DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

Camera resolution questions

CountryGuy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2017
Messages
77
Reactions
77
Age
34
So after many searches it's still not crystal clear to me the differences between cameras on the Pro 2 vs the Air 2. On the face of it the 48 megapixel option for the Air 2 would seem like a no brainer, but those conversations often get into the technical details of just how the different sensors and the technologies they use enter in to the equation.

In considering which DJI to purchase, the main consideration in our case is high resolution still images. l'll continue to do research (and try to absorb all the tech details!) but perhaps someone can offer advice on how the two compare with respect to still image resolution, or point me toward that kind of information on the www?
 
So after many searches it's still not crystal clear to me the differences between cameras on the Pro 2 vs the Air 2. On the face of it the 48 megapixel option for the Air 2 would seem like a no brainer, but those conversations often get into the technical details of just how the different sensors and the technologies they use enter in to the equation.

In considering which DJI to purchase, the main consideration in our case is high resolution still images. l'll continue to do research (and try to absorb all the tech details!) but perhaps someone can offer advice on how the two compare with respect to still image resolution, or point me toward that kind of information on the www?
If you are looking for the bottom line no BS answer the M2Pro has a better camera. It will take better sharper photos hands down.

MA2 has a lower resolution camera but by means of a software trick it will allow you to crop your photos up to 4x without losing quality. The full resolution photos will be better on The M2P, however.

If you are interested in purely resolution because you plan to heavily crop your photos the M2Zoom might be the best option because you can zoom in optically AND it has a unique feature that takes several photos and stitches them together to get higher resolution in a better way than the MA2 by leveraging the adjustable zoom. The MA2 is basically making educated guesses to emulate what the M2Zoom is doing but guesses none the less.
 
I think this is a good read on the 48MP quad bayer design on the Air 2:


Resolution doesn't really equate to image quality as it's simply the number of pixels in the image which means it's entirely possible to have a high number of pixels and a poor overall image and an image with a low number of pixels can be a high quality image. The physical size of the sensor plays a large part in image quality with bigger sensors able to offer much wider dynamic range, lower noise and better detail and this is the advantage the Mavic 2 Pro offers with its larger 1in sensor compared to the 1/2in sensor in the Mavic Air 2. However to gain the most benefit from the M2P you need to be processing the raw files whereas the jpegs straight from the drone don't really show its potential.
 
There are some sample images here, both 12 and 48 Mp resolution: DJI Mavic Air 2 sample gallery
To my eye, they look a bit soft when viewed at 1:1. I don't think the tiny lens is really resolving 48 Mp and is already diffraction limited at f 2.8.
In low light, the M2 Pro will certainly be better. In the brightest light, it is hard to say if the MA2 would resolve more than the 20 Mp of the M2 Pro. I have yet to find any side by side still images to compare the two.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TampaTC
So after many searches it's still not crystal clear to me the differences between cameras on the Pro 2 vs the Air 2. On the face of it the 48 megapixel option for the Air 2 would seem like a no brainer, but those conversations often get into the technical details of just how the different sensors and the technologies they use enter in to the equation.

In considering which DJI to purchase, the main consideration in our case is high resolution still images. l'll continue to do research (and try to absorb all the tech details!) but perhaps someone can offer advice on how the two compare with respect to still image resolution, or point me toward that kind of information on the www?
May I suggest you do some reading on sensor size and how it affects image quality?
 
In regards to stills the 48mp output is a misnomer.

Anytime you interpolate you are guessing and adding softness.

Bayer guesses 2 of three colors by design. Capture red guess green and blue. Etc.

Now add 4x more interpolation for resolution and you just increase softness and fine detail loss.

Sensor is not new it’s been around over a year on some phones. Results have been shown to be less than stellar at the 48mp resolution.

Someday it might come in a native sensor but I don’t see it coming anytime soon. 20mp in pro is best there is for stills unless you want to go to the more expensive zenmuse cameras and APS-C

Can’t speak to video but safe to assume in low light quality will suffer.

Paul C
 
In regards to stills the 48mp output is a misnomer.

Anytime you interpolate you are guessing and adding softness.

Bayer guesses 2 of three colors by design. Capture red guess green and blue. Etc.

Now add 4x more interpolation for resolution and you just increase softness and fine detail loss.

Sensor is not new it’s been around over a year on some phones. Results have been shown to be less than stellar at the 48mp resolution.

Someday it might come in a native sensor but I don’t see it coming anytime soon. 20mp in pro is best there is for stills unless you want to go to the more expensive zenmuse cameras and APS-C

Can’t speak to video but safe to assume in low light quality will suffer.

