DJI Phantom 3 Pro vs Inspire 1 3X cameras

These two cameras share the same specs.

 

Are they the same camera?

<p>I use the X3, and have worked with the P3's camera. I think the X3's doing a little more work when encoding AVHCD video, but that's splitting hairs. I think the integrated gimbal on the Inspire is substantially better than the P3's, and the Inspire itself is far more stable in the air, especially when working in windy conditions. I had an Inspire up shooting an event last week, and was in steady 15mph winds ... and the video looked like it was shot from a tripod. The P3 is more vulnerable to dirty air, and that means less stability for stills and video. I also use a P2 with a GoPro onboard, and still trot it out regularly when I don't want the slightly beefier Inspire in play.<br /><br />But here's the main thing: the Inspire is a much more flexible platform. Just this week dealers are starting to ship the Inspire 1 Pro, which is essentially the same bird, but with the X5 gimbal/camera onboard ... and that's a Micro 4/3 format camera onto which you can mount some very nice lenses. If you go with the normal Inspire, you can still swap in an X5 camera later, because the gimbals quickly disconnect as a module.<br /><br />If you're serious and have the funds, the Inspire is a much better (than the Phantom) platform for photographers/videographers.</p>

That X5 is not a $3500 camera.

Nor the X5R a $5100, one. If you took them off the copter. Maybe if Leica made them, sure. Not Hong Kong RC Copter company made.

 

I think I should probably email DJI on this question.

 

Honestly, I don't know what I am going to do with video. I'm really

after stitching stills, for large format prints. (Post vids on Facebook for likes? BFD)

 

The moment one tries to sell a video or still, you have the federal

government up your rectum. I definitely don't need that. And the

Inspire in any of its versions just screams commercial use. There

is a whole section on the FAA site enlisting the efforts of law

enforcement agencies.

 

The Phantom 3 looks like a toy.and is priced like one. Just in case

some Fish and Wildlife warden Ranger Rick feels it's his duty to

confiscate my cameracopter, $1300 is a manageable loss. $3K isnt.

 

If it's the same camera, the X3 a la carte is $500, Then the Phantom

3 might be the better investment.

 

I was looking at the 3DR Solo, but the Gopro wide angle would make stitching problematic. And by the time you get a kit.together, it's almost $2300. $4-500 short of the Inspire.

<p>If you're not shooting high-end video (where you'd need the 5R's very high bit rate writing RAW to the onboard SSD drive), then don't even talk about that system. When you are looking at the Inspire Pro (with the X5), you can't think about it like a $3500 camera. The Inspire is a serious quad - very powerful, stable, and highly integrated in terms of the ground side apps, the gimbal, and the flight controller. The fact that you can get real-time HD downlink to a tablet while you're flying, and have total control over aperture, shutter, focus, ISO and other camera behaviors - there's nothing else out there than can come close regardless of the price. Well, you can come close, but it would cost $10k to put the rig together, and it would be a beast and very fiddly.</p>

X5R camera shoots still photos in raw format. None of the other cameras discussed, or on the table, do.

 

Raw format images are desirable.

 

Not wanting raw video, or any video, does not remove it from the discussion.

 

That said, even the DJI Phantom 3 Standard camera takes the same size still images as the 3X camera(which too does not shoot in raw). Has the same size sensor, same size image. At $700(with the copter and gimbal included).

<p>When I shoot with the Inspire's current X3 camera, I use the app to tell the camera to record both a JPG and a (RAW) DNG file. The DNGs, of course, have far more data to work with in post.<br /><br />Note that regardless of the similarities or differences between an X3 gimbal/camera on the Inspire and the P3's version of that, the REAL difference between the two is the incredible in-the-air stability of the Inspire platform. If you're looking to stitch panos shot from the air, the Inspire is going to greatly increase your rate of keepers and cut down on post production time ... because that thing is like a rock in the air. </p>

Oh,

 

I was watching a video with photographer Trey Ratcliff, he stated

his Inspire 1 didn't have raw.

 

A DNG is RAW. Even a TIFF would be satisfactory.

 

 

Thank you, that's a big difference.

And looking at the specifications more closely, it is the same

sensor.

 

So same camera.

