Nidge
Second Officer
Offline
|
I’ve just watched some Beta reviews of the Frost Byte system on the Tube and currently I can see both Pro’s and Con’s when compared to the DJI system.
I would say the biggest Pro is that the Fatshark system is more open. By this I mean you are not tied to a proprietary camera or goggle. I could quite happily use my non-Fatshark goggles, and in the event of a crash, where the flight camera was destroyed, I’d at least have a choice and flexibility in what to replace it with.
Another pro is not having to register the unit and being locked to channels and power limits based on my geographical location. I’m licensed to use alternate frequencies and power levels which with the DJI system would require me to defeat various firmware protections and most likely invalidating any warranty.
The third pro is the form factor allowing for greater installation choices.
Lower latency and a more conventional method of handling picture breakup.
Now the Con’s.
I think the one noticed by most is that the Byte Frost image is not as rich and fluid as that on the DJI system, I’m basing this on the DVR footage obtained on the downlink having not seen it first hand in the goggles.
Secondly, a lack of DVR on the air unit, though this might be one of the reasons why Fatshark have delayed the official release.
Whilst it is a big cost saving pro for those of us whom already own compatible goggles it does look a little cumbersome being tethered to the ground element by a HDMI cable. Someone has already mentioned that this could be offset by placing the ground element into a box goggle and replacing the existing screen. Another nice feature for the ground element would be the ability to spilt the screen so it might be used with some of the cheap VR headsets on the market.
We may have some interesting times ahead of us. Just look where we are today after DJI released the original Phantom.
Regards
Nidge. |
|