UAV realtime zoom capable video camera?

[Sean_M_2007]

Hi everyone! First post here so let me first say thank you all for this wonderful resource and community! There are so many knowledgeable people here so I know I've come to the right place!

I am finishing the last year of my aerospace engineering degree and for our senior project, a group of us are designing a prototype for a forest fire monitoring UAV.

I've been researching what we'll use for our payload electronics. So far I've only found cameras that are very nice but much too expensive, or cheap but very limited. Ideally a UAV would use a camera like this (http://www.micropilot.com/prod_cameras1.htm) but unfortunately that one costs $10,000. The only affordable cameras for UAVs I've found are only TV quality resolution such as those sold by http://www.blackwidowav.com/.

I've been looking around these forums at the low cost solutions people have made, but I'm not sure this would work for us. I see that many people hack their hand held still or video camera to use it on an airplane, but I don't think these people are transmitting the video to the ground and viewing it in realtime as we would like to do.

So my question is: are they any affordable cameras that provide a decent resolution (say 640x480) and are also zoom capable? And do transmitters have the bandwidth for a resolution of 640x480? For affordable, let's say anything less than $2,000 (camera and transmitter/receiver together) to keep our options open, but most likely we wouldn't pay more than $1,000 for the camera electronics. I'd much prefer to find a complete commercial package to purchase, rather than hacking a hand held camera. Most likely a production version of our forest fire monitoring UAV would use expensive cameras including an infrared camera. So for the prototype we build, the improved video resolution would just be to better test and demonstrate what the final version could do. If that costs too much or is too much trouble, we'll just stick with the KX141 camera.

Another question I have is what does it take to have more than one camera sending realtime video to the ground? Have a separate transmitter for each camera? Is it ok if they're both 2.4ghz transmitters?

Additionally, I've heard that it's not good to have a 2.4ghz transmitter and a 2.4ghz receiver aboard the plane. Currently I'm thinking our video will use a 2.4ghz frequency, and our telemetry will be transmitting on 900mhz. What frequency should our controller be? 72mhz to avoid conflict?

Thanks ahead of time for any information you're able to provide. I've tried to explain our goals and limitations, but if there's anything you need me to clarify, just say so.

[tomsal]

The only way I know if to meet your needs at the present time is with a Canon A640 with 10 megapixels and 640x480 at 30 frames per second.

This camera can be remotely controlled with a unit from blip.com (http://blip.com.au/) and has three zoom positions available.

I have this setup and it works very well.

[_helitron_]

Hi, is also possible with the former model Canon A620 with 7,1 MPix plus blip interface, I use this constellation.

Cheers,

//Erwin

[kd7ost]

Why don't you look through supercircuits products? They also have a number to call for assistance.

Dan

http://www.supercircuits.com/

[mlbco]

Sean,

Here is the camera I use in our production UAVs:

http://www.aegis-elec.com/products/sonyfcbix980s.html

We control the 25:1 zoom through a serial port.

You didn't make it clear if you want a camera only or an entire stabilized sensor system. The stabilization is what costs the big bucks and is just as tricky to build as the entire UAV. UAVs are essentially sensor platforms and these systems are often the most expensive single component on the aircraft. If you can't see clearly from the air, there is little commercial value to the UAV. A good UAV design normally starts with the imaging and sensor requirements. It's good that you're considering this up front.

Steve

[UAVeez]

Here's a neat little camera for $125.

http://www.procerusuav.com/Documents/GimbalCameraSpecs.pdf

[LukeZ]

When I bought the S2 IS (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042201canons2is.asp) two years ago it was close to $400, but I think the price is closer to $200 now. It has a 12x optical zoom, which can be manipulated during video recording mode (640x480, 30 fps). It also has video out.

By now I think they actually have the S3 IS and maybe even a newer model than that.

Controlling the camera remotely is more of a challenge, but there is an interface that you can use via the USB connection, if you're really into programming. Otherwise servos and the like could be made to work...

Good luck,


Luke

[Sean_M_2007]

Thank you all for the responses. These are just the sort of solutions I'm looking for.

The blip.com controller with a A640 or S2 IS would do the job for a short duration demonstration flight. I'm not sure how long those cameras can shoot video continuously, but the batteries would probably be dead by the end of a full fuel flight (we're shooting for 4hours endurance).

