Thanks Neil! Interesting review! May I humbly ask a delicate question or two?
First, some of the footage looked a little jerky. Would you attribute that primarily to a new user becoming familiar with the unit, or to it being an inexpensive lightweight device with less-than-completely-professional controls? In other words, if I want totally smooth performance, am I likely to get it from this unit with practice or should I budget for a "professional" craft?
Second, if you were spending your own money, would you buy the version you tested or the GoPro version? I'm guessing you sacrifice the tilt capability if you use the GoPro?
The GoPro version is on a 2-axis gimbal, so has full tilt and rotation, and is also rather better stabilized as a result.
Thanks Neil! Interesting review! May I humbly ask a delicate question or two?
First, some of the footage looked a little jerky. Would you attribute that primarily to a new user becoming familiar with the unit, or to it being an inexpensive lightweight device with less-than-completely-professional controls? In other words, if I want totally smooth performance, am I likely to get it from this unit with practice or should I budget for a "professional" craft?
Second, if you were spending your own money, would you buy the version you tested or the GoPro version? I'm guessing you sacrifice the tilt capability if you use the GoPro?
The GoPro version is on a 2-axis gimbal, so has full tilt and rotation, and is also rather better stabilized as a result.
I haven't bought a GoPro yet.
With a gimbal, donut you need weights to counterbalance the unit to reduce stabilization.
Also, isn't the current GoPro limited as far as attaching additional lenses?
Don't get me wrong, the GoPro seems a great value for the money -- but I can't justify it.
This is about the most one-sided review I've ever seen. I own a Phantom. The original model which flies the same but has a shorter battery life. I also purchased the Zenmuze Gimbal and the GoPro camera. I had a project I was working on.
It is "relatively" easy to fly but it is really hard to maneuver. If you Google some realistic reviews of this setup what you'll realize what this means is you can make it go up and down, left and right just fine. But try to get a particular shot at a particular angle is very hard to do. The reason for this is you are flying in three dimensions. Even from 30-40 feet away it gets very hard to tell which is the front of the machine and if you are trying to turn and keep it oriented in space it is hard to do. It also gets hard to judge distance when you are not near it. I've crashed mine into trees and bushes when I thought there was still lots of distance to the obstacle. The very hardest The best example is try to point this thing at a person and fly around the person in a circle while photographing them. It is almost impossible because of the way you have to work both joy sticks and keep it rotating and going around.
It was fun to use and it gets a lot of attention from bystanders. But it is very frustrating and scary for fear you'll break it. It takes a lot of work to get good steady shots (that ski area shot is a good example and is shaky as hell) and because of the price, think long and hard before you buy one. It is a expensive toy with limited use. Mine now mostly collects dust.
Don't get me wrong, the GoPro seems a great value for the money -- but I can't justify it.
It's a great two- or three-trick-pony. Its benefit is decent quality in a tiny package at an affordable price. When you need that, it's hard to think of something better. BUT, when you need a long lens or decent audio or green-screen or a zoom or running handheld… there are better choices.
When the situation calls for it, having a GoPro is awesome. I just wouldn't want it to be my only camera.
What kind of insurance is required? I know in California, flying model aircraft is not allowed in state parks without liability insurance and a permit.
I like this unit very much and could see someone developing a nice business around it such as for high end real estate sales promotions.
That might now be possible following the recent ruling that the FAA do not have legal authority to outlaw commercial drone use. They are appealing that decision though.
Ha! Crazy California!
San Francisco is considering a ban on releasing butterflies at weddings and other events.
Every year when my daughter plants her garden she buys and releases several containers of lady bugs -- a totally natural way to reduce pests like aphids.
Thanks Neil! Interesting review! May I humbly ask a delicate question or two?
First, some of the footage looked a little jerky. Would you attribute that primarily to a new user becoming familiar with the unit, or to it being an inexpensive lightweight device with less-than-completely-professional controls? In other words, if I want totally smooth performance, am I likely to get it from this unit with practice or should I budget for a "professional" craft?
