I do NOT accept the fact that my gimbal motor lifespan will be reduced by using ND filters.

That is the reason why I choose not to use ND filters and so I speak cautiously about them.

It was a simple decision I made when first learning about ND filters. When I weighted the cost and benefits of using ND filters, I decided not to cause reduction of my hardware for marginal picture quality improvement.

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-8 17:35
I don't see why someone can't just correct lighting in post if they're really stingy about picture quality. We can see the benefits of adding filters, but there is enough wear and tear on the gimbal motor without them, be sure to understand adding them will just reduce the life of your motor.

If you want to reduce the life of your motor by adding filters to gain marginal improvement that you can simply correct in post production, then buy and use the filters. Otherwise, it's obviously an easy decision to steer away from them so not to limit the lifespan of your drone's capabilities.

If it were the case that the very little and I mean little weight of the filters would shorten the life of the motors why is it that DJI came out with filters to use with their drones?   I am not trying to argue with you and I respect that you have your opinion and do not agree with the use of them trust me I find these kind of conversations are what help the community.  I just feel that if you get a good quality light weight filter that it will do little to no harm with the motor and help with the quality of the image/video more even than what post work will fix.  

You can’t add pixels that aren’t there.  If the highlights are blown out there’s nothing to fix in post.  With video slower shutter speeds are often needed to get the effect you want.  If your particular style doesn’t call for filters, great. We all take our own paths. It’s art.

SparksBird Posted at 2018-4-8 18:32
If it were the case that the very little and I mean little weight of the filters would shorten the life of the motors why is it that DJI came out with filters to use with their drones?   I am not trying to argue with you and I respect that you have your opinion and do not agree with the use of them trust me I find these kind of conversations are what help the community.  I just feel that if you get a good quality light weight filter that it will do little to no harm with the motor and help with the quality of the image/video more even than what post work will fix.

I respect your opinion, and you're entitled to use filters however you see fit.

I only rebut your argument simply because you're not accepting the fact that your motors are under more stress with the filters on, than without filters off. If someone can not admit this fact to be true, regardless of how meaningful the amount of additional wear and tear amounts to, then this reply goes in vain.

First you can find interest in ND filters. But before you make your decision, you have to admit to yourself the obvious: filters cause greater risk to, and more stress on, your gimbal motor.

Someone who purchases and uses ND filters think to themselves, that they'll manage the process of removing and placing the lenses properly. That may be true and could possibly be done. But still we can't ignore after 100 flights using the filters there will be a difference with your gimbal motor, however minor it is.

Again, if you can accept using filters and flying with your drone's camera functionally at least slightly less than someone who does not fly with filters, then you took the time to decide that using the filters outweighs the small difference in overall drone usage time.

Plain and simple, if you look at the statistical population of all DJI drone users who use filters compared to those who don't use filters, there will be a noticeable difference in duration of time between filters and no filters, with the better statistical total usage time favoring users who do not use filters.

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-8 17:35
I don't see why someone can't just correct lighting in post if they're really stingy about picture quality. We can see the benefits of adding filters, but there is enough wear and tear on the gimbal motor without them, be sure to understand adding them will just reduce the life of your motor.

If you want to reduce the life of your motor by adding filters to gain marginal improvement that you can simply correct in post production, then buy and use the filters. Otherwise, it's obviously an easy decision to steer away from them so not to limit the lifespan of your drone's capabilities.

Sadly David, that post just demonstrated to me that you don't really understand what ND filters do. I suggest you research more on what effect ND filters have in bright and reflective conditions.

And the argument that filters stress the gimbal motors is rubbish - well, at least partially, as it'll depend on the filter make. Hey, you get what you pay for. Just remember that the filter replaces what's already on there - it's Not an addition. So if the filter is built using similar light-weight materials as what DJI build their stock lens with, it should be like-for-like.

But as you said, it's personal preference. I just suggest you post your opinion with a caveat, as opinion does not make fact.

Kevjones1959 Posted at 2018-4-7 21:39
I am sure the comment of spraying liquid oil around the gimbal was meant as a joke. As mentioned the factory piece that comes off is a ring with a hole. You are not going to get oil off your lenses. Please don't use a hairdryer either.

You are not going to get oil off your lenses.

It would be difficult.  With possibility of oil ruining any coating that was on lens surface.
I would not put any kind of oil on camera lens / filter threads.

