White, as I said in the earlier post, the gimbal will work fine with up to a 100 grams, as I sat a 100g weight on the cam, and it lifted it..the filter holder and uv filter I have on there now weigh in at 17.7 grams, and it works flawlessly. the heli has given me over 100 flights with no issues, but, I have never taken it out of "vision" mode..no reason to. if I wanted a sport quad, I would have bought one. I also feel the DE gimbal was worth the $$, as it is a nicely thought out piece, and does what its supposed to do.
Dronexpert gimbal for Phantom Vision
- Thread starter dronesetc
- Start date
strange, I wonder why it wont hold filter up ( I have the same one from DJI) . . . the camera just droops down when the filter is on it. I might try it the way you have it and see how it works by gluing it to the body of the FC200.
Thanks for the reply.
Thanks for the reply.
http://vimeo.com/88021442
White, I see no speed difference either, with or without the filter..and the legs on the holder are not very heavy, as the whole thing was 12 grams..cant weigh them, as I machined them off, nothing left but aluminum shavings..
White, I see no speed difference either, with or without the filter..and the legs on the holder are not very heavy, as the whole thing was 12 grams..cant weigh them, as I machined them off, nothing left but aluminum shavings..
Great, so maybe the Dronexpert can hold a filter. However, can anyone show a difference that a filter really makes in quality? I am really suspect how much of a difference it would make using a cheap lightweight filter and offset what you would lose with quality from cheap glass vs any improvements by the filter itself? Since the camera is not really high quality, adding a lower quality glass on top of it, is suspect in improvements if any at all?
Only filter that would be worth putting on it would be a cpol. All other filters can be added via software with the same effects. That being said, I am not sure who makes the lens inside the camera but if you have a lot of sun glare then yes a cpol would help. Other then that, use software to do what you want.
There's a thread elsewhere about filters and the experience some of us have had with them. Circ pol definitely had potential, but the shiny lens surround on the Vision causes reelection glare. Coloradosky has produced some non-reflective stickers to go on the surround the cut the glare...
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=8714
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=8714
QuadZilla said:
But fot the most part, the circular polarizer would have same effect as a ND only it can reduce glares also if set right. NDs can have too much darkening which can cause a blur effect if it is overly dark, thus the circ polarizer has a reduced darkening. Although the filters may have a benifit, it is still extra glass to reduce photo or video quality, expecially using the cheapo glasses of most filters. Would like to see a side by side comparison for real determination still. I no longer use any filters on my land camera any longer, other than special effect circumstances, to retain maximum quality. If real improvement is realized, then
I use one and mostly circ polarizer and infrequent ND, but very high quality of those. My ND actually has combo circulat polarizer and Adjustable ND strenghts.
I still don't understand why people in here seems to bee so hooked on filters for the PV2.
I'm also sure a lot of the people don't even know what the filters are doing, but have just read about the hype of the filters in here.
I have been writing this before but I do it again
\
Don't think you can get a cheap noisy and blurry camera to produce better quality with a filter, it can only (in most cases) be worse.
I'm also sure a lot of the people don't even know what the filters are doing, but have just read about the hype of the filters in here.
I have been writing this before but I do it again
\Don't think you can get a cheap noisy and blurry camera to produce better quality with a filter, it can only (in most cases) be worse.
I posted a very short video clip which, apart from the flaring for which I have the sticker cure coming, showed even a cheap circular polarizer produced reflection-free water and some good contrasty clouds (they "pop" nicely) even at a non-optimal angle to the sun... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcCKkUy7F80 I think it shows some promise for using a CP compared to stock. Once I've got my matte sticker from http://www.signsoflife.net/phantom-bezel.php I'm going to do more testing when the sun makes a reappearance and I don't have the halo flaring going on...
Pull_Up said:
Pull up please can you explain flaring, I had a short flight on Sunday and when moving forward against the sun had horizontal lines flashing across the screen?
I've just made a sticker for the lens, I have matt vinyl however it has a slight sheen so I printed it so there's no sheen at all, need to test but never seem to get the time to get out much these days.
QuadZilla said:
Soryy but that is NOT correct. You are talking about Video, and the Video have a fixed frame per second like 30fps or 60fps so the filter will not change the shutter time!
And for Photography, the faster shutter you can get the better!
QuadZilla. I can't tell if your theory is right or not, but I have been testing this gimbal and when shooting at higher fps (60 vs 30) the jello effect is less perceptible than when doing so at 30fps. The fact is that you can choose between fps (frames per second) when shooting video, but shooter speed is performed automatic by camera when it is recording video.
QuadZilla said:
Not sure about others, but got a bill from FedEx from my shipment for $18.22 for Customs Duty fees. Just making anyone aware to figure this in with the costs that may not be expected. Just making aware to insure you plan on it if ordered as well as other products also from other gimbal suppliers also if ordered from overseas.
dastagg said:
Hi Dastagg, I'm not sure but could it be an import tax?
I'm in Ireland and looking at maybe buying the rotorpixel gimbal because I'm not liking the jello on all the videos I've seen so far from the dronexpert gimbal.
Anyways... If I do buy the rotorpixel from Canada I'm expecting to pay their advertised price + shipping and then normally when you buy something from outside Europe I'll be expecting a bill from the shipping company for the import tax which im sure will be a lot more than what you paid. The shipping company wont give me my goods until I pay the duties.
Thanks, it was a little unexpected, however, I'm fine with it since they possibly have no control of these charges.
QuadZilla said:
Ok. Then If I add the filter it could help me solve my hello problem specially at 30fps?
dastagg said:
Import/customs duties are levied by your government on items you import. International sellers can't add that into the cost because a) it's not applied by the government of the exporting company's country, and b) rates of import/customs duty vary country by country, and then further vary depending on the type of goods.
Most jurisdictions will apply a minimum value for goods below which they won't worry about collecting duty as the admin involved outweighs the income. I've found that state postal services are far looser at collection than the large carriers like FedEx, UPS, DHL, etc who seem to collect duties owed without fail. Given an option I try and opt for a standard postal service if possible on higher ticket items for this reason (although at this level of spend you'd probably always get hit with the duty as the value is high).
http://www.dutycalculator.com/country-g ... ed-States/
Thanks for clarification and I did some editing to my posts to be sure to negate any adverse impact to the company, as Again, I am well satisfied with gimbal and their company. Sure don't want to relay any bad rap on them for something they cannot control. Hope I didn't leave impression of any negative impact. They have been most cooperative in their services.
Similar threads
