How crashworthy is Zenmuse?

avmedia123

avmedia123

Member
For those of you that have a Zenmuse and have crashed it, just wondering how well it held up? As I assume they would not do so well due their precise calibration etc, did you have any luck getting it repaired? Costs to get it repaired? Time it took to repair? Who repaired it? Have not been able to find much info on this so far. Thanks, looking forward to any replies!
 

D

DennyR

Active Member
I had one fall from 120 feet into the sea, it smashed the front element of the lens on impact. The Zen was not broken, the only damage was oxidization on some electronic parts due to the salt water. The Nex-7 will never work again. despite everything being washed in fresh water within five mins. Repairs were carried out at DJI, if you send it back then you must declare the value at zero or it will stay in the customs shed for weeks. I expect that service departments will be set up one day. I would think that only people with electronic service facilities and spare parts could do repair work reliably.

As far as it's ability to withstand impacts, it is a good deal stronger than anything else that I have seen. I expect that it would get knocked out of alignment at the adjustment points and would need careful rebalancing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ROVguy

ROVguy

Member
Id expect it to be practically atomic bomb proof for the amount of money they are charging for it, £2500!!!!!!. Its an extra £600-£700 more than buying the S800 fully loaded including a WKM-M with GPS. Yes, I know its a 'Pro' camera mount, but so is the Photo Higher Av200 Pro and with Skyline RSGS its still only just over £1000. I know the DJI stuff is very nifty looking, well built and works very well, but I honestly believe (certainly with respect to the Z15) these people have to realise that their pricing is crazy!!!
 

FerdinandK

FerdinandK

Member
The time you need to get other gimbals to work is also crazy (and you never manage to get them 100% working). If you feel your time is something valuable, the Z15 is a good choice, if you feel it is too expensive, take another "pro" gimbal.
best regards

Ferdinand
 

D

DennyR

Active Member
The difference is that the Av 200 is a total waist of money and the Zen works. 2,500 is far too cheap for what you get.
 

ROVguy

ROVguy

Member
As I work in a time critical industry I can appreciate something working pretty much out of the box especially when compared to something that requires a lot of setting up. If thats the case with the Zen v AV200 then I will shut my cake hole and go climb under a rock ;) I still think its a lot of money though compared to everything else. But then, if what you are providing is video footage to your client, having is a reliable mount is essential I guess. Unreliable/shaky mount = crappy images/video = no payment!

I will say this though, after seeing a video clip of it in operation (not from the inflight camera), it looks bloody gorgeous. If I had the money Id have one, however as Im a poor mortal not in the video/film-making industry I will have to pass.

Rich.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

FerdinandK

FerdinandK

Member
If you hold the Z15 in your hands for the first time, you notice, that there is an integrated HDMI->AV converter, and and IR-emitter onboard, an all of the electrics an electronics are made in a way that you can rotate to infinity on all axis, without panic that some kable might get too short, you can just mount the Video-TX on the copter and get the AV-signal out of the Z15-controller. This is really nice, what sense does it make if a 360° deg gimbal if it is limited by cables, or if you need an extra powersource, or if the VTX mounted on the camera-tray. If you think of the price, you should also remember, that in April you got it for about £1500 in the preorder. No risk no fun :)

best regards

Ferdinand
 

S

Stacky

Member
If you are doing pro work then you should be charging about $250/hour and it wont take long to have it pay for itself.

ROVguy said:
As I work in a time critical industry I can appreciate something working pretty much out of the box especially when compared to something that requires a lot of setting up. If thats the case with the Zen v AV200 then I will shut my cake hole and go climb under a rock ;) I still think its a lot of money though compared to everything else. But then, if what you are providing is video footage to your client, having is a reliable mount is essential I guess. Unreliable/shaky mount = crappy images/video = no payment!

I will say this though, after seeing a video clip of it in operation (not from the inflight camera), it looks bloody gorgeous. If I had the money Id have one, however as Im a poor mortal not in the video/film-making industry I will have to pass.

Rich.
Click to expand...
 

ROVguy

ROVguy

Member
FerdinandK said:
If you hold the Z15 in your hands for the first time, you notice, that there is an integrated HDMI->AV converter, and and IR-emitter onboard, an all of the electrics an electronics are made in a way that you can rotate to infinity on all axis, without panic that some kable might get too short, you can just mount the Video-TX on the copter and get the AV-signal out of the Z15-controller. This is really nice, what sense does it make if a 360° deg gimbal if it is limited by cables, or if you need an extra powersource, or if the VTX mounted on the camera-tray. If you think of the price, you should also remember, that in April you got it for about £1500 in the preorder. No risk no fun :)

best regards

Ferdinand
Click to expand...

I agree Ferdinand, having everything routed through sliprings makes all the difference and now that Im aware of that then I can see where the cost lays. I wasnt aware it was available to pre-order at that price, in that case then its a bargain!

Rich.
 

ROVguy

ROVguy

Member
Stacky said:
If you are doing pro work then you should be charging about $250/hour and it wont take long to have it pay for itself.
Click to expand...

