im selling my DJI Inspire 2 system and moving to the H520. It arrives today. I’ve ordered all 3 cameras to ensure I can offer full range of services through my commercial operation. I thought I’d researched everything possible about the H520 but I seemed to have missed the messages on this page. Should I be worried? I love my Inspire 2 but felt after flying the Inspire 1, the 2, The phantoms, and the Mavic Pro it was time to move to the H520.
Moving from Inspire 2 to H520. Have I made a mistake?
- Thread starter Ayrshire UAV
- Start date
Me too but I had the good idea to keep my Inspire. And I did well, because the H520 is far, very far from having the cinematic potential. (I do not want Yuneec but it's far, very far from DJI's sneakers).
In a word, you should have kept your Inspire because the time that the expected improvements on the H520 arrive, Dji has had time to get us four new models.
To tell you, of the 147 flights I have to do, there will be only 23 that will be made by the H520, the rest by the Inspire. Reported, 75 miles for the Inspire and 11 miles for the H520. Always knowing that the H520's courses come in the lining of the Inspire.
I do not denigrate the H520, it's a very good team but not the potential of what is expected today. (And unfortunately, what competitors offer for the sale of their machine).
In a word, you should have kept your Inspire because the time that the expected improvements on the H520 arrive, Dji has had time to get us four new models.
To tell you, of the 147 flights I have to do, there will be only 23 that will be made by the H520, the rest by the Inspire. Reported, 75 miles for the Inspire and 11 miles for the H520. Always knowing that the H520's courses come in the lining of the Inspire.
I do not denigrate the H520, it's a very good team but not the potential of what is expected today. (And unfortunately, what competitors offer for the sale of their machine).
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2016
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 22
- Age
- 42
Yes. Im afraid. If you want quality images that are easily processed, to give to your clients in a timely manner, you should have kept the I2. I bought an i2 after the 520 was so rubbish, although I dont like the quad configuration of the I2. The x5s camera is a beast and can take outstanding quality pictures without the need for too much post processing to make them deliverable for a client.
Having done the same thing as you @Ayrshire UAV and opted for all the cameras for the 520 from a DJI past you will find that the E90 camera is very disappointing. So much so that I find myself reverting to my Inspire 1 with X5R for most photo and video work. However, the 520 with the E50 for inspection work and CGO-ET for low spec thermal work and low light situations you will enjoy I hope. If you have not finalised the sale and you can afford to keep both, it could be worth hanging on to the I2 until the E90 problems are fixed.
It very much depends on what your business model is. The H520 is quite a different beast to the I2, and if you come to it expecting something that behaves "like a DJI", you'll have a hard time of it. The camera undoubtedly needs more work than the X5/7 to get 'cinematic' footage, but for surveys and inspections it's a pretty good platform.
From what I've heard from Yuneec, they recognise that there is work to be done to keep competitive with DJI - and the changes the company has undergone in the background this last year has not made that easy. However, to their credit they continued to support and improve the Typhoon H far beyond initial firmware fixes, and if they can evolve the H520 the same way, it will be a good long term platform.
From what I've heard from Yuneec, they recognise that there is work to be done to keep competitive with DJI - and the changes the company has undergone in the background this last year has not made that easy. However, to their credit they continued to support and improve the Typhoon H far beyond initial firmware fixes, and if they can evolve the H520 the same way, it will be a good long term platform.
If not for Tuna's great app "UAV Toolbox" for the Yuneec H480 & 520, there isn't other 3rd party support in comparison to the AutoPilot, MapPilot, Litchi or DroneDeploy to mention a few, not to mention the specialized apps for Thermo, IR, SAR, Construction or Ag.
I sold my I1 when purchased the H480 & H920 birds and later purchased a I1 X5R for the autonomous and semi-autonomous flight modes or airspace mode (drone to drone capturing).
