Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

Came to a mutual understanding with myself today

Discussion in 'Phantom 2 Vision Discussion' started by JimDE, Apr 19, 2014.

  1. JimDE

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    0
    I got my filter adapter today and installed it ... I used to shoot a Contax G2 35mm rangefinder a lot so I have plenty of 46mm filters. I put a B&W SMC UV on it and the UAV blackout sticker then stacked a B&M cir polarizer on it...... IQ was much improved as was flare and the stacking of filters vignetted the image frame a bit which I cropped out and this also took out the two lwr corner OOF/smearing issue as well. I can live with 30mp tif's and no corner issues for my stills shooting DNG's. IQ and contrast was fairly decent at -7 exp comp @100 iso cropped.

    I was looking at all the fine vision pics and sad to say most had a corner or two with OOF/smearing even the pics shown on the P2V+ forum. I figured I could be playing this DJI Russian Roulette sending camera after camera back and never get one totally free of this issue. Not fair to me or B&H to do this searching for the one in a million (sadly my first P2V had a fairly decent camera .. too bad it had a defective motor and ESC).

    So I am going to stop trying to find that one in a million and just crop my frustration away and frame the initial image wider than I normally would to compensate for this. Sad for $1200 the camera can't match a iPhone 4 but it is what it is..I will not return this one and pay more for the plus just to get the identical still issues. If they ever put a decent still camera on a future version I may consider a move but my faith in DJI products has been severely tarnished these past 5 week exposure to them.

    I probably won't be on the forums much anymore either as seeing all the issues posted does not make this experience enjoyable and only gives me something else to be concerned with. I will just fly and shoot what I have till it fly's away of self destructs.
     
  2. SilentAV8R

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2014
    Messages:
    943
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    Orange County, CA - USA
    I've watched your frustration for a while now. ALl I can say is that I think you are simply expecting too much from this consumer level device. BTW, it is not a $1,200 camera. It is a much less expensive camera strapped to a far more expensive UAV/drone.

    As an experience professional photographer it seems to me you should be saving up for the S1000 and strap a Canon 5D on there with some "L" glass!! :D

    In the mean time I think you have hit on the best solution, crop it away. Consider that this is a wide angle lens with a good deal of barrel distortion. Photoshop lens correction can only do so much!!
     
  3. JimDE

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    0
    The lens profile is absolutely horrible ... It flattens the horizon at the expense of distortion and smearing peripheral subjects. One is better without it.

    I shoot full frames and APC's but not Canon.... But honestly going in I did not expect IQ any better than a iPhone 4 out of this thing but it is a long way from that level IQ for stills. Video looks fair but it uses less of the sensor so smearing and OOF is not as visible.

    But yes I agree I am frustrated and you made a good point about it is not a $1200 camera. But to me that is all I see it as because I bought it to see if I want to go deeper into this aerial photography with my SLR's. What I have learned is the technology of these quads are highly advanced but with fly aways, power failures, and firmware updates deteriorating the experience I doubt if I will go further as IMO at least from what I have experienced and seen with these last 5 weeks I am not going to put $10k of my equipment up in the air. I feel it just is not ready for primetime yet.

    I might be able to get something usable for the web but printing is out of the question. I have settled in to this being a novelty and not a tool, at least with stills. I don't do video...
     
  4. SilentAV8R

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2014
    Messages:
    943
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    Orange County, CA - USA
    While lots of people are using it as a commercial tool, it clearly has limitations and I do not think DJI ever meant for it to be more than a high end consumer product. Overall I think it does that mission very well. If I get to the point of making money with AP/AV then I will certainly move into a higher end airframe and imaging equipment What the Phantom does best is give people with almost no flight experience and entree into the world of flight with the appeal of being able to take adequate, albeit not professional level, photos/video. The Phantom is the first step, not the endpoint.
     
