what's the most prefer camera for h+?

[Ty Pilot]

Perhaps in the future. . . Yuneec could avoid this problem altogether by simply making the barrel (or lens) of any of their cameras have standard female threading to accept standard type filters with no adapters.

 

[LinsonW]

Perhaps in the future. . . Yuneec could avoid this problem altogether by simply making the barrel (or lens) of any of their cameras have standard female threading to accept standard type filters with no adapters.

yes, it's better if could be common filter. And Yuneec also should provide custom filter for non-standard design. I think ND4/ND8/ND16 are mostly used.

 

[Fred Garvin]

yes, it's better if could be common filter. And Yuneec also should provide custom filter for non-standard design. I think ND4/ND8/ND16 are mostly used.

ND32.....plus a set of PL’s.....I needed the 32 on my Mavic Air to get down to 1/60. Mid day, bright Texas Sun.

 

[PatR]

Whatever is done, a true 50mm lens is a mandatory minimum. Not one of the current Yuneec cameras is suitable for serious inspection work. The CGO-4’s 14-42mm was quite useful but the gimbal could not stabilize it at extended focal length. The E-50 is the closest thing Yuneec has to being acceptable but still lacks the resolution necessary for use at safe stand off distances. The day of the converted security camera and lens combo has long passed. Continue to employ such conversions means your prospective customers will buy something else.

A 1” or micro 4/3 sensor are the minimum acceptable to be competitive. 23+mpxl is now an “industry standard”. You have that or the people that do get the job instead of you.

Zooms must be mechanical. Falsely creating a zoomed image vis cropping reduces image quality at every level of zoom and customers demand high resolution product that hasn’t been downgraded to present an acceptable aspect ratio.

Should you research the market you’ll likely find that small platforms are being rapidly replaced by larger ones far more capable of providing features and hardware being demanded by paying customers of any significance. Those platforms must be capable of performing multiple tasks. The single task platforms like Anafi, Evo, Mavic, base level Phantoms and Typhoon H derivatives are not performance competitive. Having one and trying to use one for serious work is a fast way to be disqualified for consideration. They make for nice recreational tools but don’t cut it for high level product quality.

One other thing, all firmware has to work, every time, the first time. You can either depend on your tools to function correctly every time or you dispose of that tool for one you can depend on. There’s no half way point in that. Operators are required to assure their aircraft are safe for flight and buggy firmware means they can’t be legally flown, and if flown liability insurance coverage would be denied after an incident.

Companies that can’t or won’t test their firmware code to exacting standards should not be selling products. Our federal incident/accident reporting requirements are mandatory, and corporate clients ate adopting them as part of their contracts. Any manufacturer that continues to market unreliable auto pilots or firmware should anticipate they will soon be prevented from importing them.

As harsh as it sounds, general Chinese manufacturing and marketing standards must be elevated to higher American standards to stay in the game. Anyone that cannot achieve at least parity with American customer performance standards might as well stay home.

 

[JackMTaco]

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

I disagree. The hardware on the C23 is more than capable of delivering 2 second intervals and with a buffer it would help substantially. It is very provable by the ability of pressing the shutter button and watching the LED change from Green to Blue and back to Green again when it has written the file to the card. I've timed it and it is exactly 2.05 seconds for it to write a DNG & Jpeg to the card before being ready for the next picture. If you consider that a DNG file is 32Mb and a Jpeg is 8, you can conclude that the system has a write speed of 18.6 Mb/s. And considering that a 4K60 @ 100Mbs file averages about 18MB for every 1 second of video, this confirms that it is not a card issue but a write issue from the camera. If the camera would dump to an internal buffer while simultaneously writing to the card, you can further improve transfer speeds along with having the ability to shoot continuously. DSLR's operate the same principle, I have 2 of them and I can burst shot photos continuously and dependent on my settings I can hold it indefinitely or max the buffer out due to high ISO/long exposure requiring more data to be written. Either way, a buffered sensor would have more ability to write data faster to the card while still having the ability to operate the next shot.

What gets me is that this camera has the ability to hardware encode H265, that alone requires extensive processing power from the camera to compress. The C23 can be an amazing camera if they would unlock it's potential instead of hindering it. If It did not have to write both DNG and Jpeg, it would have the ability to shoot continuously by holding the shutter butter down. Compressing a jpeg and writing it to the card requires additional processing instead of just dumping the raw file onto the card while continuously shooting.