I'm optimistically anxious to see the 520 or the H Plus prosper and take off with Yuneec OEM tools but would also be very beneficial... practically required to have 3rd party Software\Hardware support too. It's clearly not the android platform of the ST16 preventing, most all the above apps support the Android platform, it's more the position of Yuneec's proprietary market stance. The all-in-one RC & Screen is also a great advantage in several ways in comparison, but even that's not properly marketed.
Although, I'd offer a slight change in RC unit by modifying the package slightly with an ejectable screen mount and offering upgradable screens for brightness & clarity (3rd party). Modified plastic case molds and electronic plugs are cheap to add in comparison to add-on sales. It's a life cycle of what's feeding what... SW or Hardware, both are needed to advance and compete. The benefits of the Hex platform are well acknowledged, and Yuneec already has a major lead offering several reasonably priced Hex platforms in comparison to other offerings. If they had the support of 3rd party innovation and marketing, they'd unquestionable sell in the growing commercial market. Why this isn't being utilized as an advantage results in both current market loss as well as future.
I've noticed an uptick in commercial outfits purchasing DJI Hex with current price drops and offering commercial focused platform options: 2 belly camera mounts, 1 top camera mount, multiple video stream options and multiple options for RTK GPS modules. This demand isn't great yet, but again... cycle feed... Hardware / Market; the technical commercial shops will respond to maintain an equal or competitive edge. Yuneec is prime to jump on this growing commercial market; but they're currently reluctant or unable to move on their current product offerings.
We all gain with competition, I'd really like to see Yuneec perform; as well as Autel and other smaller companies. I totally dislike a market of one major player, but if 99% of the the 3rd party companies utilize one company... again cycle feed equates win-win.
The philosophy is consumer market is the bread & butter... I'm not convinced that has to be the path followed in today's world of technology & marketing; it wasn't at the beginning of transportation industry, telecommunications, sporting goods, and most recently the computer industry... the consumer market grew out of the commercial professional market... it's how it's marketed.
Personal (Consumer) Computer development wasn't the original focus, it was spawned to meet the desire of the professional having their own, this drove the layman to have the computer, and that drove mass consumer market. Professional needs drove the cellular telecommunications which drove consumer market (Military is considered professional). Acknowledged, the drone industry is already consumer and commercial, but that doesn't indicate it's stuck in a path... the bicycle was primarily a consumer comercial product, quickly faded as commercial, later faded in consumer market too. Later with the development of hi-tech components, carbon fiber frames, computerized servos, closed network drive trains, specialized outfits all focused on Pro Bikes and Riders (aka: commercial) spawned a new consumer trend... consumer to commercial, driving consumer... differnt marketing perspective.
Although, if drone market is a consumer market, then Yuneec may have a problem when you compare the flood of competition product and their current response time.
Looping back to the top... I'd like to see the H520 & H-Plus succeed, hopefully the last few years don't represent the outcome. For now I'll have a little of both brands.
PatR
Premium Pilot
Peggy
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2017
- Messages
- 424
- Reaction score
- 376
You should have said. I have all 3 cameras and would gladly do a swop with you for your i2 if it has the X5s gimble and camera.
Remember you have 30 days to send it back if unused and this is something you want to consider.
I have a P4P, an Inspire 2, and an H520 and was thinking I would get rid of the one I used the least. What I have learned is they are all very different, and it really does depend on your target market. They all have their strengths and weaknesses.
The H520 hands down is steadier in the wind than the other 2 machines, (rather disappointing in the I2 does not seem to track straight). I think that is an advantage of the six motor design. So for me if you a lot of inspection close to structures, the is bread and butter for the H520.
Need to fly when it is cold? - I2, need more camera lens options, I2. So I would evaluate what your target market is, I have not found that one machine can replace the other.
The H520 hands down is steadier in the wind than the other 2 machines, (rather disappointing in the I2 does not seem to track straight). I think that is an advantage of the six motor design. So for me if you a lot of inspection close to structures, the is bread and butter for the H520.
