Newbie in Idaho

[AUsome]

Ready to take the plunge, but need some basic answers to help guide me. I like the idea of the Vision as it seems to put a lot into a single package. But then again, I like the idea of being able to modify things and create exactly what I need. Being new to this, not sure if I should start off with something like the Vision and then see where to go from there, but here are some issues that I'd like help with:
1. With the Vision, it appears you have a lot of control of the camera while in flight. Is it possible to control other cameras, such as the GPH3 similarly? If so, at what range can you still control the camera? The Vision appears to limit camera control to around 300 ft if I understand correctly.
2. On the Vision, if I am correct about the 300 ft camera control limits, would you still have FPV out to the control range of 1000m? I think that is what they are saying will be the maximum control range of the Vision. Do other quadcopters have similar ranges (with/without FPV)?
3. I already have a pretty nice Nikon point and shoot (shock proof/water proof) that takes nice pics. Any reason I couldn't use this in lieu of an GPH3? I'd obviously not be able to control it in flight, but see question 1...not sure (yet) if I could control the GPH3 in flight either.
4. So, does FPV operate independent of any camera onboard? Does something like the Vision have BOTH FPV AND camera, or does the FPV use the onboard camera (in which case FPV would be limited to around 300 feet???
5. If noise of the copter matters, are some quieter than others? Or are they all about the same in terms of noise?
6. If I decide to build my own, is it possible to put together a package that would have much of the same ability of the Vision, but close to it in price?

Anyway, answers to these questions will give me a good base to begin my research. Thanks in advance and cheers.

 

[miskatonic]

For FPV you are required to have an amateur radio operators license to operate legally within the US. The FCC is kind of closed at the moment. Also it is possible to do FPV straight though the GoPro. You can get a second camera but as a new pilot I recommend just working on a single camera.

The Phantom frame is small and has a weight limit. It can only be modified so much. If I had to do everything over again I would probably buy an F450 and modify that as I needed. The F450 is pretty much a Phantom without the white plastic shell, it is a lot easier to customize and can be made to take higher loads.

The Vision is basically a souped up Phantom that includes wifi and a camera. This camera is not on a gimbal so it only looks straight ahead. They are getting by the FCC requirement for FPV by placing the camera onto a WIFI frequency. Building an F450 or and F550 will give you the capacity to easily surpass the Phantom Vision in terms of what we know it can do currently.

RC copters are noisy, there is no way around it except to fly high.

 

[AUsome]

For FPV you are required to have an amateur radio operators license to operate legally within the US. The FCC is kind of closed at the moment. Also it is possible to do FPV straight though the GoPro. You can get a second camera but as a new pilot I recommend just working on a single camera.

The Phantom frame is small and has a weight limit. It can only be modified so much. If I had to do everything over again I would probably buy an F450 and modify that as I needed. The F450 is pretty much a Phantom without the white plastic shell, it is a lot easier to customize and can be made to take higher loads.

The Vision is basically a souped up Phantom that includes wifi and a camera. This camera is not on a gimbal so it only looks straight ahead. They are getting by the FCC requirement for FPV by placing the camera onto a WIFI frequency. Building an F450 or and F550 will give you the capacity to easily surpass the Phantom Vision in terms of what we know it can do currently.

RC copters are noisy, there is no way around it except to fly high.

Thanks...good info. I picked up a GPH3 (silver) at Costco today just to get a feel for what it can do. I see that it uses WiFi, but not sure if that would be of much use unless I set my phone in tether mode (hotspot)...but even then, not sure what range it would have. As such, I think the WiFi would not really be of much use for flying purposes.

I gather the FPV equipment is what would provide the signal between the copter in flight and the ground receiver. Not sure how I feel about wearing a headset like the fatshark uses. Is there an alternative where you could have a receiver on the ground that could then wirelessly connect (bluetooth I'd guess) to a phone (Android or IOS)? That would make it more similar to the Vision. I do like the way the Vision has a video screen just above the controller. All nice and compact and no headset. If there is an alternative way to achieve about the same setup, I'm all for that.

If using the camera ALSO as my flying eyes, will I be able to use it to see and still record video and/or take still shots at the same time as using it as my eyes?

Now, regarding the F450. I see what you are saying about the ability to modify that over the phantom. I like the thought of that. Couple of things along those lines: Can you piggyback batteries (i.e., use more than one at a time (in parallel) to extend the flying time? If not, won't the FPV and camera put a significant drain on the battery and really reduce the flying time?

