When using the Open pilot or any other imu mounted directly on the camera baseplate it is important to know that there is a difference in the imu performance based on how you configure the servos. You have the choice of direct drive proportional with a normal servo or have the pot attached to the axis of movement but still working in proportional mode even if the servos are geared. That is the most straightforward solution. Then there is the slew mode where the continuous rotation servo has the pot locked at center and the imu will define the neutral position wherever it is parked. This is when the imu needs to be very high resolution with about .1 us res and be fitted with high sensitivity gyros accel and a mag. If any gyro drift is present then the neutral position will start to drift especially after a disturbance. Thus it does require more than just a standard FC. Servo deadband will also effect things.
Camera Mount recommedations
- Thread starter ovdt
- Start date
When using the Open pilot or any other imu mounted directly on the camera baseplate it is important to know that there is a difference in the imu performance based on how you configure the servos. You have the choice of direct drive proportional with a normal servo or have the pot attached to the axis of movement but still working in proportional mode even if the servos are geared. That is the most straightforward solution. Then there is the slew mode where the continuous rotation servo has the pot locked at center and the imu will define the neutral position wherever it is parked. This is when the imu needs to be very high resolution with about .1 us res and be fitted with high sensitivity gyros accel and a mag. If any gyro drift is present then the neutral position will start to drift especially after a disturbance. Thus it does require more than just a standard FC. Servo deadband will also effect things.
I did try higher voltage on the older AV130 that I have under the standard Hexa, seemed like it would overshoot at 6.5 V and higher so I backed it down to 6 volt and left it there. I haven't tried it with the newer one and there is a difference in servos, the older unit having the Hyperion servos the new one having the Savox, so I don't know if it would do the same thing on the older one. I think one thing that needs to be mentioned is I don't usually put a lot of weight on the camera mount so consequently don't need as much power from the servos as I would if I had a DSLR with big lens on there. The main reason for using the external BEC is make sure there is enough current for both servos to be active at the same time, the MK flight controller board is limited to 1 to 1.5 amps on the servo circuit depending on which Recom is fitted and teh savox servos can easily draw 3 amps each under load. The secondary reason is the servos are rated at a faster speed on 6 volts than on 5 volts.
The new version is by far the best I've used. The older AV130 was slightly better than the mkTR mount I had but neither one was up to the job for video work, stills were Ok but would occasionally require correction in software to straighten a tilted horizon. The Avertical mount was noticeably better for video work but had a number of faults that needed to be corrected before it could be used as well as it wasn't the ideal setup for mounting under a Droidworx frame. It did work better for video than the mounts I had used previously but still had problems delivering steady recordings due to flexing of the long L shaped mounting beam in flight.
The new AV130 just works, I removed the Avertical mount from the Droidworx frame, installed the AV, and mounted a CC BEC Pro on top of the mounting bracket. The Pro version has a 20 amp rating as well as two power outputs so while I will not need the amperage it is nice to have a separate feed to each servo. Due to where I mounted it changing the voltage setting is a bit of a pain but it also discourages tinkering with the settings to try and improve on something that is working fine as-is...
The first time I flew it with a video camera the difference was immediately noticeable, the tilt axis wasn't bobbing back and forth and the horizon stayed level in FF as well as while climbing and descending. Previously to get reasonable video results required a healthy dose of post process stabilization most of the time, with the new AV130 I can actually use video right out of the camera and not feel like it needs to be worked on. Any flaws in the video now can be directly attributed to either the pilot or the setup of the flight controller, the mount is working exactly as it should.
I haven't had a lot of opportunity to get out and work with it much as of yet, the weather here hasn't been ideal for flying between the wind, random thunderstorms, and oppressive humidity. I do plan to do a lot more flying as the weather settles down and we move towards fall and the foliage season so between now and then I'll mainly be doing a lot of pratice flying working on being smooth and steady on the sticks.
Ken
DucktileMedia
Drone Enthusiast
Ken, what camera(s) are you using? I just bought the gh2 but I am a little turned off by the need to convert all the .mts files to use on a mac. I like how my canon files can be previewed instantly on my computer. Also, Everything else i have is 1080 30p where the GH2 is still in 60i. But the video is quite nice from it and it does weigh less than anything equivalent. Thoughts? I will probably end up getting the new AV130 but I am still thinking for my needs i dont really need level video as much as smooth video. So for $900 i think I can probably find a simple way to do some isolation.