Second, if you were spending your own money, would you buy the version you tested or the GoPro version? I'm guessing you sacrifice the tilt capability if you use the GoPro?
The GoPro version is on a 2-axis gimbal, so has full tilt and rotation, and is also rather better stabilized as a result.
I haven't bought a GoPro yet.
With a gimbal, donut you need weights to counterbalance the unit to reduce stabilization.
Also, isn't the current GoPro limited as far as attaching additional lenses?
Don't get me wrong, the GoPro seems a great value for the money -- but I can't justify it.
The GoPro is somewhat limiting with a fixed, and very wide, lens that is not ideally suited to aerial work, but it does produce great images. The Phantom 2 with the Zenmuse gimbal is optimized for the GoPro, and it doesn't need any balancing.
This is about the most one-sided review I've ever seen. I own a Phantom. The original model which flies the same but has a shorter battery life. I also purchased the Zenmuze Gimbal and the GoPro camera. I had a project I was working on for a local TV show and we wanted some aerial scenes for the show.
It is "relatively" easy to fly but it is really hard to maneuver. If you Google some realistic reviews of this setup what you'll realize what this means is you can make it go up and down, left and right just fine. But try to get a particular shot at a particular angle is very hard to do. The reason for this is you are flying in three dimensions. Even from 30-40 feet away it gets very hard to tell which is the front of the machine and if you are trying to turn and keep it oriented in space it is hard to do. It also gets hard to judge distance when you are not near it. I've crashed mine into trees and bushes when I thought there was still lots of distance to the obstacle. The very hardest The best example is try to point this thing at a person and fly around the person in a circle while photographing them. It is almost impossible because of the way you have to work both joy sticks and keep it rotating and going around.
It was fun to use and it gets a lot of attention from bystanders. But it is very frustrating and scary for fear you'll break it. It takes a lot of work to get good steady shots (that ski area shot is a good example and is shaky as hell) and because of the price, think long and hard before you buy one. It is a expensive toy with limited use. Mine now mostly collects dust.
Sounds like you didn't fly it using FPV, so yes - it would be very difficult. That's not the application under review.
I also added in the on-board 5.8Ghz link to goggles for FPV. It helps but it really takes two people. FPV only lets you see what is in front of you. Nothing to the side, behind, or above you.
To do this right you need DJI's more expensive copters. They have better 3-axis gimbals and the ability to have a pilot flying and a camera man to get the footage. The pilot can make sure it does not hit anything and the camera man with a 3-axis gimbal has much more flexibility to get the shot. These also have more sophisticated flight control systems that will allow you to automate difficut shots like POI (Point of Interest). So you can get great shots for about $7,000.
Believe me I've done a lot of research on these things and spent a lot of time learning how to fly the Phantom. If you are rich and want to have some fun. It is fun. It is not as easy as they make it out and the Phantom is limited as a serious tool.
I also added in the on-board 5.8Ghz link to goggles for FPV. It helps but it really takes two people. FPV only lets you see what is in front of you. Nothing to the side, behind, or above you.
To do this right you need DJI's more expensive copters. They have better 3-axis gimbals and the ability to have a pilot flying and a camera man to get the footage. The pilot can make sure it does not hit anything and the camera man with a 3-axis gimbal has much more flexibility to get the shot. These also have more sophisticated flight control systems that will allow you to automate difficut shots like POI (Point of Interest). So you can get great shots for about $7,000.
Believe me I've done a lot of research on these things and spent a lot of time learning how to fly the Phantom. If you are rich and want to have some fun. It is fun. It is not as easy as they make it out and the Phantom is limited as a serious tool.
Fair enough, but if you were using FPV then I don't understand why you would not be able to tell which direction the device is facing. For professional video I agree that the bigger platforms are more suitable, but it is really quite remarkable what you can get with a GoPro-equipped Phantom, and there are plenty of examples on the web of very usable footage, with the wide-angle lens being the main limitation. The Phantom also provides significantly longer flight time, which is important for some applications.
