I am returning the Nano+

[izometric]

I never said that he said that Mini 2 is better, no need to exaggerate, so here it's again if you missed it "Mini 2 has close enough image to Nano+ "

Then I will say it: Mini 2 is better than Nano+. In every possible way (daylight photography included) except night photography. But then there are no manual controls for AEB and Panoramas, so back to worse than Mini 2.

By the way, after several flights with Nano+ I also observed horizon tilting (mini 2 also has this problem).

 

[March411]

I guess we can agree to disagree.

He attempted to fly the drone like any other person and had issues.

How about to go back down and return with relative ease?

Why should you have to make any adjustments to your flight? Quick answer, because it isn't functioning properly.

Again, all he did was take a normal flight like anyone including myself would do in the normal course of a flight and had multiple issues. I always check the wind and wind direction but do not let it dictate where I fly or in what direction, I just ensure that I have enough battery in reserve to RTH. But he couldn't even RTH due to a failure with obstacle avoidance stopping the very short flight with zero obstacles in his flight path.

I understand that you own one and want to protect your interests but I will again state, short flight, multiple incorrect obstacle avoidance issues with no obstacles in his flight path and having to land in a neighbors yard because the avoidance feature stopped his flight path is a problem.

If you disagree so be it, I can live with that but I still have the right to my opinion.

 

[March411]

Then I will say it: Mini 2 is better than Nano+. In every possible way (daylight photography included) except night photography. But then there are no manual controls for AEB and Panoramas, so back to worse than Mini 2.

By the way, after several flights with Nano+ I also observed horizon tilting (mini 2 also has this problem).

I own the MM2 and overall I am pleased but unfortunately can not offer a comparison the Nano+, hopefully at some point I will own one and can speak directly once I compare.

I was just stating that based on what I read on these forums, what I believe to be a reliable source, presented live factual information on the Nano+ that I would hold off spending the money. I would love to own a drone without Geofencing, spent a month in Florida and it was a PITA to fly.

That being said, thanks for the feedback izometric, it further validates me waiting until the bugs are ironed out.

 

[lifeisfun]

I guess we can agree to disagree.

He attempted to fly the drone like any other person and had issues.



Why should you have to make any adjustments to your flight? Quick answer, because it isn't functioning properly.

Again, all he did was take a normal flight like anyone including myself would do in the normal course of a flight and had multiple issues. I always check the wind and wind direction but do not let it dictate where I fly or in what direction, I just ensure that I have enough battery in reserve to RTH. But he couldn't even RTH due to a failure with obstacle avoidance stopping the very short flight with zero obstacles in his flight path.

I understand that you own one and want to protect your interests but I will again state, short flight, multiple incorrect obstacle avoidance issues with no obstacles in his flight path and having to land in a neighbors yard because the avoidance feature stopped his flight path is a problem.

If you disagree so be it, I can live with that but I still have the right to my opinion.

NO, because that's common sense if you can't walk, you have no experience with that drone and you did not bother to check wind speed at the elevation you are flying.
All common sense for some

Couldn't care less, I guess yo missed the threads I complain about issues with it.

I think you have that problem , when you have the need to say something I did not say

Good luck!

 

[March411]

NO, because that's common sense if you can't walk, you have no experience with that drone and you did not bother to check wind speed at the elevation you are flying.
All common sense for some

Couldn't care less, I guess yo missed the threads I complain about issues with it.

I think you have that problem , when you have the need to say something I did not say

Good luck!

It's been fun talking to you lifeisfun but it's difficult to understand why you continue to discuss wind direction and speed. Those factors had absolutely to bearing on the issues he had with the obstacle avoidance, it was caused, he believes by direct sunlight into the sensors.

Enjoy your weekend.

 

[lifeisfun]

It's been fun talking to you lifeisfun but it's difficult to understand why you continue to discuss wind direction and speed. Those factors had absolutely to bearing on the issues he had with the obstacle avoidance, it was caused, he believes by direct sunlight into the sensors.

Enjoy your weekend.

