Hoverfly Mikrokopter vs. HoverflyPro
- Thread starter Ron2020
- Start date
RotorFilms
Member
Hi Ron,
This is a very good question, I have the new HoverFly Pro board (black board) and I must admit I am truly amazed at how easy it is to setup and how incredibly stable it is. I have no experience with the Mikrokopter flight controller though so I won't be able to help you there.
Would be interesting to see what reply's you get though.
Regards,
Andre
This is a very good question, I have the new HoverFly Pro board (black board) and I must admit I am truly amazed at how easy it is to setup and how incredibly stable it is. I have no experience with the Mikrokopter flight controller though so I won't be able to help you there.
Would be interesting to see what reply's you get though.
Regards,
Andre
I have both. The basic difference is the MK is the gold standard that everything else has been judged by for several years now, there isn't much out there that has the same feature set and is inclusive of advanced software functions like waypoint routing for no additional cost. Some flight controllers now have similar software features but as steep additional cost add-ons, if all of the advanced functions that Mk has are what you're looking for without spending just as much again to get those features then it's the only real choice.
H/F on the other hand does not have nearly the functionality that MK has and costs nearly as much. The big advantage is that you don't need to assemble any components onto boards or do any real software setup and configuration beyond the few steps of initial setup, it's very easy for just about anyone to make one fly. Mk on the other hand requires much more advanced skills to get in the air and is not for everyone, especially if you don't feel comfortable doing soldering work.
As far as basic flight capability, they both do autoleveling, altitude hold, and support just about any frame/motor configuration you might care to use. H/F allows auto leveling to be turned on and off, Mk defaults to on all the time although it is possible to turn it off in the software if you really want to, I've never done it. From my experience the autoleveling is about the same on either, Mk has the advantage with altitude hold allowing either fixed or variable height control which works quite well either way.
Adding full navigation to either one is additional cost, the H/F needs a $450 GPS add-on board, MK requires a navigation board plus GPS board, the total cost of both being a bit less than the H/F setup. Functionally there is no comparison, MK wins hands down in the GPS category, the functionality and feature set is years ahead of H/F and it all works although some of the advanced capability can be a lot of work to get setup the way you want it to work. Basic functions such as position hold, return to home, and waypoint routing work flawlessly on the Mk and I use it on all of mine. Capabilities such as keeping the camera pointed at a POI (point of interest) are included but I have yet to use it, and other things such as carefree mode that keeps control response the same (tail-in) regardless of orientation are nice when starting out but again not something I use. H/F GPS is basic functions such as position hold and RTH and that's about it as I recall, so dollar for dollar you get a lot more from MK on the GPS side of the equation.
One other thing, the H/F works with standard PWM ESCs, Mk requires I2C controllers. The Mk versions are roughly $75 each and you need one for each motor, so depending on configuration that can add substantial cost to the initial buy-in if you go the MK route. On the other hand, the Mk hardware works seamlessly where I've had some issues with H/F not playing nice with some cheap ESCs from China, or the ESCs not playing nice with the H/F, however you want to look at it...
So if features and functionality is the primary concern you may want to consider going with MK being aware that it is a more complex system and likely more expensive in terms of hardware. If simplicity of build and setup along with initial cost is a bigger concern you may want to go the Hoverfly route if you don't need all the features and functions that MK provides.
Ken
H/F on the other hand does not have nearly the functionality that MK has and costs nearly as much. The big advantage is that you don't need to assemble any components onto boards or do any real software setup and configuration beyond the few steps of initial setup, it's very easy for just about anyone to make one fly. Mk on the other hand requires much more advanced skills to get in the air and is not for everyone, especially if you don't feel comfortable doing soldering work.
As far as basic flight capability, they both do autoleveling, altitude hold, and support just about any frame/motor configuration you might care to use. H/F allows auto leveling to be turned on and off, Mk defaults to on all the time although it is possible to turn it off in the software if you really want to, I've never done it. From my experience the autoleveling is about the same on either, Mk has the advantage with altitude hold allowing either fixed or variable height control which works quite well either way.
