100MP and 25MP DNG please

[Meta4]

There is no question that there are many variables when shooting; from where we focus to wind knocking the camera around, to what f-stop we are using.

As long as your exposure is right, none of those should have much impact on image quality.

The software and tech are amazing, but the camera is mediocre at best for high quality photography. My ten year old Panasonic m4/3 pocket camera with its Panasonic 14mm 2.8 lens delivers much sharper images from edge to edge.
There is no reason they can’t put that kind of quality on a Mavic if they wanted to

But your 10 year old pocket camera can't fly.
There are lots of weight saving compromises necessary to get a make a good aerial camera.
I think DJI has done a good job of it and your pessimism about camera quality are exaggerated.
Their cameras do produce high quality images.

 

[KS-6]

...and here we are again, even on the mavic4pro you have to be (perhaps) lucky enough to have a unit with the main lens centered, otherwise we are back to the usual, photos with blurry edges. This thing is starting to tire me. I have given a lot to dji and essentially it has given me machines that have allowed me to do beautiful, creative work and has given me the opportunity to express myself as I wanted on a photographic level (yes, alas I am more of a photographer than anything else), but it is not possible that in front of a new jewel of technology (because these drones, thinking carefully about what they do and how they fly, are small works of art of technology at prices, all in all, accessible to more or less everyone), as is this new mavic 4 pro, the problem of the non-centered lenses continues not to be addressed once and for all. And dji would have all the means and all the ways to be able to check the centering of the lenses, only that it continues not to do so. Unfortunately I see that we photographers are always the ones who get angry about this problem and it makes me think that if dji continues not to address the problem, I believe that most dji users use their drones for videos, where the non-centering of the lenses causes "less" damage than it does in photos. I don't know what to think, honestly for my work I would gladly take the 4 pro (creator) and basically I am also "happy" with its price, which is not hyper galactic as many thought, only that I get pissed off that, I spend over € 3500, all happy when the drone arrives, all happy I go to fly and take photos and then... and then you can find the edges blurred (and not just the edges sometimes). How do we put it? Let's say that DJI does what it wants, because it has no competition and sells drones as if nothing were happening.

I got over my sample variation anger when I bought my Mavic 3 Cine after I went through 3 of them over the course of a month to get one with a centered lens.

Then I got a good Mavic 3 Pro in the first one. So I am used to this game and as long as I can return them for a better one, I will keep doing that until I find one with properly collimated optics. So now we have the Mavic 4, I am hoping I get one as good as Meta-4 has once I do get one..whenever that is.

I am not expecting these mid sized drones to kick out image quality like my Hasselblad X2D, but I do have ways of making 200-300MP files out of the medium and telephoto cameras by shooting tiled that come out spectacular.

It’s a very unique tool and I say this as a person who still shoots aerials from helicopters and fixed wing aircraft. I know exactly what I am getting with it when I fly them.

 

[wco81]

As long as your exposure is right, none of those should have much impact on image quality.

But your 10 year old pocket camera can't fly.
There are lots of weight saving compromises necessary to get a make a good aerial camera.
I think DJI has done a good job of it and your pessimism about camera quality are exaggerated.
Their cameras do produce high quality images.

I haven't followed the GoPro cameras. Not sure if they ever made one with a large sensor. Maybe GoPro isn't some paragon of quality either since it's mostly about footage for online sharing. They tried to put out their own drone but maybe if they partnered with DJI, would it produce a better flying camera?

It seems DJI makes compromises to fit in these extra cameras and going for flashy things like vertical shooting and long flight times.

Because there are far more buyers interested in sharing cool videos instead of maximizing image quality.

 

[KS-6]

It seems DJI makes compromises to fit in these extra cameras and going for flashy things like vertical shooting and long flight times.

Because there are far more buyers interested in sharing cool videos instead of maximizing image quality.

I’m going to disagree with this, I shoot vertical photographs all the time with all my camera except for my square format Hasselblad film cameras. I think it is great move and likely came from talking with working pros vs Tik Tok influencers.

And these extra cameras are a **huge** plus for me, I use them a lot more than the wide angle camera because I stitch normal perspective images from them that are just filled with amazing detail and hold up to massive enlargement.

