Update 1.3 - 1 March 2018

[RGilmore]

Agreed, but the majority of people that buy these things have zero knowledge of what is required to produce the best end result, expecting whatever software or cloud service used to overcome the deficiencies they induced and render a product better than the data provided. Pretty hard to turn out finish work when using rough tools.

That’s partially what I meant when I used the word “naive” earlier. Ignorant is a more accurate term but people get put off by the word as they believe it assaults their intelligence. It’s much too course in delivery for them. The more involved the activity the more ignorance of influences that impact that activity will affect the end result.

Well PR, I agree with you to an extent, while I may not know everything about mapping and the software used, and how to get the best results, I am trying to learn enough as a basic skill set, and after talking to someone highly skilled in this area, who does this for a living, it is his bread and butter from he qualified as a surveyor many moons ago, long before UAVs were invented, has been using homebiuiltuilt Multirotor and Fixed wing aircraft since the Birth of APM, uses many softwares as and when he sees fit, has done many mapping and surveys and is sub contracted out by some of the biggest companies in the UK to carry out the work. He bought the H520 as his quick "GO TO" tool for small sites, he is a wealth of talent and information in this field. And when someone like this.....Tells me that the images from the 520 are not no where near as good as what they should be, and is having to repeat jobs with his own homebuilt craft. Then I believe him.

 

[PatR]

RG,

The difference between you and some others is that you understand and recognize there’s more that goes into this stuff than the obvious. Therefore you push yourself to explore and learn what is needed to get good at it.

My hat is off to you and those like you. I think you may misunderstand some of what I’ve been saying though. The E-90 is better for photogrammetry than photography. That’s a relative description. I’ve never said it was a good camera as I don’t feel it is. I sensed Yuneec was holding something back from us when they failed to deliver direct image comparisons between the E-90 and E-50 after multiple requests.

 

[arruntus]

Arruntus,

You are one of those that has far more cause to be upset with the 520 as your early promotion of it were in many ways the reason some bought one. I’ve mentioned before that you must feel you were betrayed by Yuneec, and I feel you are justified if you do.

FYI, the deficiencies you referenced in your last post, along with others, is exactly why I passed over the 520 for a 920. Obsolete platform that’s been discontinued but a far better camera than the E-90 or E-50 if not employed for photogrammetry. As I’ve said soooo many times, it’s all about the camera. The rest of the multirotor is just a means of transport.

Indeed, the H520 is the first drone I've ever bought. I've spent a lot of money compared to what it costs me to build my own. The ones I have, I've built whole since 0.

For lack of time I bought the H520 and 6 months later we are talking about what we talked about.......... All the advertising and features that the H520 should have made me take the plunge. Now I'm just waiting for them to come true, I'm still waiting.....

 

[claudius62]

And hope is life but unfortunately it also has its limits.
And I too thought he was going to do better than my Inspire, but that money and time wasted. Thank you Yuneec.

 

[PatR]

The 800lb gorilla is the 520 is already half way through Yuneec’s typical featured product life cycle.

 

[Panomapic]

Is it possible that the lens on my E90 is just not as bad as others? Could this be one of the reasons behind some of the misunderstandings here? Every picture of the horizon I have is as flat as a pancake. I've drawn lines across every single one. Towers in the distance do not lean. What I am suggesting is that perhaps this is QA/QC issue with the lens. Some are good, some are not, others are in between. I'm not saying that is better by any means but it might explain some of this. It's like when Samsung had a certain number of batteries explode in their phones, they canned the whole lot. Something to ponder at least.

 

[PatR]

It’s very possible as it would be the same as what happened with some early H-480 cameras.

 

[Peggy]

Is it possible that the lens on my E90 is just not as bad as others? Could this be one of the reasons behind some of the misunderstandings here? Every picture of the horizon I have is as flat as a pancake. I've drawn lines across every single one. Towers in the distance do not lean. What I am suggesting is that perhaps this is QA/QC issue with the lens. Some are good, some are not, others are in between. I'm not saying that is better by any means but it might explain some of this. It's like when Samsung had a certain number of batteries explode in their phones, they canned the whole lot. Something to ponder at least.

Could you post some examples without any correction especially in DNG.
How long have you had your E90?
Perhaps Yuneec changed this lens later on?
If you have flat horizons and no distortion I am very envious of you

 

[PatR]

For general info, I received word this morning from another person that has a zero or minimal distortion E-90.

 

[Kev Waite]

For general info, I received word this morning from another person that has a zero or minimal distortion E-90.

Could you please ask them for an untouched sample of dng file, jpg and video and when did they buy their H520/E90

 

[PatR]

I could ask but don't know that I'd receive as he has reason to not participate in this forum. I do know he acquired his 520 very early after they were released. With recent clarification/expansion of copyright laws I could not re-post any of his work without permission.

 

[10-8]

For general info, I received word this morning from another person that has a zero or minimal distortion E-90.

One thing to keep in mind, and this is no disrespect to those having issues, is this is a product forum. And having been involved in the computer industry for 35 years, I can say from experience that any product forum will generally attract those having an issue more than those that do not. It doesn't matter if the product forum is Mercedes cars, Samsung TVs or DJI drones, people having a problem will seek support. If you are not having an issue, you would never know of those that are. The majority of those with any product that are satisfied are generally using them as intended every day and not concerned, nor have a reason to be, interested in those that are having an issue with the same product. I've seen it over and over again in forums I've been in over the years. And from that, you can get a false sense of majority regarding a product.