The original version. One time the prop nut came off. Thankfully it was not too high in the air so the crash was not that bad. They are durable and can withstand crashes fairly well. The Phantom 2 fixed the prop nut issue. When we started we did not have the FPV feature but even when we did, it only helps you know which way you're facing. You can't just look at FPV because you don't know what is to the side or above you like power lines or tree branches. You have to look up and down while trying to fly it and capture the footage. Its like doing three jobs at once. With LOTS of practice you can get good at it and do OK. But my whole point with this review is it is not as simple and care free as the reviewer made it out to be.
You could compensate by adding a gimbal -- but that would increase weight, battery and cost.
You can mitigate the problem by post processing the video.
Here's a short comparison showing a quick and dirty image stabilization with Final Cut Pro X. The areas under the bridge and the arch shows the difference best:
[VIDEO]
You can do a lot finer stabilization by spending a little time with the various settings.
FCPX can compensate for low light and punch up the video too!,
Edit: Oops, Sorry -- I originally posted this to YT as private ... OK, now!
Wow, that makes a big difference. Seems like they should bundle in Final Cut Pro X!
I am Mrs Cailtin Poore from the United States Of America. I want to share a testimony and i will always give thanks to Dr Abu who brought back my divorced husband that has left me for 4years within 72hours, i promised to always tell people about this great miracle that happen in my life,we where 2 year ago,since we got married,i have not been able to give him a child,although he try to bear with me but it came to a time his parents where so hot him,that he should get another wife because his mother needed a grand son from him,so because of all this,he left me. I have been looking for how to get pregnant and how to get my divorce husband back to my life because i love him with the whole of my heart,i could not replace him with any other man,one day i was watching my television when i saw a lady giving thanks to Dr Abu and telling the world how he helped her, i was so shocked i could not believe it because i never taught that there are powers that can bring back lost marriage,then i decided to contact him too because i do really need my divorce husband back,when i contacted him i told him everything and he told me not to worry that my divorce husband will surely come back to me, within 72hours, at first i could not believe because i was thinking how could somebody that has gone for 4years come back within 72 hours, then i decided to watch and see,after all the necessary thing have been done,to my greatest surprise within the next 72hours i got a call from an unknown number ,so i pick the call the next thing i could hear was my husbands voice he was pleading and begging me on the phone that i should forgive him, that i should forget all that have happened that he did not know what came over him,he promised not to leave for any reason,that he was really sorry for what he did,i was so surprised because i never believed that this could happen,so that was how i accepted his apology and the next morning he came back home to meet me and still pleading for me to forgive him i told him that everything is okay that i have forgiven him,that was how we started again and he has Change and 6months later i became pregnant,we where bless with a baby boy and live happily. I promised to say this testimony in radio station,commenting this testimony that am now a mother, i promise to say this in radio station and i will sir, thank you very much.World please am begging you people to try and help me thank this man for me,or if you need his help here is his email address [email protected] or you can also reach him through his mobile number,+234 903 800 7421*
Thanks Neil! Interesting review! May I humbly ask a delicate question or two?
First, some of the footage looked a little jerky. Would you attribute that primarily to a new user becoming familiar with the unit, or to it being an inexpensive lightweight device with less-than-completely-professional controls? In other words, if I want totally smooth performance, am I likely to get it from this unit with practice or should I budget for a "professional" craft?
Second, if you were spending your own money, would you buy the version you tested or the GoPro version? I'm guessing you sacrifice the tilt capability if you use the GoPro?
The jerky footage you're referring to was mostly due to the weather. While hard to tell with the fisheye lens, it was very snowy and windy out. The camera is pretty stable in normal conditions, but I would say it was mostly the wind, plus some of my inexperience piloting it, that led to shaky footage.
