Best camera settings for Mavic 2 Pro (guide)

[WithTheBirds]

unless your subject is close. ive flown 3 feet from the weeknds face

What’s a weeknds?

 

[Sockeye]

+1 sharpness cuts back on that bad noise reduction. Using 0 or -1 or even worse -2 will brutalize and scrub the life out of your trees and bushes. It will turn them into a ball of wax. So....doing +1 sharpness WILL bring in more noise but you will bring shadow details and trees and bushes back. You can remove noise more acurately in post than the Mavic image processor can do in real time. DJI's teal time noise reduction is sloppy and inefficient.

Is this still the case for the Mavic 2 Pro? I used to push it to +1 for the Mavic 1

 

[Aerial West]

What’s a weeknds?

The guy in this music video i did the aerials on. the last shot, i was flying 3 feet from his face.

2 weeks later he performed on the grammys with daft Punk.

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

 

[UnlimiteDrone]

The guy in this music video i did the aerials on. the last shot, i was flying 3 feet from his face.

2 weeks later he performed on the grammys with daft Punk.

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

You did the aerials in the linked video?

 

[Aerial West]

You did the aerials in the linked video?

yeah, was speciofically referring to the pullback shot at the end I did.

 

[UnlimiteDrone]

yeah, was speciofically referring to the pullback shot at the end I did.

Awesome! Very good job. A lot of people watched your footage

 

[Paul2660]

Depth of field is of no concern with such a wideangle lens in aerial photography.

I agree on the DOF, but with both of the MP2 drones I have, the lens is not exactly centered, one of off on the right, the other left. Thus if you are at F2.8, you will have some corner softness, at least I do. More smearing than softness. Common with most wide lenses wide open and at the extreme corners. Even MF glass. So by F 4.5 to F 5.6 I see the least amount of this, before I start to see softness from diffraction by F 7.1 or so.

The amount of de-centering is minor, enough I will live with it as odds of getting another drone with a worse case situation is pretty high. And DJI can't make any real adjustments to lens like the one in this drone.

Problem with 20MP is that it's less forgiving than 12MP and such Quality issues show up.

Paul C

 

[UnlimiteDrone]

If only the Mavic 2 Pro shot 4K 60fps **

would be awesome

 

[CanadaDrone]

Problem with 20MP is that it's less forgiving than 12MP and such Quality issues show up.
Paul C

Actually this isn't quite true because if we are talking about the M2 drones, the 12MP sensor is not the same size as the 20MP one and they have different pixel sizes. For an easy comparison, a 20MP 1" sensor is equivalent to a ~54MP FF sensor and a 12MP 1/2.3" sensor is ~67.44MP. The 12MP sensor actually has more resolving power and is going to be harder on the lens than the 1" 20MP sensor. If the sensors had exactly the same angle of view, only then would the 20MP version would resolve more, as optical magnification is a factor of resolution.

Higher MP being less forgiving is actually a common myth because it's only true when scrutinizing at the pixel level in isolation. As soon as you do an equivalent comparison, it is no longer true. All else equal, a higher MP image will never be worse than the lower MP image if downsized proportionately to match the lower MP image for an accurate comparison. All else equal, it's always better to have higher resolution if you can get it (from an image quality perspective). You simply have more flexibility with no downside other than file size. If you want to get the most out of any sensor, regardless of resolution, the best lenses and best techniques are still necessary. This is especially easy to see in the DSLR world - less comparisons are made in the drone world but the exact same principles apply. To get the most out of a higher MP sensor, better glass and technique is needed, however it will never be worse than a lower MP sensor all else equal.

 

[llucixxeu]

There are no best settings for any camera. In general photographers and videograpers adjust their settings according to environment and setup. Ambient lightning, custom lights, weather conditions and the subject itself can influence camera settings. If you want to have always best settings for specific scene, then you need to learn basics of photography / filmmaking. Simple rules can force you to make those correct settings, like 180 rule for doubling the shutter speed over fps number, rule of thumb, triangle of lights balancing. Once you understand this, it will be quite simple to setup your hardware.

DJI Mavic 2 review

 

[Cliff_622]

Actually this isn't quite true because if we are talking about the M2 drones, the 12MP sensor is not the same size as the 20MP one and they have different pixel sizes. For an easy comparison, a 20MP 1" sensor is equivalent to a ~54MP FF sensor and a 12MP 1/2.3" sensor is ~67.44MP. The 12MP sensor actually has more resolving power and is going to be harder on the lens than the 1" 20MP sensor. If the sensors had exactly the same angle of view, only then would the 20MP version would resolve more, as optical magnification is a factor of resolution.