Maybe you need to use more imagination in how you might apply these tools, you know…think outside the box.

 

[Filmarik]

...and here we are again, even on the mavic4pro you have to be (perhaps) lucky enough to have a unit with the main lens centered, otherwise we are back to the usual, photos with blurry edges. This thing is starting to tire me. I have given a lot to dji and essentially it has given me machines that have allowed me to do beautiful, creative work and has given me the opportunity to express myself as I wanted on a photographic level (yes, alas I am more of a photographer than anything else), but it is not possible that in front of a new jewel of technology (because these drones, thinking carefully about what they do and how they fly, are small works of art of technology at prices, all in all, accessible to more or less everyone), as is this new mavic 4 pro, the problem of the non-centered lenses continues not to be addressed once and for all. And dji would have all the means and all the ways to be able to check the centering of the lenses, only that it continues not to do so. Unfortunately I see that we photographers are always the ones who get angry about this problem and it makes me think that if dji continues not to address the problem, I believe that most dji users use their drones for videos, where the non-centering of the lenses causes "less" damage than it does in photos. I don't know what to think, honestly for my work I would gladly take the 4 pro (creator) and basically I am also "happy" with its price, which is not hyper galactic as many thought, only that I get pissed off that, I spend over € 3500, all happy when the drone arrives, all happy I go to fly and take photos and then... and then you can find the edges blurred (and not just the edges sometimes). How do we put it? Let's say that DJI does what it wants, because it has no competition and sells drones as if nothing were happening.

I’m going to disagree with this, I shoot vertical photographs all the time with all my camera except for my square format Hasselblad film cameras. I think it is great move and likely came from talking with working pros vs Tik Tok influencers.

And these extra cameras are a **huge** plus for me, I use them a lot more than the wide angle camera because I stitch normal perspective images from them that are just filled with amazing detail and hold up to massive enlargement.

Maybe you need to use more imagination in how you might apply these tools, you know…think outside the box.

The 70mm especially has been an absolute champion for stitching. The stitched panos can be printed large and look stunning exhibiting incredible detail. Even a pro landscape photographers shooting with MF cameras and not familiar with current drone technology are amazed and can't believe that this is possible to achieve with a tiny flying machine. Something like this simple 3 shot stitch can be printed 40" wide without any problem

 

[wco81]

I’m going to disagree with this, I shoot vertical photographs all the time with all my camera except for my square format Hasselblad film cameras. I think it is great move and likely came from talking with working pros vs Tik Tok influencers.

And these extra cameras are a **huge** plus for me, I use them a lot more than the wide angle camera because I stitch normal perspective images from them that are just filled with amazing detail and hold up to massive enlargement.

Maybe you need to use more imagination in how you might apply these tools, you know…think outside the box.

I haven't used a drone with tele cameras. But is it a coincidence that these drones with multiple cameras are compromised image-wise?

I do have iPhones with multiple cameras and for all the hype, when you see the tele camera images, there's a decided difference in image quality. I still use them sometimes, including to get panos (individual shots that I stitch in Lightroom, because iPhone outputs an HEIC pano file instead of a DNG like individual shots).

All this has resulted in heavier aircraft which no longer is under 900 grams, at a time when there are more regulations to restrict recreational drone flights.

While some of you may have liked the tele cameras, what are the tradeoffs, especially with the image quality of the main camera?

 

[KS-6]

While some of you may have liked the tele cameras, what are the tradeoffs, especially with the image quality of the main camera?

None, I batch process the component photos of the final photo in DXO and then use Lightroom to stitch the final file. Just so you are clear, that means I take a bunch of 12MP photos of portions of the landscape I am wanting and it then becomes anywhere from 200-300MP. Then I drag that massive file and put it into photoshop raw and fine tune it, output to a tiff.

There is no single file from any drone that even comes close to these stitched files, they are phenomenal and greatly up the value in how I use drones for aerial landscapes.

