Worst thing about Mini 3 Pro and the new DJI RC and the FLY APP

[globetrotterdrone]

Battery life on the RC is reported to be very good, so... buy a hood, keep it pointed at the Mini 3 Pro

At least for me, I can confirm that.
After 5 flights (~ 25 mins each), 3 lights still on.

It is darker than the SC but the battery life seems to hold up very well.
With the SC and the M2P I needed to recharge after 5 flights, after 6 flights for sure.

 

[RUFFSTUFF]

You are right here in NC. Glad you aren't getting suboptimal range. Mine arrives Friday after the usual assortment of nonsense, like marking it "all shipped" 10 DAYS ago. Printing a label/registering a Tracking number does not an "all shipped" make. Sigh.

I would have been thrilled to buy a "no controller" version. I have 3 RC-N1 Controlers, one of which I may get QMA connectors installed, to occasionally use my
AlienTech Duo II on, since it would work with my Air 2, Mavic 3 and now Mini 3 Pro. Let's see how range is with that beast serving up the waves!
Unfortunately DJI, Retailers & Amazon all have "starting on August 1st for RC-N1 and no controller versions, and that's quite a wait.
Ideally DJI will pair RC Pro with Mini 3 Pro, but as of now, it looks like almost the opposite is going to occur with this RC - model number is RM330 - getting paired to Mavic 3 as a step up from RC-N1 for folks who don't have a spare kidney to sell for the RC Pro.

It's really not bad, for a bump of about $150, it's a good value, but you are not the first to be less than thrilled by the brightness -or lack thereof. Then again, it is said to maintain that and not dim when hot, so perhaps a good hood design could improve the experience. Battery life on the RC is reported to be very good, so... buy a hood, keep it pointed at the Mini 3 Pro, and nag DJI tomake RC Pro compatible. That's the plan as of Friday. Assuming the $#%@ gets delivered!

Maxi Happy Flying

You guys are missing the best part of the 700nit RC... It's still brighter than an iPhone on a sunny day!

 

[cah]

You guys are missing the best part of the 700nit RC... It's still brighter than an iPhone on a sunny day!

While this is true, I used a hood with my iPhone/iPad which meant I could see it in the sun (even with lower nits/reduced brightness).

In the sun it's really hard to see the RC.

 

[moldorf]

speaking of nits and shades and such....

yesterday I was driving past a park and I saw a guy flying a drone who was wearing a large umbrella hat. It looked kind of ridiculous but thinking about it I can see how that would make it easy to keep a phone screen....or controller screen...in the shade making it more readable.

has anybody ever tried this? I'd imagine it would be an accessory that would fail on a windy day though

 

[johnmont250]

speaking of nits and shades and such....

yesterday I was driving past a park and I saw a guy flying a drone who was wearing a large umbrella hat. It looked kind of ridiculous but thinking about it I can see how that would make it easy to keep a phone screen....or controller screen...in the shade making it more readable.

has anybody ever tried this? I'd imagine it would be an accessory that would fail on a windy day though

haha, a Hiking/water ports sun hat with brim works just fine also but not quite as cool looking

 

[old man mavic]

i am repeating this because others may have missed it
when the RC is set up for the first time ,mine came with both the sound and screen brightness at about 75% of their maximum setting ,i wonder if a lot of those people who are experiencing issues seeing the screen ,in bright sunlight have not altered that setting
i have flown mine in the middle of the day with the sun overhead, and had no trouble seeing the information on the screen, even with my old eyes, and my reading glasses on the end of my nose

 

[z28lt1]

The difference in brightness between 700 nits and 1000 nits is barely 10%. If you can't see your screen at 700 nits in sunlight, you aren't going to see any significant improvement with 1000 nits either. You'd see a much bigger difference just by getting a sunshade.