Higher MP being less forgiving is actually a common myth because it's only true when scrutinizing at the pixel level in isolation. As soon as you do an equivalent comparison, it is no longer true. All else equal, a higher MP image will never be worse than the lower MP image if downsized proportionately to match the lower MP image for an accurate comparison. All else equal, it's always better to have higher resolution if you can get it (from an image quality perspective). You simply have more flexibility with no downside other than file size. If you want to get the most out of any sensor, regardless of resolution, the best lenses and best techniques are still necessary. This is especially easy to see in the DSLR world - less comparisons are made in the drone world but the exact same principles apply. To get the most out of a higher MP sensor, better glass and technique is needed, however it will never be worse than a lower MP sensor all else equal.

"optical magnification is a factor of resolution."

Actually, magnification factor and resolving power are two completely different subjects.

I had a guy email me saying that the M2P's 28mm lens had more "resolution" than the Zoom or P4P's 24mm lens because it puts you field of view "closer".

I challanged his logic and he replied to me that a 100mm lens has "four times" the "resolution" of 25mm lens because you can "see allot more details with the 100mm".

His logic is utterly stupid!! ( I hope he is not reading this)

If you have bad eye sight and you cant see a stop sign at 100 yards. Is your eyesight ANY better if you can now see it perfectly standing 10 yards away from it? No!

The resolving power of your bad vision does NOT improve because you moved closer to it. Your bad vision resolving power is identicle at 100 yards as it is at 10 yards.

When the lens industry does resolution tests on lenses, they line up the calibration marking on the 4 corners of every chart. This requires everybody to physically move a camera forward or backward to match the field of view and calibrate the markings.

The science requires every lens' magnification factor to be REMOVED from the resolution test. It equalizes the field of view to detect the actual resolving power of each lens.

Magnification factor and field of view has nothing to do with resolving power.

 

[CanadaDrone]

"optical magnification is a factor of resolution."

Actually, magnification factor and resolving power are two completely different subjects.

I had a guy email me saying that the M2P's 28mm lens had more "resolution" than the Zoom or P4P's 24mm lens because it puts you field of view "closer".

I challanged his logic and he replied to me that a 100mm lens has "four times" the "resolution" of 25mm lens because you can "see allot more details with the 100mm".

His logic is utterly stupid!! ( I hope he is not reading this)

If you have bad eye sight and you cant see a stop sign at 100 yards. Is your eyesight ANY better if you can now see it perfectly standing 10 yards away from it? No!

The resolving power of your bad vision does NOT improve because you moved closer to it. Your bad vision resolving power is identicle at 100 yards as it is at 10 yards.

When the lens industry does resolution tests on lenses, they line up the calibration marking on the 4 corners of every chart. This requires everybody to physically move a camera forward or backward to match the field of view and calibrate the markings.

The science requires every lens' magnification factor to be REMOVED from the resolution test. It equalizes the field of view to detect the actual resolving power of each lens.

Magnification factor and field of view has nothing to do with resolving power.

I think we are talking about the same thing and you may have misinterpreted my post or more likely I did not explain clearly enough The email you got from that person is not at all what I am describing and doesn't take into account pixel size or sensor size.

 

[Cliff_622]

I think we are talking about the same thing and you may have misinterpreted my post or more likely I did not explain clearly enough The email you got from that person is not at all what I am describing and doesn't take into account pixel size or sensor size.

There was a lot in there that was not pointed at you! Sorry! Im just getting soooo many people telling me that they want me to test HQ 40mm and FOV 28mm and Zoom's 24mm.......the same exact feet placement from a test wall! Some people (not you) have this backwards idea that a 28mm lens has more resolution than a 24mm lens because it see "closer" to a subject. LOL!!!

Magnification factor/ Focal length have nothing at all to do with resolving power of a lens...that was my only point. It wasnt pointed specifically to anybody here

 

[CanadaDrone]

There was a lot in there that was not pointed at you! Sorry! Im just getting soooo many people telling me that they want me to test HQ 40mm and FOV 28mm and Zoom's 24mm.......the same exact feet placement from a test wall! Some people (not you) have this backwards idea that a 28mm lens has more resolution than a 24mm lens because it see "closer" to a subject. LOL!!!

Magnification factor/ Focal length have nothing at all to do with resolving power of a lens...that was my only point. It wasn't pointed specifically to anybody here

I think what confuses people (not you) also is sensor size and crop factors. For example if you have a 24MP FF sensor and a 16MP APS-C sensor, and assuming the glass is not the limiting factor, to put 24MP across the same scene at the 16MP you need different focal lengths on each. On it's own the 16MP sensor has higher resolving power with higher pixel density (equivalent to 36MP FF).