Paul C
I have experimented with demosaicing Bayer images and more recently looked at what it would take to process a Quadbayer image from the sensor. It's complicated and much more lossy. Add to that the AA filter, diffraction and noise from the tiny pixels, it is amazing that the images come out as good as they do considering how much information is thrown away.
 
Wow-- GREAT information! Many thanks for all who replied. By way of background, I've had a photography business-- off and on-- for decades. Until recently the focus was on aerial photography (Cessna and such) and while that was a good biz for years, over time clients went to drones for much of their needs. Mostly commercial construction development and progress type shots. We did have a few 3DR Solos (remember them?!) and got the FAA 107 and all but other business became the focus and we pretty much dropped the aerials.

Lately I've been getting requests for aerial "portraits". Still images not video. I'm reasonably well versed in most of the technical aspects of photography re. sensors and all, but kept seeing some information that just didn't seem right to me.

For example, if you look at the video below, around the 11:00 minute mark this guy states:
>>When it comes to photos and if you're a photographer watching this, the Mavic Air 2 certainly has the upper hand


He goes on to rave about how impressed he was with the 48 MP images!

I was aware that there's more to resolution than pixels, but was not up to speed at all as to how the Bayer considerations figured into it. But thanks to the info here and my continued reading/studying I'm starting to see the light. There's obviously a lot of false or at least misleading info out there. And of course there's no way the marketing people at DJI would EVER attempt to muddy the waters, right?? ;)

In the end I expect there's not a huge difference between the two platforms and both can yield excellent images. The difference between the two-- under ideal conditions-- might not be all that noticeable to a casual observer. It's just that I wanted to make the final decision by cutting through the hype and misinformation.

Relatively new here but if/when we make a purchase, you can bet I'll be back to bug 'ya all with more questions! :)
 
Straight out of camera there will be no or very little difference for not skilled eye in photos in good light. M2P is not straight of camera type drone that is why i sold it.
 
I have used the M Pro 2 for mostly still landscapes in low light (sunrise, late afternoon, sunset) in our mountainous area. I am able to offer beautiful raw photography that easily enlarges to 24 by 36 after Light Room and Luminar. Just completed a physician office with 18 local shots. That camera is excellent once you master all the nuances of the drone and camera system. No regrets using it whatsoever. (I do have part 107)
 
These '48 Mega pixel shots' - Can you download them as DNG files, or just JPG?
 
Wow-- GREAT information! Many thanks for all who replied. By way of background, I've had a photography business-- off and on-- for decades. Until recently the focus was on aerial photography (Cessna and such) and while that was a good biz for years, over time clients went to drones for much of their needs. Mostly commercial construction development and progress type shots. We did have a few 3DR Solos (remember them?!) and got the FAA 107 and all but other business became the focus and we pretty much dropped the aerials.

Lately I've been getting requests for aerial "portraits". Still images not video. I'm reasonably well versed in most of the technical aspects of photography re. sensors and all, but kept seeing some information that just didn't seem right to me.

For example, if you look at the video below, around the 11:00 minute mark this guy states:
>>When it comes to photos and if you're a photographer watching this, the Mavic Air 2 certainly has the upper hand


He goes on to rave about how impressed he was with the 48 MP images!

I was aware that there's more to resolution than pixels, but was not up to speed at all as to how the Bayer considerations figured into it. But thanks to the info here and my continued reading/studying I'm starting to see the light. There's obviously a lot of false or at least misleading info out there. And of course there's no way the marketing people at DJI would EVER attempt to muddy the waters, right?? ;)

In the end I expect there's not a huge difference between the two platforms and both can yield excellent images. The difference between the two-- under ideal conditions-- might not be all that noticeable to a casual observer. It's just that I wanted to make the final decision by cutting through the hype and misinformation.

Relatively new here but if/when we make a purchase, you can bet I'll be back to bug 'ya all with more questions! :)
As long as you are interested in 72dpi and web production, he is right, as any iPhone can take a great picture. If you are interested in final prints, at 300 dpi, which he is not, from watching the video, then I believe you will see differences. I have worked with digital stills since 1999 at 2.7MP Nikon D1, and have tried to years to find a great software that will interpolate up to a greater resolution, but have never found one that equaled native resolution for a print.

It's all a matter of what you are after. My comments are reflected for the use of creating an image for printing, and not web use, remember everything looks great in sRGB at 72 dpi, on the web.

