P2V+ for still photography

[cfsalicath]

Hi y'all!

First of all, I'm new to the forum, this here's my first post. I'm an urban designer working as a photographer on the side, based in Oslo, Norway.
After having a small epiphany were I suddenly wanted to try aerial still photography I stumbled across the DJI Vision+. Having no experience in drone photography, I seems to be a good starting point. In addition to personal projects I can see myself using it for surveing, property- and general aerial shoots for clients. Primarily stills. I work with area planning and design for the railway business, so I will use it a lot over in-accessible railyards etc.

But, I have som doubts about the image quality. Generally quality is no longer an issue, with cameras getting better and better. 90% of publishing happens on screen, reducing demand for printable files. When my iPhone is usable, anything goes. With the DNG-capabilities of the vision, it seems everything is in order. But is it?

So, anyone out there who have experience using the Vision+ (or Vision, as I understand they have the same camera) for primarily still photography who want to share their opinions? Are the files usable for general semi-proffesional purposes, and does the software offer enough control in shooting? Also, sample photos, or even raw files I can tinker with, will be greatly appreciated.


All the best
CF Salicath

www.cfsalicath.no

 

[fire2fire2fire]

I think its pretty good, I personally enjoy images more than video.

http://tinypic.com/r/29nvt55/8

RAW:
http://sharesend.com/4w7fh1p7

 

[semaj]

The P2V+ is the right move... Be prepared for small issues though... You may have none, however, just read the manual first, start with learning how it handles and how you react to how it handles and you'll be fine...

Mine (1st one) was really good and I had plenty confidence in it, but I noticed a pulsing effect from one or more motors at idle... It flew fine, but the noise bothered me so I asked my dealer (Drones Etc) about it... I sent them a short video of what it was doing and after they contacted there DJI rep, DJI suggested a replacement... Drones Etc sent me a replacement overnight once I shipped mine back to them, however, my new one had a gimbal issue right out of the box, so now I have to send it back for another replacement... Yes, it's a pain in the ***, but if the product is functioning right, you will have a winning device that is great for areial photos and videos...

Don't let too many scare you about the videos... There pretty good as well...

Good luck...

 

[boludo]

I think still photography is decent on these. My issue that I'm having is with faster moving objects. For example I took pix of an outside basketball game (sunny) and they were very blurry. I wanted to take some surfing pix as well but I may just set it to video the whole time instead only because action pix are not what I hoped. Anyone else experience that?

 

[brianwancho]

I purchased mine primarily for still photography. I think the quality is acceptable for online use and very small print use.

Download the full JPG
http://brianwanchophotography.com/vision_files/DJI00033.jpg

Download the DNG
http://www.brianwanchophotography.com/vision_files/DJI00033.DNG

 

[cfsalicath]

Thank you so much guys for helpful advice and DNG-files. From my point of view they look great, and with some tinkering one can get rid of some besky buggers such as croma, noise and distortion. The DNGs seem to contain enough information to regain most lost highlights. Although some low-light files I found weren't too impressive, so I guess I should plan for mostly daylight use.

My issue that I'm having is with faster moving objects. (...) Anyone else experience that?

I'm interested in this issue as well, can anyone shed some light on it? Is there a way to control shutterspeed/ISO/aperture or do you have to pray the drone get it right? Moving trains could be one of my subjects, and from experience I need at least 1/1000 to freeze-them when speeds exceed 160km/h.

 

[MikesTooLz]

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7435/141 ... 05_o_d.jpg

 

[ocphantom]

Pics are def better quality than the vids

 

[JimDE]

CF, I have returned 3 Visions and never really got what I would feel is a decent camera IQ..... don't expect much from these for stills. You have to crop and use the center section to avoid smearing and OOF issues. The lens profile in CS6 is imo horrible and distorts worse than the fisheye horizon distortion it is trying to correct.

Noise even at 100iso once cropped is in a word horrible. You'll spend plenty of time trying to salvage a image that still is worse than a typical smartphones camera. Typical issues to look for is edge to edge sharpness, smearing, distortion, noise, random OOF regions, etc....

I was excited with this technology at first but the thrill is gone...... poor IQ, unreliability (both mechanically and it's technology) so advanced it truly is not ready for primetime from a safety standpoint nor a property damage aspect with fly aways or other uncontrolled flight characteristics. At best web usage is about the only usage I might put my name on a image.... prints? you need a client with a tin cup and a seeing eye dog for these to be acceptable for anything other than documentation usage.

If your even semi serious about your IQ personally I would look at something else.... you'll pay more but also get something that can be used and you may want to put your name on. I see it as a RC quadcopter with a camera more than a camera that flies. If your a a RC modeling enthusiast these may make you happy but if you are a photographer looking for aerial perspectives to use... this is not the way to go.

 

[Kevin Paluch]

I purchased mine primarily for still photography. I think the quality is acceptable for online use and very small print use.

Download the full JPG
http://brianwanchophotography.com/vision_files/DJI00033.jpg

Download the DNG
http://www.brianwanchophotography.com/vision_files/DJI00033.DNG

Nice work and I wish I could say I get the same result from still photography. I am curious what setting you use. I have been an active photographer was 10 years and the quality I am getting from the phantom 3 are marginal thus far. On a windy day I have little acceptable luck. I'm finding a minimum shutter speed of 320 is almost mandatory and even after post process it's barely acceptable VS the awesome video results I get. I have played with a 2ND filter, 4ND filter, and polarizing filter. The PF works best by far for both stills and video.

I guess my question is what settings do you have the most success with. I am seriously considering the Inspire with micro 4/3 camera for stills.

Thoughts?

 

[sdtag]

Search for GIMP to remove fish eye.
It works pretty well with some tweaking
It's nice to see nice straight lines again.