While I prefer the GoPro's quality, I really enjoyed the ability to view footage live with the Vision camera via the Wi-Fi range extender. This wouldn't be possible (as far as I know, at least) when using a GoPro, which has short range connectivity with the iPhone. Our review was focused on testing this device with the iPhone, which is why we didn't test the camera-less version. If you're comfortable piloting it without a live view, I think the low-end model with a GoPro would be fine. Just don't let it get too far out of sight (something easy to do with a drone this powerful).
You can do a lot finer stabilization by spending a little time with the various settings.
As usual, it's a balance between shakiecam vs. stabilization artifacts. Jerkiness is annoying, but sometimes the image pinch/bloat introduced by the stabilization causes an unconscious barf reaction that's even worse!
Thanks Neil! Interesting review! May I humbly ask a delicate question or two?
First, some of the footage looked a little jerky. Would you attribute that primarily to a new user becoming familiar with the unit, or to it being an inexpensive lightweight device with less-than-completely-professional controls? In other words, if I want totally smooth performance, am I likely to get it from this unit with practice or should I budget for a "professional" craft?
Second, if you were spending your own money, would you buy the version you tested or the GoPro version? I'm guessing you sacrifice the tilt capability if you use the GoPro?
The jerky footage you're referring to was mostly due to the weather. While hard to tell with the fisheye lens, it was very snowy and windy out. The camera is pretty stable in normal conditions, but I would say it was mostly the wind, plus some of my inexperience piloting it, that led to shaky footage.
While I prefer the GoPro's quality, I really enjoyed the ability to view footage live with the Vision camera via the Wi-Fi range extender. This wouldn't be possible (as far as I know, at least) when using a GoPro, which has short range connectivity with the iPhone. Our review was focused on testing this device with the iPhone, which is why we didn't test the camera-less version. If you're comfortable piloting it without a live view, I think the low-end model with a GoPro would be fine. Just don't let it get too far out of sight (something easy to do with a drone this powerful).
You can easily add a 5.8 GHz live SD video downlink to the GoPro version, or just upgrade to the upcoming LightBridge which provides long-range HD FPV and control (~ 1 mile) on a 2.4 GHz dual link.
You can do a lot finer stabilization by spending a little time with the various settings.
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">As usual, it's a balance between shakiecam vs. stabilization artifacts. Jerkiness is annoying, but sometimes the image pinch/bloat introduced by the stabilization causes an unconscious barf reaction that's even worse! </span>
Yes ... and add to that:
the video I stabilized was downloaded from the Internet @720p instead of the 1080p available from the camera original
the downloaded video was multiple clips assembled into a single video -- if each clip were stabilized separately the results would have been better
The music from the first video in this article immediately made me think, "The iPhone Controlled Drone, The Future & You - A Centron Production". Ok, that's all I have. Sorry. Carry on!
Comments
Thanks Neil! Interesting review! May I humbly ask a delicate question or two?
First, some of the footage looked a little jerky. Would you attribute that primarily to a new user becoming familiar with the unit, or to it being an inexpensive lightweight device with less-than-completely-professional controls? In other words, if I want totally smooth performance, am I likely to get it from this unit with practice or should I budget for a "professional" craft?
Second, if you were spending your own money, would you buy the version you tested or the GoPro version? I'm guessing you sacrifice the tilt capability if you use the GoPro?
The GoPro version is on a 2-axis gimbal, so has full tilt and rotation, and is also rather better stabilized as a result.
I haven't bought a GoPro yet.
With a gimbal, donut you need weights to counterbalance the unit to reduce stabilization.
Also, isn't the current GoPro limited as far as attaching additional lenses?
Don't get me wrong, the GoPro seems a great value for the money -- but I can't justify it.
