100% centre DNG crops for comparison?

[Peter Evans]

Here is an uncropped, but resized version (800px so it fits onscreen)

And here is a link to the full size version:
http://bigscaryjeep.com/web/sample1.jpg
Am I being too particular, or is the image REALLY soft??? There is very poor detail in the trees.Ignoring the fact that it's a low contrast shot since it was overcast, I think the focus is rather blah.
I stripped the EXIF (due to GPS info), but the shutter speed was 8000th of second. No camera shake issues at that speed! LOL!

No, you're not being too particular; to my eyes, that's comparable to the results from a 15 year-old cheap compact and is pretty much the same poor quality result that I was seeing from mine (which has now gone back - see next post).

Is that a JPEG straight from the camera, or a straightforward JPEG version of the unprocessed RAW image?

 

[Peter Evans]

Peter,
Please let us know how the Phantom/RX100 combo works out for you. I'm ready to do the same thing - just waiting for some answers from dronexpert on battery life, FPV range, etc.
Geoff

I will do, Geoff. My P2V should have been received back at my French dealer on Thursday and if they don't confirm that by email tomorrow I'm going to be on the phone to them PDQ.

My RX100 arrived here from Amazon on Friday and I confess that I'm somewhat stunned by the quality of the still images and the video from such a tiny camera. Unbelievable really; I don't know how Sony have done it but the stills are comparable to the results from my Nikon D300 with my best lens. I can't wait to get it up in the air (once I've resolved the issues with my dealer and got back from them the P2 with the DronExpert platform).

EDIT:
For anyone interested, I've just uploaded to my site two images shot from my Man Cave. One was using the Sony RX100 at 28mm equivalent (which is it's widest angle of view and the angle I'll use mostly when it's in the air). The other image was shot with an APS-C DSLR - a Nikon D300 + 18-200 DX Nikkor Mark 2 set to give a similar angle of view. You can see the whole image and a 100% centre crop from each. Both were shot in RAW and then the RAW image was cropped and converted straight to HQ JPEG before upload. No processing whatsoever has been applied to either image. ISO was set to the base ISO on each camera.

Here's the link http://www.peter-evans-photographer.com/p917979095

 

[gmtx]

Peter, as you've discovered, the RX100 is an amazing camera. Got one when they first came out and just loved that I could finally have really good image quality in a camera that actually fit in my pocket. Traded it recently for an RX100II (always chasing that one more stop of low-light capability) and I'm still in love with it. Wait until you see the video. The stabilization is hard to believe until you see the results. and I can't wait to get one of these in the air. I keep thinking if someone (Sony - are you listening??) would modify a QX100 (an RX100 without the body) for full remote control it would be the ideal flight cam. Maybe one day.

Geoff

 

[Peter Evans]

Traded it recently for an RX100II
Geoff

Yeah, I looked long and hard at the Mark 2, Geoff, but then saw it was considerably heavier so, given the purpose for which I wanted it, I opted for the Mark 1. It was cheaper too! ;-)

 

[FSJ Guy]

No, you're not being too particular; to my eyes, that's comparable to the results from a 15 year-old cheap compact and is pretty much the same poor quality result that I was seeing from mine (which has now gone back - see next post).

Is that a JPEG straight from the camera, or a straightforward JPEG version of the unprocessed RAW image?

That was a straight JPEG from an unaltered DNG file. No sharpening added. Shouldn't really have to, IMHO. I don't add sharpening to my Canon raw files and they come out fine, but that's another story.

I was looking at some earlier photos I shot when it was sunnier and they look better. I'll try some more tomorrow and then decide if I need to call B&H for an RMA or not.

I like the dedicated video downlink, but the camera quality is less than impressive so far. :- (

 

[FSJ Guy]

UPDATE: I decided NOT to return my camera. I figured it was just a simple focus issue. Sure enough, I took apart the camera module, cut off the goo holding the lens in place and re-focused the lens.

Result: Nice sharp photos! Still with a lot of noise, but they're sharp!!!! Noise can be removed. Sharpness, once lost, is gone forever.

 

[Peter Evans]

I took apart the camera module, cut off the goo holding the lens in place and re-focused the lens.

:shock: Jeez; you're a braver man than I am Gunga Din. All I can say to you is, "Chapeau!"

How did you make sure it was focusing correctly from edge to edge? And what did you fix it in place with?

 

[AnselA]

Sure enough, I took apart the camera module, cut off the goo holding the lens in place and re-focused the lens.

Interesting. Tell more how to do it. (So that I can tell my dealer

 

[FSJ Guy]

I haven't fixed in in place with anything yet. It's currently snowing and foggy out, so I'm unable to check infinity focus. But to the neighbor's house about 100' away it looks MUCH sharper than before. I may try a SMALL bit of RTV on a pin. I want to be able to re-focus it later if necessary. I'll try to take some photos and post pics later today in a new thread.

The side to side focus was not an issue for my camera. (whew!)

 

[Peter Evans]

The side to side focus was not an issue for my camera. (whew!)

No, but it might be if you've re-positioned it

 

[FSJ Guy]

The lens was simply focused by rotating it within its existing mount.

Side to side softness is probably from a fault (decentered element, for example) in the lens assembly itself. There doesn't appear to be any other adjustments available.