The likelihood of my doing pro work is slim im afraid. I am completely new to MRC's, in fact I dont even own one at the moment, Im just carrying out research. However I will be investing in one soon enough (a smallish one I think for personal use). I have a possible use for MRC's within my industry, Im just currently working out feasibility and cost v requirement. If theres not going to be any return on my investment then I wont do it, as Im looking at £10,000+ to cover the cost of the equipment and then there is the BNUC and insurance on top of that. Im not in the film industry, Im not a professional photographer, although I do love photography and yes in a few instances I have earned some decent money from it, but, I wont be looking to make a career from it. Im not involved in these industries directly and its unlikely I ever will be, so there will be no call for me to have this kind of investment in a mount. $250/hour is not bad, the figures I was thinking of charging for what I was planning to do was a fair bit more than that though, however, it would be covering the cost of equipment and 2 peoples wages. I will see how ther research goes, you never know, it may be a non starter.... it could also end up making me a fortune! lol
 



MombasaFlash

MombasaFlash

Heli's & Tele's bloke
Yes Ferdinand, I have seen your vids several times. However, THAT is not a solution, it is a temporary workaround.

My point is why DJI bother to put SO MUCH effort into first, designing a gimbal that actually works, second, took into consideration the wiring issues associated with 3-axis 360° rotation and then spent no time whatsoever on the landing gear. It will have to be some sort of retract system, the precision pan axis does not need to be bashed about by having skids attached, so I wonder why they have not already produced - or at least announced - a sensible solution?
 

FerdinandK

FerdinandK

Member
Understood! You are the expert.

Retracts are additional weight (a lot) I prefer to mount batteries instead, but I am not a pro (really happy about that).

best regards

Ferdinand
 

MombasaFlash

MombasaFlash

Heli's & Tele's bloke
That is a rather churlish response. Firstly, I am not attacking you and secondly, I am no expert and have never claimed to be one.

To quote your good self: ".. Also the CLP (copter launch platform) 1.0 was used for takeoff and landing, to have free field of view in all directions when paning the cam. It is not beautiful, but it has to work until the retracts are ready." (a double 'n' in panning BTW)

It seems as though you were obviously thinking along similar lines to myself initially, despite being neither expert nor pro :)02.47-tranquillity:), and have presumably changed your mind along the way. Have you since discovered that the retracts are too heavy and decided not to bother with them?


Anyway, none of this changes the fact that having gone to the extensive trouble of designing the Z-15, DJI have not made much of an effort to come up with a solution to permit the 360° pan to be utilised without the skids coming into view - other than resorting to the drastic measure of removing the landing gear completely.

It will not stop me getting the Z15 - if and when it ever comes into stock - and then I will address the landing gear problem.

Naturally, being an expert pro it is going to be an elegant solution ... an' then I'll sell it to you for a DJI price :tennis:!!
 

FerdinandK

FerdinandK

Member
@MombasaFlash

I am sorry if you understood it that way. I am able to write between the lines (or add a hidden meaning to a text) in German, but for sure not in English (not even a chance in French). I just meant what I wrote, that I understood, and that (I assume) you are the expert, since I am (back) to multis since last summer starting with a GAUI, reading a few post of you here I just extrapolated. My main interest is the engineering behind. My efforts in building retracts (for my current copter or the S800) ended at the point I could estimate the additional weight that would cause. The point is, you need another (much bigger) copter if you wanna add retracts (and much more batteries). On this I am working (building a new copter) and interested. The gimbal question to me is resolved (with the Z15), but I have to admit, that this make the Z15 and taking videos with it, a bit less interesting. So to me the missing retracts are an issue, but not an excuse (not to be able to pan around), and it is a challenge to build a platform that is able to carry the Z15 with retracts (and still flies efficient).

best regards

Ferdinand

P.S: Yet another point ... If you wait until DJI resolves something, you have to be very patient, better to resolve if yourself (that is most likely faster).
 
Last edited by a moderator:


yeehaanow

yeehaanow

Member
I think retracts are too complicated and heavy and have potential to fail. I've been thinking about a simple 360 panning landing gear that simply "follows" the zenmuse pan. Obviously it could not keep up with extreme speed, but as long as it's not mechanically linked in any way then it wouldn't matter so much.
 

D

DennyR

Active Member
I think the issue of having 360 deg. of pan movement is one that needs some explanation. In full size filming with a Cineflex we have 360 degrees but you never see the landing gear except in rare cases where some action is being followed around a race track etc. and some unusual event happens. With a two man model set-up you can also avoid that happening because the pilot can see the camera image in the same way as the full size heli. But you can have a single operator set-up with the DJI. Here you can use the FPV mode. This is quite good because it will still give you that locked in shot because it moves within the stabilizing limit of view but is essentially slaved to the heading of the model. I don't really see the need for removing landing gear. Most times when you see the landing skid it is just to demonstrate the stabilization.

Quite often with full size camera operators the helicopter is providing the main movement with the camera heading being moved with just trims. Less = more in most cases.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MombasaFlash

MombasaFlash

Heli's & Tele's bloke
Of course you are correct, Denny, although, and I am sure you can clarify this, a front mounted Cineflex will probably still give the Cam. Op. a good 200° of unobstructed pan. On these MR's, with their underslung cameras, fixed u/c just seems like a bit of a wasted opportunity for two-man setups to deny the Cam. Op. total, unobstructed pan freedom. However, as you say, sufficient latitude to soak up movement but essentially following the model heading is all most situations would require.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.
Top