What arrived today?

[CurryKitten]

Oh, interesting! One thing I was thinking whilst flying mine, theres a lot of screen prodding and setting up, how do you do that with the goggles? Or is it just assumed that you have it all set up then stick the goggles on and use the buttons on the Tx to start/stop recording etc?

I saw Flitetest talking about them, and they mentioned you could touch the side of the goggles to operate things - like a touch pad of sorts.

[beesleyboy]

Yes you can control your settings from the goggles.
As I mentioned, its raining hear, so I have been playing with them in the house, the picture is absolutely stunning, I can't emphases how good it is.
The one problem I have is I only have one eye and no mater how I move the lens in the goggles, I cant see the left bottom corner of the screen, If my right eye worked, I would see this with my right eye. in the right screen. lol

[Dillwhacker]

Tried a mate's yesterday, and blooming hell, what an image! Jees I would love that on a plane.
His Mavic is so stable, it's like your'e looking at a photo, but I wonder what the image would be like in a fast moving plane....
I have a horrid feeling the MPEG compression and latency would ruin it for anything other than slow flying.
Come on tech geeks, all I want is 1080, real time, no latency, no MPEG blockiness, 90 degree FOV, all in focus,  and 10km's range..
Please.
Pretty please with a cherry on the top....
:)

[iwan_canobi]

Thats interesting, hadn't considered how it would cope with movement. From my limited experience so far the image is pretty smooth, but I haven't flown in sport mode yet. I have noticed dropped frames when you start recording though, which is a bit annoying. I'll need to have a play with the settings, theres lots of options for the transmitted image.

It is ridiculously stable though, a few times I thought it had frozen as the image just doesn't move when it's in a hover! :D

[SnoozeDoggyDog]

The image hasn't "moved" since at least the phantom 3. They have gimbals. Not sure what else you would expect for 1k outlay. The stills are not as good on the mavic compared to the p3.

If you want fast moving fpv image you can turn down the steam bitrate at the cost of the received image. I have found due to the nature of 2.4g that you'll soon lose signal if you have anything in between you and the mavic/P3 and it will go into RTH.

The dji stuff is great for what it is .... but I found you get bored very quickly with it. It's a flying camera, not a flying experience. Thats why I jumped to fixed wing.

P

[Dillwhacker]

Yep. £1500 worth of kit, but no smile on his face, no giggles of fun, no ducking and shouting 'gees that was close'.
I'll stick with my £40 Hornet thanks.
:P

[Coyote]

Huge new toy turned up today, no expenses spared .........




£37 HobbyRC.co.uk

Watch out for no review coming soon !!


:)

[iwan_canobi]

The image hasn't "moved" since at least the phantom 3. They have gimbals. Not sure what else you would expect for 1k outlay. The stills are not as good on the mavic compared to the p3.

If you want fast moving fpv image you can turn down the steam bitrate at the cost of the received image. I have found due to the nature of 2.4g that you'll soon lose signal if you have anything in between you and the mavic/P3 and it will go into RTH.

The dji stuff is great for what it is .... but I found you get bored very quickly with it. It's a flying camera, not a flying experience. Thats why I jumped to fixed wing.

P

Well having built all my own stuff for the last 4 years it's impressive to me just how stable is actually is. I've used gimbals before but never had them this stable, I suspect there is some in sensor stabilisation going on as well though.

Thats why I bought it though, as a flying camera. I've got plenty of other crafts to get my fast flying kicks from, this was purely for aerial photo stuff.

[Epicurus1]

Much like Coyote I got a new FPV cam from Hobby rc, £30 for a Runcam Eagle 16:9. 

[Coyote]

That's what I initially wanted, I prefer flying in 16:9 for whatever reason, but the fact its CMOS put me off trying it.

[English Turbines]

That's what I initially wanted, I prefer flying in 16:9 for whatever reason, but the fact its CMOS put me off trying it.

I love flying on my 16:9 Monitor so a 16:9 Camera sounds a great idea to me...Is this CMOS Eagle no good then...?
 
     :vulture:

[CurryKitten]

I bought a bunch more 3s (allegedly high C) 550's for the Lizard 95, a it's a massive pain going out with 1 lipo and then not being able to remember all the changes you might want to make.

The props is a12 x 6.5" folding prop for the Skyhook 2.6 build... now the slowest build ever (but it's coming on)

[GlenJacob]

That's what I initially wanted, I prefer flying in 16:9 for whatever reason, but the fact its CMOS put me off trying it.

I love flying on my 16:9 Monitor so a 16:9 Camera sounds a great idea to me...Is this CMOS Eagle no good then...?
 

With all due respect, I'm not sure if you've actually given this a go, but the CMOS on the Eagle and Monster are way better than the old CMOS stuff.

I have the Monster (V1) (or HS1189, I think) and for Fixed wing FPV, the image is MILES ahead of the Swift 2 or their closest competitor (in terms of image quality). I would definitely keep going back to the Eagle and Monster (and I assume the V2s are better) for all my fixed wing flying. I do agree it's not as useful to (race) quad pilots however.

[Epicurus1]

I do agree it's not as useful to (race) quad pilots however.

Indeed. There is a trade off between image quality and latency. If I were wholly interested in racing I would have chosen the Swift 2 without a doubt. 

[Coyote]

I love flying on my 16:9 Monitor so a 16:9 Camera sounds a great idea to me...Is this CMOS Eagle no good then...?
 
     :vulture:

It looks good on the plank videos so yeah it will be fine for you, but for being strapped to my 250 I wanted to stray away from CMOS.

I will probably get some for my Talon and Venturi though at some point.