You will see on previous posts on this forum, those that have issues and are justifiably upset. But it is the same 8-10 individuals. When 2 or more have a crash, I have seen posts exclaiming 'WTH! These things are falling out of the sky like crazy!'. But in reality, there are 90% of total sales being used every day. This certainly includes DJI as an excellent example. Check out most any of their forums, and you will see a great deal of unhappy customers. But as a whole, the vast majority are out flying doing there job.

Like I said, it doesn't help when you are one having an issue. But it's still a #s game. I have seen several posts here and on FB of those that are sorry to hear the 520 is an issue for some. But they are using it every day. And the fact is, it is those having an issue that will seek a forum. And then you'll hear: 'Yeah, but I have XX issue and I know 4 others with the same issue', meaning of course that the majority must be also. But it is when someone says in general that ' the product is crap and unfit for ANY client' that is most disturbing, for that statement can only be the opinion for them and their clients since they were never elected by the majority of customers to speak for them.

 

[Tuna]

I must admit I'm confused by reports of camera results. Some people seem very happy and are getting good results, and some treat the output as near unworkable. With the Typhoon H it took a while before people really got the best from the camera, and started to identify particular things to look for - but the H520 community is much smaller, so the information seems to be coming out much more slowly.

It's quite a job to fully characterise a camera and as I haven't been able to spend serious time with the E90 I'm just going on what people say - which is not much better than gossip and rumour (and just bitching in a few cases).

As with all drones, it seems some people are photographers, some are pilots, some are gamers and some are engineers - and each gets very different results from the same machine.

 

[LutinMalefique]

all these probable problems with the E90 make me postpone a purchase of the h520. If there is a problem with the lenses, why not list the serial numbers and identify lots that would be defective?

 

[PatR]

How would you identify “lots”. To do so would assume there has been more than one lot and that Yuneec would provide such info. The latter is beyond improbable.

 

[Kev Waite]

I know of at least 10 who are unhappy with the lens distortion. Seems like anyone with photography experience is unhappy, me included. Even, Douglas Spotted Eagle from, Yuneec USA, who apparently are in charge of camera development, has admitted in a message that it’s not possible to remove the distortion from a 23mm lens without reducing the resolution and they are not willing to do that! Also seems that the couple of people claiming to have the E90 with little or no distortion are not willing or able to show photos in a non adjusted form that shows this. I personally think the people responsible for the camera design, don't have enough photographic experience and seem to accept that the distortion is acceptable and fine for mapping. Well if they don't sort the problem, possibly with a different lens then the guys buying the Typhoon H Plus with the C23 camera, same camera with different firmware, are going to be very unhappy.Yes the image is much better than the CGO3+, but with lens distortion that is very difficult or impossible to remove in post. I am also aware of a growing list of owners that are either selling their H520 or in the process of returning them to Yuneec for refunds as after almost 6 months now and repeated broken promises, including the latest firmware that in the release notes claims to have fixed the distortion, but does not. Its not right when a friend of mine had to survey a transmission tower and the results could not be stitched together but his DJI Mavic performed the same task with ease. We have 3 different Yuneec departments in 3 different countries working on different parts of the H520/E90 and none of them seem to be able to agree on what this platform should do.

 

[PatR]

I use both a 16mm and 20mm lens on a Sony a6000. Either of them is better than the E-90’s “23mm”. Sure, the camera is 24mpxl instead of the E-90’s 20Mpxl but even the CGO-4 16Mpxl, 1” sensor camera with a 12mm-44mm lens at any focal length provides higher quality images.

 

[Kev Waite]

I use both a 16mm and 20mm lens on a Sony a6000. Either of them is better than the E-90’s “23mm”. Sure, the camera is 24mpxl instead of the E-90’s 20Mpxl but even the CGO-4 16Mpxl, 1” sensor camera with a 12mm-44mm lens at any focal length provides higher quality images.

The CGO4 camera should be better, it has a bigger micro 4/3 sensor not 1". It also uses quality lenses. Apart from the case it's actually not a Yuneec camera it's a rebadged Panasonic GH4.

 

[javier Olalla González]

The focal length of E-90 is 8.3 mm

 

[Tuna]

Its not right when a friend of mine had to survey a transmission tower and the results could not be stitched together but his DJI Mavic performed the same task with ease.

That really doesn't mean anything without more information. You can fly the same mission twice and get one set of images that won't stitch for no apparent reason, and another that stitch just fine. Equally, stitching very much depends on which software you're using - some of the tools are optimised for DJI cameras, and some are just 'dumb stitchers' that don't know anything about the specifics of drone surveys. If I blamed the camera every time a stitch didn't come together, I'd have thrown all my kit in the bin by now.

It's right that fixing the distortion in the camera would lower the resolution of the output - if the lens is fisheye rather than rectilinear, then correcting the distortion involves cropping off the edges - and suddenly they'd have to advertise the 20Mp camera as being only 18Mp for stills. As resolution is everything for Orthomosaics, that would be a poor compromise. Most decent photo editing software has lens correction built in, so it should be possible for someone to produce an E90 profile to use in Photoshop etc. That would allow people who use the E90 for videography to have rectilinear output when needed.

The alternative is that someone produces an aftermarket rectilinear lens. Has anyone taken the E90 apart to see how easy a lens swap would be?