It comes with two batteries, so I'm guessing it's 2x11 minutes.
Quite possible, good thinking.
It comes with two batteries, so I'm guessing it's 2x11 minutes.
You're presuming it was filmed in the USA.
This particular drone is a consumerized toy compared to professional grade drones carrying fully gimbaled GoPro cameras for only a few hundred dollars more.
Battery performance on devices like this drops off rapidly as temperatures drop.
While this is awesome technology, I believe devices like this will revolutionize modern terrorism.
As a former military member, the combat potential of these devices is obvious, and depending on payload capability, could make something like the Boston Marathon bombing look like child's play.
As it is written: Everything's permissible, but not everything is beneficial.
The total flying weight of this drone is under one pound. Their "payloads" are a couple of ounces at most.
What kind of equipment deserves to be called "professional" depends heavily on the profession. I know a videographer who is currently using the Phantom. I asked for his opinion about this product. If he thinks it could work for him then it's professional at that level. I am also looking into drones for use in my profession. I would not be using it for complicated video work (mainly stills), so it would be entirely professional as far as my profession is concerned.
It's also worth noting that the movie studios consider all of these products to be consumer-level. They spend ten times as much and more for their camera lifting platforms.
----------
The total flying weight of this drone is under one pound. Their "payloads" are a couple of ounces at most.
As others have already surmised, the gimmick with which this drone delivers gimbal-less HD video is sketchy, and to call it 1080P full HD borders on fraudulent.
The dirty little secret (okay, not such a secret, but definitely not explained to the average consumer) of the digital camera industry is that an image sensor is rated by the number of pixel sensors, not the number of actual delivered RGB pixels as like to think of them. It takes 3 pixel sensors (1 red, 1 blue, and 1 green) to make up one actual RGB pixel, and in a typical bayer filter there is an extra green sensor for each RGB pixel.
What this means to the end user is that a 14MP camera is actually taking a 3.5 MP image (14MP / 4 sensors per pixel) and the extra green sensor information and scaling it up to the 14MP advertised resolution. In terms of the Parrot Bebop, the floating 1920x1080 window inside the actual image frame is actually a 960x540 image that is resized to 1080P resolution. That is hardly what I would call "full HD 1080p"...
Well, that's good, but are there some out there that can carry more than a few ounces?
RDX-based explosive is not heavy, and it could be easily molded into the drone's internal fuselage and rigged with a simple fuse/trigger. I see IED's taken to the next level here.
A terrorist cell could use several of them; these people are quite innovative and clever.
At $499 there is nothing like it. Add the controller at a total of $899 and you get closer (but still undercutting) the DJI Phanton 2 Vision (the one with the stabilized gimbal camera) that runs $1100-1200.
The stabilized video from the Bebop is *obviously* not as clear or stable as the DJI Phantom 2 Vision, but it is close... and at a smaller, lighter, cheaper package it may be more than good enough. I for one knew I didn't want to get into drones without stabilized video but by the same token I didn't want to pay $1500+ for my first drone, once DJI Phantom 2 Vision got down to $1100-1200 I was ready to pull the trigger but I am wondering if perhaps this would be the better choice. At $900 for the extended range receiver (which the DJI Phantom 2 does in the first place) I wonder if stepping up the DJI for a couple hundred more is the better choice... hmmm.