I think it’s futuristic – the drone that is. The camera, on the other hand, is another story.
The drone
For a guy like me who not only follows the commercial market for drones but is also an avid photography and multirotor enthusiast, the new DJI Inspire 1 is, well, inspiring. It’s chock full of features I wish I had four years ago when I first started mounting GoPro cameras on quadcopter kits — things like ease of use, a simple interface, controller ergonomics, telemetry, a 3D-axis gimbal, integrated HD video downlink, optical flow for indoor flying (how cool is that!?).
Much has already been written on the Inspire 1 T600 (like here and here) so I won’t repeat it. The question for this post is: Did DJI hit the mark for the target market? For that answer, we need to go beyond the drone itself and look at how professional photographers and videographers use drones and cameras.
The market
As a primer, you may want to read what I have already written about this market in Film or Farm: Which is the Bigger Drone Market? and The Democratization of Aerial Photography.
Drone manufacturers understand photographers have longed for inexpensive ways to take aerial images, and DJI heralded the turnkey consumer-level camera drone with its DJI Phantom Vision. Some billed it as a toy. But it didn’t take long for professional photographers to notice its package of features and ease of use. Soon, every camera retailer, from Adorama and Amazon to B&H Foto, carried the Phantom line. Even photography software companies like Adobe tailored offerings to it. Product sales skyrocketed.
Concurrently, drone manufacturers like DJI and FreeFly Systems created larger multirotor airframes, controllers, gimbals, and componentry to satisfy the growing market for high-end aerial photography and cinematography. On these machines, users can mount their favorite (and heavy) Sony, Canon, and Panasonic DSLR – and even Red Epics. However, these drones do not arrive ready-to-fly (RTF). They require considerable assembly to get operational. This left the door open for savvy resellers like Aerial Media Pros, DSLR Pros, and Quadrocopter to do that work and offer high-margin RTF packages. Besides video and cinematography, these packages are used for the following photo applications:
- REAL ESTATE – showcase homes, marquee properties, commercial buildings, and structures
- LEGAL – support forensic investigations, insurance claims, and property assessments
- CONSTRUCTION – progress reporting for commercial, residential, and civil engineering
- LAND – landscape architecture, land development, and research
I think DJI correctly assessed the entry level and high-end camera drone markets and recognized the middle was open. Why not offer a better turnkey package that satisfies the demands of professionals but does not cannibalize their own high-end products?
The camera
For professional photographers and videographers, it’s not about the drone; it’s about the camera. The drone is just an extension of their reach. It’s a camera platform, a flying dolly, a zooming boom, a tripod in the sky. Mounted on a drone, a camera becomes a tool for better storytelling, and its unique aerial perspective broadens the possibilities for those stories and gives audiences a better sense of an object’s physical space and context to location. As a tool for this kind of storytelling, camera resolution matters.
But herein lies the rub for the Inspire 1 T600. The drone has very high-end features, but the camera (see specs here) may not satisfy all intended professionals. Clearly, 4K video meets the needs of a large population of aerial videographers, but 12-megapixel still photos will not meet the needs of aerial photographers involved in supplying images for the applications listed above. It will if the image is destined only for the web, but not if it’s used in print (think real estate brochures) or detailed investigative work (like construction exploration, legal investigations, and land surveying).
Two factors are unknown about the T600’s camera at this point: the resolving power of the lens and the dynamic range / image noise. These two issues matter greatly to photography professionals, who will surely scrutinize and vet these over social media. No doubt comparisons will be made between cameras of all types – including the one on the less expensive Phantom 2 Vision+. On the surface it looks like DJI may have got the lens right. Apparently gone is the DJI Phantom 2 Vision+ wide-angle distortion that professional photographers and videographers had to correct post production (same problem with GoPro). Low light sensitivity and noise is TBD.
The upgrade?
It’s hard for me to believe DJI didn’t know that still image resolution didn’t matter for the target market and it’s quite plausible that a better or different camera is coming. And it should! I have talked to several existing Phantom owners who are professional photographers and many say they’ll wait to buy one when a better / more versatile camera is available. As DJI explained at its press launch, the Inspire 1’s gimbal and camera system is “modular and upgradable.” That’s important if the company wants to keep up with professionals who demand ever better sensor and image processors. Whatever the reason, it’s paramount that DJI get this right – especially if it wants to provision other commercial markets like GIS where the camera’s still resolution is king.
While the $2,900 price point is set right for a mid-tier turnkey camera drone system, it seems the camera spec is too skinny and the price just high enough to create a barrier for some existing customers, especially those who are professional photographers.
I would love to hear your thoughts. Feel free to comment or write me at info@droneanalyst.com.
