This was posted 8 years 5 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Bundle JJRC H37 Elfie Foldable Pocket Selfie Drone Black + Extra 3.7V 500mAh Battery USD$38.99 (~AUD$54.37) Delivered@Geekbuying

70
Bundle JJRC H37 Elfie Foldable Pocket Selfie Drone Black + Extra 3.7V 500mAh Battery USD$38.99 (~AUD$54.37) Delivered@GeekbuyingAffiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
pyreusk on 26/12/2016 - 22:45 geekbuying.com (319 clicks)
Last edited 26/12/2016 - 22:45
JJRCH37E
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

Was looking for a cheap drone to play with and saw this on Geekbuying. Then found a USD $5 discount coupon from Coupons.com, plus you get 3.2% back from Cashrewards. All up thought it was a good deal. So I got one.

I don't know anything about drones but for close to $50 buck I thought it was a good way to start. After this Phantom 4. I wish…

Note the discount coupon is only for this JJRC H37 drone.

There is also the drone only version (without the extra battery) for USD $41.99, I'm assume the code will work for this as well, so with the USD $5 discount, brings it down to USD $36.99 (~AUD $51.58)
http://www.geekbuying.com/item/JJRC-H37-ELFIE-Pocket-Selfie-…

Here is a video review https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBy2dVbr73Y

And here is the blurb about the drone from the geekbuying site

Highlights

Foldable Design
Designed to be portable, the aircraft featrues a foldable design, allowing for carrying anywhere on the go without hassle.

WIFI FPV
The WIFI enabled FPV camera is mounted on the aircraft, to broadcast the live video to the pilot on the ground, so that the pilot is flying the aircraft as if he/she is onboard the aircraft instead of looking at the it from the pilot’s actual ground position.

Altitude Hold Mode
In altitude hold mode, the aircraft maintains a consistent altitude while allowing roll, pitch, and yaw to be controlled normally.

Headless mode
Headless mode, a function through which the aircraft will consider the direction opposite to that of the remote control as the correct one by default when it flies to a height where the operator is not able to judge the direction of the aircraft head with bare eyes, so that he/she can go on with the remaining positions.

One Key to Take off & Land
One press automatically taking off or landing, rc quadcopter will take off or go back to the position where it took off.

3D Roll
Just press the button on transmitter, and you get 360-degrees Flip, continuous roll for perfect action and wonderful performance.

LED Light
The creatively designed LED lights are fitted for night flight possibilities, leaving a beautiful landscape in the night sky.

Toys & Kids Quadcopter

Related Stores

Geekbuying
Geekbuying

closed Comments

  • HomeAlone on 26/12/2016 - 23:22
    -5

    I don't know anything about drones but for close to $50 buck

    It's over $50

    HomeAlone on 26/12/2016 - 23:22 (Collapsed - Offtopic. Show)
    • DongerDash on 26/12/2016 - 23:33

      close to doesn't have to be under that amount

      • HomeAlone on 26/12/2016 - 23:36
        -6

        Actually it does. Look it up in a dictionary if you don't believe me.

      • HomeAlone on 26/12/2016 - 23:38
        -2

        Here, I did it for you.

        • tryagain on 27/12/2016 - 09:55

          Actually it does.

          Here, I did it for you.

          Doesn't say it has to be under that amount.

        • HomeAlone on 27/12/2016 - 13:56

          @tryagain: You telling me you don't even know what "almost" or "very nearly" means?

        • pegaxs on 27/12/2016 - 15:33

          @kamoi: OP said "close to $50." Not, "almost" or "very nearly" and I can assure you that $54.37 is close to $50. If it was $41.28, one would not say, "it's almost $50" or "it's very nearly $50." What one might say is, "it's close to $40" because, for some matamatical reason that escapes me, it is closer to being $40 than it is to being any other whole round 10 unit number…

        • HomeAlone on 27/12/2016 - 15:55

          @pegaxs: The definition of "close to" is "almost" or "very nearly".

          Pretty sure ~AUD $51.58 is OVER $50.

          You don't say you came close to hitting someone when you actually hit them do you?

          You don't say you are close to finishing a project when you've already completed it do you?

        • kahn on 27/12/2016 - 17:27
          +1

          @kamoi:
          I almost think you two are close to a divorce.

        • pegaxs on 27/12/2016 - 17:29

          @kamoi: Hitting someone is the same as the item being exactly $50. Now, if I didn't hit them, I would say I came "close to" hitting them. So, poor analogy there. And if I did hit them, I could say, I came "close to" missing them.

          And $50 isn't an end point. So you are allowed to go past it, unlike your "project" analogy. But let's say, you have $50. I find you a selfie drone that is just out of your budget, but isn't too far outside, let say it's only $4.37 over budget, I might say, here, what about this one, it's "close to" $50.