Another issue I have is why can I manually operate the camera faster than 5 seconds between shots but the intervals lowest setting is 5. I can press the shutter button every 2 seconds with no issues and the camera performs fine. This is how I have been shooting most of my still frame time lapses. That's what makes me upset with the overall performance of the camera. ****, if they removed the Jpeg option and wrote straight RAW, bet we could squeeze 1 second intervals out of it. Why require a Class 10 U3 card if it's only utilizing 20% of it's writing abilities?!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[oliver]

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

Hi,
you work for Yuneec?

 

[TurboDad81]

@JackMTaco In that video, are you shooting JPEG+DNG? Or just JPEG?

 

[JackMTaco]

@JackMTaco In that video, are you shooting JPEG+DNG? Or just JPEG?

DNG and Jpeg.

 

[TurboDad81]

DNG and Jpeg.

Wow. Mine is nowhere near that fast. Seriously takes every bit of 5 seconds to get the shutter sound.

 

[NorWiscPilot]

I disagree. The hardware on the C23 is more than capable of delivering 2 second intervals and with a buffer it would help...

Jack,

I understand your points, but I think you missed mine.

First, we’re talking about what we want/need in new camera capabilities.

My point: if a buffer is needed in order to allow for shorter interval shooting, eventually this buffer WILL fill up and the interval shooting will have to pause until the buffer empties sufficiently. Per your DSLR example, it happens there too, given high enough amounts of data. There’s no way around this.

Continuing, what I am saying is this: we need the transfer speed from the sensor to the card, and whatever is in between, to be greater than what the sensor can capture and output, in order to provide for continuous interval shooting, at whatever interval is designed as a capability.

I see no other way around this; it’s a law of physics. Something has to drain out of a container equal to or faster than what is going into it, otherwise an overflow occurs.

As far as the C23, I agree with your points. But unless Yuneec changes the options, as you describe, we have to keep asking for the capability to be built into any future cameras; the premise of this thread. Right?

Hope this helps clarify the point I was trying to make.

Respectfully,

Jeff

 

[PatR]

I wonder if Yuneec cameras are actually taking two photos when in DNG + JPG mode or creating a derivitive JPG from DNG image data?

 

[LinsonW]

Wow. Mine is nowhere near that fast. Seriously takes every bit of 5 seconds to get the shutter sound.

I also double if @JackMTaco get both JPG+DNG, with my test it at least takes about 3s for JPG+DNG output

 

[Fred Garvin]

H

I wonder if Yuneec cameras are actually taking two photos when in DNG + JPG mode or creating a derivitive JPG from DNG image data?

All digital cameras capture in RAW. Each has their own proprietary format, but are essentially the same. Some use DNG. Even phones, tablets, cheap point and shoots capture in RAW. Some devices, like DSLR’s, record this capture in that RAW format. Most lower end devices apply some sort of image enhancement profile, then export with a compression to JPG. That is the final image produced because it is very small and easiest for consumers to work with, that most (if not all) consumer grade image managers can read.

So, no, it’s not two images....it’s the RAW capture, plus a profiled, enhanced, compressed JPG. And why, professionals and serious hobbiests abhor camera produced JPG’s, preferring to do their own image corrections and exporting a final JPG themselves. Or not....sending a tiff to the printer, or even an adjusted RAW. This is one advantage of DNG.....it doesn’t have a sidecar, like other RAW’s do.

 

[Ty Pilot]

After watching Jack's video above I had to see it for myself and sure enough I was able to manually shoot a near two second (slightly more) interval for as long as I choose. This was with JPG and DNG being recorded.

 

[PatR]

Fred,

Thanks for that breakdown. I never knew how the camera produced two different images of the same scene. Never made any sense that a shutter would have to trigger twice to do it, with no way to do it fast enough to capture a movement image without some difference between images.

The difference between RAW anf JPG I already knew. With the “averaged” state of a JPG the reason I always shoot in RAW or DNG. Drives my wife crazy as she always wants the finished product to come straight from the camera and can’t put together why a color corrected JPG almost never works out as well as the same photo that was corrected from a RAW file. Too much work to post process a photo from her perspective.