Punchbuggy Posted at 2018-4-8 23:28
Sadly David, that post just demonstrated to me that you don't really understand what ND filters do. I suggest you research more on what effect ND filters have in bright and reflective conditions.

And the argument that filters stress the gimbal motors is rubbish - well, at least partially, as it'll depend on the filter make. Hey, you get what you pay for. Just remember that the filter replaces what's already on there - it's Not an addition. So if the filter is built using similar light-weight materials as what DJI build their stock lens with, it should be like-for-like.

I guess you are one of the naysayers who tends to disprove statistical probability as fact. There's nothing radically difficult to understand - some 3rd party accessories - like filters - tend to shorten camera lifespans of drones.

I won't disprove this data as fact, it's the truth, and because it exists we all know the devil is in the details. We're talking about ND filers as a whole, not statistical outliers and anamolies, bottom line no matter what kind of filter you go with, over time it will reduce the lifespan of your gimbal motor, plain and simple.

I'm not debating whether the ND filter adds betteer detail and more saturation to your picture, it may or may not. In my opinion, I think the improvements of ND filters are not worth the cost, over time, of having likely a shorter camera lifespan.

The camera quality of DJI drones are already pushing the highest boundaries of photography. We all know that each time we take off with our drones, there's the risk of some potential type of complication happening. In short, we all have to think and focus on many factors when flying, adding filters I feel is just one more thing I'd rather not have to worry about. Sound logical?

SparksBird Posted at 2018-4-8 16:18
So you do not use Filters at all with your MP?

I use Filters on all my drones. ND4's - ND 32's

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-8 16:39
Do you think we'll see a Mavic Pro II anytime soon?

Probaby a Christmas release. By that I mean Sept/Oct

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-9 00:17
I guess you are one of the naysayers who tends to disprove statistical probability as fact. There's nothing radically difficult to understand - some 3rd party accessories - like filters - tend to shorten camera lifespans of drones.

I won't disprove this data as fact, it's the truth, and because it exists we all know the devil is in the details. We're talking about ND filers as a whole, not statistical outliers and anamolies, bottom line no matter what kind of filter you go with, over time it will reduce the lifespan of your gimbal motor, plain and simple.

the ND filter weight is nearly the same as the original ring you remove. So no additional stress to the gimbal motors. I read it in another thread on ND filters here on the forum from a Polar Pro guy commenting the exact same concern from someone else.

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-9 00:17
I guess you are one of the naysayers who tends to disprove statistical probability as fact. There's nothing radically difficult to understand - some 3rd party accessories - like filters - tend to shorten camera lifespans of drones.

I won't disprove this data as fact, it's the truth, and because it exists we all know the devil is in the details. We're talking about ND filers as a whole, not statistical outliers and anamolies, bottom line no matter what kind of filter you go with, over time it will reduce the lifespan of your gimbal motor, plain and simple.

The ND filters I use replace the metal ring on the gimbal by default. The replacement ND filter weights the same so what is the problem.  I'm somewhat of a bs-er myself, but occasionally i enjoy listening to an expert. So please, carry on.

QuadKid Posted at 2018-4-9 01:25
Probaby a Christmas release. By that I mean Sept/Oct

I agree with you if we see a Mavic Pro II this year it will have to be around that time.

Briviao Posted at 2018-4-9 02:09
the ND filter weight is nearly the same as the original ring you remove. So no additional stress to the gimbal motors. I read it in another thread on ND filters here on the forum from a Polar Pro guy commenting the exact same concern from someone else.

I think it's the orientation of the ND filters, not just its weight, which causes a stress overload to the gimbal motors.

Giant53 Posted at 2018-4-9 03:00
The ND filters I use replace the metal ring on the gimbal by default. The replacement ND filter weights the same so what is the problem.  I'm somewhat of a bs-er myself, but occasionally i enjoy listening to an expert. So please, carry on.

Again, I think it's the orientation of the filters on the camera, not just the weight, which causes the overload of stress to occur on your gimbal.

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-9 06:11
Again, I think it's the orientation of the filters on the camera, not just the weight, which causes the overload of stress to occur on your gimbal.

Well you are free to take your own decision not to use the filters. I think your gimball motors will probably last for many decades. Long after your batteries are dead and not available anymore.