This image made last week was with the 70mm cam on my Mavic 3 Pro. Using crampons and an ice axe, I climbed up to 11,500’ on a steep snowfield, cut and built a level launch and landing platform in the snow and then flew and shot a square format image with 25 frames, that is 220MP. I would be very comfortable printing this around 6x6’ feet…

 

[Filmarik]

None, I batch process the component photos of the final photo in DXO and then use Lightroom to stitch the final file. Just so you are clear, that means I take a bunch of 12MP photos of portions of the landscape I am wanting and it then becomes anywhere from 200-300MP. Then I drag that massive file and put it into photoshop raw and fine tune it, output to a tiff.

There is no single file from any drone that even comes close to these stitched files, they are phenomenal and greatly up the value in how I use drones for aerial landscapes.

This image made last week was with the 70mm cam on my Mavic 3 Pro. Using crampons and an ice axe, I climbed up to 11,500’ on a steep snowfield, cut and built a level launch and landing platform in the snow and then flew and shot a square format image with 25 frames, that is 220MP. I would be very comfortable printing this around 6x6’ feet…

View attachment 182599

Have you processed this also in color? That could be interesting too. Do not get me wrong I am a big fan of B&W and this photo looks like Sumi-e, a japanese ink painting. Incredible!

 

[Meta4]

I haven't followed the GoPro cameras. Not sure if they ever made one with a large sensor.

GoPro has only used small sensors.
Their current camera has a smaller sensor (1/1.9) than the long tele of the Mavic 4 pro.

Maybe GoPro isn't some paragon of quality either since it's mostly about footage for online sharing. They tried to put out their own drone but maybe if they partnered with DJI, would it produce a better flying camera?

Their cameras aren't in the same league as DJI and their attempt at a drone (and attempt to revise it after recall) were just horrible.
GoPro have only ever used superwide lenses and small sensors.
They have nothing to offer the maker of the world's best drones.

It seems DJI makes compromises to fit in these extra cameras and going for flashy things like vertical shooting and long flight times.

Yes, they have to compromise things to get them into a package that is flyable on a small drone.
That means you can't fly a full frame sensor and a 300 mm f2.8 lens on a Mavic drone.
But that doesn't mean that their cameras are junk.

Because there are far more buyers interested in sharing cool videos instead of maximizing image quality.

DJI are interested in maximising image quality within the constraints of what is possible for a consumer drone.

I haven't used a drone with tele cameras. But is it a coincidence that these drones with multiple cameras are compromised

More to the point ... is that a fact?

All this has resulted in heavier aircraft which no longer is under 900 grams, at a time when there are more regulations to restrict recreational drone flights.

It's unfortunate that some countries have additional regulations that limit (but don't prevent) the use of >900g drones.
But that's not a reason for DJI to stop development of their >900g drones.

While some of you may have liked the tele cameras, what are the tradeoffs, especially with the image quality of the main camera?

You keep saying that the tele cameras are a tradeoff, but you have no experience using them.
My experience tells me that you don't know what you are talking about.

Exhibit A .. a pano made with the long tele.

But you don't have to make large composite images to get good results from the long tele.
Exhibit B: a single image from the long tele camera

Exhibit C: a single image from the mid tele camera

I have hundreds of similar examples for all the cameras of the Mavic 3 pro and will soon be adding more from the new drone too.

 

[GadgetGuy]

It looks like his 28 cam is de-centered, soft to the right. Bummer about the 10 degree tilt limit on vertical mode, makes sense given the gimbal design.

Glad to see these, less of an improvement from the Mavic 3 Pro than I would have thought...

The 10° vertical tilt limit up and down was supposedly doubled in an update over the last week. Should now be +/- 20°.

 

[GadgetGuy]

that would be great as for sure I like a 10" tablet as it helps when flying to get shots like this.

Just rotate the 7” RC Pro 2 into portrait mode and the Mavic 4 Pro gimbal automatically simultaneously rotates to vertical shooting mode for tall sailboats! The vertical width of your 10” tablet screen is undoubtedly smaller.

 

[GadgetGuy]

It looks good to me, pretty well centered at that. This is encouraging, hopefully I can get my hands on one sooner rather than later.