It is "relatively" easy to fly but it is really hard to maneuver. If you Google some realistic reviews of this setup what you'll realize what this means is you can make it go up and down, left and right just fine. But try to get a particular shot at a particular angle is very hard to do. The reason for this is you are flying in three dimensions. Even from 30-40 feet away it gets very hard to tell which is the front of the machine and if you are trying to turn and keep it oriented in space it is hard to do. It also gets hard to judge distance when you are not near it. I've crashed mine into trees and bushes when I thought there was still lots of distance to the obstacle. The very hardest The best example is try to point this thing at a person and fly around the person in a circle while photographing them. It is almost impossible because of the way you have to work both joy sticks and keep it rotating and going around.
It was fun to use and it gets a lot of attention from bystanders. But it is very frustrating and scary for fear you'll break it. It takes a lot of work to get good steady shots (that ski area shot is a good example and is shaky as hell) and because of the price, think long and hard before you buy one. It is a expensive toy with limited use. Mine now mostly collects dust.
It's a great two- or three-trick-pony. Its benefit is decent quality in a tiny package at an affordable price. When you need that, it's hard to think of something better. BUT, when you need a long lens or decent audio or green-screen or a zoom or running handheld… there are better choices.
When the situation calls for it, having a GoPro is awesome. I just wouldn't want it to be my only camera.
Ha! Crazy California!
San Francisco is considering a ban on releasing butterflies at weddings and other events.
http://rt.com/usa/san-francisco-butterfly-ban-781/
Every year when my daughter plants her garden she buys and releases several containers of lady bugs -- a totally natural way to reduce pests like aphids.
Sigh, I suppose that'll be banned next.
Thanks Neil! Interesting review! May I humbly ask a delicate question or two?
First, some of the footage looked a little jerky. Would you attribute that primarily to a new user becoming familiar with the unit, or to it being an inexpensive lightweight device with less-than-completely-professional controls? In other words, if I want totally smooth performance, am I likely to get it from this unit with practice or should I budget for a "professional" craft?
Second, if you were spending your own money, would you buy the version you tested or the GoPro version? I'm guessing you sacrifice the tilt capability if you use the GoPro?
The GoPro version is on a 2-axis gimbal, so has full tilt and rotation, and is also rather better stabilized as a result.
I haven't bought a GoPro yet.
With a gimbal, donut you need weights to counterbalance the unit to reduce stabilization.
Also, isn't the current GoPro limited as far as attaching additional lenses?
Don't get me wrong, the GoPro seems a great value for the money -- but I can't justify it.
The GoPro is somewhat limiting with a fixed, and very wide, lens that is not ideally suited to aerial work, but it does produce great images. The Phantom 2 with the Zenmuse gimbal is optimized for the GoPro, and it doesn't need any balancing.
This is about the most one-sided review I've ever seen. I own a Phantom. The original model which flies the same but has a shorter battery life. I also purchased the Zenmuze Gimbal and the GoPro camera. I had a project I was working on for a local TV show and we wanted some aerial scenes for the show.
It is "relatively" easy to fly but it is really hard to maneuver. If you Google some realistic reviews of this setup what you'll realize what this means is you can make it go up and down, left and right just fine. But try to get a particular shot at a particular angle is very hard to do. The reason for this is you are flying in three dimensions. Even from 30-40 feet away it gets very hard to tell which is the front of the machine and if you are trying to turn and keep it oriented in space it is hard to do. It also gets hard to judge distance when you are not near it. I've crashed mine into trees and bushes when I thought there was still lots of distance to the obstacle. The very hardest The best example is try to point this thing at a person and fly around the person in a circle while photographing them. It is almost impossible because of the way you have to work both joy sticks and keep it rotating and going around.
It was fun to use and it gets a lot of attention from bystanders. But it is very frustrating and scary for fear you'll break it. It takes a lot of work to get good steady shots (that ski area shot is a good example and is shaky as hell) and because of the price, think long and hard before you buy one. It is a expensive toy with limited use. Mine now mostly collects dust.
Sounds like you didn't fly it using FPV, so yes - it would be very difficult. That's not the application under review.