Punchbuggy Posted at 2018-4-8 23:28
Sadly David, that post just demonstrated to me that you don't really understand what ND filters do. I suggest you research more on what effect ND filters have in bright and reflective conditions.

And the argument that filters stress the gimbal motors is rubbish - well, at least partially, as it'll depend on the filter make. Hey, you get what you pay for. Just remember that the filter replaces what's already on there - it's Not an addition. So if the filter is built using similar light-weight materials as what DJI build their stock lens with, it should be like-for-like.

It seems that there’s a lot of agreement about using filters.

The gimbal will wear, with or without a filter on the end of the lense barrel. All else being equal, the one with less weight hanging on will have less wear after the same amount of use. The ring that you unscrew to replace with a filter has weight too, so if you want to minimize the load on the gimbal, it would be logical to remove it too; I don’t suggest doing so, since the ring protects the thread on the barrel.

If DJI did not expect filters to be used, why would they cut a thread into the lense barrel?  

Whatever filter you put on, ND, CP, UV, etc., we’re talking about less than 1 gram, so you have to keep things in perspective.

Finally, I suspect there are other factors that affect the wear on the gimbal, such as accidentally leaving the gimbal cover on when powering up the drone, or handling the camera while the drone is powered up.

I think my original question (OP) about installing filters has been answered.

MAPilot Posted at 2018-4-9 12:44
It seems that there’s a lot of agreement about using filters.

The gimbal will wear, with or without a filter on the end of the lense barrel. All else being equal, the one with less weight hanging on will have less wear after the same amount of use. The ring that you unscrew to replace with a filter has weight too, so if you want to minimize the load on the gimbal, it would be logical to remove it too; I don’t suggest doing so, since the ring protects the thread on the barrel.

Hey, I agree. Thanks for summing up, and sure, it'd be crazy to not have Any lens installed (standard or filter) as the covering lens also serves as protection for the actual camera lens, not just the thread.

At very least put a UV filter on your lens. One scratch and it is finished. I dont know any photographers who dont protect their high quality / cost lenses.

Filters also only need to be "finger tightened" dont use all your force to tighten it on.

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-8 17:40
With filters, one need's to understand by using ND filters, the lifespan of your motors will be reduced. Initially, one has to accept the consequence of gaining picture quality but reducing the overal gimbal motor lifespan, BEFORE making the purchasing decision to buy the filters. If one can get over the fact of reduced hardware lifespan, then one is truly ready and willing to use the filters. If one cannot accept there is a reduction of motor lifespan by using the filters, then one SHOULD NOT buy and use them.

I have the DJI ND filters for the Mavic Air...  And just bought a small scale (for my hard core drugs)....  

The ring by itself is 0.40g.  The ND filter 0.52g,   How much can 0.12 of a gram reduce the lifespan of the gimbal?  (serious question, not sarcastic, just to confirm)

Since the ND filters are used to lower shutter speeds and give a more natural blur in brighter conditions, this is not something that can generally be created in post.  (at least not as realistic)

hamstergraphics Posted at 2018-4-16 18:47
I have the DJI ND filters for the Mavic Air...  And just bought a small scale (for my hard core drugs)....  

The ring by itself is 0.40g.  The ND filter 0.52g,   How much can 0.12 of a gram reduce the lifespan of the gimbal?  (serious question, not sarcastic, just to confirm)

...and as an added bonus, here's my 'how to' install filters video onto the Mavic Air for those novices out there (myself being one)

Maybe I was lucky and got a ring that wasn't that tough to remove.

hamstergraphics Posted at 2018-4-16 18:47
I have the DJI ND filters for the Mavic Air...  And just bought a small scale (for my hard core drugs)....  

The ring by itself is 0.40g.  The ND filter 0.52g,   How much can 0.12 of a gram reduce the lifespan of the gimbal?  (serious question, not sarcastic, just to confirm)

Where does it say the weight is 0.12 grams? How much do you think those bands supporting the gimbal weighs in total?

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-17 03:21
Where does it say the weight is 0.12 grams? How much do you think those bands supporting the gimbal weighs in total?

I weighed the ring that is installed on the Air, then the filter....  0.12 g is the difference.  The ND filter being 0.12g heavier.

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-17 03:21
Where does it say the weight is 0.12 grams? How much do you think those bands supporting the gimbal weighs in total?