So if you have no arguments you just switch to another issue?
BTW if you read the comments below the video many posted that they don't have this issue, I got two Nano+, one from January (reversed gimbal mounts), and second from March (the so called new version) and they both perform exactly the same. Yes, sometimes direct sun will trigger the avoidance sensor but it is very rare, so I can live with it. since to disable it is just a click away.

 

[March411]

So if you have no arguments you just switch to another issue?
BTW if you read the comments below the video many posted that they don't have this issue, I got two Nano+, one from January (reversed gimbal mounts), and second from March (the so called new version) and they both perform exactly the same. Yes, sometimes direct sun will trigger the avoidance sensor but it is very rare, so I can live with it. since to disable it is just a click away.

I am having a very difficult time understanding what you are talking about and what your problem is lifeisfun. Do you just like to troll?

I would suggest that you read! I posted a video in my first post and than have been discussing the obstacle avoidance issues from my second post forward.

My take on this is if you have to make adjustments to your flight or disable functions to use the drone it has challenges, I use the obstacle avoidance where I fly so for me it is a requirement. Those pesky tree's and buildings love to eat drones for lunch. Please don't suggest that I should change my flying habits, I purchase my equipment based on my preferences.

You can continue to argue the point but the bottom line is members on Autel forums, respected reviewers with actual documented video proof that show that the drone is incomplete. Why you continue to argue the point when in your last post admitted you have issues is quite confusing.

I always enjoy good conversation and apposing viewpoints based on information, this site and other platforms show there is issues and I should keep my money.

This example of the Nano+ is no different than the Mavic 3, they rushed the release and have many unhappy customers. While owning one would be great for the cinematography I don't feel like waiting 5 minutes to get a home point on a cold boot, I kept my money on this one too.

I fail to understand you logic so I believe it is time to move on.......

 

[lifeisfun]

I am having a very difficult time understanding what you are talking about and what your problem is lifeisfun. Do you just like to troll?

I would suggest that you read! I posted a video in my first post and than have been discussing the obstacle avoidance issues from my second post forward.

My take on this is if you have to make adjustments to your flight or disable functions to use the drone it has challenges, I use the obstacle avoidance where I fly so for me it is a requirement. Those pesky tree's and buildings love to eat drones for lunch. Please don't suggest that I should change my flying habits, I purchase my equipment based on my preferences.

You can continue to argue the point but the bottom line is members on Autel forums, respected reviewers with actual documented video proof that show that the drone is incomplete. Why you continue to argue the point when in your last post admitted you have issues is quite confusing.

I always enjoy good conversation and apposing viewpoints based on information, this site and other platforms show there is issues and I should keep my money.

This example of the Nano+ is no different than the Mavic 3, they rushed the release and have many unhappy customers. While owning one would be great for the cinematography I don't feel like waiting 5 minutes to get a home point on a cold boot, I kept my money on this one too.

I fail to understand you logic so I believe it is time to move on.......

You know what? don't care

 

[Landey]

If Ian just switched off obstacle avoidance and activated Ludicrous mode, he would have had no problems returning the Nano at all.
There's a software bug which doesn't allow the Nano using more motor power in the low-power modes than under windless conditions - that's the reason why it "can't" (better: doesn't) fight stronger winds. Obstacle avoidance off and Ludicrous mode - problem instantly solved. Just hope that motor power bug will get corrected with the next firmware.

Picture quality: Yes, he tries to make the Mini 2 look on par. But it's just obvious it isn't.

March411: Yes, OA is still quite buggy, it's in my "Issues" list. Thus I use it for difficult situations, but switch it off as soon as I am sure there's no obstacles all around.
Another bug a firmware update should fix soon.

 

[Rumpleproofskin]

The reasons for returning it:

1. Poor flying in relatively low wind. It takes ages to accelerate and it crawls against low wind where Mini 2 would fly 3 times as fast.
2. No manual camera controls for AEB and Panoramas
3. Significant vignetting and corner distortion.
4. Color inaccuracy. Even with the correct profile correction, the photos tend to have a greenish tone which needs tint correction. Also, some roof tops developed yellow/magenta zebra stripes -> a lot of work to correct this in Lightroom.
5. It takes 2 minutes to shoot a 360 panorama in low wind (mini 2 needs not more than 40 seconds).
6. Significant video feed delay causing me to loose time trying to frame a photo as the drone will move after I stop touching the controls.

