How do you like your new Mavic 2?

[STKNRUD]

Only thing I don’t like about mine is it came yesterday. Named it 911.

Better name than OBL.

 

[STKNRUD]

I now have both, have flown the Mavic Pro 2 and its flight characteristics are excellent, pity I cant say the same about the so called Hasselblad camera which should be as good as my Phantom 4 Pro camera but its not. Hopefully DJI will come up with some upgrades to fix the barrel distortion and soft video quality in FOV mode. Hope they get rid of pixel binning or line skipping and use the full sensor for video. Photo mode is very good.

Great videos! Thanks for sharing. Did you breath a little easier after the bird reached the shore on return?

 

[SteveCA]

I now have both, have flown the Mavic Pro 2 and its flight characteristics are excellent, pity I cant say the same about the so called Hasselblad camera which should be as good as my Phantom 4 Pro camera but its not. Hopefully DJI will come up with some upgrades to fix the barrel distortion and soft video quality in FOV mode. Hope they get rid of pixel binning or line skipping and use the full sensor for video. Photo mode is very good.

Very cool! how did you the capture sound??

 

[Jeffdj]

Very cool! how did you the capture sound??

Bit of a cheat here, I was swimming with Humpback whales in Vava'u some years ago and took the sound track from that video.

 

[SteveCA]

Bit of a cheat here, I was swimming with Humpback whales in Vava'u some years ago and took the sound track from that video.

wow, you matched the sounds perfectly to the whales breathing! excellent job!

 

[Red 5]

Upgraded from original Mavic Pro. The M2P is a more refined machine. I don't feel like I'm about to break the gimbal off in my hand when mounting the clip and cover. I like that it does about 31mph in P mode vs about 20mph for the M1P. Connectivity range seems improved. Control while flying seems somewhat better, but the M1P was great in this regard already. I like that it has collision avoidance in all directions now, but I haven't tested it. The slightly quieter rotors are welcome. I love the internal storage. I've forgotten to reinstall the microSD card in my M1P more than I'd like to admit.

The 20mp 1" camera beats the old 12mp unit nicely, which is the main reason I did the upgrade. Resolution and dynamic range are improved significantly. This is key for me as I just got a 5K iMac, and the old 12mp images don't even fill the screen without upscaling. However I also shoot a high end DSLR, so the M2P's image is still nowhere near that quality. I'm not big into making cinema quality movies so I don't have demanding expectations of video mode.

I don't mind the new gimbal clip/cover, I like that it's one unit. I had forgotten to remove the clip on my M1P a few times, this is now impossible. It would be nice if the gimbal could somehow "park" itself when powered off so that it didn't freely move about while getting the clip/cover on.

The DJI intro video implies that the M2P will follow a skier downhill. I'm looking forward to testing that.

Obligatory sample images. RAW conversion in Lightroom.

 

[Curt]

This is my second Mavic and it lives up to all the hype. My Mavic pro was so good I just had to have the Mavic pro 2 and so far it exceeds my expectations. This Mavic 2 took the place of my Mavic pro and Phantom 4 pro + which I sold a week ago. I travel a little and the compactness of this drone makes it a breeze to carry on an aircraft and clear TSA. I got a trip to Chiapas Mexico in December and am looking forward to flying my Mavic 2 pro.

 

[Roamer105]

Great videos! Thanks for sharing. Did you breath a little easier after the bird reached the shore on return?

Glad you flew the M2P for this video. Guess what, the horizon is actually level and the video is great!

 

[eukaryote]

M2P great for photography, very average for videography. I bought it mainly for photography, so not a great miss for me. Pity it was advertised as a video power house yet delivers much less.

Would I buy it after the $200AUD rise with the $100AUD fly more rise? No

edit:
Sample Photo:

 

[noosaguy]

Upgraded from original Mavic Pro. The M2P is a more refined machine. I don't feel like I'm about to break the gimbal off in my hand when mounting the clip and cover. I like that it does about 31mph in P mode vs about 20mph for the M1P. Connectivity range seems improved. Control while flying seems somewhat better, but the M1P was great in this regard already. I like that it has collision avoidance in all directions now, but I haven't tested it. The slightly quieter rotors are welcome. I love the internal storage. I've forgotten to reinstall the microSD card in my M1P more than I'd like to admit.