 

[NorWiscPilot]

After watching Jack's video above I had to see it for myself and sure enough I was able to manually shoot a near two second (slightly more) interval for as long as I choose. This was with JPG and DNG being recorded.

Thanks for the confirmation, @Ty Pilot!

So, wonder why the time lapse interval is set to 5s then?

I bet what has already been said is true, remove the “jpg creation [from the raw capture] step and I bet the C23 could get close to the 1s interval. Will the bus to the card handle it is the next question.

I do recall the CGO3+ does 1s interval time lapse, but only to jpg. The camera can handle the capture and processing to output the jpg just fine. My bet is the bus is not fast enough to send both a dng AND the jpg to the card.

Hopefully our dreams soon become reality.

Jeff

 

[LinsonW]

Thanks for the confirmation, @Ty Pilot!

So, wonder why the time lapse interval is set to 5s then?

I bet what has already been said is true, remove the “jpg creation [from the raw capture] step and I bet the C23 could get close to the 1s interval. Will the bus to the card handle it is the next question.

I do recall the CGO3+ does 1s interval time lapse, but only to jpg. The camera can handle the capture and processing to output the jpg just fine. My bet is the bus is not fast enough to send both a dng AND the jpg to the card.

Hopefully our dreams soon become reality.

Jeff

Thanks @Ty Pilot and @NorWiscPilot
Will check if possible to get pure DNG within 2s and pure JPG within 1s
CGO3 is 12M and C23 is 20M, a little different

 

[RPR]

Do you think money is an issue if the product is reliable?

 

[DoomMeister]

Thanks @Ty Pilot and @NorWiscPilot
Will check if possible to get pure DNG within 2s and pure JPG within 1s
CGO3 is 12M and C23 is 20M, a little different

I would love to see being able to select DNG only in both the C23 and the CGO3+. I quit using JPG on my Canon DSLR’s long ago. The RAW format gives much more latitude in post and frees the the user to make their own choices for what makes the best end result.

 

[LinsonW]

Whatever is done, a true 50mm lens is a mandatory minimum. Not one of the current Yuneec cameras is suitable for serious inspection work. The CGO-4’s 14-42mm was quite useful but the gimbal could not stabilize it at extended focal length. The E-50 is the closest thing Yuneec has to being acceptable but still lacks the resolution necessary for use at safe stand off distances. The day of the converted security camera and lens combo has long passed. Continue to employ such conversions means your prospective customers will buy something else.

A 1” or micro 4/3 sensor are the minimum acceptable to be competitive. 23+mpxl is now an “industry standard”. You have that or the people that do get the job instead of you.

Zooms must be mechanical. Falsely creating a zoomed image vis cropping reduces image quality at every level of zoom and customers demand high resolution product that hasn’t been downgraded to present an acceptable aspect ratio.

Should you research the market you’ll likely find that small platforms are being rapidly replaced by larger ones far more capable of providing features and hardware being demanded by paying customers of any significance. Those platforms must be capable of performing multiple tasks. The single task platforms like Anafi, Evo, Mavic, base level Phantoms and Typhoon H derivatives are not performance competitive. Having one and trying to use one for serious work is a fast way to be disqualified for consideration. They make for nice recreational tools but don’t cut it for high level product quality.

One other thing, all firmware has to work, every time, the first time. You can either depend on your tools to function correctly every time or you dispose of that tool for one you can depend on. There’s no half way point in that. Operators are required to assure their aircraft are safe for flight and buggy firmware means they can’t be legally flown, and if flown liability insurance coverage would be denied after an incident.

Companies that can’t or won’t test their firmware code to exacting standards should not be selling products. Our federal incident/accident reporting requirements are mandatory, and corporate clients ate adopting them as part of their contracts. Any manufacturer that continues to market unreliable auto pilots or firmware should anticipate they will soon be prevented from importing them.

As harsh as it sounds, general Chinese manufacturing and marketing standards must be elevated to higher American standards to stay in the game. Anyone that cannot achieve at least parity with American customer performance standards might as well stay home.

Thanks a lot. Agree reliable system is much important for drone system, as you mentioned a lot times, LOL.
For high quality image system, big sensor and good lens are the two key factors, plus rich software functions. Hence it's not one day or one year task and should move forward step by step. 1 inch->4/3->APS-C->Full frame, would be similar with DSLR history.