I also added in the on-board 5.8Ghz link to goggles for FPV. It helps but it really takes two people. FPV only lets you see what is in front of you. Nothing to the side, behind, or above you.
To do this right you need DJI's more expensive copters. They have better 3-axis gimbals and the ability to have a pilot flying and a camera man to get the footage. The pilot can make sure it does not hit anything and the camera man with a 3-axis gimbal has much more flexibility to get the shot. These also have more sophisticated flight control systems that will allow you to automate difficut shots like POI (Point of Interest). So you can get great shots for about $7,000.
Believe me I've done a lot of research on these things and spent a lot of time learning how to fly the Phantom. If you are rich and want to have some fun. It is fun. It is not as easy as they make it out and the Phantom is limited as a serious tool.
I also added in the on-board 5.8Ghz link to goggles for FPV. It helps but it really takes two people. FPV only lets you see what is in front of you. Nothing to the side, behind, or above you.
To do this right you need DJI's more expensive copters. They have better 3-axis gimbals and the ability to have a pilot flying and a camera man to get the footage. The pilot can make sure it does not hit anything and the camera man with a 3-axis gimbal has much more flexibility to get the shot. These also have more sophisticated flight control systems that will allow you to automate difficut shots like POI (Point of Interest). So you can get great shots for about $7,000.
Believe me I've done a lot of research on these things and spent a lot of time learning how to fly the Phantom. If you are rich and want to have some fun. It is fun. It is not as easy as they make it out and the Phantom is limited as a serious tool.
Fair enough, but if you were using FPV then I don't understand why you would not be able to tell which direction the device is facing. For professional video I agree that the bigger platforms are more suitable, but it is really quite remarkable what you can get with a GoPro-equipped Phantom, and there are plenty of examples on the web of very usable footage, with the wide-angle lens being the main limitation. The Phantom also provides significantly longer flight time, which is important for some applications.
Were you using the P2 or the original version?
The original version. One time the prop nut came off. Thankfully it was not too high in the air so the crash was not that bad. They are durable and can withstand crashes fairly well. The Phantom 2 fixed the prop nut issue. When we started we did not have the FPV feature but even when we did, it only helps you know which way you're facing. You can't just look at FPV because you don't know what is to the side or above you like power lines or tree branches. You have to look up and down while trying to fly it and capture the footage. Its like doing three jobs at once. With LOTS of practice you can get good at it and do OK. But my whole point with this review is it is not as simple and care free as the reviewer made it out to be.
Wow, that makes a big difference. Seems like they should bundle in Final Cut Pro X!
Hello Every One
I am Mrs Cailtin Poore from the United States Of America. I want to share a testimony and i will always give thanks to Dr Abu who brought back my divorced husband that has left me for 4years within 72hours, i promised to always tell people about this great miracle that happen in my life,we where 2 year ago,since we got married,i have not been able to give him a child,although he try to bear with me but it came to a time his parents where so hot him,that he should get another wife because his mother needed a grand son from him,so because of all this,he left me. I have been looking for how to get pregnant and how to get my divorce husband back to my life because i love him with the whole of my heart,i could not replace him with any other man,one day i was watching my television when i saw a lady giving thanks to Dr Abu and telling the world how he helped her, i was so shocked i could not believe it because i never taught that there are powers that can bring back lost marriage,then i decided to contact him too because i do really need my divorce husband back,when i contacted him i told him everything and he told me not to worry that my divorce husband will surely come back to me, within 72hours, at first i could not believe because i was thinking how could somebody that has gone for 4years come back within 72 hours, then i decided to watch and see,after all the necessary thing have been done,to my greatest surprise within the next 72hours i got a call from an unknown number ,so i pick the call the next thing i could hear was my husbands voice he was pleading and begging me on the phone that i should forgive him, that i should forget all that have happened that he did not know what came over him,he promised not to leave for any reason,that he was really sorry for what he did,i was so surprised because i never believed that this could happen,so that was how i accepted his apology and the next morning he came back home to meet me and still pleading for me to forgive him i told him that everything is okay that i have forgiven him,that was how we started again and he has Change and 6months later i became pregnant,we where bless with a baby boy and live happily. I promised to say this testimony in radio station,commenting this testimony that am now a mother, i promise to say this in radio station and i will sir, thank you very much.World please am begging you people to try and help me thank this man for me,or if you need his help here is his email address [email protected] or you can also reach him through his mobile number,+234 903 800 7421*
Mrs Cailtin Poore
The folks saying the video is jerky ... That's the rookie pilot.