I don't believe this is correct (the part about not seeing a difference between 700 and 1000 - certainly a sunshade will make a big difference). Nits is a linear measurement and there are 43% more Nits in a 1000 Nit display than a 700 Nit display. Our eyes eyes perception of those Nits (which I believe is what you referred to as "brightness") is not linear which is why you might only perceive a 10% difference in those two -- although that is very condition dependent and usually only "measured" when the light source is the only light source the eye sees, since the eye compensates for lower and brighter levels of light. However in the case of these screens, the ambient light (as well as contrast, reflections, etc) has a big influence on our eye's perceived brightness as well. That's why 700 nits in a dark room seems blindingly bright, but outside in daylight seems very dim. The actual light output didn't change, but our perception of it did. Also why a sunshade helps (reducing glare and ambient light increases the perceived brightness). It is also why we might perceive the difference between 700 Nits and 1000 as small in a dark room, but bigger in daylight....

 

[old man mavic]

I tell you what, how things have changed ,since i became interested in drone flying ,and having to have a screen device to see what the drone was seeing
my only previous encounters with nits was when my young children used to come home from school with a letter from the nit nurse ,telling us that we all had to put some sort of nit killer substance on all our heads to get rid of them

 

[moldorf]

I tell you what, how things have changed ,since i became interested in drone flying ,and having to have a screen device to see what the drone was seeing
my only previous encounters with nits was when my young children used to come home from school with a letter from the nit nurse ,telling us that we all had to put some sort of nit killer substance on all our heads to get rid of them

are you being a nit wit?

 

[abruzzopat]

The difference in brightness between 700 nits and 1000 nits is barely 10%. If you can't see your screen at 700 nits in sunlight, you aren't going to see any significant improvement with 1000 nits either. You'd see a much bigger difference just by getting a sunshade.

10%... Is this true? I've never actually had the opportunity to use the Smart Controller, just heard great things about the 1000 nits brightness. I knew going in (buying the Mini 3 Pro that is) that the controller had less nits, but I was hoping that the brightness would be constant. My iPhone may start out ok, but once things warm up, it gets dimmer. Not sure if the new RC varies or not, but I'm quite sure it is disappointingly dim in bright conditions from the get go.

 

[moldorf]

10%... Is this true?

I question if that's true

a nit = 1 candle per square meter

so, 700 nits would be 700 candles per meter; 1000 nits = 1000 candles per meter. 1200 nits (Tripltek 8) would be 1200 candles per square meter. That does not look like some complex logarithmic progression. It looks linear

this is generated light. I'm willing to consider the possibility that 700 > 1000 nits does not mean the 1000 nits screen appears 43% brighter than the 700 nits screen (but it may). Or that the 1200 nit Tripltek is 72% brighter than the Mini 3 RC. But I'd like to see some actual proof for the assertion that 1000 is only 10% brighter than 700

 

[old man mavic]

@moldorf i have undeleted your post#49
my post was an attempt to inject a bit of humour into the thread
and i liked your humorous reply to me
but if you would rather delete it still then go ahead i dont mind

 

[moldorf]

@moldorf i have undeleted your post#49
my post was an attempt to inject a bit of humour into the thread
and i liked your humorous reply to me
but if you would rather delete it still then go ahead i dont mind

I was just making a joke, and as usual, it was a bad joke, or at least weak. No offense meant

 

[z28lt1]

I question if that's true

a nit = 1 candle per square meter

so, 700 nits would be 700 candles per meter; 1000 nits = 1000 candles per meter. 1200 nits (Tripltek 8) would be 1200 candles per square meter. That does not look like some complex logarithmic progression. It looks linear

this is generated light. I'm willing to consider the possibility that 700 > 1000 nits does not mean the 1000 nits screen appears 43% brighter than the 700 nits screen (but it may). Or that the 1200 nit Tripltek is 72% brighter than the Mini 3 RC. But I'd like to see some actual proof for the assertion that 1000 is only 10% brighter than 700

As I posted above, the Nits are not logarithmic. The screen really does produce 43% more light per the same area and a machine would detect it. However, our eyes/brains don't perceive it as 43% brighter, because our eyes interpret light on a different scale -- so to our eyes the difference might appear less.

The 10% though is not measurable as there is no real measure of perceived brightness. As I briefly touched on above, they've done studies to make a pretty reliable scale, when the light being viewed is the only light in the room or in other controlled settings. Not sure if the 10% is the right number (it might be), but for sure the eye perceives difference at that level as pretty small in an otherwise dark room. But due to the way our eyes work, there are too many variables for there to be a real formula for perceived brightness as the eyes adjust, and contrast, ambient light, glare and other variables that all have an impact on perceived brightness. As such, there is no real number applicable in bright ambient light with sunlight glare, but I think anyone who has seen both will say the difference is probably much more than 10% -- even though there is no way to measure what our eyes are doing.

 

[moldorf]

As I posted above, the Nits are not logarithmic. The screen really does produce 43% more light per the same area and a machine would detect it. However, our eyes/brains don't perceive it as 43% brighter, because our eyes interpret light on a different scale -- so to our eyes the difference might appear less.

The 10% though is not measurable as there is no real measure of perceived brightness. As I briefly touched on above, they've done studies to make a pretty reliable scale, when the light being viewed is the only light in the room or in other controlled settings. Not sure if the 10% is the right number (it might be), but for sure the eye perceives difference at that level as pretty small in an otherwise dark room. But due to the way our eyes work, there are too many variables for there to be a real formula for perceived brightness as the eyes adjust, and contrast, ambient light, glare and other variables that all have an impact on perceived brightness. As such, there is no real number applicable in bright ambient light with sunlight glare, but I think anyone who has seen both will say the difference is probably much more than 10% -- even though there is no way to measure what our eyes are doing.

Thanks for response

I actually had an opportunity to see the Mini 3 700nits RC yesterday under rather bright sunlight. A guy was flying his brand new Mini 3 on it's 2nd flight in a large urban park. I had my Tripltek 8" with me and I asked him if it was ok to compare it to his screen. He said sure. Now this was comparing 700 nits to 1200 nits, so that was a pretty dramatic difference in generated light (71%)

But for sure the Trpiltek was MUCH brighter and easier to see. He had to position the RC in such a way that his body shaded it a little. That was easier to do in the mornings and evenings when the sun was at an angle. But in the middle of the day you'd need to find some shade....which in turn could limit your flight path. I even have to move around a bit with the Tripltek so the sun isn't glaring on it

I'd imagine that there is a much smaller difference between the 1000 nits of the RC-Pro and the Tripltek. Of course, the Tripletek is brighter and certainly more adaptable to different drones. And, maybe I'm too cynical, but I would expect if you were waiting for DJI to make the RC-Pro backward compatible with other drones than the Mavic 3 or the Air 2S you might be waiting a long time

 

[RUFFSTUFF]

Nits may be linear but our ability to see light is not...

 

[Platoon]

A picture is worth a thousand words. Here is a picture of a Atomos Shogun 7 7" monitor at 2400 nits ($1249 MSRP https://www.adorama.com/atomshg701a.html) , the Tripltek 8 at 1200 nits and the RC at 700 nits under sunlight condition. The minimum nits the eye need to see a display under sunlight condition is 1000 nits

 

[MS Coast]

A picture is worth a thousand words. Here is a picture of a Atomos Shogun 7 7" monitor at 2400 nits ($1249 MSRP https://www.adorama.com/atomshg701a.html) , the Tripltek 8 at 1200 nits and the RC at 700 nits under sunlight condition. The minimum nits the eye need to see a display under sunlight condition is 1000 nitsView attachment 150243

It's difficult to put much stock in a visual comparison without at least having the same content on each screen..

 

[moldorf]

It's difficult to put much stock in a visual comparison without at least having the same content on each screen..

probably true

however, I had the opportunity to view the Tripltek side-by-side with the Mini 3 RC, in sunlight, and there really was not much of a comparison. The Tripltek was viewable while the RC was essentially not viewable unless you're a contortionist adept at blocking the light

now that was 1200 nits vs 700 nits, so it's a large mathematical gap, and maybe even a larger visible gap

I haven't seen the Tripltek next to the 1000 nit RC-Pro though

 

[abruzzopat]

A picture is worth a thousand words. Here is a picture of a Atomos Shogun 7 7" monitor at 2400 nits ($1249 MSRP https://www.adorama.com/atomshg701a.html) , the Tripltek 8 at 1200 nits and the RC at 700 nits under sunlight condition. The minimum nits the eye need to see a display under sunlight condition is 1000 nitsView attachment 150243

That's what my RC looks like in the sun... black.