A question, can you use "Free Panorama" mode with all three cameras and is it true free form as in not just limited to ultra wide panoramic photos but include square, vertical, horizontal, etc? My primary use of my Mavic 3 Pro drone is using the medium and telephoto cameras to shoot 20-40 frames to stitch together much larger file sizes for fine art and high end commercial output. Being able to automate this would be a serious game changer / time saver for me.

Thanks for posting!

Yes, all three cameras support the Free Panorama mode. 25 MP images for the 28mm and 12 MP for the 2.5x and 12.5 MP for the 6x. You also can use 7 stop AEB bracketing, instead of just 5! Finally!

 

[GadgetGuy]

I agree I'd love to have a Mavic 4 and do my own tests, but all I can do is look at what other people are uploading. Hopefully, more people will continue to offer raw files that we can download and process ourselves. I don't see any contradiction, but maybe my points were poorly communicated. I'd love to see a cityscape at 100MP and 25MP (what I assume is the sensor's native resolution). The vertical stitching of panoramas should also work very well for most of my needs if any lens distortion is well-controlled.

Also, for my needs, if it has any advantages at all, it's easy to justify the purchase. The new, larger, and brighter screen on the controller alone will be a major improvement for me. The ability to have obstacle avoidance in low light is also very useful for me.

Low light performance is massively improved, so if you do any shooting at dusk, like I do, the Mavic 4 Pro sings! 16 stops of dynamic range is a huge improvement, along with the wider aperture on both the 28mm and 6x over the Mavic 3 Pro. 12,800 ISO at night is an insane improvement, over a black frame at ISO 3200. 10 more minutes of flight time alone over the Mavic 3 Pro is worth the upgrade when the light is fading, and no time to return and change batteries. True Dynamic Home Point. Full deployment in under 25 seconds from a cold start, as the batteries can be set to automatically turn on by unfolding the legs and lifting up the screen on the RC Pro 2. 2000 nits. 55 mph. Rotating the screen to vertical mode on RC Pro 2 automatically rotates the gimbal to vertical shooting. Electronic ND filter ready, as soon as DJI says it's ready for release.

 

[UAVquadman]

Just rotate the 7” RC Pro 2 into portrait mode and the Mavic 4 Pro gimbal automatically simultaneously rotates to vertical shooting mode for tall sailboats! The vertical width of your 10” tablet screen is undoubtedly smaller.

for front shots yes it will be perfect for sailboats, I took this shot with my M3P a few days ago.

 

[SkySteve83]

I find for photos on the M3P telephoto cameras, the color accuracy is poor especially ocean shots. I did my best on this shot to get the colors right but with the main camera is easy with better results.

I have no interest in the extra lenses on these drones, or it won't be a deciding factor for me. I wish DJI would focus on one main camera with outstanding optics.

 

[SkySteve83]

I finally got to look at the uploaded DNG files from PS.JPG, and they look very good in the center, but the corners are definitely soft. Applying sharpening overall helps the overall image, but the corners are beyond repair. I wonder if the focusing algorithm uses hyperfocal distance for infinity focus? As anyone who has used large-format cameras has learned the hard way, focusing a wide-angle lens too far (past their hyperfocal distance) will cause the corners to become out of focus. I'm not a nerd by any means when it comes to optical design, but maybe someone who has done more experimenting with focusing these drones can add to this? I know that with some of the manual lenses I use for my architectural photography ( the Canon 24 or 17mm TS-E), checking the focus in the corners of an image will provide more consistent sharpness across the field compared with focusing only in the center.

Getting back to our Mavics, can anyone explain how they get the 100MP raw file from the 25MP sensor? Is it any better than just uprezzing with Topaz or Photoshop? I know my attempts to upscale the files from my M3P have been fruitless in improving the images.

Sorry if I got too off track, but expecting a flat field of focus with a 12mm lens shouldn't be too much to ask.

 

[SkySteve83]

As long as your exposure is right, none of those should have much impact on image quality.

But your 10 year old pocket camera can't fly.
There are lots of weight saving compromises necessary to get a make a good aerial camera.
I think DJI has done a good job of it and your pessimism about camera quality are exaggerated.
Their cameras do produce high quality images.