Comparing the M2Z and M2P cameras is apples to oranges because you not only have different focal lengths and apertures but different resolution and sensor sizes. The 12MP 1/2.3" sensor is equivalent to a ~380MP FF sensor and the M2P a ~146MP FF sensor to put it in similar terms. Not hard to see why they are so quickly affected by diffraction!

If you compare the M2Z and M2P side by side at the same equivalent focal length, the M2P is obviously going to look way better.

Optical magnification (i.e with a lens) doesn't change the sensor's resolving power or the lens' resolving power at all but it does have an effect on the resolution of items in the scene (i.e. a building 500 feet away taken with a 24mm lens and a 600mm lens are going to have vastly different details visible when overlapping areas are compared since you will have, say, 20MP images of each).

 

[UnlimiteDrone]

There are no best settings for any camera. In general photographers and videograpers adjust their settings according to environment and setup. Ambient lightning, custom lights, weather conditions and the subject itself can influence camera settings. If you want to have always best settings for specific scene, then you need to learn basics of photography / filmmaking. Simple rules can force you to make those correct settings, like 180 rule for doubling the shutter speed over fps number, rule of thumb, triangle of lights balancing. Once you understand this, it will be quite simple to setup your hardware.

Thats what I explained in the text

 

[Bussty]

Optical magnification (i.e with a lens) doesn't change the sensor's resolving power or the lens' resolving power at all but it does have an effect on the resolution of items in the scene (i.e. a building 500 feet away taken with a 24mm lens and a 600mm lens are going to have vastly different details visible when overlapping areas are compared since you will have, say, 20MP images of each).

Totally off topic but I have in the last year purchased a 300mm Olympus f2.8 lens (effectively 600mm on M4/3), super sharp, and for close subjects is razor sharp. But I hadn't appreciated when you start pointing it at things in the distance the magnification is so strong that you start to pick up atmospheric conditions and your pictures can really start to distort. I was thinking it would be an extreme example that wouldn't show correct resolving power if you set up your 24mm to fit that building width then moved back with your 600mm to also fit the width simply because of atmospheric conditions. Of course take out the atmosphere and I guess it is a fair comparison. On the test's that Cliff did the lining up of the different focal lengths to fit the same width but resulting in different distances of the drones seemed the only reasonable way to compare and of course at the difference in those distances atmospheric conditions would have no affect.

 

[CanadaDrone]

Totally off topic but I have in the last year purchased a 300mm Olympus f2.8 lens (effectively 600mm on M4/3), super sharp, and for close subjects is razor sharp. But I hadn't appreciated when you start pointing it at things in the distance the magnification is so strong that you start to pick up atmospheric conditions and your pictures can really start to distort. I was thinking it would be an extreme example that wouldn't show correct resolving power if you set up your 24mm to fit that building width then moved back with your 600mm to also fit the width simply because of atmospheric conditions. Of course take out the atmosphere and I guess it is a fair comparison. On the test's that Cliff did the lining up of the different focal lengths to fit the same width but resulting in different distances of the drones seemed the only reasonable way to compare and of course at the difference in those distances atmospheric conditions would have no affect.

Atmospheric conditions and heat distortion most definitely can affect long distance shots - not always, but it's a factor depending on the specific conditions you're shooting in. If you are shooting across some desert sand at noon, it doesn't take much before the conditions can start to degrade your image. When discussing things like this typically we assume ideal conditions and all else equal - otherwise they are very difficult to compare objectively.

 

[Hiflyer808]

Im struggling to think of examples where this might be an issue. Usually the opposite applies where auto constantly adjusting the exposure with changing light makes the footage look a little off- your eyes don't instantly adjust to changing light so we don't expect to see that in film. Setting your exposure before flying a take for the brightest part of the scene and locking it should give you much more natural looking footage.

I guess it depends mostly on how abruptly the auto exposure makes its changes. I have found with my mo1 that the change is pretty smooth, while with manual I've had shots ruined by not changing exposure quickly enough. Also depends on how complicated your flight path is. Perhaps mp2 auto exposure changes are more abrupt..

 

[WithTheBirds]

I guess it depends mostly on how abruptly the auto exposure makes its changes. I have found with my mo1 that the change is pretty smooth, while with manual I've had shots ruined by not changing exposure quickly enough. Also depends on how complicated your flight path is. Perhaps mp2 auto exposure changes are more abrupt..

I’m suggesting not changing exposure at all during the take. Expose to the right for the brightest framing.

 

[UnlimiteDrone]

I’m suggesting not changing exposure at all during the take. Expose to the right for the brightest framing.

Yes, that's how I do it too. Should work in most cases