I live near a lake with hundreds of large gators, I'd love to video there.
Thanks Neil! Interesting review! May I humbly ask a delicate question or two?
First, some of the footage looked a little jerky. Would you attribute that primarily to a new user becoming familiar with the unit, or to it being an inexpensive lightweight device with less-than-completely-professional controls? In other words, if I want totally smooth performance, am I likely to get it from this unit with practice or should I budget for a "professional" craft?
Second, if you were spending your own money, would you buy the version you tested or the GoPro version? I'm guessing you sacrifice the tilt capability if you use the GoPro?
The jerky footage you're referring to was mostly due to the weather. While hard to tell with the fisheye lens, it was very snowy and windy out. The camera is pretty stable in normal conditions, but I would say it was mostly the wind, plus some of my inexperience piloting it, that led to shaky footage.
While I prefer the GoPro's quality, I really enjoyed the ability to view footage live with the Vision camera via the Wi-Fi range extender. This wouldn't be possible (as far as I know, at least) when using a GoPro, which has short range connectivity with the iPhone. Our review was focused on testing this device with the iPhone, which is why we didn't test the camera-less version. If you're comfortable piloting it without a live view, I think the low-end model with a GoPro would be fine. Just don't let it get too far out of sight (something easy to do with a drone this powerful).
You can do a lot finer stabilization by spending a little time with the various settings.
As usual, it's a balance between shakiecam vs. stabilization artifacts. Jerkiness is annoying, but sometimes the image pinch/bloat introduced by the stabilization causes an unconscious barf reaction that's even worse!
Thanks Neil! Interesting review! May I humbly ask a delicate question or two?
First, some of the footage looked a little jerky. Would you attribute that primarily to a new user becoming familiar with the unit, or to it being an inexpensive lightweight device with less-than-completely-professional controls? In other words, if I want totally smooth performance, am I likely to get it from this unit with practice or should I budget for a "professional" craft?
Second, if you were spending your own money, would you buy the version you tested or the GoPro version? I'm guessing you sacrifice the tilt capability if you use the GoPro?
The jerky footage you're referring to was mostly due to the weather. While hard to tell with the fisheye lens, it was very snowy and windy out. The camera is pretty stable in normal conditions, but I would say it was mostly the wind, plus some of my inexperience piloting it, that led to shaky footage.
While I prefer the GoPro's quality, I really enjoyed the ability to view footage live with the Vision camera via the Wi-Fi range extender. This wouldn't be possible (as far as I know, at least) when using a GoPro, which has short range connectivity with the iPhone. Our review was focused on testing this device with the iPhone, which is why we didn't test the camera-less version. If you're comfortable piloting it without a live view, I think the low-end model with a GoPro would be fine. Just don't let it get too far out of sight (something easy to do with a drone this powerful).
You can easily add a 5.8 GHz live SD video downlink to the GoPro version, or just upgrade to the upcoming LightBridge which provides long-range HD FPV and control (~ 1 mile) on a 2.4 GHz dual link.
Yes ... and add to that:
The music from the first video in this article immediately made me think, "The iPhone Controlled Drone, The Future & You - A Centron Production". Ok, that's all I have. Sorry. Carry on!
That said, this product looks very cool - a bit expensive for a non pro, though.
This is funny for Apple fans. See if you recognize which commercial this video appears to be based on:
http://we.dji.com/en.html#home