High quality pictures better than gopro dixxion

[simonthk]

Hello Phantom owners

I have been looking around for a camera, and I do like the gopro or adixxion. They both support wifi for smartphones and in quality I find them quite equal (unless someone can prove me otherwise).

Though I am to take pictures with my phantom as a professional photographer, and I was looking for something that is superior in picture quality compared to the gopro and adixxion. Videos aint that important, but it needs some kind of automatic picture taking each second or each 5-10 second or to be able to control through wifi.

Does anyone have any experience with this? Is the next step up some heavyweight 2000$ lens canon?

Thanks in advance

 

[slugger]

The Sony RX100 and RX100 II. I have the RX100 and it's an amazing camera.

 

[BruceTS]

"At the heart of the GoPro lies a Sony IMX117 image sensor."
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/GoPro+He ... wn/12457/2

Guess the GoPro3 uses the best.......

 

[syotr]

The Sony RX100 would be great if there were some way to remotely control it or set it up to shoot a series of time lapse photos. Many of the Canon compact cameras can shoot time lapse with scripts and CHDK firmware. A Canon S95 or S100 would give much better still images than a GoPro.

 

[syotr]

Found some info on interval shooting with the RX100. It is possible to hold the shutter button down in continuous mode with a rubber band. Set the camera for RAW plus JPEG files. It will slow down as the buffer fills up.

 

[simonthk]

Cool man thanks for the replies!

Bruce... do you believe that gopro takes the best pictures? I only need good pictures, not video, not action, just pictures of high quality.

 

[simonthk]

The Sony RX100 would be great if there were some way to remotely control it or set it up to shoot a series of time lapse photos. Many of the Canon compact cameras can shoot time lapse with scripts and CHDK firmware. A Canon S95 or S100 would give much better still images than a GoPro.

Read about the s100 and I can get that for reasonable price. I guess the picture quality with 12mp must be extremely good compared to sony as15 2mp? I guess cause I don't know....
Do you have any idea of how good these pictures will get? I mean.... will I get satisfied if I want the almost best? Or do I need a bigger quadrocopter and an even more expensive camera?
I am not photographer, but want to take some really great pictures.

Ill just add some links about the s100 timelapse option:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/sho ... ?t=1151764
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvcM1XYvkyY

 

[simonthk]

Just gonna add a link more about the s100 and possibility for FPV http://www.multirotorforums.com/archive ... 11166.html
mount https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_SMds-ChJ8

 

[halfpipe]

I use an rx100 and the stills and video are excellent
The Phantom carries it along with a an Hd video transmitter no problem
At times I also use a nokia 808 under the phantom the Nokia is more or less comparible to stills shot with an rx100 and the nokia at half the price is 90 grams lighter also with interval shooting without elastic bands carl zeiss lens on both without barrel distortion

 

[Videoguy]

I use an rx100 and the stills and video are excellent
The Phantom carries it along with a an Hd video transmitter no problem
At times I also use a nokia 808 under the phantom the Nokia is more or less comparible to stills shot with an rx100 and the nokia at half the price is 90 grams lighter also with interval shooting without elastic bands carl zeiss lens on both without barrel distortion

I also use the Sony RX-100, it's an amazing camera; I'll try to post some video in the next few days. Halfpipe, which HD transmitter are you using? I'm going to add FPV and really need the option for through-the-lens viewing, straight out of the Sony. (Ideally, I'd like to be able to switch from FPV cam to Sony's output, on-the-fly, but I need to figure out how to do that.)

But back to the RX-100, I'm really happy with the footage... the lens is more "natural" than the crappy gopro fisheye lens, the sensor is amazing, and the weight is almost an advantage... the Phantom flies a little smoother. Any camera operator will tell you that more mass means smoother handheld shots. The only drawback I had was reduced flight time by about 1-2 minutes, and it took me a while to figure out the best anti-vibration mount. And framing your shot, if you're close to the subject, is a bit trickier without FPV than the Gopro, since the gopro lens has such wide field of view. I'm a video director and I've been able to cut it into projects, just needs some tweaking in Post. It only shows a difference if you really, really look closely and analyze, which most viewers don't do. Plus, it's a great camera to stick in your pocket everywhere you go.