Dan, I glanced through supercircuits but didn't find anything suitable.

UAVeez, that's a nifty and cheap little camera, especially since it has 360 degree panning.

Steve, the Sony fcbix980s looks very good. The reason I didn't mention stabilizing is because all the stabilized cameras I had found were much too expensive until I saw this camera. It looks like we still need to make a mount to pan and tilt it, but we would have to do that for most cameras anyway. I've seen some of the MLB Bat video clips, and the stabilization appears to do a good job. I'll send you a PM later to get more details about your camera.

I'm still not sure what kind of transmitter we'll need for our video. In addition to a panable camera, we'll probably have a small fixed camera (e.g. KX141) looking forward to pilot by. Will we need two video transmitters?

-Sean

[tomsal]

The A640 will record video for quite a while on a 4 gig SD card and the batteries are no problem. It uses 4.8 volts (4 cells) and here is a handy external power plug where you can attach any size 4 cell pack you want.

[LukeZ]

Shooting 4 hours of video (and recording it) is going to be a challenge no matter what camera you use. Hollywood doesn't even shoot that long (without changing tape). I don't know of a digital camera that can record for that length of time today, at least at 640x480/30fps: only tape/film cameras.

Now, if all you need is video back to ground, then you'll have no problems. The consumer cameras like the S2 IS with video out have the video stream going all the time, whether the camera is in record mode or not. You don't even need to worry about a memory card. In that case you are really using your camera as nothing more than a Black Widow system, with the exception that you will have a million times better lens and hence video quality, not to mention the zoom ability that you want. If you wanted to record the flight you could put it on tape at the receiving end (ground station).

Let us know how you make out. This is an interesting project.


Luke

[elossam]

Here's a neat little camera for $125.

http://www.procerusuav.com/Document...CameraSpecs.pdf
Is that price right? or it is the camera value only without the pan/tilt ball enclosure?

[elossam]

Self answered,
From procerusuav web: .... For use with the Kestel Autopilot, a servo expansion board is required - $125. Please call for gimbal details and pricing.
So $125 is not the camera and/or gimbal but a required stuf to operate this gimbal with the IMU unit.

[n00b_FIN]

Here is a good one:
http://oemcameras.com/
Model : RHP-35X-OEM

The RHP-35X-OEM is the latest addition to our line up of OEM products, and a compact chassis camera design for surveillance of various applications under a wide range of light conditions. High-contrast conditions can be viewed without glare or loss of detail thanks to the wide dynamic range design. The wide-dynamic range, the high-sensitivity, and the 35X zoom, make this is ideal for industrial applications.

- 35x Optical Zoom to 1.7° HFOV
- 12x Digital Zoom
- 1/4" Solid State CCD
- > 520 TV Lines
- 752(H) x 582(W) Pixels
- Composite Video & S-Video Out
- NTSC & PAL
- 9 to 12 Volts DC Operation
- Weight: 240g
- Progressive recording direct to HDD
- High Sensitivity F1.4 lens, 0.5 lux interlaced
- Wide-Dynamic Range (WDR)
- Day/night switching

[lospalos]

Here is a good one:
http://oemcameras.com/
Model : RHP-35X-OEM

I didn't find any pricing on their site ;o(, the camera looks great for UAV purposes.
p.

[UAVeez]

Self answered,
From procerusuav web: .... For use with the Kestel Autopilot, a servo expansion board is required - $125. Please call for gimbal details and pricing.
So $125 is not the camera and/or gimbal but a required stuf to operate this gimbal with the IMU unit.

Correct. It sounded like I was saying the camera was only $125 dollars but it is actually for the expansion board. You have to call them for pricing on the camera.

[CenTexFlyer]

$4500

[elossam]

somewhere on his web i found a pfd that tolds 3000 for the non retract one, 4000 for the rectract one, 5000 for the bigger (sony) oner non retract and 6500 for the bigger and retract one

[tulz43]

Shooting 4 hours of video (and recording it) is going to be a challenge no matter what camera you use. Hollywood doesn't even shoot that long (without changing tape). I don't know of a digital camera that can record for that length of time today, at least at 640x480/30fps: only tape/film cameras.

