Polar Pro filter tip

[Marty Markoe]

If gimbal clamp is holding gimbal, it's easier and safer to install/push on the filter.
Marty
Ps. Don't forget to remove the clamp after installing filter.

 

[MavicKhan]

For the moment I gave up on their filters. Too much hassle and, in my view, a possible menace for the gimbal's integrity, depending on tolerances.

I will certainly consider their products in the future, including filters if things are sorted out, because their support is second to none.

They offered to test and hand-select a new replacement batch or, alternatively, a full refund. (I have Taco-RCs on the way).

I opted for the refund, which was processed with a speed that I didn't know was even possible.

MK

 

[CC Rider]

For the moment I gave up on their filters. Too much hassle and, in my view, a possible menace for the gimbal's integrity, depending on tolerances.

I will certainly consider their products in the future, including filters if things are sorted out, because their support is second to none.

They offered to test and hand-select a new replacement batch or, alternatively, a full refund. (I have Taco-RCs on the way).

I opted for the refund, which was processed with a speed that I didn't know was even possible.

MK

I've been looking for the right ND filters for my Mavic for awhile now. Got burned by one filter set purchase that gave me motor overload messages and gimbal alerts when I tried using them. I was thinking about getting Polar Pro's Cinema Series filters. Do you happen to be familiar with them or know if they are worth getting? Or are the Taco filters the way to go do you think?

Thanks for any input you can give me. I don't want to waste my time or money again.

 

[DodgeP]

The Polar Pro Cinema series can be left on during startup, they clear all obstacles plus you def. need that ND32. I have a set of Neewer filters that I have to put on after I start the bird but it doesn't bother me much. I may upgrade but I needed a set sooner than the Cinema series would be avail.

 

[Anthony Viscomi]

The filters function fine...I just can't seem to get the feeling that constantly taking them on/off the gimbal has to have some affect on it. The DJI filters seem to have an entirely different design in regards to the way the attach to the camera:

 

[MavicKhan]

I've been looking for the right ND filters for my Mavic for awhile now. Got burned by one filter set purchase that gave me motor overload messages and gimbal alerts when I tried using them. I was thinking about getting Polar Pro's Cinema Series filters. Do you happen to be familiar with them or know if they are worth getting? Or are the Taco filters the way to go do you think?

Thanks for any input you can give me. I don't want to waste my time or money again.

I've used the Cinema Series NDs, which PolarPro was kind enough to send at a residual fee, when I complained about having just bought the original ones (...which must be off the gimbal for initialization...) and being then faced with improved versions, launched so close to those first series.

The Cinema Series looks sleek and the ND filtering, itself, is pretty color neutral with good overall optical quality. I really wanted to keep using them.

Unfortunately, I started having gimbal initialization errors, due to the fact that I was not pushing the filters all the way in to the correct resting position.

I suspect that most of the gimbal overload alerts reported here and in other resource sites, although many times blamed on weight tolerances, might actually stem from the same error by users: If the filters do not rest at the appropriate "full aft" position, even for 1 or 2 mm, the gimbal head will hit the mast during initialization and an alert will issue.

...but when I investigated why I wasn't pushing the filters all the way in in the first place, I came to the conclusion that it was because they offered an inordinate amount of resistance getting to that final correct position.

This, all by itself, wouldn't be a problem but it turned out that, if fitting them all the way in already required some very positive pressure, taking them out, then, turned out to be almost impossible.

During some testing, here in my home office, some days ago, it took me almost 20 minutes to remove one of the filters from the camera with me getting increasingly worried that the disproportionate amount of force I was applying with 2 fingers on one hand or the balancing force I was applying to the gimbal on the opposite direction, to prevent it from being forced forward, would result in a serious mishap, as one of the 2 pairs of fingers slipped, resulting in destructive moments to one of the sides.

I finally had to resort to a set of long nose pliers (!) and, very gently, had to make small-steps incremental pulls on the filter while rotating it, for it to finally come off. A very unpleasant experience...

Jeff, from PolarPro has advocated here that the filters should be pulled with the finger pads but that assumes that people have quite narrow and long fingers, for such approach to work on such a confined space to work in. Still, in my case, not even that resulted, function of the resistance offered by the filter coming off.

It seems that not all filters offer this kind of absurd resistance coming out but, to me, and not matter how much I appreciate PolarPro continued and effective efforts to make things right, my experience with their filters has terminated.

I suspect though, that, in the future, they might come up with a third approach to the filters, one that solves all reported problems by means of design and tolerances and adjustments and, if that happens, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend their products.

As it is, I am now waiting for my Taco-RCs and will see how that goes.

Hope this helps.

