Can you tell me if this is the normal photo quality from the Mavic?

[TheSaffer]

This was taken with auto settings. I'm not expecting brilliant quality photos, but I didn't expect a potato cam...
Looks to me like a waterpainting...

I'm on the latest firmware...

 

[halley]

Does not seem too far out of the ordinary. A little post-processing on the 0029 image would result in a keeper. The 0011 image is too dark so the Mavic is over-aggressively compressing the foliage; see "watercolor effect." If you are in bright sun, and you don't ask it to dull the sharpness as a lot of youtube pundits suggest, it tends to do a better job.

 

[james_mav]

This was taken with auto settings. I'm not expecting brilliant quality photos, but I didn't expect a potato cam...
Looks to me like a waterpainting...

I'm on the latest firmware...

This was taken with auto settings. I'm not expecting brilliant quality photos, but I didn't expect a potato cam...
Looks to me like a waterpainting...

I'm on the latest firmware...

Are you kidding? Those look great for straight out of the box. I expect the Mavic II, III, IV, etc. will come with better cameras but it will also come with a higher price. If you had never read complaints about the watercolor effect from some of the professionals or those who may have gotten a faulty camera then you'd be extremely happy.

 

[Robbyg]

There certainly is something a bit weird about the Mavics pictures. It almost looks like a really good CGI version of the real thing. I have no complaints, after all its built to a price point and I seriously doubt they could squeeze a better camera in at this price level.

 

[KiterTodd]

This was taken with auto settings. I'm not expecting brilliant quality photos, but I didn't expect a potato cam...

Potato? The bepop camera looks like it was shot by a potato. This does not.
As long as you focus well, mavic photos are crisp.
Look around for tips on white balance settings and other settings

As comparison, I'm new to the Mavic but have found the color accuracy and balance is not as good as my GoPros, but the image seems clearer.

 

[Andrew F]

Those were pretty dark scenes. Do you have the RAW versions to check? I'm thinking the JPG compression algorithm DJI is using is sub-par. I personally don't care very much so I'm fine with the water-color treatment on the bushes and trees, but if you are trying to take high quality shots, then I think you have every reason to be disappointed. I haven't tried RAW but will the next time I have a chance so I can see if it is still so lossy.

 

[joet]

I have no issues with the quality. Are you grabbing them from DJI Go's editor and not downloading the original images? I grab mine from the SD card. Here's a sample:

 

[Andrew F]

I have no issues with the quality. Are you grabbing them from DJI Go's editor and not downloading the original images? I grab mine from the SD card. Here's a sample:

View attachment 5881

Nice photo and good point. He may be taking the photo from the cache rather than the original. However, I think many people have complained about this, so that may be irrelevant as I'm certain they were getting from the disk.

 

[TheSaffer]

The photos were taken from the SD card. I have cache disabled on both my drones.
I have taken some more today and when I look at the picture with 100% magnification, the images look anything but good. The RAW and jpeg files looks like this. I will take more with different settings to see if I can get better results.

 

[Andrew F]

The photos were taken from the SD card. I have cache disabled on both my drones.
I have taken some more today and when I look at the picture with 100% magnification, the images look anything but good. The RAW and jpeg files looks like this. I will take more with different settings to see if I can get better results.
View attachment 5887

It's looks like the website is converting the raw to jpg or you attached 2 jpgs? Honestly, I think the shots are amazing. I'm happy to trade off photo quality with accessibility. I'm filming whales and sharks that would be impossible without a drone and I'm very happy with the portability.

 

[james_mav]

It's looks like the website is converting the raw to jpg or you attached 2 jpgs? Honestly, I think the shots are amazing. I'm happy to trade off photo quality with accessibility. I'm filming whales and sharks that would be impossible without a drone and I'm very happy with the portability.

I wish posters would realize this is essentially a $200 camera in the drone. With the number of crashes reported on this website thank goodness DJI didn't put a higher end camera in the drone. It's not supposed to be a professional camera, if enthusiasts need that then they should go spend the extra $2 or $3K for the Inspire.

 

[Andrew F]

I wish posters would realize this is essentially a $200 camera in the drone. With the number of crashes reported on this website thank goodness DJI didn't put a higher end camera in the drone. It's not supposed to be a professional camera, if enthusiasts need that then they should go spend the extra $2 or $3K for the Inspire.

Exactly. They need a different quad copter with a much bigger camera.

 

[TheSaffer]

I appreciate the comments and I am really not comparing the Mavic to my Inspire Pro setup.
I'm only trying to find out if the photos from my Mavic is normal compared to other people's.

I have been comparing the images to my phone to be honest and in my humble opinion, I find the images from my Mavic disappointing.

None the less, I love the fact that I can sling the little drone in my rucksack and to be able to fly off in about 3 mins!

All in all I'm very happy with the Mavic...

 

[Andrew F]

I appreciate the comments and I am really not comparing the Mavic to my Inspire Pro setup.
I'm only trying to find out if the photos from my Mavic is normal compared to other people's.

I have been comparing the images to my phone to be honest and in my humble opinion, I find the images from my Mavic disappointing.

None the less, I love the fact that I can sling the little drone in my rucksack and to be able to fly off in about 3 mins!

All in all I'm very happy with the Mavic...

Yes. I don't believe the comment was directed at you. Lots of newbies complaining about the jpg compression.

 

[TheSaffer]

Just an update on my photo quality issues I apparently suffered...

After getting back to the UK and looking at the photos on my proper computer monitor, I realised that the photos are quite good. The issue was apparently the laptop screen resolution that I was using to view the photos!
Lesson learnt...

 

[Kilrah]

0029 looks normal, so your camera is probably fine.
0011 looks pretty awful, but that's due to shooting at ISO480 and the Mavic's noise reduction being pretty harsh. By shooting RAW you could do much better with good post work.

 

[MrMavic]

They look out of focus to me ... too soft.

 

[CactusJackSlade]

There certainly is something a bit weird about the Mavics pictures. It almost looks like a really good CGI version of the real thing. I have no complaints, after all its built to a price point and I seriously doubt they could squeeze a better camera in at this price level.

What others would you compare to at this price? Just wondering... The P3P comes to mind, but a much larger machine...