Adding full navigation to either one is additional cost, the H/F needs a $450 GPS add-on board, MK requires a navigation board plus GPS board, the total cost of both being a bit less than the H/F setup. Functionally there is no comparison, MK wins hands down in the GPS category, the functionality and feature set is years ahead of H/F and it all works although some of the advanced capability can be a lot of work to get setup the way you want it to work. Basic functions such as position hold, return to home, and waypoint routing work flawlessly on the Mk and I use it on all of mine. Capabilities such as keeping the camera pointed at a POI (point of interest) are included but I have yet to use it, and other things such as carefree mode that keeps control response the same (tail-in) regardless of orientation are nice when starting out but again not something I use. H/F GPS is basic functions such as position hold and RTH and that's about it as I recall, so dollar for dollar you get a lot more from MK on the GPS side of the equation.
One other thing, the H/F works with standard PWM ESCs, Mk requires I2C controllers. The Mk versions are roughly $75 each and you need one for each motor, so depending on configuration that can add substantial cost to the initial buy-in if you go the MK route. On the other hand, the Mk hardware works seamlessly where I've had some issues with H/F not playing nice with some cheap ESCs from China, or the ESCs not playing nice with the H/F, however you want to look at it...
So if features and functionality is the primary concern you may want to consider going with MK being aware that it is a more complex system and likely more expensive in terms of hardware. If simplicity of build and setup along with initial cost is a bigger concern you may want to go the Hoverfly route if you don't need all the features and functions that MK provides.
Ken
No experiance with the hoverfly pro but I do have an MK.
MK Pros:
Plenty of features for the pros
Constantly updating the firmware
Stable in heavy winds
MK Cons:
No support you will have to read through docs and go on MK forums instead
Gyro can act up at times
Requires setting up and some soldering so by the end of it if you crash you will know how to put everything back together again
Plenty of horror stories of MK's dropping out of the sky (FOD)
The hoverfly pro and the fact that its a plug and play system is very appealing coming from someone who bought an MK.
Once youve done your research get back to us and tell us what you decide on. I'm really curious about the hoverfly pro as I havent heard anything about it.
MK Pros:
Plenty of features for the pros
Constantly updating the firmware
Stable in heavy winds
MK Cons:
No support you will have to read through docs and go on MK forums instead
Gyro can act up at times
Requires setting up and some soldering so by the end of it if you crash you will know how to put everything back together again
Plenty of horror stories of MK's dropping out of the sky (FOD)
The hoverfly pro and the fact that its a plug and play system is very appealing coming from someone who bought an MK.
Once youve done your research get back to us and tell us what you decide on. I'm really curious about the hoverfly pro as I havent heard anything about it.
Aerial Media Pros
Member
RTRyder,
Great review. I am building another Skyjib 8 right now. I am using the Aerodrive 8 Board. Do you know if H/F will work with that? I am a full on MK guy, but also have DJI products on my cheaper copters. For Aerial Film work, I have stuck with MK. Well recently, I was chatting with Linda at droidworx. She mentioned the guys who did the RED Video with the Skyjib, were not happy with the MK set up and were switching to hoverfly. This got me thinking If I should make a change also. Grrrrrrrrrrr, what to do what to do. I am subscribing to this thread, because I am very interested in the replys, and other peoples exsperiance with the two.
Thanks again for your responce.
Great review. I am building another Skyjib 8 right now. I am using the Aerodrive 8 Board. Do you know if H/F will work with that? I am a full on MK guy, but also have DJI products on my cheaper copters. For Aerial Film work, I have stuck with MK. Well recently, I was chatting with Linda at droidworx. She mentioned the guys who did the RED Video with the Skyjib, were not happy with the MK set up and were switching to hoverfly. This got me thinking If I should make a change also. Grrrrrrrrrrr, what to do what to do. I am subscribing to this thread, because I am very interested in the replys, and other peoples exsperiance with the two.
Thanks again for your responce.
As I recall the Aerodrive is just a bunch of uprated MK BL controllers in a single large board so that would not work with H/F as it speaks I2C and not the PWM the H/F uses. I don't know a lot about the Aerodrive so I could be wrong and maybe it is usable with PWM flight controllers but someone more familiar with it would have to answer that.
I have a lot of MK hardware, it works. Not the easiest to get setup and dialed in but once you do it's like the Energizer bunny, just keeps going and going...
On my Cinestar 6 I'm using a DJI WKM controller, I have yet to fly ANYTHING that can match the smoothness and height hold capability of the WKM. I've tried running MK electronics on the CS and while it has better stability in gusty wind than the WKM, the WKM wins in just about any other circumstance, I simply cannot produce the same results with the same minimal level of piloting effort with any other flight controller, period. Yes it has issues with some things but for a system that hasn't even been around for a year yet I think it does pretty well against some well established competition.