Take into account points 1, 5, 6 combined with the flight time of 28 minutes (22 real) and you are left with very little usable time in the air. If I shoot 3 panoramas at 500 meters away in 15 kmph wind, I will come back on fumes with the drone in auto landing mode, needing to fly with the left stick up so the drone would not land automatically on a roof top.

The drone is launched way too early to the market, a clearly unfinished product, way too expensive for what it offers.

The advantage of non-detection by Aeroscope (no. 1 reason for purchasing it) cannot compensate for all the drawbacks.

I love the Nano+, hence my positive T3 review. I don't have issues with wind because I've never flown any drone – incl all DJI's - in wind. Like I don't take it – or my land camera – out when it's cloudy or play tennis in the rain. For me it's all about the camera and the Nano+ has a cracker of a camera. I love it's lightness and size and the fact I don;'t have to jump through a bucnh of legal hoops to fly a drone which I only do occasionally. But that's me and each to their own.

 

[March411]

If Ian just switched off obstacle avoidance and activated Ludicrous mode, he would have had no problems returning the Nano at all.
There's a software bug which doesn't allow the Nano using more motor power in the low-power modes than under windless conditions - that's the reason why it "can't" (better: doesn't) fight stronger winds. Obstacle avoidance off and Ludicrous mode - problem instantly solved. Just hope that motor power bug will get corrected with the next firmware.

Picture quality: Yes, he tries to make the Mini 2 look on par. But it's just obvious it isn't.

Agreed, I want the Nano+ for the improved picture quality over the MM2 and looking to stay under 250 grams. The lack of geofencing is the other reason. I also really like the overall design and appearance of the Nano but that is more personal preference.

Once the bugs are ironed out (if they get worked out) I see myself picking one up.

In the areas that I fly working obstacle avoidance for me personally is a must have since I use it for scouting when I hunt. I've been using my MA2 but it's pretty damn noisy, that said it has paid off when I am in the field.

 

[LeeInMpls]

You can keep dreaming that it will be flawless

As flawless as the new Mavic III?

 

[LeeInMpls]

I love the Nano+, hence my positive T3 review. I don't have issues with wind because I've never flown any drone – incl all DJI's - in wind.ut that's me and each to their own.

Clearly, some folks have received lemons and are not cut out to be early adopters. I heard much of the same whining when I "early adopted" the M1 Mac Mini having been MSDOS/Windows since 1985. It was similar with the early INSTA360 One 2 and the Go 2 action cameras. It really gets tiresome. Like with cars, if you can't take the heat, you probably shouldn't buy a new model in the first year of production. PERIOD.

The Nano+ has been "Berry, Berry, Berry, Good To Me!"

 

[Darkmatterx76]

Ah, I see. You've just given up on the idea that a company should release a product when it works correctly. Once you do that, you can forgive just about anything and blame people being unhappy with problems on them being too picky to buy a retail product that hasn't been out for over a year.

What you're talking about is a beta tester, not a retail product owner. I'm sorry, but you sound like either a fanboy or a shill...

I suppose you have a good excuse for Autel's flip flops or silence on wind speed tolerance and missing features too? I'll just assume it's because people should be grateful for the chance to pay to beta test a product that you like. /rolls eyes

Clearly, some folks have received lemons and are not cut out to be early adopters. I heard much of the same whining when I "early adopted" the M1 Mac Mini having been MSDOS/Windows since 1985. It was similar with the early INSTA360 One 2 and the Go 2 action cameras. It really gets tiresome. Like with cars, if you can't take the heat, you probably shouldn't buy a new model in the first year of production. PERIOD.

The Nano+ has been "Berry, Berry, Berry, Good To Me!"

 

[March411]

It happens everywhere Darkmatter. I am am operational industrial engineer and we develop software (ERP, WMS and logistics) and we test the hell out of it but really can't pressure test it until we roll it out to hundreds of users. I'm not saying its right but during our testing we take it as far as we can, users pound the hell out of it and normally bring us back to square one.

I'm not an advocate of the process but it appears to be a growing trend.