Ken, what camera(s) are you using? I just bought the gh2 but I am a little turned off by the need to convert all the .mts files to use on a mac. I like how my canon files can be previewed instantly on my computer. Also, Everything else i have is 1080 30p where the GH2 is still in 60i. But the video is quite nice from it and it does weigh less than anything equivalent. Thoughts? I will probably end up getting the new AV130 but I am still thinking for my needs i dont really need level video as much as smooth video. So for $900 i think I can probably find a simple way to do some isolation.
I use the GoPro with Sunex lens the most, it's the least expensive option for 60 FPS progressive video which IMO is the minimum resolution needed to get smooth pans in all directions while flying. I also use a Canon SX 200 and a Canon Vixia camcorder. The Vixia has nice video in its native format (60 FPS interlaced) but tends to look like crap once converted into just about any other format so it doesn't see much flight time.
So for the most part I use a stock GoPro and a modified GoPro for just about everything as I'd rather spend the $ on the flying hardware than on the payload the camera mount is carrying, at least until there is a reasonably priced camcorder that will do 60 FPS progressive. The price is starting to come down but the least expensive I know of are the Panasonics and they're still north of $1000. If I did this to make money it would be a different story and perhaps once the FAA gets off its butt and decides what the requirements will be for commercial use I might go that way and get some better equipment but for now I'm just a hobbyist that doesn't do it for $...
Ken
DucktileMedia
Drone Enthusiast
In that case you should check out the TM90. it shoots 1080 60p and is amazingly light. I bought the GH2 because I needed something that would take good photos as well as video that was small enough to be lifted by my Xaircraft v8. As it turns out, I am making a custom frame and the weight wont be as big of an issue. These things do add up quickly in weight when you add mounts/batteries/FPV and cameras. The rolling shutter on the gopro is just too noticeable if you have anything other than perfect fluid movements. And although the GH2 is much better with this, it will still show at times. But I do agree, the gopro is an amazing piece of equipment for the money.
MombasaFlash
Heli's & Tele's bloke
WHAT? That is 180° wrong.
The GoPro is like any other rolling shutter CMOS sensor equipped camera. Hopeless with vibration and fast movement. The obvious result being the famous 'Jello' effect where the whole image wobbles. On the other hand, the SD9 with its CCD's displays vibration as vibration with no other artifacts. The OIS on the SD9 actually works reasonably well. I use it to good effect on a Raptor where experiments have shown that, despite it being effectively tripod-mounted (in which case OIS is not supposed to be used) the video is smoother with OIS active.
I am anyway a little surprised to hear you have vibration issues with a drone. My first foray into multi-rotors as a camera platform is so far encouraging (with the exception of poor MK QC) and it is quite clear that smooth, level video is far more accessible than with single-rotor heli's.
CopterCam
Member
DucktileMedia
Drone Enthusiast
I cant see difference between the tm90's single sensor and the 3mos. At this level of amateur video it is just bragging rights for your gear. In other words, not worth the extra dough IMO. PLus the TM90 only weighs 8.64 oz. Compare that to the Gopro's 6 oz. Cost is $450 and is worlds greater in almost every respect other than the convenient interval mode for photos on the gopro.
Last edited by a moderator:
MombasaFlash
Heli's & Tele's bloke
.MTS files are just the wrapper for AVCHD which Final Cut imports since version 7. If you have an earlier version of Final Cut there are two options - both of them long winded. The first is to import your video from the camera into iMovie which recognises AVCHD and will convert it to QuickTime which can then be read natively by FCP.
The second option requires a (blasted) PC and converts the MTS files into MXF files (which is essentially recognised by FCP as Panasonic P2). Both methods work well but it is time consuming. If you do not have FCP them you must presumably have iMovie - if it is a legitimate Mac
And ... er ... 60i IS 30p in essence after interlacing has been removed.
MombasaFlash
Heli's & Tele's bloke
What is a Sunex lens, what is great about it and, if it is completely desirable, where is obtainable?
DucktileMedia
Drone Enthusiast
.MTS files are just the wrapper for AVCHD which Final Cut imports since version 7. If you have an earlier version of Final Cut there are two options - both of them long winded. The first is to import your video from the camera into iMovie which recognises AVCHD and will convert it to QuickTime which can then be read natively by FCP.