The sensor and optics in my Panasonic would easily fit into the camera on the Mavic if they would dump the second and third cameras. I guess they prioritize quantity over quality; those of us who are looking for uncompromised still photos are left out. Stitching looks like it may be the best solution, but sometimes that's not an option.

"high-quality images" is very subjective. Try making a 30x40" print from a landscape shot from your Mavic and let me know how it looks. For some of us, that is our requirement. It's frustrating that DJI is so close to being able to provide that, but don't. That is just not their market.

Maybe when I get my hands of the new M4P it will be better than what I expect or have seen so far.

 

[KS-6]

Yes, all three cameras support the Free Panorama mode. 25 MP images for the 28mm and 12 MP for the 2.5x and 12.5 MP for the 6x. You also can use 7 stop AEB bracketing, instead of just 5! Finally!

I got info from both a user and DJI that it is not exactly free across the board. For instance, let’s say I want to use the 168mm cam to make a large file that is equal to a 70mm or even a 28mm field of view, it would like choose those cameras instead of allowing a jumbo file size pano to be made from the 168mm.

That does not mean an update won’t change that but for now, until I get my hands on the drone and use my process to get the result I want, I have to go by what I am being told by others.

 

[SkySteve83]

None, I batch process the component photos of the final photo in DXO and then use Lightroom to stitch the final file. Just so you are clear, that means I take a bunch of 12MP photos of portions of the landscape I am wanting and it then becomes anywhere from 200-300MP. Then I drag that massive file and put it into photoshop raw and fine tune it, output to a tiff.

There is no single file from any drone that even comes close to these stitched files, they are phenomenal and greatly up the value in how I use drones for aerial landscapes.

This image made last week was with the 70mm cam on my Mavic 3 Pro. Using crampons and an ice axe, I climbed up to 11,500’ on a steep snowfield, cut and built a level launch and landing platform in the snow and then flew and shot a square format image with 25 frames, that is 220MP. I would be very comfortable printing this around 6x6’ feet…

View attachment 182599

Nice job on this one! Now that is something I'm looking forward to trying with the new one. My M3P is the original with the terrible tele lens and camera.

 

[KS-6]

I finally got to look at the uploaded DNG files from PS.JPG, and they look very good in the center, but the corners are definitely soft. Applying sharpening overall helps the overall image, but the corners are beyond repair. I wonder if the focusing algorithm uses hyperfocal distance for infinity focus? As anyone who has used large-format cameras has learned the hard way, focusing a wide-angle lens too far (past their hyperfocal distance) will cause the corners to become out of focus. I'm not a nerd by any means when it comes to optical design, but maybe someone who has done more experimenting with focusing these drones can add to this? I know that with some of the manual lenses I use for my architectural photography ( the Canon 24 or 17mm TS-E), checking the focus in the corners of an image will provide more consistent sharpness across the field compared with focusing only in the center.

Getting back to our Mavics, can anyone explain how they get the 100MP raw file from the 25MP sensor? Is it any better than just uprezzing with Topaz or Photoshop? I know my attempts to upscale the files from my M3P have been fruitless in improving the images.

Sorry if I got too off track, but expecting a flat field of focus with a 12mm lens shouldn't be too much to ask.

I’m finding the files that Meta-4 uploaded to be much better than previous drones on the Mavic 4. Maybe not Zenmuse better, but certainly workable. The problem you describe of field curvature could very well be an issue they won’t be able to solve in such a tiny camera. I would take less center sharpness for much better uniformity for sure as it is far easier to globally sharpen than locally or have to build annoying sharpening masks like I have to do with my Mavic 3 Pro to get uniform sharpness.

Most of my large format lenses being top shelf glass generally have very uniform sharpness at prime taking apertures, even with movements. But the widest I go is 75mm and I rarely even use that as my go to zone is between 135 to 350, much like other formats.

But uniform sharpness is a pain to get from makers these days, I had to go through 3 copies a piece of the 38mm and 55mm V lenses for my Hasselblad X2D system before I got a good one with centered optics. And that is really what the complaints have been about DJI’s optics outside of the ones for the Inspire series, field curvature can be worked with, but a improperly collimated lens that is de-centered is an absolute deal breaker.