And your point is well taken LeeInMpls, I'm not cut out to be early adopters, so I wait until the dust settles. The DJI M3 is the perfect example, some people love it and others are just downright angry..... they should have waited.

 

[Darkmatterx76]

Hey, I'm not saying that the actual beta testers can find all the bugs. That's just not realistic. Even so, it seems like more and more companies are cutting more and more corners and sending out worse and worse products in a slippery slope problem run amok.

Also, a lot of this is about communication, and that's a big problem in general these days with companies.

It happens everywhere Darkmatter. I am am operational industrial engineer and we develop software (ERP, WMS and logistics) and we test the hell out of it but really can't pressure test it until we roll it out to hundreds of users. I'm not saying its right but during our testing we take it as far as we can, users pound the hell out of it and normally bring us back to square one.

I'm not an advocate of the process but it appears to be a growing trend.

And your point is well taken LeeInMpls, I'm not cut out to be early adopters, so I wait until the dust settles. The DJI M3 is the perfect example, some people love it and others are just downright angry..... they should have waited.

 

[Landey]

Agreed, I want the Nano+ for the improved picture quality over the MM2 and looking to stay under 250 grams. The lack of geofencing is the other reason. I also really like the overall design and appearance of the Nano but that is more personal preference.

Once the bugs are ironed out (if they get worked out) I see myself picking one up.

In the areas that I fly working obstacle avoidance for me personally is a must have since I use it for scouting when I hunt. I've been using my MA2 but it's pretty damn noisy, that said it has paid off when I am in the field.

I own both, Mini 2 and Nano Plus. Already wrote this at another thread: Since I've got the Nano, I did not fly my Mini 2 a single time. First exception yesterday: I went out with a friend and her two little daughters (6 and 8) - I flew my Nano and took bad videos (because I am a bloody video novice), the kids had fun with the Mini 2.

So let's serve some facts ...

1) Mini 2 is easier to fly, also stops faster if you take your hands off the joysticks - the Nano has a longer "braking distance". Again, this is software-related.

2) Airborne stability is just comparable. The Nano works better with hovering near the ground. If the Mini 2 moves about 5 cm, it's just about 1 cm with the Nano. Two cameras plus ultrasonic sensor at the bottom of the Nano, just one tiny camera and infrared diodes with the Mini 2. Nano Plus also does real precise landings, Mini 2 doesn't.

3) I found the Nano's transmission to be more stable - I could easily reach places and keep control where the Mini 2 lost it's connection.

4) Nano Plus has a more serious video lag than the Mini 2 - video response while flying is a bit sluggish. I guess that's caused by the high bandwith used for video transmission.

5) I did NOT experience ANY issues with stronger winds with the Nano Plus. It was just as stable as the Mini 2, also I did not experience any accidental "gimbal drops" with the Nano, but countless ones with the Mini, even at slower speeds.

6) I DID experience the Nano being unable to move forward under strong wind, this is TRUE.
Just try to imagine you've got a car with three gears. Gear 1 is restricted to 10 km/h, gear 2 to 20 km/h, gear 3 to 55 km/h.
Restrictions for gears 1 and 2 are set for driving on a plain even street, power is limited to 10 HP and 20 HP for gears 1 and 2 for reaching 10 or 20 km/h on plain level ground, gear 3 is unrestrictred.
Now imagine what will happen if you go up a hill. Gears 1 and 2 are restricted to 10 and 20 HP, so your car won't reach 10 and 20 km/h because acceleration will be stopped as soon as the HP limit is hit. You switch to gear 3 - and easily go up that hill.
This is why the Nano struggles with strong wind. It CAN reach it's speeds, but the software restricts the motor power to a level which is just suitable for reaching it's speed with no wind. Simple software correction, problem solved.

7) I was surprised about the Nano Plus' batteries lasting longer than the Mini 2's, I did not expect that. I was wildly swirling around in Ludicrous mode while the kids crawled the meadows in the slowest mode the Mini 2 allows - and still the Nano lasted longer. Might've been just luck, but that's the way it was.