That said, I'll soon be testing a YS-X6 flight controller system that if it lives up to the claims will easily surpass the WKM and quite possibly even MK. It's going to be a long couple of weeks waiting for it to arrive...
Ken
Last edited by a moderator:
I think people in this dilema have to really ask themselves what features they are really going to use rather than thinking oh thats cool but never actually using it. Lets face it probably the only addditional feature we use on a regular basis that doesnt come with standard FC's are GPS position hold, altitude hold and maybe RTH every so often. I think we get too worked up over features at times. If anything we just want reliability with the amount of expensive gear that flys above our heads lol.
Using just the criteria of reliability in my own direct experience I would have to rate as follows, MK #1, WKM #2, H/F #3. I have one MK flight controller that now has over 20 hours in the air with only one inflight incident, two others having less flight time with none, both of the WKM I own have fallen out the sky at least once, and the H/F more than once.
Ken
Benjamin Rowland
Member
I've only used Hoverfly on my Cinestar 8 so far. It has been great. At some point, I'll try the other flight controllers to compare.
DucktileMedia
Drone Enthusiast
I would wait until Bart gets back from his flight as he is doing extensive testing with teh new HFP against the MK. from what he tells me, he is almost completely sold on it.
Coming from someone who has neither, I can tell you that I do not care how well the unit works if only a handful of them work that well. I also put customer service high on the list. I also think for a company to be able to put all their customers to blame when something goes wrong due to the required soldering is bogus. From what i hear, you would be LUCKY to get an email from MK telling you it's your fault!
then you have DJI, who makes a great system and I am quite happy with it so far. But they dont fix things quickly. They seem to have more interest in selling you their "new and improved" classy elegant bird.
So unless you speak fluent Chinese or are neighbors with Holger, I would give the guys who are active on the forums a serious consideration.
Coming from someone who has neither, I can tell you that I do not care how well the unit works if only a handful of them work that well. I also put customer service high on the list. I also think for a company to be able to put all their customers to blame when something goes wrong due to the required soldering is bogus. From what i hear, you would be LUCKY to get an email from MK telling you it's your fault!
then you have DJI, who makes a great system and I am quite happy with it so far. But they dont fix things quickly. They seem to have more interest in selling you their "new and improved" classy elegant bird.
So unless you speak fluent Chinese or are neighbors with Holger, I would give the guys who are active on the forums a serious consideration.
redridinghood
Member
DJI wookongs's product cycle is close to an end. I would wait for the new Wookong II or for one of the Chinese clones arriving any day now.
I look at all the videos online the pro users produce and there are so many outstanding videos done with MK that its clearly top of the table. I am starting to see really nice video from the Wookong and the HFP start to appear and the Wookong has clearly made a great impact since its release. With respect to customer service my own personal experience with HFP over the last 12 months is that they have been superb.
If there's one thing for certain, the way new products are hitting the market lately it doesn't matter much what you buy today, there will be something newer and allegedly better coming along very soon. Used to be just MK as king of the hill, there are now a number of serious challengers and more on the way...
Ken
Ken
Mactadpole
Member
Ken pretty much summed it up.
For those trying to make this decision you absolutely must ask yourself these questions.
I first started out in MR's over two years ago and it was with the QuadPowered boards that were the Hoverfly predecessor. They were very easy to setup and very stable but all of us flying them were truly beta-testers with each new firmware release. A lot of feature promises were made with no time frame. It then became Hoverfly which went through a serious bought of growing pains during the first few firmware releases. The HoverflyPro flew really well and stable for me until I went to a heavy-lift X8. With HF you are limited to the configurations they have available, I wanted to fly an X8 that had alternating prop rotation on top and bottom to provide maximum redundancy. HFP only offers an X8 configuration where all top props spin one direction and all the bottom spin opposite. This allows for redundancy with one motor out but if you lose two or more then you lose yaw authority. I know, how often are you going to lose two? or more? You never know! I tried flipping the motors on opposing arms to fly the configuration I wanted but could never get rid of a little twitch. I tried to get HFP to create this configuration and to allow for control of motor speed on coax configurations but they wanted to keep it simple. I had no choice but to go with Mikrokopter. I was also very close to being at the point where I wanted/needed waypoint navigation for the work I do with it. Once I had the full suite of MK electronics it flew exactly how I wanted and I had access to all the features I wanted/needed. I still kept flying Hoverfly on other copters because I do like the community flying them, the fact it is designed & made in USA, ease of tuning, and cheaper build hardware. My only disappointment has been the slow development of advanced features and the lack of a true beta-tester group who work out the firmware kinks before release. I see they are now forming a group for this very purpose which is awesome. Hopefully Hoverfly will start catching up with the others a little faster in the advanced features arena.
