I find that you can usually just ignore those twitter-style abbreviations. They seldom add much meaning. TBH is "to be honest."
RC brightness level is 700 nits... NOT as good as RC Pro
- Thread starter boldblue737
- Start date
globetrotterdrone
Well-Known Member
Sorry, tbh = to be honest ...
imho = in my humble opinion
afaik = as far as I know
...
Top 50 Text Abbreviations and Internet Acronyms in 2021
Walk down the street in any major city and you can’t help but notice how many people are glued to their phones. We are constantly texting through iMessage and WhatsApp, chatting on Facebook and sending DMs (direct messages) on Instagram. And it’s only natural to want to communicate in the...
Will check it out. ThanksSorry, tbh = to be honest ...
imho = in my humble opinion
afaik = as far as I know
...
Top 50 Text Abbreviations and Internet Acronyms in 2021
Walk down the street in any major city and you can’t help but notice how many people are glued to their phones. We are constantly texting through iMessage and WhatsApp, chatting on Facebook and sending DMs (direct messages) on Instagram. And it’s only natural to want to communicate in the...www.wix.com
globetrotterdrone
Well-Known Member
I have to confess, I don't know the most of them ... I really only every use tbh, afaik, imho ... maybe asap but that's it.
Sorry for confusing.
Sorry for confusing.
"To be honest" (TBH) Google is your friend:
Faster
Well-Known Member
Brilliant turn of phrase!And the RC only adds about $250 to the package. The RC Pro alone is almost $1200. I'm not going to NIT pick.
No problem. Have to step up my game.I have to confess, I don't know the most of them ... I really only every use tbh, afaik, imho ... maybe asap but that's it.
Sorry for confusing.
Remote Pilots Australia
Well-Known Member
What a lot of people miss is the fact that brightness measured in nits is a linear scale while the human eye does not perceive brightness in a linear fashion. Doubling your brightness in nits only increases apparent brightness to the human eye by 50%. This of course plays right into the “numbers marketing” game. Often other factors like contrast can be more important.
These days I fly with either a iPad mini 6 which (from memory) is around 600 nits and a Tripltek Pro which is quoted at 1200. I can tell you it’s nothing like twice as bright and if I’m out flying directly under our lovely Australian sun and need a hood for the iPad generally I need it for the Tripltek as well. Yes, there are intermediate situations where the extra brightness of the Tripltek makes a difference but it’s not as black and white as people would think.
Back in 2020 I was doing some flying out on the Great Barrier Reef from vessels with a Mavic 2 Pro and the Smart Controller was just as useless on deck without a hood as the iPad Mini 5 I had at the time. In fact, as I preferred how the iPad ran third party apps I kept the iPad and hood and sold the SC.
If you have a device that runs a constant 600 nits you’re going to need a device capable of a constant 2400 nits to be twice as bright to your eyes. As far as I am aware no one makes that yet although we’re getting close.
I haven’t seen the Mini 3 pro “pro controller” yet, I don’t think anyone in Australia has but all thngs being equal if it has decent contrast I’m sure at 700 nits I’ll be able to work with it and a hood under pretty well any conditions.
Regards
Ari
These days I fly with either a iPad mini 6 which (from memory) is around 600 nits and a Tripltek Pro which is quoted at 1200. I can tell you it’s nothing like twice as bright and if I’m out flying directly under our lovely Australian sun and need a hood for the iPad generally I need it for the Tripltek as well. Yes, there are intermediate situations where the extra brightness of the Tripltek makes a difference but it’s not as black and white as people would think.
Back in 2020 I was doing some flying out on the Great Barrier Reef from vessels with a Mavic 2 Pro and the Smart Controller was just as useless on deck without a hood as the iPad Mini 5 I had at the time. In fact, as I preferred how the iPad ran third party apps I kept the iPad and hood and sold the SC.
If you have a device that runs a constant 600 nits you’re going to need a device capable of a constant 2400 nits to be twice as bright to your eyes. As far as I am aware no one makes that yet although we’re getting close.
I haven’t seen the Mini 3 pro “pro controller” yet, I don’t think anyone in Australia has but all thngs being equal if it has decent contrast I’m sure at 700 nits I’ll be able to work with it and a hood under pretty well any conditions.
Regards
Ari
globetrotterdrone
Well-Known Member
@Remote Pilots Australia
I did know that from our hearing ability but wasn't aware that a similiar logarithmic scale also applies to perception of luminance.