The second option requires a (blasted) PC and converts the MTS files into MXF files (which is essentially recognised by FCP as Panasonic P2). Both methods work well but it is time consuming. If you do not have FCP them you must presumably have iMovie - if it is a legitimate Mac
And ... er ... 60i IS 30p in essence after interlacing has been removed.
Yeah I am aware of these options. But they all involve extra steps. I like to go through my footage straight off the card and delete all the junk first. This way you have to load imovie/PP/mts to mov/etc. to convert the file just to preview it. Premiere Pro will open the files ok but I notice there is a lot of "digitization" on the files whereas the .mov from my canons are nice and clean and quick. I have an 8 core 16gb mac pro so i can process with the best of them but I am lazy and anxious! But I have the camera and dont really think I will return it just for that reason. I was just complaining a bit.
ZAxis
Member
No need for a PC to convert Mac .mts to .mov
Aunsoft MTS Converter from www.aunsoft.com does the job just fine.
I use it for NEX-5 files so should work for others.
From what I can gather on various discussion forums, AVCHD 50i/60i files are actually 50p/60p but have to be erroniously refered to as 50i/60i to conform to AVCHD specified formats.
I have noticed that de-interlacing NEX-5 .mts files produces no visible effect, which I take as proof.
Aunsoft MTS Converter from www.aunsoft.com does the job just fine.
I use it for NEX-5 files so should work for others.
From what I can gather on various discussion forums, AVCHD 50i/60i files are actually 50p/60p but have to be erroniously refered to as 50i/60i to conform to AVCHD specified formats.
I have noticed that de-interlacing NEX-5 .mts files produces no visible effect, which I take as proof.
The Sunex lens is a replacement lens that while not specifically made for the GoPro fits in place of the original fisheye lens and gives the recorded video a more normal flat look. You give up some of the field of view that can be had with the stock fisheye and you don't get that distorted curved view around the edges. I have the modded GoPro and a standard one for those occasions where the larger field of view is desirable and the fisheye effect not an issue.
The lens comes from these folks... http://www.optics-online.com/ I don't have the part number off the top of my head but could dig it up if need be.
Ken
DucktileMedia
Drone Enthusiast
Sorry if i turned this into a file conversion thread. I have Auntsoft and it is the best for the job but STILL is extra work i dont have to do with my canons. That was my only point in bringing it up. When they say 60i it means there are upper and lower fields. In most NLE's it is an automatic conversion to your file output settings. In other words, it is no big deal to convert 60i to your 29.97p/30p output. And, tell me if I'm wrong on this, if you were sending footage to a broadcast network they would be more friendly to the 60i format anyways as they are setup for this. It has something to do with color spacing/signal broadcasting. The technical side goes over my head quickly at this point. I doubt that 60i is hiding 60p anywhere in the files. Although the manual does mention that the sensor output is more than capable of 60p output, yet the Panny bastards wont give it to us. And no one can hack it yet. If it wasnt for photos I would have gone TM90 in a second. i was really impressed by that little camera. I thnk the GH2 is a great compromise for it's size and weight. But i was secretly hoping to stay all Canon as I have lenses already and the interfaces are similar. AND it works on the mac without conversions!
Last edited by a moderator:
MombasaFlash
Heli's & Tele's bloke
Sounds like you need a Premiere update.
I use Final Cut 7 and it reviews and imports AVCHD files without any prior processing or conversion and BTW, I am told that Premiere actually handles AVCHD better than FCP.
And yes, progressive is for the LCD screened computer crowd and the internet. Broadcast want interlaced video.
Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, (just to fool the administrator that we're not talking infecting the forum with off-subject threads).
I use Final Cut 7 and it reviews and imports AVCHD files without any prior processing or conversion and BTW, I am told that Premiere actually handles AVCHD better than FCP.
And yes, progressive is for the LCD screened computer crowd and the internet. Broadcast want interlaced video.
Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, Multi-rotor, (just to fool the administrator that we're not talking infecting the forum with off-subject threads).
DucktileMedia
Drone Enthusiast
Yes, it does, I have cs5. I guess I just like having all my files the same type. On that note, although the rendered file is good, I have issues while previewing avchd within premiere pro. It shows up but it is very pixelated with tons of artifacts. My quicktime files dont have that at all. I am on a very fast computer as well. Any input on that? I will try importing a file converted from Aunsoft.