MK

 

[Richard]

Have now over 40 flights with the latest edition of Polar Pro's 3 filter set and they work flawless.
Usually have the ND16 permanently installed and no issues at start up or during gimbal calibration

 

[Manfrenjensen]

I'm a little surprised to hear people saying this. For me, the filters go on so easy. I just turn the mavic upside down, pinch the camera between my fingers and push the filter on. No problem. I personally don't see any reason to use the gimbal lock.

For me, the problem is taking the filter off. I have had some serious struggles with that.

 

[Chase R]

The Polar Pro Cinema series can be left on during startup, they clear all obstacles plus you def. need that ND32. I have a set of Neewer filters that I have to put on after I start the bird but it doesn't bother me much. I may upgrade but I needed a set sooner than the Cinema series would be avail.

When would you def. need an ND32?

 

[Richard]

I'm a little surprised to hear people saying this. For me, the filters go on so easy. I just turn the mavic upside down, pinch the camera between my fingers and push the filter on. No problem. I personally don't see any reason to use the gimbal lock.

For me, the problem is taking the filter off. I have had some serious struggles with that.

Agree, have tried the three mayor brands and all have the same issue. Given the fragile nature of the gimbal-camera assembly, taking the filters off is something I try to avoid as much as possible.

 

[royalhghnss]

I have them too, and have also had issues with install / removal. It is not as easy as it looks in their videos. The fit is much tighter. I had a flight after I took them off where the gimbal was going full dummy. Overload errors, and not righting itself to level. The flight after that was ok, but I'm pretty worried the gimbal is messed up. I was super careful taking off and putting them on too.

 

[cobra46]

Any mechanical design will be manufactured within a certain tolerance. Higher tolerance equals higher cost so good engineering practice is to not over-tolerance parts. This is something I always have to teach new engineers.

This may be something we and PolarPro are fighting. I have no clue what the inside diameter tolerance is on the PolarPro filters but if I were designing the mount the ID tolerance would be pretty tight. The other issue is that DJI likely has a relatively loose tolerance on the camera outside diameter because it's cheaper and there would be no reason to make it tight.

Our standard tolerance on parts is +/-.010 of an inch. This is good enough for most feature dimension but I regularly dimension features that are +.0000 / -.0003. At my previous job in the semiconductor equipment field we had one part that went to about .00005. That was an expensive bugger as the equipment and facility was very specialized for this precision work.

There will naturally be extremes of fits on the filters. If you are the unlucky soul who has a camera OD that's on the high side of the tolerance and you have a filter that is on the small side of the tolerance, it will be very difficult to install. The opposite is also true where some filters could end up feeling like they may fall off. And of course the ones in the middle may very well fit nicely.

 

[sierra2018]

Cobra just described why the DJI filters appear to use a springy retention method -- much more tolerance friendly.

 

[jerryflah]

I just received Polarized ND Freewell Filters today, promised to be Mavic gimbal tolerant[can be installed before Startup. One of the designs recommended by MavicHelp. I'll let you know how they work as soon as the snow melts around here[18"]

 

[Filmscum]

When would you def. need an ND32?

sunny day+no clouds+snow on ground=ND32

 

[Col@Medlow]

Any mechanical design will be manufactured within a certain tolerance. Higher tolerance equals higher cost so good engineering practice is to not over-tolerance parts. This is something I always have to teach new engineers.

This may be something we and PolarPro are fighting. I have no clue what the inside diameter tolerance is on the PolarPro filters but if I were designing the mount the ID tolerance would be pretty tight. The other issue is that DJI likely has a relatively loose tolerance on the camera outside diameter because it's cheaper and there would be no reason to make it tight.

Our standard tolerance on parts is +/-.010 of an inch. This is good enough for most feature dimension but I regularly dimension features that are +.0000 / -.0003. At my previous job in the semiconductor equipment field we had one part that went to about .00005. That was an expensive bugger as the equipment and facility was very specialized for this precision work.

There will naturally be extremes of fits on the filters. If you are the unlucky soul who has a camera OD that's on the high side of the tolerance and you have a filter that is on the small side of the tolerance, it will be very difficult to install. The opposite is also true where some filters could end up feeling like they may fall off. And of course the ones in the middle may very well fit nicely.

Check out this modification (

) and give opinions whether or not the Polar Pro filter will still function effectively i.e. Will light get in?
I am still waiting to order the best filters, although this method does seem like a solution for easier removal of filters on a camera which have a larger tolerance.


Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots

 

[Filmscum]

Check out this modification (

) and give opinions whether or not the Polar Pro filter will still function effectively i.e. Will light get in?
I am still waiting to order the best filters, although this method does seem like a solution for easier removal of filters on a camera which have a larger tolerance.


Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots

I tried this method on one of my pp filters. It definitely makes it easier to remove, but the insert can very easily fall out. In fact the first time I used it in the field I lost it. I would highly recommend NOT doing this. The filters become easier to remove the more you remove them.