This post also appears in sUAS News ‘Multirotor‘ section.
Price is too high for mass market. But having such a drone makes you someone for your friends.
Be sure to check out the comments about this subject on DIY Drones: http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/does-dji-s-new-drone-hit-the-target-market
I’ve received many comments by email and here are some posted with permission:
And
And
And
And
And
Thanks guys for your comments.
I hope the raw images are better than the P2V+ I have never gotten the same kind of results from it like I get from my Sony RX100 II or a6000 (which I put on a CineStar 6 hex) – especially night shots or lighted buildings at dusk. To me the DJI camera on this drone should be at the current spec of the most popular prosumer mirrorless cameras like the Sony a7S and Panasonic GH4.
Many liken DJI Global as the Apple of the consumer drone world. While that may be too high of a compliment I think there are many fair comparisons. I think the Inspire 1 is like the very first iPad. Remember when Steve Jobs first introduced us to it? Everyone wondered, “why do I need a tablet, when I have a smartphone and a computer?” The original iPad was not powerful and had little utility unique to it. Then the market adjusted to the product while the product simultaneously got better. Now the iPad and all tablets are undoubtedly useful devices. Some people say, “I will wait until the Inspire 1 has a better camera.” That’s fair. There are upgrades on the horizon, just like there will be a new iPad out nearly every year. You can wait or start having fun now. Either way, this platform represents the future of aerial photography.
Thanks Jason. Good insights.
I own a Phantom 2 Vision + as well as a new Inspire 1. I was hoping the camera on the Inspire would eclipse that on the Vision +. As a professional landscape photographer I hoped the raw (DNG) format and “superior” camera would allow me to print gallery-quality images up to about 16X24 in. I have only taken a few test images with the Inspire (albeit on a breezy day) but I have to say the camera on the Vision + makes better, clearer images than the camera on the Inspire. Of course they require more post to straighten horizons and curved fence lines, but overall, they are superior to images captured with the Inspire. Of particular note is edge and corner sharpness. In this area alone the Vision + runs circles around the Inspire. The video quality is excellent on the Inspire. At this point I think I either got a bad lens (I downloaded several unedited RAW images allegedly taken with an Inspire to evaluate them and these images were superior to unedited images from my Vision +) or the images I downloaded for evaluation were aberrations. One other thing: the images taken with my Inspire have what I consider to be excessive chromatic aberration. Luckily, there is a great tool in Adobe Camera Raw that does a terrific job of removing CA. All in all, I wish I had waited a while before plunking down three grand for the Inspire. Perhaps an upgraded camera aimed more toward the still market is in the wings. Sure hope so.
Thanks for your comments Joe. I’ve done the same comparison and I’m hoping for a better still camera for the Inspire 1 also. My take on that bird here: http://droneanalyst.com/2014/11/16/dji-new-drone-hit-target-market/
Colin, an update on the Inspire 1 camera. There are many setting and aspect ratios available on this camera. After experimenting with them all (and after cleaning a glob of goomba off the inside of the ND filter, which had escaped my eye) I have finally been able to get acceptable RAW (DNG) images that can be nicely upsampled to 16 in. by 24 in. The far corners are not perfect, but by adding vignette to the final images (which I normally do anyway) and working them in post with Photoshop and a cadre of NIK plug-ins, they are quite acceptable and suitable for gallery display. Also, being new to the whole video thing, I am finding that very nice 8x10s can be printed from individual frames if you shoot in 4K video and export a freeze frame from a video editing program such as Adobe Premier. Again, a little post in a good photo editing program yields very nice images.
I also notice that the sheer weight of the Inspire keeps it anchored fairly well in breezy conditions. I shot some straight-down mapping images this morning of a neighbor’s property from an altitude of 78 meters with winds gusting to about 15 mph and the images were very sharp, as was some incidental video I shot getting into position. All in all, I’m now very happy with the Inspire. It just takes a little work to find its sweet spots. Hope this is useful.
Thanks Joe for the update! I’m starting to experiment myself and as you point out it is possible to get fairly good results after a bit of post-production processing. I’m still hoping for a better plug and play still camera so the work flow is reduced. Cheers.
UPDATE: 9/10/2015 – Finally we got the long-await announcement from DJI that brings a new camera option to this platform. Today they announced their new ZENMUSE X5 series of Micro Four Thirds Cameras for the Inspire 1 drone system. The question is, is this really the “game changer” some people are calling it, or will it really make any difference. This writer dissects some of the features and see what this will really do for aerial imaging: http://www.dronecoalition.net/kgarrison/djis-zenmuse-x5-camera-takes-aerial-video-to-new-levels/