The 20mp 1" camera beats the old 12mp unit nicely, which is the main reason I did the upgrade. Resolution and dynamic range are improved significantly. This is key for me as I just got a 5K iMac, and the old 12mp images don't even fill the screen without upscaling. However I also shoot a high end DSLR, so the M2P's image is still nowhere near that quality. I'm not big into making cinema quality movies so I don't have demanding expectations of video mode.

I don't mind the new gimbal clip/cover, I like that it's one unit. I had forgotten to remove the clip on my M1P a few times, this is now impossible. It would be nice if the gimbal could somehow "park" itself when powered off so that it didn't freely move about while getting the clip/cover on.

The DJI intro video implies that the M2P will follow a skier downhill. I'm looking forward to testing that.

Obligatory sample images. RAW conversion in Lightroom.

Like you Red 5, I'm predominantly a photographer, not videographer. A also use high end DSLR gear and a 1" sensor isn't going to match a full frame, or even APS-C in anything less than ideal conditions. But if I look objectively at both your images above, and include my early results, there's no doubt in my mind that I'll be able to compete in photographic competition and do well. I feel that many of the complaints about image quality stems from the fact that many photographers shoot in JPEG. So much in finished image quality depends on post processing and it's obvious by the images above, you have a good handle on that.

 

[noosaguy]

Glad you flew the M2P for this video. Guess what, the horizon is actually level and the video is great!

I hate to tell you but the horizon isn't level but the video IS great.

 

[eukaryote]

Like you Red 5, I'm predominantly a photographer, not videographer. A also use high end DSLR gear and a 1" sensor isn't going to match a full frame, or even APS-C in anything less than ideal conditions. But if I look objectively at both your images above, and include my early results, there's no doubt in my mind that I'll be able to compete in photographic competition and do well. I feel that many of the complaints about image quality stems from the fact that many photographers shoot in JPEG. So much in finished image quality depends on post processing and it's obvious by the images above, you have a good handle on that.

I wouldn't jump so soon. In quite a few cases when printing at A3 sized prints, the difference between a well exposed m2p photo and my D810 with good glass isn't substantial, even when light starts to get low. Sure highlights and shadow recovery isn't as good, but for most of the day I'd say a 1 inch sensor and full frame won't yield much difference if printing relatively small prints.

Come night time though with astro etc, full frame blows it all out if the water

 

[CanadaDrone]

I wouldn't jump so soon. In quite a few cases when printing at A3 sized prints, the difference between a well exposed m2p photo and my D810 with good glass isn't substantial, even when light starts to get low. Sure highlights and shadow recovery isn't as good, but for most of the day I'd say a 1 inch sensor and full frame won't yield much difference if printing relatively small prints.

Come night time though with astro etc, full frame blows it all out if the water

The quality of a print depends on many things, including viewing distance and print medium. For example, you can print fairly low PPI if the image is only ever going to be viewed from a large distance, and mediums such as canvas are much more forgiving than high end photo paper or coated metal.

Further, we can't strictly look at megapixels - a 20MP smartphone photo (or 1 " sensor) and a 20MP FF DSLR photo are not going to look the same when printed to their theoretical maximum sizes. Ignoring this, A MP2 photo at 300 ppi (gallery quality) maxes out at 18 X 12 and a D810 would be 24 X 16 at the same. That is a pretty large difference, not to mention the pixel size and quality on the D810 is in a whole other league. The D810 image would also hold up much, much, better if pushed to a huge 36", 48" or 60" print. The smaller the print gets, the less this will be noticeable assuming we also ignore the much higher file malleability of the D810 in post processing, which would also translate into a better print. The 20MP sensor in the MP2 is equivalent to a 54MP FF sensor in terms of pixel size/density. If you look at a 4X6 or something very small, then there is little to differentiate even a smartphone photo or a 100MP Phase One MF photo all else equal, but it doesn't take long for the advantages of larger sensors to become visible as print size increases.