He said the ND filter weighs 0.52 grams.  You have to remove the original ring that weighs 0.40 grams to fit the ND filter.

0.52 - 0.40 = 0.12 grams.

Careful when it does come off.  At some point the clear UV lens dropped out of the frame on mine.  Its small...clear..light.  you wont hear it drop either.  I only realized it when i went to reinstall it, no clear lens.   The ND filters really help the image viewing quality...much more natural looking.  I bought a basic set also but recently  bought the cinematic set from polar with the ND32 and 64.  Flying in vegas and Hawaii i needed the extra stops.  

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-8 17:35
I don't see why someone can't just correct lighting in post if they're really stingy about picture quality. We can see the benefits of adding filters, but there is enough wear and tear on the gimbal motor without them, be sure to understand adding them will just reduce the life of your motor.

If you want to reduce the life of your motor by adding filters to gain marginal improvement that you can simply correct in post production, then buy and use the filters. Otherwise, it's obviously an easy decision to steer away from them so not to limit the lifespan of your drone's capabilities.

the difference between the stock UV filter and frame vs a Polar pro ND 64 for example is negligible...even if you use the  ND64PL (Polarizing filter).  the use of ND filters is NOT really about picture quality (as in still images)..its about the quality and "look" of video when you move about.  Pan..tilt...fly  etc...as well as the action in your shot.  IMO the improvement is far more than "marginal" in all those cases on a bright day.

QuadKid Posted at 2018-4-7 12:13
The OEM Bezel has no lens in it, it is simply a threaded ring, as said above very light pressure, if that fails you can use a hair dryer to warm up/expand the bezel, just briefly you don't want to heat up the male threads to much, don't worry it won't hurt the camera. This is how I got mine off. Once warmed up it came right off.

I swear mine "had" a clear UV filter on it. ...I  thought that my clear lens had dropped out?  Can anyone confirm that the stock OEM bezel actually does NOT have a clear/UV filter in it?  Thnx.  Usually good practice on any camera to at least have a clear protective lens over the ACTUAL lens of the camera.  Which one would you rather scratch!!!

hamstergraphics Posted at 2018-4-16 18:51
...and as an added bonus, here's my 'how to' install filters video onto the Mavic Air for those novices out there (myself being one)

Maybe I was lucky and got a ring that wasn't that tough to remove.

HA...no glass.  That answered my question. THNX for the video!

100% sure there is no lens in the cap.  Go to marker 7:59 in the video (i specifically mention this and demo its just a cap with no filter in it).  Hope that helps.  

TH757 Posted at 2018-4-17 09:46
HA...no glass.  That answered my question. THNX for the video!

Glad it was useful!

hamstergraphics Posted at 2018-4-16 18:47
I have the DJI ND filters for the Mavic Air...  And just bought a small scale (for my hard core drugs)....  

The ring by itself is 0.40g.  The ND filter 0.52g,   How much can 0.12 of a gram reduce the lifespan of the gimbal?  (serious question, not sarcastic, just to confirm)

Please let's just say it's common sense with ND filters: we're really talking about just sunglasses for cameras? You put shades on your face it doesn't improve your vision like someone with better eyesight. ND filters do not make your camera's lens see any better from having another lens. You see my comparison: when we use eyes to lens, we don't change the capture image of the lens, we add or decrease light glare into the lens, that's all do you understand?

Think of it this way: The risk of damaging your camera is akin to risk of someone needing eye surgery because the person's eyes for years wore too tight fitted lenses. Just like with the eye, theoretically we have contact lens that are specifically applied for cameras. This camera contact lens process is referred to as adding another, more larger, top lens. We are not adding a top lens to the Mavic Pro's camera, we are putting sunglasses over its encoded gimbal casing.

There's one difference believe me. I don't think it's apples-to-apples in comparing the risk of damaging one's gimbal motor - or eye lens - to the risk of placing something counterproductive to it. This is a scientific and economic decision failing to compensate those of the belief.  The loss in your overall image quality or sight, we must agree is different here, than from the loss in your poor, and blurred, image resolution.

hamstergraphics Posted at 2018-4-17 03:40
I weighed the ring that is installed on the Air, then the filter....  0.12 g is the difference.  The ND filter being 0.12g heavier.

Please read my post above. Thanks.