Now, if all you need is video back to ground, then you'll have no problems. The consumer cameras like the S2 IS with video out have the video stream going all the time, whether the camera is in record mode or not. You don't even need to worry about a memory card. In that case you are really using your camera as nothing more than a Black Widow system, with the exception that you will have a million times better lens and hence video quality, not to mention the zoom ability that you want. If you wanted to record the flight you could put it on tape at the receiving end (ground station).

Let us know how you make out. This is an interesting project.


Luke

Have a short clip to show us what the video quality is like with the canon?

[LukeZ]

Sure,

I have several videos posted online of RC plane stuff. These are ok, but of course to post them there I've had to compress them, and also you're not going to have your camera at a stationary point filming a moving object, but rather the other way around. Nevertheless, here are two hosted on RCGroups:

Ivan Pettigrew Blackburn Beverley: Click here (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=734969).

Ivan Pettigrew Short Solent: Click here (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=692704).

But I just put two other videos on my website that are entirely uncompressed, and not of RC planes. The files are a bit clunky (30 mb each approx). I recommend you right-click and select "Save Target As..." to put them on your hard-drive first instead of attempting to stream.

I also recommend you turn the volume down on both if you value your ears.

Train filmed from car (video taken today in fact): Click here (http://www.kansasflyer.org/Images/eZone/Test/MVI_0042.AVI). I was holding the camera with one hand and driving with the other. The camera was out the window. If this camera didn't have image stabilization the video would have been much more jerky.

Waves crashing into rocks: Click here (http://www.kansasflyer.org/Images/eZone/Test/MVI_0172.AVI).

One thing I will say is that this camera is rather heavy. I don't know many people flying with something this weighty. You could save a little weight by getting rid of the 4 AAs and powering it from some other source already on-board, but you’ve still got a substantial brick that remains.

Although not your typical AP camera, I am trying to design an airframe for it myself because I like it so much. I wouldn't feel comfortable chancing an SLR to flight due to the cost but I wouldn't mind so much with this one. The massive lens unquestionably results in higher quality photos and video than the more compact cameras.

If you want to see forty million pictures taken with this camera, you can browse my RC photo album page at: http://rcphotos.ishouldntwonder.com.


Luke

[macboffin]

If you want to see a zoomed picture , live or recorded, your biggest problem will be stabilisation of that image.This will entail not only3 axis stab of the plane, but ditto the camera seperately. It helps with a larger plane, the bigger they are, the less rapid the movements. Big fires usually generate a fair amount of local turbulence also, which doesn't help matters. How big of a plane are you proposing?

[macboffin]

Further question ; Why are you proposing a 4 hour duration? Have you considered what that means in terms of fuel weight, ot batteries?

[LukeZ]

If you want to see a zoomed picture , live or recorded, your biggest problem will be stabilisation of that image.This is an extremely important consideration. The higher the zoom, the more every single movement of the camera is pronounced in the resulting image.

There is software available that can correct for a lot of this after the fact, I can't remember what the name of the process is called. We see it in some videos posted on this forum, where the image in the center of the screen remains fairly steady but you can see the borders of the video jumping all over the place...


Luke

[Sean_M_2007]

Further question ; Why are you proposing a 4 hour duration? Have you considered what that means in terms of fuel weight, ot batteries?

We're sizing it to be a 60-70lb airplane. Estimating 35lbs for the empty weight, 10lbs of payload, and as much fuel as we can fit in it. The 4hr endurance target is based on the idea that if we can fly for 4hrs with a stock engine, a modified engine with decreased fuel consumption should be able to achieve 12hrs or so. I noticed the extreme range UAVs (Aerosonde, TAM-5) got most of their range by decreasing their fuel consumption.

A stabilized camera would be essential for performing the actual mission of fire surveillance. But so are things like an infrared camera and an autopilot. All of that will be at least $10,000 optimistically. We're hoping for the best for our fundraising, but we would still like to demonstrate some capabilities if the money comes up short. I'm exploring our possibilties, and the Sony fcbix980s may be within our reach. Are there other stabilized cameras for less than $700?

The nice thing about a well stabilized camera with high zoom is that you can look at things from far away, maybe far enough away to be out of the turbulence generated by the fire. Other than that, there's not much we can do to counter turbulence, except make it bigger. I think turbulence is one of those things we'll just have to build it and see how it does.

-Sean

[LukeZ]

If anyone finds a video clip taken by the FCB-EX or similar block camera, I'd be real interested to see it.

Luke