 

[halfpipe]

I'm using this Ed WD3207 and the downlink is plugged HDMI into a 1280x800 monitor so it's a glance at for framing rather than fpv
They say ony has a 30m range however and my work sofar has been withing that range
The ziess cinemizer glasses might work with it
http://www.phantompilots.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1854#p12550

 

[Videoguy]

I'm using this Ed WD3207 and the downlink is plugged HDMI into a 1280x800 monitor so it's a glance at for framing rather than fpv
They say ony has a 30m range however and my work sofar has been withing that range
The ziess cinemizer glasses might work with it
http://www.phantompilots.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1854#p12550

Very interesting, thanks for the info. It would be great if the range was higher. So is there a reason you don't use it for FPV? Is the HD signal too much bandwidth, so the frame rate is reduced... or just personal preference for LOS?

 

[MedicineMan4040]

The Sony RX100 is listed as 8.5 ounces, is that about right?
I ask because I have an aging Sony Nex-5, depending on lens it would be right at 18oz--too heavy? or just smaller flight time?
There was a question about timelapse and the RX100, does the RX100 have i.r. input? If so then there is this from Britain:
http://www.gentles.ltd.uk/gentled/
I've used it on a Nex-7 and Nex-5 without any problems.

 

[halfpipe]

18 oz is out of the question fof a phantom
rx100 is pushing it but doable without gimbal
rubber band for continuous shooting (Brocolli stalk rubber bands with a little blip glued to the shutter button works a treat)

 

[MedicineMan4040]

Thanks for the hard/heavy reality.
I'll search the forum for use of a Sony TX20, it's 4.9 ounces and very shockproof...she that
rules the world just got the TX30 so the older model risk it's life. If you or any other
think it might work and curious about its video qualities, well I've at least 50 hiking vids on
you youtube channel MedicineMan4040 via the TX20.

p.s. the Blade MQX arrived today....spent 10 minutes sliding on the kitchen floor either to me or away from me or into the wall or chair. I can already tell this $100 was well spent when it comes time to increase the lifespan of the Phantom. So off to Youtube to get hints on trimming out the first thing I've attempted to fly since a childhood kite.

 

[halfpipe]

@MedicineMan Yes I believe that your TX20/30 would be perfect weight wise and I think it has the sony active stabilization so fancy shock absorbing and heavy mounts may not be necessary and it's footage is real nice.
I have found that the minimilist approach works when designing a way to mount it to the phantom. For instance you might try this uber simple straight down set up. "cut a layer of 1/2" foam about the size of the tx200 and sandwich it between the camera and the belly of the phantom then use a couple good rubber bands to hold it in place. Only shoots straight down but that's a valid and interesting perspective.

 

[halfpipe]

@VideoGuy
Not sure what the max range is . must test it
I'm new to this los fpv aerial video world.
Just the thought of watching SD made me look for an HD solution but that might have been a hasty decision based on preconcieved notions as I had nothing to go by and hadn't really considered that the flying/viewing time frame was measured in minutes so the SD/HD thing turns out to be far less important than previously thought. However when I look at the video stream from the recording camera on the 7" 1280x800 monitor I can see the focus and the exposure and know whether the shot is potentially a keeper or do I have to try again.
Many years ago (1971) I worked at a TV station and we had studio cameras on pedastals that had a padded viewfinder hood which you stuck your face to and it was like a fpv but you could pull your face back and look around.
I don't like the idea of being immersed in a virtual world for 5+ minutes and not being aware of what might be happening right in front of me. I don't want to take the googles off and find a stranger standing right in front of me like that guy who shot the marina elsewhere on this forum where people actually had to duck to avoid the on-coming phantom (but that's a different issue)
Zeiss make cinemizer glasses which accept hdmi in and I can only imagine that the video is fantastic but there is still the isolation issue.