Robothamster Posted at 2018-4-17 03:41
He said the ND filter weighs 0.52 grams.  You have to remove the original ring that weighs 0.40 grams to fit the ND filter.

0.52 - 0.40 = 0.12 grams.

What "original ring"?

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-19 00:45
What "original ring"?

To fit the ND filters, you 1st have to remove the original ring that is there to protect the threads:

Robothamster Posted at 2018-4-19 00:50
To fit the ND filters, you 1st have to remove the original ring that is there to protect the threads:

[view_image]

Please read my post above in reference to "I have the DJI filters for the Mavic Air".

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-19 00:42
Please it's common sense with ND filters, we're talking about sunglasses for cameras? You put shades on your face it doesn't improve your vision like someone with better eyesight. ND filters do not make your camera lens see any better than having a better camera lens. You see my comparison: eyes to lens, you don't change the capture image of the lens, you add or decrease light glare into the lens, understand?

Think of it this way: The risk of damaging your camera is similar as the risk of someone needing eye surgery because they for years had been wearing tight sized contact lens, just like there are contact lens for cameras - it's called adding a larger top lens. We're not adding a top lens to the Mavic Pro camera, we're putting sun glasses over it.

I don't think you are grasping what ND filters are for.

You don't put them on to "improve the image".  You put them on so that you can try to maintain 100 ISO and a slower shutter speed as this in video helps to smooth out the video and give a more realistic motion blur effect.  

Watch this from 1:20 onwards:  

My hands and my mechanic skill is so bad that i won't touch filters. I always
brake something. Wish this could have been made easier. However, maybe
i try one day,if i dare. The hard part is the first time i guess, but to brake
the gimbal? Wow...no jet

Robothamster Posted at 2018-4-19 00:59
I don't think you are grasping what ND filters are for.

You don't put them on to "improve the image".  You put them on so that you can try to maintain 100 ISO and a slower shutter speed as this in video helps to smooth out the video and give a more realistic motion blur effect.  

Trust a Hamster to speak common sense!....  

^ This  

Nobody said the ND filters improve the quality of the image.  They allow you change the settings to create a more realistic recording.  I for one will be taking the risk of adding ND filters.  

MAPilot Posted at 2018-4-9 12:44
It seems that there’s a lot of agreement about using filters.

The gimbal will wear, with or without a filter on the end of the lense barrel. All else being equal, the one with less weight hanging on will have less wear after the same amount of use. The ring that you unscrew to replace with a filter has weight too, so if you want to minimize the load on the gimbal, it would be logical to remove it too; I don’t suggest doing so, since the ring protects the thread on the barrel.

There was an original question?

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-4-19 00:42
Please it's common sense with ND filters, we're talking about sunglasses for cameras? You put shades on your face it doesn't improve your vision like someone with better eyesight. ND filters do not make your camera lens see any better than having a better camera lens. You see my comparison: eyes to lens, you don't change the capture image of the lens, you add or decrease light glare into the lens, understand?

Think of it this way: The risk of damaging your camera is similar as the risk of someone needing eye surgery because they for years had been wearing tight sized contact lens, just like there are contact lens for cameras - it's called adding a larger top lens. We're not adding a top lens to the Mavic Pro camera, we're putting sun glasses over it.

Well, I cant speak for any other brands, but here at PolarPro we have done extensive stress testing, and are confident the added weight of our filters will not shorten the lifespan of the gimbal/camera. We have always offered full coverage for damage caused by our filters, in the last 5 years we have had zero claims.

I wouldn't be worried about the added weight.

Hope that helps!
-Jeff from PolarPro

www.polarprofilters.com

PolarPro Posted at 2018-4-19 04:37
Well, I cant speak for any other brands, but here at PolarPro we have done extensive stress testing, and are confident the added weight of our filters will not shorten the lifespan of the gimbal/camera. We have always offered full coverage for damage caused by our filters, in the last 5 years we have had zero claims.

I wouldn't be worried about the added weight.

Hi Jeff.

I have a slightly off topic question.  I've recently received a set of the Vivid series ND 4/8/16 filters from you (bought direct, delivered to UK in about 1 week, very happy).

I've seen thanks to Mauro on here & YouTube that Freewell now have an ND1000 filter for long exposure photos, is that something PolarPro may manufacture in the future?