Tested - Hands-On with DJI's Phantom 4
- Thread starter P.Lindblom
- Start date
We can see the props on one shot, on other video DJI said the motors were higher so it was impossible to see props on video..
Last edited:
If you're in a hurry, check out the vid starting at 5:30. It can track a human just because it's a human. It recognizes the human form and will follow it. No GPS device needed.
That's not at all what the video said. Go watch it again.
It said the motors are higher so you can go faster without the props getting into the frame. Nothing at all about 'impossible'.
Yet on the first hands on ever we can immediately see the props getting into the frame..
If flown at 45deg it would be kinda hard not to have them in the frame with the camera forward, i guess only possible in sport mode,
Gives those long distance flyers something to battle against those head winds
Have you lost your mind?
Yes, you can see the props in the demo of 'sport mode', which they also highlight as allowing the aircraft to go up to a 45-degree angle to get a much higher forward velocity.
I don't know what you expect? You need a considerably bigger drone with more vertical separation between camera and props (like the Inspire) to have props-in-frame be a 'never' event. It's just geometry.
They've clearly worked to mitigate it at least a bit here by raising the props a little. All they ever promised was that you could go faster than the P3 while keeping props out of frame.
It's not some kind of horrible betrayal that you'll sometimes see the props in the frame. If you truly need the props out of the way 100%, go get an Inspire.
They didn't update the camera. I'm not interested. I've gone to Yuneec for the simple fact I can use the superior color of the GP4 Black. I really hope the camera tech this year on drones improves tremendously with the nikon keymission360 coming out. 4k monikers are not enough. It needs to be the correct 4k bitrate and 10bit color.
It's purdy. I'll start with the negatives (IMHO):
1) I noticed they've managed to make the ribbon cable MORE exposed on the gimbal, which is probably
to make it easier to change, considering it's sooo robust.
2) Having forward only collision avoidance and a fixed directioncamera means they're sure you won't see
what you're about to crash into on the screen... Considering the amount of time I spend flying directly
into my photo/video subject, this becomes a 'moot' technology. IF the camera were to rotate 360*
I'd say the technology could be much better utilized by the operator.
3) The track feature seems to need more 'tweaking' as it seemed to relatively easy to lose its track.
Can it follow 'other forms' besides human?? Not mentioned in the review.
4) No dedicated HDMI OUT out of the factory... really?? with a SPORT MODE?
5) The collision avoidance cameras are integrated into the landing gear... I hope they're sturdy,
otherwise landing gear is gonna be pricey.
OK... Now the positives (again IMHO):
1) Increased flight time... though most claimed times are exaggerated, we'll take every minute we can get!
2) Improved propeller mounting, I like the 'lock' idea.
3) The gimbal itself seems sturdier. Any improvement there is a huge plus.
4) The Sport Mode allowing faster speeds is nice if you're photographing something you need to really travel to.
5) Price point is still within reach of the Phantom line.
6) Dual IMU and Dual Compass... though if calibrated at the same time makes me... well.... wonder.
Do I want one now? No. My Phantom 3 has the same lateral and backwards crash avoidance, and these
directions are used just as much, if not more, in aerial photography than forward. I'm already set up for the P3
with batteries, nd filters, spares.... So I'll keep my P3 until I back it into a wall with it.
1) I noticed they've managed to make the ribbon cable MORE exposed on the gimbal, which is probably
to make it easier to change, considering it's sooo robust.
2) Having forward only collision avoidance and a fixed directioncamera means they're sure you won't see
what you're about to crash into on the screen... Considering the amount of time I spend flying directly
into my photo/video subject, this becomes a 'moot' technology. IF the camera were to rotate 360*
I'd say the technology could be much better utilized by the operator.
3) The track feature seems to need more 'tweaking' as it seemed to relatively easy to lose its track.
Can it follow 'other forms' besides human?? Not mentioned in the review.
4) No dedicated HDMI OUT out of the factory... really?? with a SPORT MODE?
5) The collision avoidance cameras are integrated into the landing gear... I hope they're sturdy,
otherwise landing gear is gonna be pricey.
OK... Now the positives (again IMHO):
1) Increased flight time... though most claimed times are exaggerated, we'll take every minute we can get!
2) Improved propeller mounting, I like the 'lock' idea.
3) The gimbal itself seems sturdier. Any improvement there is a huge plus.
4) The Sport Mode allowing faster speeds is nice if you're photographing something you need to really travel to.
5) Price point is still within reach of the Phantom line.
6) Dual IMU and Dual Compass... though if calibrated at the same time makes me... well.... wonder.
Do I want one now? No. My Phantom 3 has the same lateral and backwards crash avoidance, and these
directions are used just as much, if not more, in aerial photography than forward. I'm already set up for the P3
with batteries, nd filters, spares.... So I'll keep my P3 until I back it into a wall with it.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2015
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 130
- Age
- 67
You are correct, I should have added 'or a fundamentally different design, bringing the camera much farther forward relative to the props'.
But I'll stand by the 'geometry' element, and everything I said regarding the Phantom - with the camera hanging low and centered, to keep the props out of frame, what's needed is either a narrow field of view, minimum aircraft body tilt, or more vertical distance between lens and rotors.
You can tweak all of those factors to get geometry that keeps the props out of the frame, but with the P3/4 FOV, camera position and aircraft body tilt, it's NOT going to be a 'never' event.
- Joined
- May 29, 2014
- Messages
- 843
- Reaction score
- 212
Exactly.... a "spider"design was what I was hoping for in the next gen Phantom.... This is why I like my AD-1.... equipt with Zenmuse gimbal although I would prefer the Phantom camera to GoPro for aerial any day...
Attachments
There are beta versions of apps that allow active tracking that will be coming out for the P3
There are also two camera sensors on the bottom of the Phantom (total of 4) for collision avoidance
The front sensors are NOT in the landing legs, but integrated into the body
- Joined
- May 29, 2014
- Messages
- 843
- Reaction score
- 212
Yeah, the obstacle avoidance in the FRONT is kind of a waste to me... you can see in the front, I'd rather it be on the rear or sides for lateral or backwards flying as already mentioned.
I too will not be rushing out for a P4 but instead pick up another P3P. I'm actually surprised they had a #4.... the #4 is unlucky in Chinese culture - I guess we'll see
I too will not be rushing out for a P4 but instead pick up another P3P. I'm actually surprised they had a #4.... the #4 is unlucky in Chinese culture - I guess we'll see
On a second look, I see the forward sensors mounted just above the landing gear.
I stand corrected.
So with the sensors being fixed and up where they are. If you are flying fast and your drone is at say a 30-40 degree angle, are those sensors going to be pointing down or will they see the object coming.
Those look pretty small and the downward VPS only worked within 2.5m so I cant imagine the front facing ones are any better,
Similar threads