          Or a time time trial race. Fastest qualifying time is 50 seconds, but you just didn't make it with a time of 54.37 seconds. Some might say you were "close to" qualifying…

          I could also say you are "close to" being correct, but you're not. :)

        • HomeAlone on 27/12/2016 - 18:05
          -2

          @pegaxs: The education system has failed you.

        • kahn on 27/12/2016 - 18:41

          @kamoi:
          If I said one of the following, which would worry you more?
          1. Your house is close to mine.
          2. Your house is almost mine.

        • HomeAlone on 27/12/2016 - 18:59

          @kahn:

          close to
          (of an amount) almost; very nearly

          Do you not even know what amount means?

        • kahn on 27/12/2016 - 19:14

          @kamoi:
          Yes, but you didn't answer my question.

        • HomeAlone on 27/12/2016 - 19:20

          @kahn:

          A house isn't an amount. Has no relevance here.

        • kahn on 27/12/2016 - 19:54

          @kamoi:
          That's kinda my point. I refer to your comment "The definition of "close to" is "almost" or "very nearly". Now that you've added reference to amount, I'll quietly exit this conversation.

        • pegaxs on 27/12/2016 - 21:04

          It doesn't matter. You're still wrong. While not wrong wrong, as there are many ways to use "close to", your adaptation of how it has to be used is incorrect. And your examples are irrelevant. Like, really really irrelevant.

          Simple as that.

          As for your above question, your house close to mine, that scares me, I don't want that at all. And I don't want my house to be yours either, so, please don't buy it out from under me. I like living here..

          And this is getting confusing on who is saying what.. :/

        • HomeAlone on 27/12/2016 - 21:13

          @kahn:

          Now that you've added reference to amount, I'll quietly exit this conversation.

          I didn't just add the reference to amount now. It's been there the whole time in the originating comment of the chain you decided to get involved in. Didn't they teach you to pay attention in school?

        • kahn on 27/12/2016 - 21:18

          @kamoi:
          Oops. Still, you could've done without the other two analogies. I think they did teach attention techniques in school, but I probably wasn't paying attention at the time.

        • HomeAlone on 27/12/2016 - 21:21
          +1

          @pegaxs: Oh no. Random internet person says I'm wrong, but not wrong wrong. lol

          Like, really really irrelevant.

          but is there a lot more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking?

        • pegaxs on 27/12/2016 - 21:26

          @kamoi: I'm sorry, but I had to upvote that. :D

        • tryagain on 27/12/2016 - 22:48

          @kamoi:

          You telling me you don't even know what "almost" or "very nearly" means?

          Not only do I know, I looked them up for certainty. Don't confuse the context something is commonly used in with its meaning.

        • HomeAlone on 28/12/2016 - 02:00

          @tryagain: Ask someone for help with that dictionary.

        • pegaxs on 28/12/2016 - 07:23

          @kamoi: I need help with mine. Yours is different. Not one dictionary have I looked at says what you are saying. I have used, Oxford, Miriam Webster, Cambridge, MacMillan, Dictionary.com and any others I could find, hell, I even got desperate and used good old unreliable Google. I am having trouble finding one that says "close to means near the target amount, but under, never over." All the dictionaries I consult say the same thing;

          close to - (of quantities) imprecise but fairly close to correct.

          So, I am interested in your dinctionary that states, near in quantity/amount, but not over. (Hehehe, even the definition uses "close to" :D )

        • HomeAlone on 28/12/2016 - 18:01
          -1

          @pegaxs: Clearly you don't know how to use a dictionary.

        • pegaxs on 28/12/2016 - 19:20
          +1

          @kamoi: Did that. I cant find a single one that says "close to" must only refer to amounts under the targeted amount. Collins comes close though.

          Close to (or close on) : (Of an amount) almost, very nearly.

          ie: We don't have one in your $50 budget, but this one is $54.37, which is "close to" your budget…

          fistpump.jpg

        • HomeAlone on 28/12/2016 - 20:50

          @pegaxs:

          I cant find a single one that says "close to" must only refer to amounts under the targeted amount. Collins comes close though.

          It literally says it in all of them, but I suppose you can't see that if you don't even know the meaning of almost.

          Collins goes a step further and spells it out for you, but for whatever reason even that is beyond your comprehension.

          Close to a particular amount or distance means slightly less than that amount or distance. In British English, you can also say close on a particular amount or distance.

        • pegaxs on 28/12/2016 - 22:28

          @kamoi: See, now you're just wrong AND boring. It's like you read everything except my examples.

          $54.37 is "almost" $50. $59 is not.

          If you only have $5,000 to spend on the car of your dreams, and you find it, but it's $5,437, you would say, well, it's almost $5,000. Or you would say, at $5,437, it's close to $5,000… you tell the salesman you only have $5,000 and even he might say, well, I like you, you're a good kid, Kamoi, I'll see if I can get close to $5,000. That does not mean he is going to go under $5,000 just because he said "close to".

