DJI announces Inspire prosumer drone with 4K video recording, releases SDK for Phantom 2 Vision
At a press event on San Francisco's Treasure Island, drone vendor DJI unveiled its new prosumer-class Inspire drone with 4K video capabilities and announced a new Software Development Kit to allow third party developers to write apps that work with its flagship Phantom 2 Vision flying cameras.
The SDK also provides access to battery voltage and status; WiFi range, power and link status; ground station controls for setting programmed waypoints for automated flights; and camera and gimbal data for full control of photo and video capture.
Additional information on the new SDK is available at http://dev.dji.com. The company also featured a new sharing site for aerial photography at skypixel.com.
The new drone was introduced with the help of Adam Savage Jamie Hyneman of MythBusters (above). It's priced at $2,900, about twice as much as the consumer-oriented Phantom Vision 2 but far less than DJI's professional grade S-1000, which starts around $7,000.
AppleInsider has reviewed DJI's Vision 2 Plus, which has been used to capture sneak peaks of Apple's mysterious showroom used to introduce Apple Watch and iPhone 6, as well as to present a tour of Apple's Campus 2 and existing Infinite Loop headquarters.
For those looking to buy the DJI Inspire 1, B&H Photo has them up for preorder at $2,899, with no sales tax collected for buyers outside of New York. The Inspire 1 is currently slated to ship on Dec. 1.
Phantom SDK
DJI's new SDK allows developers to tap into a variety of data and settings available on Phantom 2 Vision Plus and Phantom 2 Vision drones. This includes direct access to the flight controller, providing altitude, longitude and latitude; status and error information; and home point and no-fly zone information (such as when operating near an airport).The SDK also provides access to battery voltage and status; WiFi range, power and link status; ground station controls for setting programmed waypoints for automated flights; and camera and gimbal data for full control of photo and video capture.
Additional information on the new SDK is available at http://dev.dji.com. The company also featured a new sharing site for aerial photography at skypixel.com.
The new DJI Inspire 1
DJi also announced its new Inspire drone platform, a higher end offering 4K video capture on a new camera featuring exchangeable lens filters; the company's Lightbridge video streaming technology and a new flight control system featuring a downward facing camera that helps stabilize the unit even when it loses GPS lock.These guys got free ones #DJI pic.twitter.com/HsaAYb85pJ
-- Daniel Eran Dilger (@DanielEran) The new drone was introduced with the help of Adam Savage Jamie Hyneman of MythBusters (above). It's priced at $2,900, about twice as much as the consumer-oriented Phantom Vision 2 but far less than DJI's professional grade S-1000, which starts around $7,000.
AppleInsider has reviewed DJI's Vision 2 Plus, which has been used to capture sneak peaks of Apple's mysterious showroom used to introduce Apple Watch and iPhone 6, as well as to present a tour of Apple's Campus 2 and existing Infinite Loop headquarters.
For those looking to buy the DJI Inspire 1, B&H Photo has them up for preorder at $2,899, with no sales tax collected for buyers outside of New York. The Inspire 1 is currently slated to ship on Dec. 1.
Comments
I give it 12 months and these things will be banned. Or you'll need a licence to own them.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2014/10/15/drone-pilots-beware-new-faa-enforcement-policy-targets-you-licensed-pilots-at-particular-risk/
I give it 12 months and these things will be banned. Or you'll need a licence to own them.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2014/10/15/drone-pilots-beware-new-faa-enforcement-policy-targets-you-licensed-pilots-at-particular-risk/
Something definitely needs to done. There is a lot of potential in the use of drones for both good and bad, so some regulation and licensing of these 'drones' is needed.
Why "must" something be done?
Something definitely needs to done. There is a lot of potential in the use of drones for both good and bad, so some regulation and licensing of these 'drones' is needed.
Why "must" something be done?
It's just a matter of time before the government regulates when you can take a pee inside your own home.
This isn't a drone anyway, it's a remote-controlled model copter. "Drone" has become a phrase for the lazy and uninformed to use as a catch all phrase.
I don't get drones. It's a hobby copter with a camera. Ok...I don't need to spy on things and people.
It's not about spying for most. It's about first person flying. It's about bird's eye. If you ever dreamed of flying you know what I mean.
Why "must" something be done?
I never said 'must', I said needs. If you don't have the vision or imagination to see why some sort of regulation will be needed then nothing I can say will help.
Or, from a practical point of view, it's about aerial photography and video made widely accessible and affordable.
It's not about spying on anyone, it flies for 18 mins and makes a loud buzzing noise, who you going to spy on, the Deaf?
I never said 'must', I said needs. If you don't have the vision or imagination to see why some sort of regulation will be needed then nothing I can say will help.
Ironically, its the folks that lack "vision" and/or "imagination" that generally want to ban/restrict/regulate things they don't understand.
The VAST majority of people that are afraid of these "drones" (remote-controlled quad-copters) are completely ignorant of what they are and what they can do (and cant do).
Some people think cameras on smart phones are dangerous and an invasion of privacy... perhaps we should bow to their illogical and hysterical opinions and get the government to restrict their use too....
When some idiot puts on a GoPro and starts spying on people being nude, having public sex, etc., then people will figure just one angle about how come these need to require a commercial class license.
Hamm radios require a commercial license and I don't see anyone with a pulse objecting to it, or should I say anyone with higher reasoning skills.
If you stop and think, if one had a limited imagination, one could say the same thing about a camera or a video camera. Using your logic, or lack thereof, all cameras are for spying because some are used for that. There are a million, non spy related and fun reasons to own one for photography or videography alone.
As to regulations, I can see the logic behind some rules for public safety reasons. I notice there are already plenty in place regarding American football games etc. I'm not sure but that is probably as much to do with marketing rights as safety.
I would not be shocked if Rick Scott in Florida issued a new law allowing the shooting down of drones or people wearing Google Glass if you feel your privacy has been threatened. The "Stand Alone" Law.
I agree with you. I would assume then that you see no more danger in Google Glass than you do with a drone or any other vehicle with recording capabilities. Every method has the potential for abuse, but doesn't make it abusive. Still the early FUD has probably killed Google Glass as it's currently designed. By carefully and slowly introducing it Google gave the fear-mongers a window of opportunity to do their work. IMHO they would have been much more successful with it had they just opened the door to retail sales shortly after the reveal. The drone builders were smarter about it, throwing it out there before the nay-sayers could get their feet under them.
Still they may not entirely avoid the privacy concerns either. Once the public has a chance to use these kinds of things the imaginary dragons tend to disappear but there's not that many drones around yet so there's some suspicion about those that use 'em. Wasn't some teenager attacked at a beach for using one?
Why "must" something be done?
Clearly, because what might be done, will be done...
and most of it won't be pretty.
Drones could potentially be even more intrusive and privacy-broaching, viewing/filming entire neighborhoods backyards and peeping in second story bedrooms.
lol... peeping in 2nd story windows?
1. They are LOUD. Unless you were running a leafblower in your bedroom (hey, whatever floats your boat :-) ) - no one is going to have one of these amateur copters "sneak up" on them.
2. I do a lot of sports photography. I have a 400mm lens (not to unusual for an outdoor sports photog) and I guarantee you I could invade your 2nd story window privacy plenty with it (much moreso that with a drone).
The point is, MANY items have the potential for abuse, that doesnt mean we need to over-regualte or ban ALL of them in an overabundance of (irrational) caution.
Example: a local guy here was arrested for using his iphone to video up girls skirts.
Should the FCC regulate the use of camera phones (which are used FAR MORE often to invade privace than drones ever have)?
No, they should throw the book at the (very small percentage) of losers that are abusing the tools...