

I'm no apologist for Yuneec. There's a lot of evidence that the Typhoon needed more development and testing, and that compared to DJI they don't have quite as sophisticated software. However, if they are going to fix these things, and if users are going to get the best out of the camera, we all need accurate information and understanding of what's actually wrong. You've blustered and shouted people down, and thrown technical terms around with great enthusiasm, but the information you're providing is in places quite simply wrong and otherwise often misleading.

 

[Ed Kaz]

Well, it's not there anymore, and you state that they claimed PROFESSIONAL. Did it actually say that, or is that what you interpreted it as?

"They..Yuneec ACTUALLY claimed "professional aerial imagery"............. as well Yuneec Reps in various videos, and their partnered sellers and "reviewers" making a host of other FALSE and or misleading claims during Yuneec product "pre-sale" stages..... Just like when Yuneec first introduced the q5004k during ITS pre-sale days.

 

[Adamday331]

Says professional on my box.

Should perhaps be changed to advanced...

 

[Ed Kaz]

Says professional on my box.

Should perhaps be changed to advanced...

Or as some suggested........"TOY"

 

[Sticks]

The adverts and the box is all subjective. You ( you being those who expected more than they got) placed the expectations on the unit. The paragraph underneath reads "Delivers high quality imagery" NOT "Delivers Professional Quality Imagery."

Even the picture of the box - still subjective advert. More to point, marketing.

Point of fact it, does everything it states. It does not do a really good job of the 120fps according to some, and nobody has really commented on the stills quality (obviously the focus is likely off) - just video.

Yuneec stated 100mbs on the video recording speed, then edited their website to 60, then evidently removed it entirely. Clearly their bad on that one, and they have updated their website, and seem to be trying to correct that matter.

Again, I don't own one of these yet. Still may, or may not.

If I had, I can assure you that if I was having the experiences and feelings that you all are griping about, then it's on me, the unit did not live up to MY expectations, and be disappointed. I would not be mad at Yuneec, they have not engaged in false advertising, they did not lie to me. I placed expectations and had an idea of what results I wanted. I would be mad at myself for 1 - buying a first run. 2 - placing waaaayyy to high a standard of expected results, 3 - not doing enough research before I coughed up a months pay on a....wait for it....toy.

 

[CianMcLiam]

100MB is not 'subjective', it's a specific claim about the data output and processing capabilities of the camera. If you bought a 32GB capacity tablet from Apple or Samsung and then see in the device properties it only came with 16GB would you say 'ah well, 32, 16 it's all subjective and sure it's not exactly a mainframe super computer so I should hardly expect to get what I pay for'.

Yuneec have really struck gold with some of their indifferent customers.

 

[Sticks]

You sir are a clear cut case of NOT READING - small wonder you are upset with the product. Go back and read my post again.

I only made reference to the term "Professional" and image quality as subjective.

I noted that the 100mbs was a screw up on their part and they are making the corrections. Those who want to keep beating that dead horse, may have a leg to stand on if you want to sue the **** out of them for "False Advertising". Have fun with that.

Personally if it was me, and that was the entire reason I bought the product, I would simply return it and move on.

If that was just one little "Oops, typo, or component mfg gave us the wrong specs..." along with the other little annoyances, then I would either work with CS and try to resolve the other issues, or become my own warranty station and make my own repairs and modifications.

 

[Adamday331]

You sir are a clear cut case of NOT READING - small wonder you are upset with the product. Go back and read my post again.

I only made reference to the term "Professional" and image quality as subjective.

I noted that the 100mbs was a screw up on their part and they are making the corrections. Those who want to keep beating that dead horse, may have a leg to stand on if you want to sue the **** out of them for "False Advertising". Have fun with that.

Personally if it was me, and that was the entire reason I bought the product, I would simply return it and move on.

If that was just one little "Oops, typo, or component mfg gave us the wrong specs..." along with the other little annoyances, then I would either work with CS and try to resolve the other issues, or become my own warranty station and make my own repairs and modifications.

Anybody else think this guys a ***** or just me?

 

[Gyro108]

100MB is not 'subjective', it's a specific claim about the data output and processing capabilities of the camera. If you bought a 32GB capacity tablet from Apple or Samsung and then see in the device properties it only came with 16GB would you say 'ah well, 32, 16 it's all subjective and sure it's not exactly a mainframe super computer so I should hardly expect to get what I pay for'.

