2 Pro Vs. Air 2

[Jiggleman]

Taking images from the web and analyzing them is not ideal, what you really want are the raw files. But these seem good enough for an internet discussion (polite argument).
[/QUOTE]

I'm really curious to see some controlled tests between the drones' cameras, something along the lines of what DPreview do when they tests cameras. Overkill yes...but I like reading those reviews nonetheless if only to sate my curiosity.

 

[Johnmcl7]

It can be difficult to fairly compare the outputs of the two cameras because one of the main advantages of the larger sensor is there's a lot more flexibility in the raw file to improve the image. Small sensors like the Mavic Air 2 have very little latitude in the raw files and while the Mavic 2 Pro's 1in sensor is the smallest of the 'big' sensors it's still a big improvement and it's possible to pull back up to a couple of stops in shadows and highlights such as below:

For those that are used to processing raw images from larger sensor cameras they'll know the benefits the M2p's larger sensor brings but for those who work with jpegs straight from the drone, you're not likely to see much if any improvement from the Mavic 2 Pro. That's in no way critical of the Mavic Air 2 nor suggesting it isn't capable of great photos, I've seen people disappointed with the M2P because they've used it with jpegs and not seen the benefits they expected.

Pixels seems to be frequently treated as equivalent but they're not, the Mavic Air 2's 48MP sensor cannot capture four times the detail of the Mavic Air's 12MP sensor nor is it going to allow an extreme amount of cropping. Aside from marketing packing huge pixel counts onto small sensors doesn't bring significant benefits and it's noticeable that the megapixel wars on larger sensor cameras died off many years ago. Sony who manufacture both the Mavic Air 2 and Mavic 2 Pro sensor released their RX100 compact with a 1in 20MP sensor in 2012, the A6000 mirrorless with an APS-C 24MP sensor in 2014 and the Sony A7 with a full frame 24MP sensor in 2013. Since then they've released six more versions of the RX100 series, five more a6xxx cameras and two more A7x cameras with continual sensor improvements in each series but still the same number of pixels with the RX100mk7 still 20MP, the A6600 is 24MP and the A7Mk3 is 24MP.

Their R series is an exception with 34MP in the first generation, 42MP in the second and third generation and now 61MP in the current fourth generation but read pretty much any review of these cameras and you'll notice large caveats from the reviewers that to get the benefit of the higher resolution needs very good lenses and technique. Even the 61MP on the A7Rmk4 is still very different to the 48MP on the Mavic Air 2 because the full frame sensor is significantly larger so the pixel density is still comparatively low.

 

[swooshdave]

It can be difficult to fairly compare the outputs of the two cameras because one of the main advantages of the larger sensor is there's a lot more flexibility in the raw file to improve the image. Small sensors like the Mavic Air 2 have very little latitude in the raw files and while the Mavic 2 Pro's 1in sensor is the smallest of the 'big' sensors it's still a big improvement and it's possible to pull back up to a couple of stops in shadows and highlights such as below:

For those that are used to processing raw images from larger sensor cameras they'll know the benefits the M2p's larger sensor brings but for those who work with jpegs straight from the drone, you're not likely to see much if any improvement from the Mavic 2 Pro. That's in no way critical of the Mavic Air 2 nor suggesting it isn't capable of great photos, I've seen people disappointed with the M2P because they've used it with jpegs and not seen the benefits they expected.

Pixels seems to be frequently treated as equivalent but they're not, the Mavic Air 2's 48MP sensor cannot capture four times the detail of the Mavic Air's 12MP sensor nor is it going to allow an extreme amount of cropping. Aside from marketing packing huge pixel counts onto small sensors doesn't bring significant benefits and it's noticeable that the megapixel wars on larger sensor cameras died off many years ago. Sony who manufacture both the Mavic Air 2 and Mavic 2 Pro sensor released their RX100 compact with a 1in 20MP sensor in 2012, the A6000 mirrorless with an APS-C 24MP sensor in 2014 and the Sony A7 with a full frame 24MP sensor in 2013. Since then they've released six more versions of the RX100 series, five more a6xxx cameras and two more A7x cameras with continual sensor improvements in each series but still the same number of pixels with the RX100mk7 still 20MP, the A6600 is 24MP and the A7Mk3 is 24MP.

Their R series is an exception with 34MP in the first generation, 42MP in the second and third generation and now 61MP in the current fourth generation but read pretty much any review of these cameras and you'll notice large caveats from the reviewers that to get the benefit of the higher resolution needs very good lenses and technique. Even the 61MP on the A7Rmk4 is still very different to the 48MP on the Mavic Air 2 because the full frame sensor is significantly larger so the pixel density is still comparatively low.

I found where someone talked about the ability to shoot 12MB photos and use the extra pixels for HDR. I thought that was fascinating.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Johnmcl7]

I found where someone talked about the ability to shoot 12MB photos and use the extra pixels for HDR. I thought that was fascinating.

This could be workable on a large sensor where you can maintain a decent pixel size but the problem with doing it on the 1/2in sensor is you're going to have to use absolutely miniscule pixel sizes which is not going to be good for image quality. Given it's a stacked sensor (this technology has been ground breaking in the bigger Sony sensors) it could likely burst shots fast enough to stack full frame pictures without moving items causing trouble although you'd likely still need a decent amount of light.