          Anyway, again, you are wrong. You are right in one respect, it can mean about, or nearly. I'm not arguing that, but it is not exclusively detained to be a value lesser than the "close to" value, that I have proved multiple times if you actually read my examples. But it can work in a positive upwards comparison, or a negative downwards comparison.

          Oh_no_he_didnt.gif

        • HomeAlone on 28/12/2016 - 22:33

          @pegaxs:

          You haven't proved anything. You're only explaining in your own words what is your understanding.

          Why don't you cite some sources?

          Show something which disproves all of the dictionary definitions I have posted.

        • pegaxs on 28/12/2016 - 22:59

          @kamoi: Don't need to cite sources when my examples speak for themselves. And you cited the same sources that I would have used. Thanks for that.

          No more examples, since you don't read them anyway and want some source even when I am showing you the unicorn, in the flesh…

          Let me know what is wrong with my last example and how there is no way that "close to" could ever be used in that circumstance, then I'll be impressed. Don't need to cite sources.

          "Look, Kamoi, I talked with the used car manager and he can't let that car go for $5,000, but I can come close to your budget, say, $5,200??"

          Actually don't. I don't need a reply. It's gone on long enough. But I have proved my point. Reply if you must, but I have put this behind me. If you want, debate it in Private chat, but I won't indulge it here any more.

          SuccessKid.jpg

        • HomeAlone on 28/12/2016 - 23:35

          @pegaxs: heh. You won't cite sources because you can't find any that will back up your claims.

          Surely all those dictionaries are wrong and you are the only one who got it right.

          /s

        • tryagain on 30/12/2016 - 16:29

          @kamoi:

          You won't cite sources because you can't find any that will back up your claims.
          Surely all those dictionaries are wrong and you are the only one who got it right.

          The dictionaries are correct it's your interpretation of them that is wrong on a number of levels.

          1st numbers can be approached from both sides that is why your linked definition says "short of", not "less than" This proves the opposite of your argument if anything.

          2nd, assuming almost actually meant what you have incorrectly asserted, the definition you provide as proof isn't just "almost", it's "almost, very nearly" "nearly" certainly doesn't mean exclusivity less than. You need to prove both mean exclusively less than to make your point correct. You haven't done either.

        • tryagain on 31/12/2016 - 08:23

          @kamoi:
          Yep, nothing even remotely close to "exclusively less than" in those two links.

        • HomeAlone on 31/12/2016 - 15:43

          @tryagain: You blind mate?

        • tryagain on 31/12/2016 - 19:44

          @kamoi: checked again, didn't see "less" once

        • HomeAlone on 31/12/2016 - 19:59

          @tryagain: Do you need me to hold your hand while you cross the road?

        • tryagain on 31/12/2016 - 21:41

          @kamoi: Nope, but you have now had two people painstakingly point out to you multiple flaws in your thinking and you still can't see it, so I will wish you a happy new year and leave you to think whatever makes you happy.

        • HomeAlone on 31/12/2016 - 21:49

          @tryagain: There are no flaws. You just don't understand English.

          but you have now had two people

          Well that changes everything. If two people think so then it clearly must be true. Everything in the world should be decided this way.

          /s

    • Benjamin7711 on 28/12/2016 - 21:18
      +1

      What a pathetic string of comments bloody hell

      • pegaxs on 28/12/2016 - 22:33

        Sorry, but I love it when a grammar Nazi gets it wrong. :D

        • HomeAlone on 29/12/2016 - 14:16

          You love living a delusion.

  • 2jzzzz on 27/12/2016 - 00:50

    Wanting to spend $200 - $300 on a drone for a newbie. Any pointers?

    Sorry to semi hijack

    • Bmoney on 27/12/2016 - 06:19

      Cheerson xc-20

    • cakesy on 27/12/2016 - 07:28

      Do a youtube search, there are some great reviews there.

  • BlueSkyHarvest on 27/12/2016 - 07:14

    Watched a few video reviews.

    Wonder if this variant is a better buy - easier to control perhaps:
    http://www.banggood.com/Eachine-E50-WIFI-FPV-With-Foldable-A…
    AU$56.54 shipped which is $2 more and no second battery.

  • cakesy on 27/12/2016 - 07:31
    +1

    WIFI Camera: 0.3MP

    Horrible camera though, I think you need at least 2.0MP. You will probably need to go up to about $70 for one of those.

  • kahn on 27/12/2016 - 07:39
    +2

    I just read the words "selfie drone" and my heart sank. Can we get any more pathetic?

    • pegaxs on 27/12/2016 - 15:37
      +1

      I know, right? Because hitting people in the head in public with selfie sticks wasn't good enough. Need something to ramp that damage up. I know! I large lump of plastic with rotating propeller blades!

  • ben1680 on 27/12/2016 - 10:43

    Currently same price at Everbuying (Drone only), with better 8% cashback (Topcashback).

    Can even be US$2 cheaper if you create new account and use the point.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join