I have always been happy with the way my HFP copters have flown except the X8 and I am happy with the way both my MK copters fly. I really do love all the features offerred by the MK but it is a VERY steep learning curve compared to HFP. The fact that Hoverfly offers great customer service and speak english is a huge bonus. But don't be put off MK just because of that if there are features it has that you need. There is an extensive english speaking community on the forums who are willing to help you with your MK. You just have to be willing to do a bit more searching, reading, and patiently wait for replies to questions.
It really does go back to the question of what features you want/need and how much time and patience you have to figure out the much more complicated MK world. I lost my HFP FPV copter due to my TX battery going dead. I have really been contemplating whether I want to replace it with an MK or HFP based machine. I decided I will stick with HFP for that machine because I want to stay up to date with HFP development in hopes it will someday (soon?) have the all the features I need for my work machines.
Keep in mind that I don't use these copters for commercial photography or video work. I am an ecologist putting them to work as remote-sensing tools. So my needs greatly differ from others.
My 2¢,
Shawn
Bartman
Welcome to MultiRotorForums.com!!
Hi everyone,
It's an interesting question and one that will certainly continue to come up as people enter the market and have to choose which system to go with. RTRyder's summary in the first page is pretty complete in that MK has established the gold standard and everyone else is compared against them. But, MK isn't concerned with what you think of them as a business and even their distributors are treated without respect. Mikrokopter hardware works well enough if it's set up properly but there is a realistic chance when you get your stuff in the mail that it won't work right and that you'll be blamed for the faults. Repairs are expensive and very time-consuming if there is no other option than to send your parts back to Germany. I'm trying to address this with a service I"ll provide through my soon-to-be announced shop but for the average person buying their stuff in kit form it's a daunting decision to buy the most expensive system that has about a 30% (if I had to guess based on my own experiences) failure rate out-of-the-box.
MK does have lots of features though if you are a high end user. I've been in business for approaching a year and a half and I'm just now considering the need to do waypoint navigation so the advanced features aren't really an absolute need-to-have collection of stuff but they do allow certain kinds of very formal aerial media jobs to be done (such as property mapping for surveyors or developers).
Regarding Hoverfly, the people that make the decisions at HF are intentionally keeping things simple and trying to move in slow deliberate steps that can each be taken successfully. They are also trying to keep the design of their flight control algorithms from requiring the kind of advanced tuning and tweaking that you might remember from OpenPilot TV episode 2. My experience so far has been very positive and I've experimented with the auto-level feature enough now to say I like it as much as my MK boards.
Hoverfly is different from MK though. Like Ken said, you can tweak the MK stuff to be more maneuverable but it's not the strength of MK to be out doing flips and rolls in a beater quad. The Hoverfly Pro sets up very easily and is solid to fly in straight unassisted manual mode. In Auto-level mode, it's more of a matter of what you want from the board and then you only have to do a quick tweak to get it set up. I've got my auto-level dialed way down (39 in the travel adjustment) and it flies about the same as my MK. In fact I flew the MK for a photo job last week and, for the first time, thought I'd like it to fly more like the Hoverfly board. I'll be exploring the GPS this week so that will be another learning experience but I've been working 7 days a week since last August to design a full copter and camera mount package around the Mikrokopter system and already I've got the frame design modified for a Hoverfly Pro and the stuff that goes with it. I expect to have the first prototype parts within a week or so and will have it flying soon thereafter. What I'm flying right now is a converted MK frame set.
I'm going on a bare minimum of sleep in the last 24 hours so I'm tapped out. I'll rejoin the conversation in the morning. If anyone is considering the Hoverfly Pro board set, I'd say it's worth it. It's not perfect but none of these things are. FWIW, the camera outputs are quite competent and I'm going to try to have video availaable to show it by the end of the week.
Need sleep,
Bart
It's an interesting question and one that will certainly continue to come up as people enter the market and have to choose which system to go with. RTRyder's summary in the first page is pretty complete in that MK has established the gold standard and everyone else is compared against them. But, MK isn't concerned with what you think of them as a business and even their distributors are treated without respect. Mikrokopter hardware works well enough if it's set up properly but there is a realistic chance when you get your stuff in the mail that it won't work right and that you'll be blamed for the faults. Repairs are expensive and very time-consuming if there is no other option than to send your parts back to Germany. I'm trying to address this with a service I"ll provide through my soon-to-be announced shop but for the average person buying their stuff in kit form it's a daunting decision to buy the most expensive system that has about a 30% (if I had to guess based on my own experiences) failure rate out-of-the-box.