Lens quality also matters a lot for prints, and I haven't had a chance to play with a MP2 yet myself, but I am guessing the lens is nothing special compared to a good DSLR lens. I know the Mavic Air uses plastic lens elements, I am not sure about the MP2. The MP2 probably also has an AA filter (I am guessing it does), the D810 does not, which will make a noticeable difference for still images at wide apertures. Depends how picky you are too at the end of the day too Myself I have a D850 and a Sony RX100 VA, the latter of which has almost the same sensor as in the MP2 so I am quite familiar with it. I do a lot of large printing, up to 40X60".

 

[zwt100]

Well, I didn't voted, as I am not going to return my M2P, but I think I spent my money without much gain over MA. I did a few tests and I can't really see any difference between MA and M2P camera. My reasons to get M2P having MA already was:
1. Adjustable aperture, so I don't have to change NDs every time. But it seems that I will have to get NDs for M2P because aperture only can't compensate for conditions which I use a drone.
2. Range. I can get 1.5-2km on MA with fcc hack, but 500m+ makes control unreliable, starting quickshot 500m away is a challenge. With M2P I got 2.5km in same place and attempt to start hyperlapse in 1km was fail.
3. Side sensors. 90% of time I use quickshots and this is there side sensors should help. But APAS isn't really doing its job as expected, when I want to make a circle quickshot at low altitude it won't fly obstacle above, but just stops at obstacle.

I can't say I am disappointed in M2P but I think it just don't justifies 2x price over MA.

That’s interesting thanks for the comments. I’ve seen some really beautiful photos posted from the Mavic 2 and have been considering selling my MA and Spark along with all the accessories just so I can afford it. I’ve been really tempted but it sounds like it might not be worth the hassle. The major reason for me wanting to upgrade is the camera.

 

[noosaguy]

I wouldn't jump so soon. In quite a few cases when printing at A3 sized prints, the difference between a well exposed m2p photo and my D810 with good glass isn't substantial, even when light starts to get low. Sure highlights and shadow recovery isn't as good, but for most of the day I'd say a 1 inch sensor and full frame won't yield much difference if printing relatively small prints.

Come night time though with astro etc, full frame blows it all out if the water

I have to say, it's early days but I'm very happy with my M2P. It's the first drone to tempt me based on image quality and convenience (portability). I can take this little mother anywhere. My mate is a specialist mining photographer and he uses the Phantom 4 and he reckons it's a pain in the a** because of its size. He's buying the M2P which has the same sensor.

 

[noosaguy]

M2P great for photography, very average for videography. I bought it mainly for photography, so not a great miss for me. Pity it was advertised as a video power house yet delivers much less.

Would I buy it after the $200AUD rise with the $100AUD fly more rise? No

edit:
Sample Photo:View attachment 47723

Is that a stitched pano or a cropped single frame? It's nice.

 

[BlueBay]

I'd be interested to know how many people purchased the M2P for stills, and how many for video (or both). If this was marketed primarily as a full 1 inch still camera drone, how many would actually buy it at this price?

 

[eukaryote]

The quality of a print depends on many things, including viewing distance and print medium. For example, you can print fairly low PPI if the image is only ever going to be viewed from a large distance, and mediums such as canvas are much more forgiving than high end photo paper or coated metal.