Something like the F450...exactly how much weight COULD it actually lift? (just curious as I can't think of any reason to consider lifting more than a camera (I'm well past the days of wanting to send hamsters into space :twisted: ).

So to summarize to see if I understand. I would get some type of FPV unit (fatshark or other type), mount it to the copter and also connect it to the GPH3. This would both allow the GPH3 to function as a camera (still or video), but also as my "eyes" so I could pilot the copter. But, if I use FPV via something other than wireless (like the Vision will use), then I will need an FCC license. I want to think I saw that the Vision will use 5.8MHz and use 2.4MHz for the camera feed. Not sure if I have that right or not. Anyway, other than the FCC not being available right now due to govt shutdown, if that process of getting a license difficult, costly or take a long time?

I know I'll have many more questions, but will stop for now. I am really stoked about getting into this hobby!

 

[AUsome]

This camera is not on a gimbal so it only looks straight ahead.

More incorrect information. Do you just make this stuff up or do you just make really bad assumptions over and over again?

Fact: The Vision camera is on a single axis gimbal.

Thanks for the info. I think I could live with a single axis. Wouldn't the second axis be able to be compensated for by using the yaw function on the copter?

 

[martcerv]

The single axis is just pitch, a 2 axis gimbal is generally pitch and tilt where a 3 axis will also have full 360 degree yaw rotation.

For stabilisation you really need pitch and tilt and as can be seen by many users there is a bit of yaw jitter using 2 axis gimbals especially in gps mode. 3 axis is ideal but woukd be too heavy on a phantom and be quite pointless with current landing gear as it would be showing the landing gear with pretty much any yaw correction. A custom FPV setup will have much lower video lag and also better range. Anyone buying the vision will be buying it as is because changing radio or video links youd be much better off buying a regular phantom or other quad. The vision is doing things very different so you cant use a stock 2.4g radio with this though im sure someone will try and cry when it flys away lol.

The vision uses the same camera for fpv and recording as do many people using gopro cameras. I heard of .25s lag on the vision so not sure how it will be for precise fpv control. Range wise the figures given dont mean much but likely they are giving a safe limit easily reached in most conditions with direct line of sight. Same as the current phantom tx real range will likely be a fair bit beyond in ideal conditions.

Different props will have an effect on how loud it is more then anything. These are the loudest part and differnt sizes profiles and rpm will have a huge impact on the sound of the setup. With gws 9050 triblades my phantom is much quiter then with any other props ibhave tried.

The vision looks to be a good rtf model that will be good enough for most but a modded phantom or any other custom built quad will give better performance amd range. These will all take more work to get the most out of them and with mods or custom you have complete control over what parts you use for eother cheaper price or better performance.

 

[AUsome]

The vision looks to be a good rtf model that will be good enough for most but a modded phantom or any other custom built quad will give better performance amd range. These will all take more work to get the most out of them and with mods or custom you have complete control over what parts you use for eother cheaper price or better performance.

Would be interested in flying time for various choices. Is it possible to run multiple batteries (in parallel)? So far, none I've seen appear to use more than one. If not possible to do so, I'd think that the bigger the machine, the less flying time per charge. The Vision seems to be promising 20+ minutes per charge. How do other models stack up?

 

[miskatonic]

This camera is not on a gimbal so it only looks straight ahead.

More incorrect information. Do you just make this stuff up or do you just make really bad assumptions over and over again?

Fact: The Vision camera is on a single axis gimbal.

Yep you are right. I was wrong. It is on a single axis gimbal.

There was a much better way of correcting somebody's mistake. Is there a specific reason you feel the need to be a jerk and a half?

 

[martcerv]

The vision looks to be a good rtf model that will be good enough for most but a modded phantom or any other custom built quad will give better performance amd range. These will all take more work to get the most out of them and with mods or custom you have complete control over what parts you use for eother cheaper price or better performance.

Would be interested in flying time for various choices. Is it possible to run multiple batteries (in parallel)? So far, none I've seen appear to use more than one. If not possible to do so, I'd think that the bigger the machine, the less flying time per charge. The Vision seems to be promising 20+ minutes per charge. How do other models stack up?

Though there is no info on the phantom v2 most speculation is that it will be the vision minus the camera so it should have the extra large battery and larger 9 inch props. I still would love to know the actual weight of the vision as those claimed flight times are pretty impressive.

I would expect a phantom v2 with gopro, gimbal and fpv will still end up a bit heavier then the vision so totalt flight times wont be as long. Until we get an actual weight comparison between vision and phantom v2 its hard to even guess how big a difference it will be.