Need to fly when it is cold? - I2, need more camera lens options, I2. So I would evaluate what your target market is, I have not found that one machine can replace the other.
- Joined
- May 3, 2018
- Messages
- 8
- Reaction score
- 4
- Age
- 79
I am rated to fly aircraft of various configurations with a few personal favorites on my short list. I have found UAV platforms to be no different when in comes to personal preferences. Depending on your initial UAV experience, there is a tendency for people to favor that platform because they have the most experience with it. I began my first UAV log time flying various DJI vehicles. I ended up with H520 because of its rotor redundancy, sharp images, air stability and it's swappable multiple camera payloads. I prefer the H520 because it brings out the real pilot in you. It can do anything a DJI platform is capable of achieving once your piloting skills are up to speed. The hand-fly approach really pays off especially in the public safety/management sector, because when an in-flight emergency pops up, you have shortened response time to identify and mitigate the problem.
arruntus
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2017
- Messages
- 1,851
- Reaction score
- 730
I'm sorry @GRFD8121 but many things you can do with a DJI, moreover, with any platform, even very basic ones, you can't do them with the H520 for a simple reason. Because they're not implemented in the flight controller. It is impossible to do them therefore. If you want to do basic things there is no problem, but if you want to advance a little more you hit a wall.
In the rest of the things you've said, I totally agree, in fact I think you've described the same reasons, in my case I have some more, that pushed me to buy the H520.
I am commenting on this because not all users' needs are the same. In this case precisely the worst negative point of Yuneec is precisely that, today, 9 months after its release, many of the features announced when it was released and still being announced today cannot be done
I would have to agree more with @GRFD8121; in his post he clearly referred twice to the ability of the pilot. Manufacturers are certainly adding more 'automated' functions like POI, WPs, etc. and I assume that is what you are referring to, but many of these are not anything we didn't do before automation. I started flying in the 80s and building and flying drones before automation and even GPS was on board. So even when those features are available, I will often hand fly it as I like being the pilot and not just the 'button pusher'. Circling an object and maintaining consistent distance is something I enjoy. Even early mapping we did by starting the camera on 2-3sec time lapse and flew the rows by hand. And I believe this is what he was referring to. And in those cases it is the hardware and stability that makes the difference. In in both of those, the 520 wins hands down.I'm sorry @GRFD8121 but many things you can do with a DJI, moreover, with any platform, even very basic ones, you can't do them with the H520 for a simple reason. Because they're not implemented in the flight controller. It is impossible to do them therefore. If you want to do basic things there is no problem, but if you want to advance a little more you hit a wall.
In the rest of the things you've said, I totally agree, in fact I think you've described the same reasons, in my case I have some more, that pushed me to buy the H520.
I am commenting on this because not all users' needs are the same. In this case precisely the worst negative point of Yuneec is precisely that, today, 9 months after its release, many of the features announced when it was released and still being announced today cannot be done
I'm sorry @GRFD8121 but many things you can do with a DJI, moreover, with any platform, even very basic ones, you can't do them with the H520 for a simple reason. Because they're not implemented in the flight controller. It is impossible to do them therefore. If you want to do basic things there is no problem, but if you want to advance a little more you hit a wall.
In the rest of the things you've said, I totally agree, in fact I think you've described the same reasons, in my case I have some more, that pushed me to buy the H520.
I am commenting on this because not all users' needs are the same. In this case precisely the worst negative point of Yuneec is precisely that, today, 9 months after its release, many of the features announced when it was released and still being announced today cannot be done
I was thinking about this, and agree. In having both platforms (DJI & the H520) I was thinking of reducing my inventory of drones (so easy to buy too much gear...). But SOME of the work I do, is not possible currently with the H520. Some of the jobs the H520 is much better. So instead of saying "they can do all jobs equally if you are a good pilot" - is not really an in depth analysis of current capabilities of the equipment.