8) Photo quality of Mini 2 and Nano Plus is roughly on par with "simple" scenes, scenes having high contrasts, strong light. Same as with cheap digital cameras - work pretty well with bright and simple scenes, but struggle with more complex subjects, especially under low-light conditions. That's the situation with Mini 2 and Nano Plus: On par with simple scenes, but the Nano nailing the Mini to the wall as soon as subjects get more complex. Plus, there's strong noise in each and every picture the Mini 2 takes, even in very bright areas. Drawback of the Nano: Post-processing RAW files is possible and results in even better quality than JPG, but it's a bit difficult, a novice would be clearly overchallenged. But the JPGs are quite great, especially in low-light conditions. The Mini 2 is NO match, not at all.

9) Video quality is like day and night. Mini 2's 4K videos are like 1080p upscaled to 4K, Nano Plus' videos are 4K. Dynamic range is low with the Mini 2, far better with the Nano. In low-light situations, Mini2 produces a slurry, Nano delivers sharp pictures. Drawback of the Nano: 1080p recordings are unusable, grainy, unsharp, small field of view, unusable because they just take a crop from the center of a 4K video instead of recording 1080p using the full sensor. You need to record videos in 4K. But those really shine. You might have seen Vics low-light videos. They are real. If filming with the Nano Plus after sunset or before sunrise, the videos look like taken under regular light. Mini 2's videos at such points of time are just a pixelated mess of noise. But of course it's also game over with the Nano if it's pitch dark.

I could write a lot more - but I guess it's enough for now.
As said: I own both drones, thus I know what I am writing about. Picture quality is always of my highest concern if it comes to binoculars (I am also a hunter), smartphones or drones. I bought the Nano just a week after I got the Mini 2. I liked the Mini 2's flight characteristcs, but it's camera is a simple no-go for me. A great drone for learning to fly (or teaching kids how to fly without greater risks), a great drone for taking pictures, even videos under ideal conditions. The Nano is a bit more difficult to handle, but has the same wind resistance (and still that power limiting issue in "low gears"), but the Mini is no alternative if you wish to capture pictures and videos you will always like.
If Autel corrects the power limit issue and hones the obstacle avoidance a bit, it would be almost all I could wish for. Add a color correction profile for working with RAWs - and I would be just happy.

 

[G_G]

I think you would have been much happier with the EVO II 6K. All of the problems you describe are not present in the EVO II 6K, but buying the EVO II right now is risky considering how quickly they drop battery support and all other support when a new version comes out.

5. It takes 2 minutes to shoot a 360 panorama in low wind (mini 2 needs not more than 40 seconds).
Autel Robotics still hasn't figured out how to shoot a 360° pano on any drone in under a minute. Takes 4.5 minutes on my EVO 2 6K without stitching. Mavic 3 shoots it on a 4/3 sensor in 40 seconds, and stitches it in 35 more seconds in camera into a 60MB Hi Res with a cloned in ceiling!

 

[earthskyvisuals]

New to the site but have been reading forever, I was planning on picking up a Nano + but have decided to wait and see if they fix their issues.

Bottom line is most drones are released for us to beta test, they need the larger market. Look at the recent release of the Mavic 3, it's a mess!

I joined today because not all reviewers are full of BS. The best out there, brutally honest reviews is Ian in London. I've been following him especially on the Autel drones because he really speaks his mind. He just gave a hard review on the Nano + after the FW update which was a solid thumbs down. I'll hold onto my money and will wait to see what shakes out between the MM3 and Autel resolving their issues before spending any money.

https://www.youtube.com/c/IaninLondon/videos

let's not forget QC Guy...Chris is consistently critical of the Nano+ through his testing experiences. i'm not subscribed to the channel, but do trust his judgment as an engineer & very pragmatic reviewer.

 

[March411]

let's not forget QC Guy...Chris is consistently critical of the Nano+ through his testing experiences. i'm not subscribed to the channel, but do trust his judgment as an engineer & very pragmatic reviewer.

I am a subscriber and pragmatic is a good way to describe him..... his soft voice and slow speaking are a bit challenging at times. He has good knowledge across several different drone manufacturers and does testing based on subscriber requests. He has also had some of the same challenges as Ian.

Ian just has better energy and Chris does at times have to much drama.