what's the most prefer camera for h+?

[LinsonW]

Besides current C23, if one day have some other cameras for you to select, which wii you purchase?

1. 1 inch, 50mm, $1000
2. 1 inch, 85mm, $1500
3. 1 inch, 24-75mm, $2000
4. 4/3, 50mm, $1500
5. 4/3, 14-24, $2500
6. 4/3, 24-75, $3000
7. Other

 

[NorWiscPilot]

Forget the prices. The sensor and focal length are primary concerns. After seeing what is available, then we look at how much each will set us back.

Besides, how are the prices calculated for this exercise? [emoji45]

Jeff

 

[Phaedrus]

I'd like to see the thermal sensor for the 520 made compatible with the H Plus.

 

[NorWiscPilot]

I'd like to see the thermal sensor for the 520 made compatible with the H Plus.

Speaking of that, has anyone been successful converting a CGO-ET (H480 version) to work with an H520?

I don’t recall seeing any follow-up threads on this conversion topic.

Jeff

 

[Fred Garvin]

I’ll buy a Zenmuse MFT for $1399......$1799 with an Oly 15mm. As long as it accepts the standard mounting, I’ll choose the lenses as I need them.

14-24 isn’t enough to be worth the effort or expense.

24-75? Can you stabilize the gyro at 75mm? Or would that be strictly, no wind, at a hover?

 

[JackMTaco]

I'd like to see the thermal sensor for the 520 made compatible with the H Plus.

That won't ever happen.

 

[Phaedrus]

That won't ever happen.

Probably not, but I can still wish for it! ?

 

[Ty Pilot]

7] Other ?

Make both a 1 inch and a 4/3 camera, each an with interchangeable lens mount then; offer an array of lenses to select from.

From a payload perspective this may not be feasible on the Plus therefore ? - revive the 920, refine it, improve upon it and support it. Or build a slightly larger Hex than the Plus - maybe 800 mm and hey - call it the Cyclone.

But those types of cameras (with versatility) are the future.

 

[JackMTaco]

****, I would be happy with the current camera if it recorded in D-Log and had an actual aperture on it.

 

[Ty Pilot]

Oh and I almost forgot. I was speaking with @JackMTaco last week and he brought up a good point; put a buffer on the camera that will allow a faster interval than six seconds for time lapse, it may not need to be every second but, at least a 2 or 3 second interval between shots is mandatory along with the others.

P.S. Do this on the C23 first.

 

[LinsonW]

Oh and I almost forgot. I was speaking with @JackMTaco last week and he brought up a good point; put a buffer on the camera that will allow a faster interval than six seconds for time lapse, it may not need to be every second but, at least a 2 or 3 second interval between shots is mandatory along with the others.

P.S. Do this on the C23 first.

All you mentioned are well considered.I think 920 is a little big/heavy and another new airframe requires additional money. If take H+ as a good platform then need more and more cameras just like DSLR. 4/3 is a common interface for lens, and for H+ 1 inch type is suitable due to weight and cost, but currently there is no many avaliable lens for 1 inch type.

 

[NorWiscPilot]

Oh and I almost forgot. I was speaking with @JackMTaco last week and he brought up a good point; put a buffer on the camera that will allow a faster interval than six seconds for time lapse, it may not need to be every second but, at least a 2 or 3 second interval between shots is mandatory along with the others.

P.S. Do this on the C23 first.

Sorry, @Ty Pilot,

Buffer won’t help unless it is large enough to hold the whole mission. Why not? Math. If the card can’t keep up with a set interval, the buffer will eventually fill up and we’re back with the same dilemma.

What is needed is a faster transfer from the camera to the card, faster transfer speed than what the camera can produce in images. Of course, we want the camera to be able to produce images every 1 to 5 seconds (user selectable).

Make sense?

Jeff

 

[LinsonW]

****, I would be happy with the current camera if it recorded in D-Log and had an actual aperture on it.

Shuold be YLog, LOL
What's meaning "actual aperture"?

 

[NorWiscPilot]

Shuold be YLog, LOL
What's meaning "actual aperture"?

Perhaps taco meant “user adjustable” aperture.

 

[JackMTaco]

Shuold be YLog, LOL
What's meaning "actual aperture"?

Correct about Y-log. Just figured I would say D-Log to maybe make Yunnec jealous.
Would like to have aperture control on the camera.

 

[LinsonW]

Correct about Y-log. Just figured I would say D-Log to maybe make Yunnec jealous.
Would like to have aperture control on the camera.

aperture control requires HW change(new lens, new system) and for current camera maybe several good design ND filters is solution.

 

[Fred Garvin]

.......for current camera maybe several good design ND filters is solution........

What a wonderful idea. Could you call Freewell and ask them about making us some filters?

 

[LinsonW]

What a wonderful idea. Could you call Freewell and ask them about making us some filters?

How about the adapter ring plus standard 40.5 mm filter?

 

[Fred Garvin]

How about the adapter ring plus standard 40.5 mm filter?

That would work.....if we had more adapter rings. The ONE SINGLE adapter that comes with the camera is quite cheap and easily buggered. They tend to seize quite easily, and changing filters is delicate work....or you risk destroying the Precious.

If more were easily available.....to purchase from Yuneec....at like, say, $1.69 like all the other Chinese adapters....

Yes, that would work.....can you make that happen? Until then, we’re.....well, we’re.....

 

[LinsonW]

That would work.....if we had more adapter rings. The ONE SINGLE adapter that comes with the camera is quite cheap and easily buggered. They tend to seize quite easily, and changing filters is delicate work....or you risk destroying the Precious.

If more were easily available.....to purchase from Yuneec....at like, say, $1.69 like all the other Chinese adapters....

Yes, that would work.....can you make that happen? Until the, we’re.....well, we’re.....

If only for more adapters, personally I think it should not be a problem, let's look for the solution.
Yes, I agree it's better if the filter could fit the lens directly, and it should be considered at the beginning of design.