Further, we can't strictly look at megapixels - a 20MP smartphone photo (or 1 " sensor) and a 20MP FF DSLR photo are not going to look the same when printed to their theoretical maximum sizes. Ignoring this, A MP2 photo at 300 ppi (gallery quality) maxes out at 18 X 12 and a D810 would be 24 X 16 at the same. That is a pretty large difference, not to mention the pixel size and quality on the D810 is in a whole other league. The D810 image would also hold up much, much, better if pushed to a huge 36", 48" or 60" print. The smaller the print gets, the less this will be noticeable assuming we also ignore the much higher file malleability of the D810 in post processing, which would also translate into a better print. The 20MP sensor in the MP2 is equivalent to a 54MP FF sensor in terms of pixel size/density. If you look at a 4X6 or something very small, then there is little to differentiate even a smartphone photo or a 100MP Phase One MF photo all else equal, but it doesn't take long for the advantages of larger sensors to become visible as print size increases.

Lens quality also matters a lot for prints, and I haven't had a chance to play with a MP2 yet myself, but I am guessing the lens is nothing special compared to a good DSLR lens. I know the Mavic Air uses plastic lens elements, I am not sure about the MP2. The MP2 probably also has an AA filter (I am guessing it does), the D810 does not, which will make a noticeable difference for still images at wide apertures. Depends how picky you are too at the end of the day too Myself I have a D850 and a Sony RX100 VA, the latter of which has almost the same sensor as in the MP2 so I am quite familiar with it. I do a lot of large printing, up to 40X60".

Most clients are viewing images at 1-2 metres distance, so for me 150dpi is adequate, at 20mp is ~ A3 sized prints. Mix of canvas and poster, with occasional fancier mediums such as glass and aluminium (I agree, canvas is very very forgiving with lower resolutions. I've printed 3 x 2m prints with a 36mp image, and they loved it, mind you people usually just glance and walk past. You wouldn't get away with this in an office where people look at it all day). Yes, 300dpi if you are literally 50cm or so from the image, and if the print company supports that resolution (most places that print cheap large prints don't even go up to that resolution would you believe) then go for it. But from my experience most people when looking at larger prints stand 1-2 metres away, hence we can relax the acceptable dpi.

High end DSLRs like the D810 will allow you to recover from a poorly exposed shot/difficult situation. However, if well exposed on both cameras, without substantial differences between highlights and shadows e.g. sunrise or sunset, then there isn't a substantial difference in image malleability, as not much needs to be done to them. The dynamic range of the D810 is 3 stops more than the Sony 1' sensor as a guess, but that only really starts to come into play when the scene is demanding. But yes, like I said before, unless e.g. sunrise/sets or astro, the dynamic range in a lot of day to day cases will be more than enough.

The advantage of a larger sensor isn't just for resolution. As has been shown with high resolution sensors that are smaller, ISO performance and graduations in tone are a massive advantage of in general having a larger sensor that has the chipset to capture high bit data. This is one of the main advantages of MF sensors and their 16 bit files. Even when printed on small sizes, the gentle/subtle graduations in tone of a MF are usually obvious in the right situations e.g. fashion photography. In normal day to day shooting, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between FF/MF/APS-C (unless you go full out wide on the lens, in which case the paper thing DOF of the MF lens will start to show up).

Lens wise, it's not bad the M2P. My 24-70 weighs more than the drone alone, so of course the M2P is going to get obliterated if comparing absolute resolution. But the DSLR and Lens combo sets me back almost 2kg, while the M2P allows for more new creative freedom, with image quality is that is quite stunning for the price, weight and portability. We've been offered a new tool that performs well in my opinion.

Fairly sure the M2P does not have an AA filter. It's got nasty moire patterns on roofs everywhere, but lightroom sorts most of it out

I think you are underpaying how good of a sensor for stills photography this drone/sony are able to produce. The Rx100 series from sony is an absolute ripper of a little thing.

 

[Porky]

Well happy with my M2P

 

[eukaryote]

Is that a stitched pano or a cropped single frame? It's nice.

It's a crop 1:3. Panos on the M2P raw output aren't bad when stitched in PS.

I'd be interested to know how many people purchased the M2P for stills, and how many for video (or both). If this was marketed primarily as a full 1 inch still camera drone, how many would actually buy it at this price?

Most people i'm guessing buy it for video. If marketed as primarily a stills drone, i'd be surprised if many bought it.