So I would come back to consider what your business "niche" or focus will be and select the machine based on that. From my experience so far with the H520 ( and it would be good to get some other user input...) the places where the H520 has shown the strength of its design has been in close-up inspections to buildings and other structures (hail damage on hotels etc ) where the wind can be quite strong at elevation. Quiet operation, great GPS hold, and wind stability.
Other Yuneec - benefits - pilot directed operations - had one job near a chicago airport where DJI would not let me take off despite having clearance. Definite plusses for Yuneec.
But the are differences in the gear, firmware, and available apps that do affect what each machine can do. There are DEFINITELY some jobs the Yuneec H520 cannot currently do.
There are some third party companies who only only support output from DJI. Signal strength for some Cinematic work could be an issue. ( it has been for me ). There are more mapping and other applications for DJI hopefully this will start to change. Need to fly in cold weather - Zero degrees F - the Inspire 2 is rated for that. None of these issues are related to pilot skills. Will you offer Panoramic Photo sets? Do you want to yaw around a subject and take photos - hard with the current controller layout.
In fairness, this is built as a platform for industrial inspection and mapping, and it has some big advantages there. Probably the most cost effective way to get the stability you need to begin mapping and do some inspection work. Also the most cost effective way to become familiar with thermal work....but limited there too if you end up needing higher resolution than the current camera offers.
It is possible that this next firmware update will remedy some of these issues, but that is not yet the case
If you are just getting started, you may not be able to predict which clients you will find success with, and you may find that you need to acquire other equipment as your clientele develops, so this may not be a big deal.
In general, we often focus too much on the equipment, as running a successful business, so much depends on you and your ability to connect and execute work. You success will likely not be as dependent on which one you pick, and more likely dependent on your ability to pursue and acquire customers and deliver the content that is helpful to them. One more thing to consider, is that the rapid development of this industry is that we seem to see a life-cycle of 18-24 months before we have a new product that offers a new level of delivery and performance. It is more important long term that you have customers who value what you deliver and you can introduce new quality and data to as this industry evolves.
Hope this helps.
arruntus
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2017
- Messages
- 1,851
- Reaction score
- 730
I completely agree @10-8, but we're not in the'80s, not even the'90s. The aircraft is from 2017 and should have, one day I hope it will have, a basic function that it does not have, especially when it is announced in certain fields that make it essential to have consistent data. I am not going to name any of these functions because we all know what they are and they are more than spoken for.
I still fly, from time to time, a drone that I improved a lot. No GPS, no help, no display or anything. What we might call today a 4-year-old boy's toy. I like to see how much I've lost, because flying with GPS-assisted help modes u loses a lot of skill, and that's when you remember that by doing certain multiple moves and camera moves, all at the same time, you would realize that there were hands and fingers missing, that you had to be an octopus with 300 hands to get what you wanted
.But unfortunately, with the H520 this is not the case here. If I want to buy such a drone toy, I'm exaggerating, I'll buy it for 50 € in China.
Far from my intention to create controversy or discuss, I only try, in my opposition, to make things clear and that no one gets the wrong idea.
To date, Tuna's great app is the only app supporting the H520. The DJI platform of 3rd party apps range from grid mapping similar to H520 expanding to several other unique specialties. With the introduction of the H Plus, several hopeful applications for the H520 will most likely not evolve. Camera support in comparison should be comparable but that also hasn't kept up. Yuneec has an outstanding Hex platform, but forward development has slowed while DJI Hex Matrice platform has excelled. I'd like Yuneec to succeed for both ownership and competition but if newly released product isn't supported with improvements or ignored after release, it won't approach the collective support of vendors, owners, and industry that DJI has gained.
Several indicate stability in wind or cold. I've looked for the H520 to add RTK GPS. The Hex platform provides stability, the GPS provides a close tolerance to maintain station. An enterprise class quad with RTK GPS will exceed and a RTK Hex provides CM stability. Yuneec needs to offer this as an optional feature and multiple batteries.