  5. JimDE

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah I agree..... And that is why I bought one initially just to test the waters so to speak. Then I experience a hardware quality issue which could happen with any product and I had no real issue with that as SH-- happens. Then came the camera issue which was horrible and unusable for still in any degree. Along with that ver 2 which made flight at hover far less stable and then ver 3 even worse. That was sent back and I got this camera with much less smearing/OOF but being stung once made me more sensitive and aggravated by it. Looking at the various threads I saw similar IQ in most of the images I saw which lowered expectations of getting a reasonably good IQ camera without this issue less likely. In 5 weeks all I have seen is more issues and less professionalism with DJI's way of conducting business and a lack if caring for its customers and their issues.

    Now, I realize 5 weeks experience with a DJI product is a snapshot in time and might not be a accurate way to evaluating a product or business model. Companies do have hiccups and this just might be one of those times. But, it is all I have to formulate a opinion with. Maybe in time I will see DJI differently but as for now. I have a workaround that will not make me puke using! I think not visiting forums will help because I will not be seeing the steady flow of complaints, concerns, and lost equipment stories daily that just ads fire to my aggravation through this experience.

    If I get a flyaway you can bet I will come home and have a DJI bonfire with the parts and products I have left. Then that will complete my $1200 education in this and can say I tried it and don't trust it.
     
  6. nhoover

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2013
    Messages:
    851
    Likes Received:
    182
    Location:
    Los Gatos, California
    I originally bought the p2v in November for photography. By January I was on my third FC200 camera and was disgusted at the general quality of the camera. I've had a lot of digital cameras in the last 13 years and this is certainly the worst. But it's the only one that flies! Turns out for me that flying the p2v is just great and the photos (crappy as they are) are just a side benefit. Someday I know I'll upgrade to a real flying camera but for now it's great. The p2v+ advances stability of the video hugely but it's still the same crap camera. 12mbps? Come on! But I expect flying it will be hugely fun too. Enjoy what you have and look forward to what's coming.
     
  7. Seahorse

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Messages:
    427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    You are flying something where the bulk of the ability comes straight from the explosion in mobile phone use. Given the poor quality of phone imagery compared to DLSR you have some waiting to do unless you are prepared to pay big bucks. With that in mind perhaps people should concentrate on enjoying what they have now rather than moaning about their unrealistic expectations. Establish the limitations of the flight model and imagery and utilise them to the full is all that any of us can do. Well, that and the hunt for tweaks that help... ;)
     
  8. enseth

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2014
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with Jim's sentiments. I'm sure you can get a "point & shoot" camera for $500, which is the purchase price of the camera on its own, that takes a far superior photo to the FC200. I'm thinking DJI haven't applied as much effort to the camera they mount as they have in developing the Phantom as a camera platform, which is a real pity.
     
  9. JimDE

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mike, For me, the flight part of this venture is the ho hum factor to this. I am not a RC modeler nor do I care to be. Yeah the quads flight is amazing and the technology behind it is incredible. I can see where RC modelers can really enjoy that part of this but to me it is a photographic tool nothing more. Over the years I have dabbled very few times in video and I do not enjoy working in that media either. Nothing against it but I just like to do stills better. My expectations were "lets see what this flying camera is like", emphasis on camera. I did not expect IQ to be as poor as it is for still's and like nhoover this is THE WORST excuse for a still camera I have ever owned period and I have owned a bunch. I could not believe this is what they were selling and I had to of just been unlucky and gotten hold of a lemon. I now realize it's a lemon tree as I see these issue's on most every still I see posted but people still line up in hordes to spend their hard earned money just to get their hands on yet another flying crappy still camera. At first this confused me that people would just keep spending their cash for more DJI technology when over the past 5 weeks the trend of poor manufacturer's quality and firmware/software releases were definitely on the downward slope as far as making the total experience worse as time went on from my perspective. Then I realized for the price it is this or nothing and if I was video orientated it is on par with the also very popular GoPro series of camera so many love for POV. I figured DJI did not obviously care as much about still IQ as video IQ as their customer base is mostly video based.

