DJI Phantom 3 vs. Yuneec 4K Typhoon

We’d understand in case you’re not informed about Yuneec; we’ve only discussing its products twice. However, it’s fairly well-known inside quadcopter world, and finest described as a principal rival to DJI. When I reviewed DJI’s 4K Phantom 3 Professional drone ($1,259), a reader asked after we could compare it to Yuneec’s rival Typhoon Q500 model (around $1,100, however with a lower-res 1080p camera). Days later, Yuneec announced an updated Typhoon with 4K shooting for $1,299, making the comparison easier. It only seemed fair to grant our reader’s wish, to see what the new Typhoon needed to offer.

The similarities between DJI’s and Yuneec’s consumer quadcopters a wide range of. Both have 4K cameras with stabilizing gimbals. Both are “ready to fly,” which mostly means there is not any assembly required; just charge and go. Both are feasible for beginners to manipulate, and both offer first-person view (aka FPV), and the ability to see what are the camera is seeing within the air in solid time, usually using the transmitter/controller. There are other items that offer the same feature set, but DJI and Yuneec did a good job packaging them in such a way that interest new flyers and hobbyists alike.

There may also be some significant differences and so on paper, at the least, many are in Yuneec’s favor. Despite being more expensive, the Typhoon offers better value. The $1,299 4K version is obtainable with a carry case (you should buy one on your Phantom). It also is sold with two batteries versus one within the Phantom. Then there’s the transmitter, with a built-in touchscreen display. This is how you view exactly what the Typhoon’s camera sees (also you can use it gain access to settings). In contrast, DJI users desire a phone to achieve this, this process works well, but is certainly one more thing to take along/charge. The last, and maybe coolest extra while using Typhoon, may be the Steadygrip, a hand-held mount to the 4K camera. Detach it in the drone, clip it to your accessory and you could film smooth video about the ground, too. DJI’s taking care of a similar product, but it is not available yet, and won’t ever be inside the box from the Phantom 3 (the digital camera is non-removable). Check Quadcopter Drone.

You’re also acquiring more flight features using the Typhoon. The ground station has GPS inside (actually, most quadcopters do, yet not always the transmitter). This means the Typhoon has options like “follow me” and “watch me,” which Phantom 3 has no right now (but a majority of features are coming eventually). So, the Yuneec will be the one to get, right? Maybe. The real test is taken it up inside the air and shooting some video. Which is, certainly, what I did.

I’ll preface my impressions by proclaiming that I learned to fly using a Phantom, and possess flown one for several hours, thus, making this what I am employed to. Yuneec made the Typhoon pretty simple to fly. I had a couple of minor wobbles the 1st time, but this might be on account of my prior Phantom experience. One example is, automagically, the Typhoon won’t fly within 26 feet of yourself (or, really, the transmitter).

This caught me off guard when I first attemptedto land, as I’m accustomed to bringing the Phantom in solid close, and quite often “catch landing” (received it low enough to carry the landing gear, to make it think it’s about the ground). I had the Typhoon above water, also it wouldn’t come nearer. I were forced to walk backward far enough as a way to land it on solid ground, rather than in an ideal spot (understand the photo presents itself this article). The same problem can catch get you started mid-flight, too. It’ll suddenly stop moving since it hits the exclusion zone close to you. I get it; it’s really a safety feature (then one you can shut down).

The Typhoon’s biggest problem inside air, I found, was that it must be not as responsive as being the Phantom. DJI’s consumer method quite a bit smaller, and responds quickly to the touch around the controls. You can throw it left to right quite sharply, and it also’ll visibly pitch (but hold its position), plus it manages to do it while keeping the digital camera steady — though should you really throw it, the landing gear/propellers can get from the shot. The Typhoon felt more sedate. Not sluggish, but less immediate. You can control its speed, but it doesn’t change the general responsiveness. Some might say it is a benefit, since I just once got propellers from the shot. But I do like the tighter feel of DJI’s setup.

What the Typhoon has going for it really is excellent battery, therefore you get more time inside the air. On average I got twenty minutes before it’d start warning me to make it home. The Phantom 3 starts complaining between 15 and 17 minutes, I’ve found. It might not look like a big difference, but those extra few minutes seem like hours when you find yourself behind the sticks. One minor thing: I’ve never been keen on how the Phantom 3 looks, but I such as Typhoon even less. As one colleague said, it’s like it should fire Nerf bullets. It’s a little… about the boyish side. The Phantom 3 isn’t handsome, but smaller and even more unthreatening.

Advertisements

Oddajte komentar

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

Komentirate prijavljeni s svojim WordPress.com računom. Odjava / Spremeni )

Twitter picture

Komentirate prijavljeni s svojim Twitter računom. Odjava / Spremeni )

Facebook photo

Komentirate prijavljeni s svojim Facebook računom. Odjava / Spremeni )

Google+ photo

Komentirate prijavljeni s svojim Google+ računom. Odjava / Spremeni )

Connecting to %s