<p>Same sensor doesn't mean the same camera. The sensor in the X3 is the same as the one in the GoPro H4 Black ... but there are tangible differences in the output (not counting the lens geometry). Each camera (not sensor) manufacturer wraps that sensor in lots of their own other stuff. The sensor is just one piece. There's the buffering memory, the image processing (with differences in compression and other encoding features, the user interface, etc. Just the camera maker's choices about when to boost ISO vs. when to slow down the shutter can make a huge difference in how stills (or video) render under difference circumstances. Those decisions are made downstream from the sensor.</p>

Agree.

 

The X5 and X5R appear to be the same sensor. But different

output. Same with the Pro vs Advance P3 camera.

 

If you can mention something different between the X3 camera and the one on the P3 Pro, I would appreciate it.

 

Other than the X3 looks like a Logitech WebCam. A functional difference. Per the specs they appear identical.

Reading the requirements for the Section 333 exemption...

 

I don't think I'm gonna put a lot of money into this right now.

 

The whole section of their website, dealing with certified airman, has broken links because of typos in their URLs.

 

 

But one gathers that to sell photos produced by an aerial

cameracopter, you need a pilots licence .

 

If I were a pilot, wtf would I need a drone for? The whole thing seems designed to somehow make sure that airplane and helicopter pilots get paid, it actually says that.

 

What does flying an airplane have to do with flying an RC model aircraft?

The FAA site essentially states that...

 

If you are flying an RC aircraft for a hobby, and take a landscape photo, you are safe.

 

But if you fly an RC aircraft and take a landscape photo, You are

now unsafe if you want to sell that photo. And you need to be a

certified airman (not airwoman)to be safe, and the dead links go to pilots

training info.

From the FAA site..

 

 

What are the main requirements needed for me to operate an unmanned aircraft or drone for my business?

 

A. You will need:

 

a Section 333 grant of exemption,

 

a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA),

 

an aircraft registered with the FAA, and

 

a pilot with an FAA airman certificate

 

Do all you landscape or wedding photographers, who use RC coptercameras actually comply with these?

 

 

The site has a bunch of different jobs as airmen. But when you follow the broken links(by adding www. to the broken link) they are discussing actual pilots.

 

 

https://www.faa.gov/uas/legislative_programs/section_333/333_faqs/#q1

<p>First: If you're going to be doing this at all, you DO need to get your feet wet. You have to learn how to start thinking about the issues that come up when you're flying such machines. You need to learn how to handle three dimensional space and backwards orientation as the machines rotates in that space. You have a LOT of factors that come into play, safety-wise, that you have to master before you can once again start thinking like a photographer that happens to have his camera on a flying robot.<br /><br />The FAA has a pending rule making that will provide a commercial waiver for operators of small, line-of-sight machines following what amounts to a fairly simple ground-school type orientation and test (renewed every year). The idea is to familiarize the operator with the things they need to know in order to operate in the same airspace that's used by other aircraft (including things like low-flying police helicopters, fire fighters, etc). The agency is being very slow to make this happen, and has now lapsed past a calendar deadline set by congress over two years ago.<br /><br />Obviously a LOT of photographers are simply doing the work in the meantime anyway. They're just keeping a low profile, and making a point of being "recreational" in terms of how they talk about their projects, and not promoting their services in plain language. Yes, it's ridiculous that we're waiting on the administration as it drags its feet on this.</p>

There obviously needs to be another agency created to address

this new frontier. It makes no sense that an agency set up to

regulate airplanes, jets, and helicopters and air traffic, is put in

charge to regulate RC model aircraft.

 

It's like a law enforcement agency determining what goes on in

healthcare.

 

Oh, forgot, that really happens.

 

Honestly, these RC craft have NO business being where real

aircraft are. But the 5 mile rule is absurd. So is the 400 foot rule.

The vastest of space contained within these parameters, contain

no airplanes, jets, or helicopters. Needing a licensed airplane pilot

to fly one so you can sell a landscape print or make a "Dolly" shot

for a married couples' wedding video, borders on insanity.

 

And the FAA is enlisting the help of every law enforcement agency in the country to enforce their hackneyed insane regulations. Any Game warden or park ranger can confiscate your equipment and cite you for violating say the 400 foot rule if you fly over a cliff in the wilderness, and are now at 1000 above ground for a short moment.

 

Or say a real estate agent is using a cameracopter to photograph a home he or she has for sale. Nowhere near an airplane.or air traffic, yet it's a violation of federal law because it's commercial.

 

The FAA has NO business regulating real estate companies or wedding photographers business practices. That's something out of the mind of Terry Gilliam.