Paul C
 
As long as you are interested in 72dpi and web production, he is right, as any iPhone can take a great picture. If you are interested in final prints, at 300 dpi, which he is not, from watching the video, then I believe you will see differences. I have worked with digital stills since 1999 at 2.7MP Nikon D1, and have tried to years to find a great software that will interpolate up to a greater resolution, but have never found one that equaled native resolution for a print.

It's all a matter of what you are after. My comments are reflected for the use of creating an image for printing, and not web use, remember everything looks great in sRGB at 72 dpi, on the web.

Paul C

Definitely-- native res always superior to any kind of interpolation. Back when we were more active in aerial photography we printed hundreds of prints the largest typically 16x24. Interestingly, as far as our scenic landscape type prints were concerned, some of the best sellers were taken with very early versions of the DSLR compared to what we used later. I think the original Canon 5D was a whopping (!) 12 MP.

Good points re. difference between www view vs. print use. All depends on your audience. One bit of info, which I expect you know, "dpi" is meaningless when it comes to viewing an image on the web. An image set to 300 dpi will appear no different than one set to 72 dpi as long as the overall pixel sizes are the same. :)
 
Just to be clear the Mavic Air 2 doesn't use interpolation for its 48MP output as it does genuinely have 48 megapixels but they're extremely small and a different layout to a normal bayer sensor with the intention that it behaves similar to a 12MP but with improvements.

My first full frame camera was the 12MP Nikon D700 and I'd still take its output over most cameras, these days I'm still only on 25MP for my full frame cameras as I did try a 42MP Sony but I wasn't getting the benefit from the higher resolution which can take quite a bit of work to take advantage of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sar104
If you are looking for the bottom line no BS answer the M2Pro has a better camera. It will take better sharper photos hands down.

MA2 has a lower resolution camera but by means of a software trick it will allow you to crop your photos up to 4x without losing quality. The full resolution photos will be better on The M2P, however.

If you are interested in purely resolution because you plan to heavily crop your photos the M2Zoom might be the best option because you can zoom in optically AND it has a unique feature that takes several photos and stitches them together to get higher resolution in a better way than the MA2 by leveraging the adjustable zoom. The MA2 is basically making educated guesses to emulate what the M2Zoom is doing but guesses none the less.
MA2 and M2Z aren’t even close to doing the same thing with with respect to creating a higher res image. The MA2 resolution is, despite the marketing department wank, 12MP. The M2Z is an automated pano which does provide for a genuine and obvious increase in resolution in the stitched image.
 
As long as you are interested in 72dpi and web production, he is right, as any iPhone can take a great picture. If you are interested in final prints, at 300 dpi, which he is not, from watching the video, then I believe you will see differences. I have worked with digital stills since 1999 at 2.7MP Nikon D1, and have tried to years to find a great software that will interpolate up to a greater resolution, but have never found one that equaled native resolution for a print.

It's all a matter of what you are after. My comments are reflected for the use of creating an image for printing, and not web use, remember everything looks great in sRGB at 72 dpi, on the web.

Paul C
Have a look at Topaz Gigapixel AI. It does a great job of upscaling for prints. You can download a free 30 day trial.
Also try their sharpening software for free.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paul2660
Good read on the quad bayer.


If it works for some then I would say go for it.

Paul C
 
Have a look at Topaz Gigapixel AI. It does a great job of upscaling for prints. You can download a free 30 day trial.
Also try their sharpening software for free.


Use them both.

Sharpening tools are excellent.

Gigapixel IMO can do a ok job but still has same basic issues of interpolation. At least from my use.

Paul C
 
Definitely-- native res always superior to any kind of interpolation. Back when we were more active in aerial photography we printed hundreds of prints the largest typically 16x24. Interestingly, as far as our scenic landscape type prints were concerned, some of the best sellers were taken with very early versions of the DSLR compared to what we used later. I think the original Canon 5D was a whopping (!) 12 MP.

Good points re. difference between www view vs. print use. All depends on your audience. One bit of info, which I expect you know, "dpi" is meaningless when it comes to viewing an image on the web. An image set to 300 dpi will appear no different than one set to 72 dpi as long as the overall pixel sizes are the same. :)


Good point on dpi and web viewing.

Paul C
 
MA2 and M2Z aren’t even close to doing the same thing with with respect to creating a higher res image. The MA2 resolution is, despite the marketing department wank, 12MP. The M2Z is an automated pano which does provide for a genuine and obvious increase in resolution in the stitched image.
That’s why I said it was better. We are saying the same thing
 
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,600
Messages
1,554,278
Members
159,607
Latest member
Schmidteh121