Yuneec have really struck gold with some of their indifferent customers.

It happens all the time, they claim 32GB and after the OS is loaded you get 8GB free space.

 

[Sticks]

Anybody else think this guys a ***** or just me?

I love you too.

 

[Chilcotin]

EXACTLY. People like tuna, trying to deflect and apologize don't help. The bottom line is that Yuneec isn't delivering on what they promised. But apparently according to a few we are supposed to be okay with that

Why are you here??

 

[CianMcLiam]

It happens all the time, they claim 32GB and after the OS is loaded you get 8GB free space.

But the physical memory capacity is what you expect, people know to buy tablets with more storage than they need since the OS and bloat ware take up a lot of space.

So let's say you buy the 32GB rather than the 16 because you know the OS is taking a good chunk of the 16GB model, then you see the actual physical capacity of your 32 turns out to be 16? Happy to live with this?

 

[cokeaddict]

But the physical memory capacity is what you expect, people know to buy tablets with more storage than they need since the OS and bloat ware take up a lot of space.

So let's say you buy the 32GB rather than the 16 because you know the OS is taking a good chunk of the 16GB model, then you see the actual physical capacity of your 32 turns out to be 16? Happy to live with this?

So let me ask you this...... What is the difference between he CGO3+ and the CGO3 on the Q500? WHY is there such a difference in the final results on the video side? Its a genuine question that I think you can answer.
Also want to know if you would qualify the P4 as "professional" quality video?
Interested to read your reply.

 

[CianMcLiam]

Honestly I think the cameras for the H were set up in a rush on a test bench with a target 5 - 10 feet away. They should have had a focus point 30-50ft away. Possibly a supplier problem rather than Yuneec's but still should have been sorted out before units started shipping. Equally Yuneec should be clearing things up for people now by making some kind of statement.

Other people have found the lens mount is not secured to the pcb properly, the CGO3 mount was glued down. If the mount is not completely level and directly over the sensor you'll get nasty problems with portions of the image blurred etc.

Do I think the P4 is capable of professional video? I think yes, in very specific circumstances. Professional equipment is usually versatile. You can get shallow depth of field to isolate subjects from the background, use different focal lengths for different perspectives etc. etc. So a P4 or H camera is definitely not one a professional would choose for general use. But for elevated landscape views or for following moving action then the P4 camera is capable of pro looking results in most lighting conditions, apart from dark scenes.

Professional quality to me means it is sharp, high resolution and relatively artifact free for the intended application. The P4 can do this in the limited applications people use it for, there's no reason the H shouldn't be capable of the same with more investment in quality parts and better training for setting the camera up.

 

[cokeaddict]

Exaclty what I said a few days back...the issue with the H is it was not adjusted on the final stages of production (quality control was not checked). That was done by a 3rd party company contracted by Yuneec. SO my point here is, Its a stuff up YES, but it can and will be sorted for anyone who has the issue.
I own 2 Phantoms, have owned phantoms for 3 years now. After a crash with a brand new P2 DJI called it pilot error. Infact it was proven to be a faulty battery and long story short, I got a full refund through the retailer as I had video evidence of the fault on my gopro which i never told them I had because I knew pilot error was going to be their final word. On that alone, I will not buy products from them again no matter what they do They have ripped off so many people its not funny.
I am more than impressed with what the H has to offer. With future firmware updates it will become fantastic. I have already ordered the replacement lens as I was going to do that no matter what.

 

[Dragonflyerthom]

I own a Q 500+ with the CGO2 Camera on it. It has been a workhorse for me. I'm not a professional photographer I am a hobbyist and I believe that it is probably one of the best quad copters on the market today. Now I wish I had the CGO3 4K camera on it but it's not necessary because I don't have anything that would play a 4K video. I am also one of the beta testers for the typhoon H I have enjoyed my TH and other than a burnt wire smell coming from it there have been no problems. I was lucky I guess and I got a good 4K camera on mine. I don't look at my typhoon H as a toy hexacopter. To me it is a Serious hobby grade or semi pro grade. The price point of my hexacopter is right in line with my Q 500+. All of this talk that you guys are relaying to us pertaining to a professional camera is way above my head fly safe my friends

 

[PatR]

The term "professional grade" gets bandied about pretty loosely. It seems a lot of people want A7, D3, or Red quality at a bubble gum price. That just ain't gonna happen with a 1/4" sensor, regardless of the price.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk