Exciting. I'm an analog holdout. Long story but, I have over 100k in DJI products in our work fleet. Lets just say familiarity has bred contempt. I hope we see more sharkbyte compatible products and the law of scales starts to kick in. I think the DJI system is great and works well but after the absolute punishment the brand has given me through work I have a difficult time spending my own money with them. Great time to be in the hobby. We are about to be spoiled for choices again.
ATX - your content is getting better and better man. You did a lot of great research on this topic, and you’re definitely breaking new ground. Cheers to you sir.
Great presentation, clarified a lot for me. Looking forward to the future, competition within the analogue HD market looks great! Thanks for putting this together :)
Well done, that all makes sense and bodes well for the future of the system and the hobby. Suddenly I'm a giant Carl Zhou fan. Thank you for the effort.
I'm curious about how SharkByte / HDZero will evolve too. Have no doubt about picture quality in general - 720p@60 FPS seems already enough for starters. Communication protocol though is still an issue - much more visible breakups than DJI have.
I do think we'll continue to see improvements in this area, the system has come a long way from when it is first released (and this is why I recommend people look at newer videos rather than only relying on the initial reviews from many months ago....lot of firmware updates since then). There are also some exciting rumors, such as a future option for 1080p30, and a 1 watt VTX (which would help solve the breakup). However, it's also important to recognize that HDZero and DJI are two different tools for different jobs. My guess is that DJI will always have less visible breakup than HDZero because of its ability to request retransmission of lost packets. Basically, the DJI goggles can communicate back to the VTX and let it know that some of the data was lost, and ask for it again. This results in a much cleaner image, but comes at the cost of variable latency. In any case where information has to be retransmitted, there will be a longer delay before that image can be displayed on the goggles. This is totally fine for a lot of use cases, such as cinematic recording, but it can be problematic for technical flying such as racing due to the unpredictable latency. On the other hand, HDZero is locked to the same latency no matter what, and you just get whatever image is able to be transmitted on the first try. The latency is exactly the same the whole time, but you do get the pixelated breakup that you've seen in DVR footage. As you've probably seen, there is an enormous amount of debate about this online in terms of which approach is better. If you ask me, they are both great approaches and it is a case of picking the right tool for the job. I do think that over time they will begin to converge--DJI will get their latency to be more consistent, and HDZero will improve image quality and penetration. They may never totally reach parity though, and it's maybe more fun for us if they don't--it gives us more interesting choices when picking parts!
@@ATXAirborne Version about duplex protocol for DJI FPV is correct. DJI FPV system is basically their usual communication system with drone, stripped down to HD video encoder + VTX + serial receiver output for FC (for people who use DJI radio too) + DVR (in DJI Air Unit) - to squash that all into one 20x20 mm mountable brick. Seems DJI are trying to solve breakups in different way - by "asking" encoder to lower encoding quality and resend frames as you said. Variable latency still persists but is less felt then. For cinematic and freestyle it is more than enough. For racing - probably not. Though people use DJI in racing too.
I remember when fatshark was the badguy, proprietary expensive goggles that inadvertently drove up the price of FPV entry. I remember when people were piecing together their own box goggle style headsets in protest to fatshark. Now DJI is the enemy and people are looking to fatshark as if they're going to save FPV. But remember how you felt 5 years ago when you scoffed at a $400 set of fatsharks, and then having to buy a module on top of that!
Hey, hope you don’t take offense to this, but I wanted to comment that I think your cross-eye is getting better. Not sure if you’re doing the exercises or what, but it looks more straight to me.
Thank you. That is something I have dealt with for almost my entire life and I don’t think there is much I can do to prevent it. It is an unusual thing and makes using FPV goggles a bit different too. Basically I tend to heavily favor one of my eyes and use it for almost all of my vision rather than using both equally. I know that it can be distracting for others to see and I hope that it doesn’t take away from the videos too much.
Great video, really well presented thanks!. One comment though, and I know you're reading from a script but any chance you could look at the camera more instead of off to the side.
When we start seeing 3rd party VTXs things will be a lot more exciting in the HDZero space. Choice to cripple camera compatibility with an authentication chip for this first round of VTXs really bit them hard in this first year, only camera choice being that horrible plastic lens runcam that ruined the system's reputation. Finally getting a decent camera out with the HDZero runcam, but because of that choice we had to wait for them to do it and they've been losing customers to DJI. Hopefully they make no further such mistakes.
I agree with most of what you said, with one exception. Based on my understanding, I don't think it's a fair characterization to say that they crippled camera compatibility with an authentication chip. Here is what I think happened. MIPI is a communication bus, but it doesn't define every aspect of the communication protocol and the way messages are sent and received. Divimath defined how they wanted this communication to work, and created an IC that implements that communication. As a result, cameras need to have that chip to communicate on the MIPI bus with the HDZero VTXes. I did ask for specific clarification on whether that chip was available for other manufacturers to purchase, and the answer was yes. So I can see why it would seem like a method of locking down the ecosystem, and I do think Divimath referred to it as an "encryption IC" in some of the documentation on their site, but phrasing things in this way makes it sound like the system is closed off to other camera manufacturers in a way that I don't think lines up with the reality.
@@daniele.markle6428 That's my understanding. Basically I think the chip is required for any MIPI communication, rather than being an extra thing on top that was intended to lock down the system in any way. But I want to make sure I'm right on this so I'm going to reach out to get confirmation on how that works.
Alright, I did get an answer from Carl on this. The IC is for handshaking-it exposes registers that allow the VTX to set its parameters for use by the camera. That IC is available to any manufacturer who wants it, and it would be surprising if anyone was saying the reason they couldn’t make a camera for HDZero was because they couldn’t get that IC. As to the question about making it compatible with DJI MIPI, it would be possible to modify the VTX firmware to support it, but Divimath is hesitant to do so because they don’t want to infringe on DJI’s standard. You may be aware that earlier this year, DJI was accusing Runcam of making a camera for their system without permission, and threatened to lock that camera out of their system.
No......Saying it's "the new analog" actually makes no sense since it's digital tech ??? From what I can tell Divimath is out to replace analog with it's digital technology...not be the new analog. Once Divimath comes out with the long range board, analogs sole purview as far as I can see will be 1s tiny whoops and from what I understand that's not out of reach , just not market feasible at the time...
Exciting. I'm an analog holdout. Long story but, I have over 100k in DJI products in our work fleet. Lets just say familiarity has bred contempt. I hope we see more sharkbyte compatible products and the law of scales starts to kick in. I think the DJI system is great and works well but after the absolute punishment the brand has given me through work I have a difficult time spending my own money with them. Great time to be in the hobby. We are about to be spoiled for choices again.
Hopefully it becomes as popular and as good as Express LRS, what a good time to be in this hobby. Great information, keep up the good work
ATX - your content is getting better and better man. You did a lot of great research on this topic, and you’re definitely breaking new ground. Cheers to you sir.
Thank you for the kind words!
Great presentation, clarified a lot for me. Looking forward to the future, competition within the analogue HD market looks great! Thanks for putting this together :)
Very well researched. Please, create more content like this.
Well done, that all makes sense and bodes well for the future of the system and the hobby. Suddenly I'm a giant Carl Zhou fan. Thank you for the effort.
Very Informative. Looking forward to more compatable products being out there.
Great video. I couldn't have said it better!
The lighting on this one is much better still a touch harsh, but better. But another good video. Nice one sir.
Thanks! I'm working on some improvements in this area....should be a bigger improvement sometime in the next couple of videos.
I'm curious about how SharkByte / HDZero will evolve too. Have no doubt about picture quality in general - 720p@60 FPS seems already enough for starters. Communication protocol though is still an issue - much more visible breakups than DJI have.
I do think we'll continue to see improvements in this area, the system has come a long way from when it is first released (and this is why I recommend people look at newer videos rather than only relying on the initial reviews from many months ago....lot of firmware updates since then). There are also some exciting rumors, such as a future option for 1080p30, and a 1 watt VTX (which would help solve the breakup).
However, it's also important to recognize that HDZero and DJI are two different tools for different jobs.
My guess is that DJI will always have less visible breakup than HDZero because of its ability to request retransmission of lost packets. Basically, the DJI goggles can communicate back to the VTX and let it know that some of the data was lost, and ask for it again. This results in a much cleaner image, but comes at the cost of variable latency. In any case where information has to be retransmitted, there will be a longer delay before that image can be displayed on the goggles. This is totally fine for a lot of use cases, such as cinematic recording, but it can be problematic for technical flying such as racing due to the unpredictable latency.
On the other hand, HDZero is locked to the same latency no matter what, and you just get whatever image is able to be transmitted on the first try. The latency is exactly the same the whole time, but you do get the pixelated breakup that you've seen in DVR footage.
As you've probably seen, there is an enormous amount of debate about this online in terms of which approach is better. If you ask me, they are both great approaches and it is a case of picking the right tool for the job. I do think that over time they will begin to converge--DJI will get their latency to be more consistent, and HDZero will improve image quality and penetration. They may never totally reach parity though, and it's maybe more fun for us if they don't--it gives us more interesting choices when picking parts!
@@ATXAirborne Version about duplex protocol for DJI FPV is correct. DJI FPV system is basically their usual communication system with drone, stripped down to HD video encoder + VTX + serial receiver output for FC (for people who use DJI radio too) + DVR (in DJI Air Unit) - to squash that all into one 20x20 mm mountable brick. Seems DJI are trying to solve breakups in different way - by "asking" encoder to lower encoding quality and resend frames as you said. Variable latency still persists but is less felt then. For cinematic and freestyle it is more than enough. For racing - probably not. Though people use DJI in racing too.
Impressive! I have not seen this information anywhere else.
frsky tandem x20 - HD version. is this contain a HD zero technology?
Yes it does, this was confirmed a month or so ago.
Go Divimath Go....🦾
Wow nice explanation... thanks!
I remember when fatshark was the badguy, proprietary expensive goggles that inadvertently drove up the price of FPV entry. I remember when people were piecing together their own box goggle style headsets in protest to fatshark. Now DJI is the enemy and people are looking to fatshark as if they're going to save FPV. But remember how you felt 5 years ago when you scoffed at a $400 set of fatsharks, and then having to buy a module on top of that!
Very interesting! I didn't know that about analog video transmitters.
Great explanation....Subbed!
Hey, hope you don’t take offense to this, but I wanted to comment that I think your cross-eye is getting better. Not sure if you’re doing the exercises or what, but it looks more straight to me.
Thank you. That is something I have dealt with for almost my entire life and I don’t think there is much I can do to prevent it. It is an unusual thing and makes using FPV goggles a bit different too. Basically I tend to heavily favor one of my eyes and use it for almost all of my vision rather than using both equally. I know that it can be distracting for others to see and I hope that it doesn’t take away from the videos too much.
Great video, really well presented thanks!. One comment though, and I know you're reading from a script but any chance you could look at the camera more instead of off to the side.
excelente vídeo...
Thanks, your video is great and very informative.
When we start seeing 3rd party VTXs things will be a lot more exciting in the HDZero space. Choice to cripple camera compatibility with an authentication chip for this first round of VTXs really bit them hard in this first year, only camera choice being that horrible plastic lens runcam that ruined the system's reputation. Finally getting a decent camera out with the HDZero runcam, but because of that choice we had to wait for them to do it and they've been losing customers to DJI. Hopefully they make no further such mistakes.
I agree with most of what you said, with one exception. Based on my understanding, I don't think it's a fair characterization to say that they crippled camera compatibility with an authentication chip. Here is what I think happened. MIPI is a communication bus, but it doesn't define every aspect of the communication protocol and the way messages are sent and received. Divimath defined how they wanted this communication to work, and created an IC that implements that communication. As a result, cameras need to have that chip to communicate on the MIPI bus with the HDZero VTXes. I did ask for specific clarification on whether that chip was available for other manufacturers to purchase, and the answer was yes.
So I can see why it would seem like a method of locking down the ecosystem, and I do think Divimath referred to it as an "encryption IC" in some of the documentation on their site, but phrasing things in this way makes it sound like the system is closed off to other camera manufacturers in a way that I don't think lines up with the reality.
@@ATXAirborne So you're saying even without the authentication chip, the DJI MIPI cameras would still not be compatible with HDZero?
@@daniele.markle6428 That's my understanding. Basically I think the chip is required for any MIPI communication, rather than being an extra thing on top that was intended to lock down the system in any way. But I want to make sure I'm right on this so I'm going to reach out to get confirmation on how that works.
Alright, I did get an answer from Carl on this. The IC is for handshaking-it exposes registers that allow the VTX to set its parameters for use by the camera. That IC is available to any manufacturer who wants it, and it would be surprising if anyone was saying the reason they couldn’t make a camera for HDZero was because they couldn’t get that IC.
As to the question about making it compatible with DJI MIPI, it would be possible to modify the VTX firmware to support it, but Divimath is hesitant to do so because they don’t want to infringe on DJI’s standard. You may be aware that earlier this year, DJI was accusing Runcam of making a camera for their system without permission, and threatened to lock that camera out of their system.
Maybe a Dev board or raspberry shield. Get the OpendHD guys excited with the purpose built chip.
Good informative video 👍🏻
Thank u very much for set the story straight great video
So when are we gonna see a Hd zero/crossfire vtx similar to the sixty 9?
It wouldn't surprise me if trappy and tony are working with HDZero/Divimath as we speak ;)
Birdy has told me thats a good reality
really informative video!
AUDIO ON SHARKBYTE PLEASEEEEEEEEE
Great video. I want that shirt!!! LOL
Great info thnx
Whatever it takes to get me a 800+mw sharkbyte VTX.
From what I’ve heard, a 1 watt VTX is in testing now!
@@ATXAirborne 1 watt would be perfect. I've been holding out for a little better range and penetration.
So SharkByte is actually HDZero and HD Zero is setting up to be the new analog.
No......Saying it's "the new analog" actually makes no sense since it's digital tech ??? From what I can tell Divimath is out to replace analog with it's digital technology...not be the new analog.
Once Divimath comes out with the long range board, analogs sole purview as far as I can see will be 1s tiny whoops and from what I understand that's not out of reach , just not market feasible at the time...
@@steve_beatty the new analog as in the default video system for quads. That’s true on the 1s comment
@@zbirdman777 Gotcha...thanks for clarifying ✌🏼
First !!