You bring up an excellent point, like it or not people are going to compare to DJI as a "standard" - for the cost, there is tremendous value here, but the follow up and support, and ongoing improvements are important. I hope Yuneec does well, as it is not good long term to have only one dominant provider in an industry.
I do not think it is correct to compare PH2-ph3-ph4 with H520 in terms of availability of apps and hardware for it. I cannot tell for sure how old is DJI PH line but it is definitely on a market for at least 5 years and H520 is kind of new thing. In five years time we may have as many apps for h520 as we have for DJI Phantoms now.
I have not expected a lot of third party hardware and software for H520 when I bought mine for this reason but as we can see with Ugcs and Pix4d they are starting to pop up quite fast. We just need to give more time for them to be available.
As for Inspire I think it is a great drone and we have Inspire 1 in our fleet but what put me aside from buying Inspire 2 is
1)its price
2) a few reports of either the whole arm broken mid flight or one of the motors coming off.
3) it is 4 motors machine while H520 has six.
I have not expected a lot of third party hardware and software for H520 when I bought mine for this reason but as we can see with Ugcs and Pix4d they are starting to pop up quite fast. We just need to give more time for them to be available.
As for Inspire I think it is a great drone and we have Inspire 1 in our fleet but what put me aside from buying Inspire 2 is
1)its price
2) a few reports of either the whole arm broken mid flight or one of the motors coming off.
3) it is 4 motors machine while H520 has six.
You bring up an excellent point... on supported software and age of systems. The software on the DJI side tends to support a wide range of models from consumer class like Phantom to enterprise class Matrice 210 or 600. The Inspire 1 is actually older than the discontinued H920 series and still supported in FW updates and 3rd party apps & hardware. The H520 is older than the Inspire 2 or the Matrice M210 and hasn't gained 3rd party or actually Yuneec support in practical operations.
That is where Yuneec really needs to step up... offer software and updates for their models. I doubt we'll see a broad range of 3rd party. Pix4D isn't fully functional and method to install is a bit side loaded... when the RC is Andrid OS this shoudn't be an issue. Likewise, the DJI CrystalSky monitor is Android and it's just recently began to be open to 3rd party software.
Software compatibility and support of their models when newly released, not promised for 1-2 years down range and continued support after the model is 2-3 years old, not discontinued.
It's interesting. The third party software for DJI was driven at least in part by the fact that they didn't have some basic functionality in early models. Litchi and some of the other apps are necessary to do a bunch of things that both the H480 and H520 do 'out of the box'. Given the huge sales of DJI machines, companies that write for them can make a decent amount of money. Additionally, having established themselves in the market, they're now 'go to' apps for all new owners, even when the core software has gained a lot of the missing features they provide.
Comparatively, the H480 and H520 platforms are much more complete. The integrated controller is complemented by some pretty sophisticated software (however much we complain about it!). When I write software for the Typhoon, it is useful to *some* pilots, but I'd never claim it was a necessary purchase as the stuff you get free from Yuneec is pretty sound. The problem comes with supporting the Yuneec ecosystem - smaller numbers of users means less money, and fewer people who need a specific feature.
As an example, I've looked at doing stuff for the thermal camera. But having put feelers out, I have had a handful of people contact me asking for specific tools or features to complement what Yuneec already provides. That's just not enough to even justify going out and purchasing a CGO-ET camera to do the necessary research and development work. The small audience will not pay off the hardware costs, never mind the time it would take to produce the software. I could spend tens of thousands on hardware and development and not make a penny back.
Unfortunately Yuneec does not actively 'chase' third party apps, so business like mine have to go out and find customers that will make a business case for development etc. That's understandable - it means they encourage people to go out and expand their markets - but it can become a bit self-defeating in that Yuneec owners don't particularly look for third party apps, so third party developers have less reason to support the platform. If forces developers to have to sell the whole Yuneec platform to potential customers if they want to build a business, which makes acting as a third party even more challenging.
Similar threads