MK does have lots of features though if you are a high end user. I've been in business for approaching a year and a half and I'm just now considering the need to do waypoint navigation so the advanced features aren't really an absolute need-to-have collection of stuff but they do allow certain kinds of very formal aerial media jobs to be done (such as property mapping for surveyors or developers).
Regarding Hoverfly, the people that make the decisions at HF are intentionally keeping things simple and trying to move in slow deliberate steps that can each be taken successfully. They are also trying to keep the design of their flight control algorithms from requiring the kind of advanced tuning and tweaking that you might remember from OpenPilot TV episode 2. My experience so far has been very positive and I've experimented with the auto-level feature enough now to say I like it as much as my MK boards.
Hoverfly is different from MK though. Like Ken said, you can tweak the MK stuff to be more maneuverable but it's not the strength of MK to be out doing flips and rolls in a beater quad. The Hoverfly Pro sets up very easily and is solid to fly in straight unassisted manual mode. In Auto-level mode, it's more of a matter of what you want from the board and then you only have to do a quick tweak to get it set up. I've got my auto-level dialed way down (39 in the travel adjustment) and it flies about the same as my MK. In fact I flew the MK for a photo job last week and, for the first time, thought I'd like it to fly more like the Hoverfly board. I'll be exploring the GPS this week so that will be another learning experience but I've been working 7 days a week since last August to design a full copter and camera mount package around the Mikrokopter system and already I've got the frame design modified for a Hoverfly Pro and the stuff that goes with it. I expect to have the first prototype parts within a week or so and will have it flying soon thereafter. What I'm flying right now is a converted MK frame set.
I'm going on a bare minimum of sleep in the last 24 hours so I'm tapped out. I'll rejoin the conversation in the morning. If anyone is considering the Hoverfly Pro board set, I'd say it's worth it. It's not perfect but none of these things are. FWIW, the camera outputs are quite competent and I'm going to try to have video availaable to show it by the end of the week.
Need sleep,
Bart
Mactadpole
Member
I have to agree with Bart's comments about buying the MK board kits and soldering yourself. You are much better off to buy pre-soldered and tested MK hardware from a reputable MK dealer. I had a Bl fail on my first okto xl distro board and was fortunately able to send it back to the US based dealer for repair. Luckily I had bought it completely assembled from them.
Shawn
Shawn
I think the biggest disadvantage with MK is that it is all open plan. Dirt, dust and moisture become a part of anything that takes off from the ground. It is almost planned failure. The way that MK lash those cheap nasty motors to the square alum. tube just about sums up their lack of mechanical engineering expertise. That show is over
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd like to express my appreciation and gratitude to everyone for contributing to such a rich discussion.I didnt expect such an overwhelming wealth of information, its awesome! It really makes my final decision that much easier.
The most important functionality I'm looking for is something capable of autonomously flying to several predetermined waypoints, loitering for some time, and then moving on to the next series of points, then returning back to the starting point. Hoverfly doesn't seem to have this yet, and I'm guessing that they're probably 2 years behind the curve on this front, but I really can't afford to wait. Yes, Hoverfly does seem to have outstanding customer support, and maybe in a couple of years they may become the new gold standard, but until then...that leaves me the Mikrokopter to fiddle with.
I'd prefer not to solder anything, but if i have to, I will.
Can anyone be a little more specific with regard to what it is that needs to be soldered on the MK board after it arrives in the mail?
Thank you,
Ron
The most important functionality I'm looking for is something capable of autonomously flying to several predetermined waypoints, loitering for some time, and then moving on to the next series of points, then returning back to the starting point. Hoverfly doesn't seem to have this yet, and I'm guessing that they're probably 2 years behind the curve on this front, but I really can't afford to wait. Yes, Hoverfly does seem to have outstanding customer support, and maybe in a couple of years they may become the new gold standard, but until then...that leaves me the Mikrokopter to fiddle with.
I'd prefer not to solder anything, but if i have to, I will.
Can anyone be a little more specific with regard to what it is that needs to be soldered on the MK board after it arrives in the mail?
Thank you,
Ron