On the other hand, very few natural things have a straight or linear approach "encoded" into them.
See in general for human perception also: Weber–Fechner law - Wikipedia and noteably under the point vision.
I did know that from our hearing ability but wasn't aware that a similiar logarithmic scale also applies to perception of luminance.
On the other hand, very few natural things have a straight or linear approach "encoded" into them.
See in general for human perception also: Weber–Fechner law - Wikipedia and noteably under the point vision.
Remote Pilots Australia
Well-Known Member
Thanks for that I found it quite interesting. I had never looked at it from a human physiology viewpoint although I probably should have.
I only qualified as a remote pilot in 2017 but I qualified as a technician in 1983 and as you’d expect I always look at these things from a technical perspective. After posting the above I was half expecting someone to ask me for reference material and as I am currently in bed with the flu I didn't feel too motivated to research material for stuff I learned decades ago but for those inclined to take me at my word rather than research it for themselves it basically comes down to the following :-
Perceived light intensity and brightness is proportional to the square root of output. So if you double the output, the light is only intensified by a factor of square root 2 or 1.41 times as bright. If you quadruble the output the light is intensified by a factor of root 4 or twice as much. This holds true for both nits and ANSI Lumens.
Regards
Ari
Last edited:
globetrotterdrone
Well-Known Member
@Remote Pilots Australia
Thank you for your input, there's something new to learn everyday and everywhere.
Get well soon too and many greetings from the always confused Australian Austria in Europe to Down Under!
Thank you for your input, there's something new to learn everyday and everywhere.
Get well soon too and many greetings from the always confused Australian Austria in Europe to Down Under!
I was so happy when I could get rid of my "hood." I use my Tripltek Pro 8 without using one and am in the bright Florida sun.
I went from this....
to this....
Last edited:
Remote Pilots Australia
Well-Known Member
I’ll be honest, my Tripltek is good for 95% + of the situations that I find myself flying in without a hood but as I earlier said. There is a few times each year where the conditions are so extreme that I use a hoodman. Specifically when flying at sea where you get a double whammy of the sun above and the reflected light from the ocean. Fortunately the same hoodman fits both my mini 6 and Tripltek.
The iPad mini needs a hood maybe 50% of the time so is less convenient for sure but that said I enjoy using it more from an ergonomic view point and there’s a couple of third party software packages I use a lot while working that I prefer the IOS flavour slightly. Also, without embarking on a company bashing exercise my experiences with Tripltek support have not always been as smooth as for most people and I don’t appreciate the wait for updates of the O/S.
Although probably 80% of my flying s done with the Tripltek the day an iPad mini with 1000+ nits is released I’ll probably sell it but I admit that’s totally personal preference. It’s a great piece of kit.
700nits is great. Is 1000 nits better, sure. But is it really that noticeable... Nah. If you didn't read about the number online you would never know.
Really obvious differences.
My phone at 700 nits is unusable in direct, bright tropical sunshine. Simple cant read anything.
The smart controller with 1000 nits is usable in direct tropical sunshine albeit a little hard at times.
My phone at 700 nits is unusable in direct, bright tropical sunshine. Simple cant read anything.
The smart controller with 1000 nits is usable in direct tropical sunshine albeit a little hard at times.
After sitting and reading forums and watching YouTube videos I have conclude that DJI cannot bee trusted in any statement they make. The distance issue is a perfect example, is there a difference in distance between the EU and the North American versions of the Mini 3? If so, then the specs should state that. Most people buying drones are very interested in the specs when it comes to deciding the product they are going to order. Why would anyone buy an expensive drone that has a range of 1.7 mi or 2.5 km, that is nuts. I ordered the Mini 3 Pro RC and the Fly More Kit five days ago; I ordered the Mini Pro RC even though I have the RC Pro because I don’t know if the RC Pro will be compatible with the Mini 3 and if in the future will it will be compatible and when will that be? I was watching a review of the Mini 3 Pro RC and the reviewer said the screen looks good when you stand in the shade. Enough said
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
1. Mini 2
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
New Threads
-
-
-
After TikTok ban passage, the prospect of a DJI ban is looking more likely- Started by rickmurray1989
- Replies: 7
-
Mini 4 Posting for posterity, my first Hyperlapse- Started by Feek
- Replies: 0
-
2 Pro Exploring the Fire Mine: Secret tunnels and dark arcades- Started by wind-up
- Replies: 0
Forum statistics