I closed it up for flight tomorrow, so no pictures. :- (

This thread has some good inside photos:

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=7595

 

[Deleted member 6917]

Peter, I think we have talked about the Vision quality before on another thread. I am a retired portrait and commercial photographer with over 35+ years experience in the studio business. I still do shoots for some of my past high end clients and have incorporated the Phantom 2 Vision with some of these shoots. Most of my assignments are for web sites so the quality of my Vision is more than acceptable. For digital presentations or TV commercials the video is just OK...When I was at Imaging USA in Phoenix in Jan. I flew the Phantom across from the Holiday Inn. I must have gotten a better quality control Vision...because the images it produces after some Photoshop work is very acceptable to most of my clients. I have attached the shot of the Holiday Inn.

 

[Peter Evans]

Good for you; it looks like you did well in the P2V 'lucky dip'

 

[gunslinger]

Greg:

Can I ask when, approximately, you purchased your P2V? I'm beginning to think they had camera issues on fairly recent builds as I don't recall seeing many posts about defective cameras early on...

Thanks...
-slinger

 

[jimre]

Greg:

Can I ask when, approximately, you purchased your P2V? I'm beginning to think they had camera issues on fairly recent builds as I don't recall seeing many posts about defective cameras early on...

Thanks...
-slinger

I think the reported bad camera focus issues definitely spiked since late January. Likely because that's when the DNG/RAW update was finally released, not because the cameras suddenly got worse. Lots of us were waiting to see RAW images from the camera before making final judgment.

 

[ResevorDG]

Here is a detail of the center of an image.
It was an overcast day so there is not much contrast.

This is a DNG. I set the sharpness to soft. It seems that for some reason the phantom still applies sharpening to the DNG file. I don't know why.

No editing at all. Just right out of the camera, cropped, and given to you.

 

[jimre]

This is a DNG. I set the sharpness to soft. It seems that for some reason the phantom still applies sharpening to the DNG file. I don't know why.

Unless you've changed the defaults - both ACR and Lightroom automatically apply a default development preset - including some contrast & sharpening - to every RAW image you open. If you really want ACR or LR to show you the unprocessed RAW bits you need to zero out every setting, and save that as the new default preset.

 

[ResevorDG]

This is a DNG. I set the sharpness to soft. It seems that for some reason the phantom still applies sharpening to the DNG file. I don't know why.

Unless you've changed the defaults - both ACR and Lightroom automatically apply a default development preset - including some contrast & sharpening - to every RAW image you open. If you really want ACR or LR to show you the unprocessed RAW bits you need to zero out every setting, and save that as the new default preset.

Very good point, I had forgotten about that.

 

[davito]

Nice thread! Thank you, Peter!

My experience is very similar than other phantompilots's ones... I bought my P2V in january, and very soon I was disappointed with the image quality of the FC200 camera. After a period testing the settings and image results, I think that the FC200 has two main problems:
1) not proper focus adjustment, derived of a deficient mount of the lens (manufacturing defect and a lack of quality control, as Peter said).
2) a lot of noise and artifacts in the image, derived (in my opinion) of a cheap lens with a optic quality (mainly F and focal length) not suitable for the size of the sensor and the main use of the camera (photos to infinite... with a long distance from lens to the object).

The problem #1 could be fixed, as FSJ Guy has explained in other thread (viewtopic.php?f=7&t=7735&hilit=out+of+focus)
[thank you FSJ Guy!!]
And this solution improve the image quality, but at the end, you have to face the problem #2: the sensor receive an image projected (better focused) but with not enough light and with a doubtful optical quality.

So, my solution to problem #2 is to buy a new M12 lens. After a lot of research, I chosen a "super megapixel board lens" (10 Megapixel) for 1/2.3"sensor, focal length=5.4mm, F/No=2.5, M.O.D.=0.2m 70° 6.0g. :
http://www.vd-shop.de/hochaufloesendes- ... p-462.html


I will receive it this wednesday. I hope to post some footage next weekend, and we will see if worth the investment.


And now, my DNG crops:

01: Before refocus my lens following FSJ Guy instructions


02: Detail of a "macro" photo during the refocus process. Note that the quality of the image is much better than outside photos (because the problem #2, I think)


03: After the refocus

 

[Deleted member 6917]

Hey guys, I am so sorry to hear that there are so many issues with the Vision camera....form viewing most of the photos posted...and complaints...I can see why...they look like the first digital 1 MP camera I owned (Nikon Cool Pix 1998) ...mostly crap if blown up larger than a 4x5. I must have lucked out and received my Phantom 2 Vision the third week of Dec. 2013 from Atlanta Hobby. It produces very reasonable both still and video images....I do think that the GoPro is better but much flatter in contrast which canbe adjusted in post processing. Peter, did you get your Sony 100 camera yet? My Nex-7 shoots amazing video and stills. My Cinewing 6 HL will be shipped tomorrow from CA. Hopefully I will get by next weekend and get some footage from the air. The test footage from the drone is very stable with the AV 200 gimbal but the quality sucks....they used a low end video camera for the flight tests. Again so sorry for all of you that got a bad batch of cameras with their Phantoms.