(1) As others have said: GET A REAL CAMERA
(2) And if you DO want supplementary light for your iPhone/Galaxy freecam, buy any one of a myriad LED flashlights or multi-LED worklights.
THIS piece of kit does NOT need Kickstarter - items like it are all over eBay and Amazon.
Calvin Chann: Recently a flight landing at Heathrow airport was aborted due to a drone. While I have no problems with them, it is true that a lot of owners are idiots.
A flock of 5kg geese would do a lot more damage than a 900g plastic flying toy. And no-one seems to have worried about petrol-powered model planes, which have been around for decades!
Gotta love LowePro - the bag I bought for my Olympus E-1, 11 years ago, is now holding my OM-D E-M1 and assorted accessories (the E-1 has acquired a hitherto unused soft laptop bag, which works remarkably well*). Still as good as new, LowePro know how to make a bag.
(*)Interesting footnote: put a FAIRLY HEAVY dSLR into a LAPTOP BAG ... then pick it up. You will be amazed HOW LIGHT it feels, compared to being in a camera bag. Especially if you are a MacBook Pro user ...
... even a fairly hefty dSLR weighs SO much less than a MacBook Pro (plus iPad in the sleeve pocket), that the laptop bag feels like it is made of goosedown!
SHOCK HORROR! 500-Tonne A380 Airbus hits 1kg Plastic DJI Phantom 2 at relative velocity of 550mph. Airbus paint slightly chipped, but the GoPro on the DJI survives to tell the tale. #viral
Actually, even a PIGEON (let alone a GOOSE or SWAN) would "win" the impact test with the average DJI drone. The likelihood of a real plane being damaged by a Phantom is next to zero.
Wanna cause damage by aerial delivery? Train a pigeon! They've been fighting our wars since at least 1914 ...
Wanna damage the White House? Train a pigeon!
Nothing more than an idiot setting off fireworks in the immediate approach to an airport would also cause planes to abort landing and/or divert. And that "technology" has been available for longer than aeroplanes. Why are DRONES getting the special treatment?
Biowizard: Funny how America gets all prissy about people playing with plastic flying toys, in case they could hurt someone - but lets its folks run amok with assault rifles and handguns.
Thousands of people are killed every week in the USA by tobacco (principally a US product); around 170 are murdered every week in the USA by firearms. Exactly HOW many people have been killed buy quadcopters?
FiveForm - a SHOTGUN would be a lot easier to use for that purpose than an assault rifle - for the same reason people use shotguns, not AK47s, on pheasant shoots ..
Well thankfully I live in a part of the world where most guns CANNOT be legally owned by private individuals - and there are SO few gun-related deaths in this country, that each one, when it does happens, becomes national news. 150 is roughly the annual death toll in the UK from guns. Still too many, but even taking our smaller population into account, WAY better than the USA. Most of US can see the TOTAL FOLLY of the US Gun Lobby. It's sick, frankly. Meanwhile, leave my drone alone! :-)
Funny how America gets all prissy about people playing with plastic flying toys, in case they could hurt someone - but lets its folks run amok with assault rifles and handguns.
The AIR is extremely exciting. That's what I would want hanging off my drone - quality on a par with a full size DSLR and weight not far off that of a GoPro. Bring it on!
KevinSB: these are not drones.. They are quad copters !!
Esquilo , your logic is good but your research is out of date. EVEN the lowly DJI Phantom can now be programmed, via an iOS app, to fly totally autonomously along a pre-programmed route, using GPS guidance. Just go visit www.helipal.com and read about it.
SIMPLES: these are DRONES. End of.
Gonna require some pretty incredible glass if there is any wish to get close to pixel-level resolution ...
And that's where your model helicopter differs from these quads ... the DJI Phantom (to name just one example) CAN and DOES fly autonomously. You can simply program it with a number of 3D waypoints, and send it on its way. Sure, it isn't a Predator laden with heat-seeking missiles, but to all intents and purposes, it is as much a drone.
I wonder whether DJI will source its camera technology from Olympus? Might even be able to do away with the expensive and cumbersome external 3-axis gimble, if they employed Oly's E-Mx 5-axis IS sensor!
It makes a lot more sense to jiggle a sensor about, than to jiggle the entire camera (as at present on, for example, the Phantom Vision +).
And I would LOVE to be able to use rectilinear lenses with normal fields of view (say 35mm in full-frame terms), rather than the omnipresent fish-eye lenses of today's "action" cameras.
Quadcopters are a type of drone, in the sense that any unmanned aircraft is generally described as a "drone".
Biowizard: Good to see the firmware updates continuing into a new version. I wonder whether they will add a 40mp "high res" mode at some point, to avoid the E-M1 being eclipsed by the E-M5 II? The physical hardware should support it ...
It would be strange for the "second tier" product (E-M5 II) to be allowed to continue to out-perform the "flagship" model - or maybe there's an E-M1 II in the wings? Having had my E-M1 for less than a year (after 10 years with an E-1), I'd rather not shell out on a new body - so Olympus, IF you can, PLEASE provide the 40mpix mode in a firmware update!
Biowizard: Well well well - who would have guessed that Olympus' OM-D E-M5II can out-resolve the Nikon 800E in its special high-res mode. SERIOUSLY impressive stuff for tripod-based shots of stationary subjects. Actually, rather amazed!
Bravo Olympus! Now all I want is the same functionality on my E-M1 please - Firmware 4.0???
Pity - not that I find the E-M1 images lacking in detail ...
Well well well - who would have guessed that Olympus' OM-D E-M5II can out-resolve the Nikon 800E in its special high-res mode. SERIOUSLY impressive stuff for tripod-based shots of stationary subjects. Actually, rather amazed!
Suzanne D.: I have an OMD EM-1 which I love, love, love. How does the new EM 5 II compare? The prices will be very comparable. My main interest is the smaller size of the EM5 II compared to the EM-1.
@Eugene232 - My first two digital cameras were Sony, back in the days when floppy disks were used for image storage. Sony's choices (non-user-changeable) of sharpening and saturation made for DREADFUL images. I always found I could improve them in Photoshop by adding a 1.5 pixel Gaussian Blur and desaturating to about -15%, before halving the size to get rid of the all-too-obvious JPEG artifacts. So on my 0.7 Megapixel Mavica, I ended up with web-usable, 512*384 pixel shots.
While I am SURE that Sony has improved since then - I still don;t trust their PHOTOGRAPHIC credentials. They are far too consumer-oriented. I don't want an expensive Zeiss lens on a CYBERSHOT.
Olympus, on the other hand, have always quietly been at the cutting edge of photography. I'll stick with the brand I love and TRUST, thank you very much.
Richard, many thanks for adding some comments and images about the E-M1. Very much appreciated! :-)