    I will do what I can with what I have and this will be it..... no progressing into equipment that will take my expensive SLR's into the air because the thought of a fly away or loss of power causing the assembly to fall from the sky into the ocean or onto concrete unexpectedly with a $7k copter and $10K in camera and lens is just too much of a risk to chance. My exposure to this activity over the past 5 weeks graphically showed me that these are real risks with a fairly high occurrence rate. It is one level of risk with a $1200 assembly but a completely different level of risk with a $15-$17K assembly. One I am not willing to take at this time.
     
  10. riblit

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2014
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    NSW, Australia.
    The camera has a lot of technology in it. Wifi, telemetry, remote shutter, remote video start stop, etc. it's more than just a post 'n' shoot. Having said that, it's a pity the technology didn't extend to the sensor and lens.

    If I were to look at something to fly my 5D Mk II and L glass it would be something that had a bit of redundancy, at least 6 rotors so I can lose 1 without it falling out of the sky and batterys that didn't rely on data transfer between them and the aircraft.
     
  11. JimDE

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    0
    enseth, one could grab just about any smartphone ever made and beat the still IQ this vision camera produces. In P&S it would be on par with the $50 no name cameras in the still IQ department. Whoever made the lens profile for it had to be on drug's if they think that is anywhere near better than without it. You trade fisheye distortion for a more dramatic periphery distortion when you use it....... obviously they do not think people make prints anymore.

    I have said my piece and gotten this off my chest. It is what it is and there is nothing I can do about it unless I want to put a great retailer like B&H through the misery of return after return till i find the golden ring so to speak. I do not think it exists with a DJI badging on it and I refuse to put B&H through this because they decided to handle this line of equipment. They too I would imagine look at this with the emphasis on camera more than flying and the profit it should create for them. My bet is over the past 2 weeks the return for upgrade surely must be making them revisit this thinking. It would me if I was the owner of B&H.

    Anyway, no more complaints will be posted by me on this! Live and learn......
     
  12. JimDE

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    0



    Totally agree........
     
  13. RCRookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2014
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    East Texas
    DJI created this camera to compete with the gopro and zenmuse to try and regain that market share. What they DID NOT set out to do... Is create a BETTER camera than their competition. Maybe they didnt want to spend the money, or maybe the technical challenge was too much at the price point they were working at.

    Ideally, an entrepreneur can build a better camera to fit into the FC200 body and fill a niche market that many would upgrade too if everything else was not affected.

    We can hope.
     
  14. usaken

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2014
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern California USA
    I just thought I would like to throw my 2 cents in on this. I am not a pro photog. I'm a lifelong photography enthusiast and private pilot who can no longer fly due to medical issues. I bought the bird to both fly and take pictures/videos. I did a lot of research before I purchased the P2V and feel like I know what I am getting into Let's face it, we are pioneers in this thing. Just like when we started using digital cameras back in the early nineties, we are operating on the bleeding edge of tech. In another 15 years thing whole thing will be totally worked out. (or totally illegal depending upon the FAA and local regulations.) As for DJI, this is a relatively small company with a product that is really amazing. They are not very sophistaced and let's face it, their customer service is poor. The camera is small but not only takes pictures and videos, but it also beams the pictures back to your phone/device. Two years ago this was the stuff of imagination for a consumer product at $1200! In the near future, drones will become mainstream. They will team up with Canon or Nikon and carry really amazing cameras. The control systems will become more reliable and fool proof. We might even see a control system that also has a cell type link to the controller. You'll have to pay a fee to Verizon or whoever, but your bird will have a backup (or primary) link through the cell system. But for the time being, we are still the pioneers in the consumer flying camera area. Enjoy it for what it is, continue to support each other, learn from each other and help develop this truly amazing tech.
     
  15. ShoreBird

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    91
    Likes Received:
    8
    Sounds like a lot of butt hurt to me. Everyone knows its not a pro-grade lense. I think the Phantom are inexpensive for what they are. Alof of camera DSLR lenses cost more than the whole DJI unit.
     
  16. Seahorse

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Messages:
    427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    They do indeed, doubt I will every get my 500mm airborne for starters...
     

    Attached Files: