Does Mavic Shoot Video or Watercolor Paintings? Don’t settle. Get Involved!

[Dale Rodgers]

This is an interesting, if slightly crude test - thanks for doing it. Since being convinced to get off the d-log bandwagon of blindly going "hey, Beavis, it has a log profile, kewl" I'm actually satisfied with my results using cinelike to the point where I'm not sure I'm sufficiently motivated to do more testing using your method, but it seems like a somewhat scientific way to determine whether there's actually anything to be gained from a different profile. Perhaps I should even be shooting in none, so I might do the same with none vs cinelike I guess.

Hey man, whatever is working best for you.

Test took 10 minutes. All from the comfort of an armchair.

 

[AyeYo]

Hey man, whatever is working best for you.

Test took 10 minutes. All from the comfort of an armchair.

Thanks for doing this. More evidence on the pile to light fire to the bandwagon and bring better quality to more Mavic owners.

 

[dv8ed]

I haven't checked this thread or DJI's forum on this issue for a while now. Has latest firmware .600 fix mushy videos or should I send my drone in for repair? I'm still on firmware .200 using Color None 0, 0, 0.

 

[Realist123456]

I haven't checked this thread or DJI's forum on this issue for a while now. Has latest firmware .600 fix mushy videos or should I send my drone in for repair? I'm still on firmware .200 using Color None 0, 0, 0.

No change as far as I can tell. My research leads me to believe that the Mavic is just compromised in regard to image quality- but that's the tradeoff for portability and convenience. The tiny chip simply can't keep up. So keep it at none, 0,0,0 D-cinelike or similar, expose as far to the right as reasonable and don't step down into negative sharpness or contrast and you'll get as good as you can expect from it. Oh, and if you're shooting and your histogram is drifting to the left and/or the light is soft and/or you are shooting very finely detailed stuff like fine grass you can expect a degree of watercolour no matter what you do. It's just what the mavic does so we'll have to live with it.

 

[alirz]

No change as far as I can tell. My research leads me to believe that the Mavic is just compromised in regard to image quality- but that's the tradeoff for portability and convenience. The tiny chip simply can't keep up. So keep it at none, 0,0,0 D-cinelike or similar, expose as far to the right as reasonable and don't step down into negative sharpness or contrast and you'll get as good as you can expect from it. Oh, and if you're shooting and your histogram is drifting to the left and/or the light is soft and/or you are shooting very finely detailed stuff like fine grass you can expect a degree of watercolour no matter what you do. It's just what the mavic does so we'll have to live with it.

Well that's not promising but I somewhat agree. Mavic just has a crap camera when it comes to low light conditions.

 

[MrMavic]

My Mavic was Delivered Mar 17, 2017. I have been very frustrated trying to get useable video. I am convinced I have one with a bad sensor. My videos are very soft looking and the colors look all melted together. Also, on the right side, the image is blurred even worse than the rest of the image. I feel that DJI should compensate us for such a crappy camera. This quality is so much less than I expected. I am going to open a claim tomorrow.

 

[AyeYo]

My Mavic was Delivered Mar 17, 2017. I have been very frustrated trying to get useable video. I am convinced I have one with a bad sensor. My videos are very soft looking and the colors look all melted together. Also, on the right side, the image is blurred even worse than the rest of the image. I feel that DJI should compensate us for such a crappy camera. This quality is so much less than I expected. I am going to open a claim tomorrow.

The bolded in an indication of a manufacturing defect, not poor camera quality. I would definitely open the case and get a repair/new one.

 

[MrMavic]

The bolded in an indication of a manufacturing defect, not poor camera quality. I would definitely open the case and get a repair/new one.

Thanks ... So all these people complaining about the cheesy camera and crummy looking footage is because they have manufacturing defects? One in the same if there are that many complaining about crappy footage. This is the best photo I have taken with it. It came out a little better than the rest of them. I did tune it up a little in iPhoto. The focus just seems off, not sharp like my Phantom.
Oh, and I get great Photos and Video when I download from the Ph3 Advanced on the same computer.

 

[AyeYo]

Was that shot in .jpeg or RAW? That's not out of focus, it's over-compressed.

 

[karkas]

this thing with mavic files is hilarious...DJI support at Germany and NL don't give me a clear answer if this major problem can be fixed with repair/replacement ...in other words is this normal file that the mavic outputs?? total confusion, too many posts about it, no clear answer. i dont accept such an image quality from a 1200eu dji drone...some ppl accept that over the dji forums saying ''mavic is not for pros...if you want good image get an inspire2""...lol well all i want is just clean image and not a color painting...there is also that document that dji released explaing that pixel binning creates moire and aliasing and thats what we get with mavic...i wish i had aliasing and moire and not that blurry brussed image....anyway even their certified dji service here in Greece expecting an answer for a whole week about what they should with all those problematic mavics...madness

 

[MrMavic]

It's JPEG. I did not compress it.
On the blurry videos, I shoot 2.7K - 30FPS - 100 ISO - Use Histogram -

Was that shot in .jpeg or RAW? That's not out of focus, it's over-compressed.

It was shot in JPEG / M / SS 16:9 / WB Cloudy / 100 ISO / Cloudy / Style 0-0-0 / Color None
What's the best way to prevent compression from ruining your videos?

 

[Kestrel]

Well that's not promising but I somewhat agree. Mavic just has a crap camera when it comes to low light conditions.

Maybe for photos but mine shoots low right 100% better than my Phantom 3 standard. I recently did a sunset vid and im really happy with the results.

 

[Japie.G]

For sure don't use jpeg, use raw for pictures. 100pct better images. For the rest, don't use log profiles and don't under expose. My feeling says that the watercolor effect did get less in the .550 firmware. Don't know if thats a placebo, but in the shots i made after .550 i saw more noise and less watercolor.

 

[Kestrel]

For sure don't use jpeg, use raw for pictures. 100pct better images. For the rest, don't use log profiles and don't under expose. My feeling says that the watercolor effect did get less in the .550 firmware. Don't know if thats a placebo, but in the shots i made after .550 i saw more noise and less watercolor.

Im not happy with the raw photos that come out of the mavic, but then again im use to DSLR.

 

[Japie.G]

At least they don't have the compression artefacts.

 

[AyeYo]

It's JPEG.

There's your issue.

 

[Miguel]

Like many people here as much as I enjoyed flying my Mavic I wasn't very impressed with it's image but figured it was just due to the sensor size and the camera. Unfortunately I crashed it and had to buy a replacement while it was being fixed. The new one is much better and there is no comparison in the image. It's worth testing and if you aren't happy trying to get it replaced. The image still isn't perfect but some Mavic are much better than others

 

[MrMavic]

Like many people here as much as I enjoyed flying my Mavic I wasn't very impressed with it's image but figured it was just due to the sensor size and the camera. Unfortunately I crashed it and had to buy a replacement while it was being fixed. The new one is much better and there is no comparison in the image. It's worth testing and if you aren't happy trying to get it replaced. The image still isn't perfect but some Mavic are much better than others

This is my point. What's up with the crappy quality control? One guy gets a Mavic that produces excellent video, and the next guy gets one that the video looks like it came from a $30.00 Harbor Freight mini drone. If Apple buys DJI, that problem will end.

 

[tmoerel]

Sorry to say this but I see it on your video. 2.05mins in, look at the buildings. My eyes are so used to spotting it now but someone else might not be able to spot it at first. I might not the best person to comment as I sell my stuff and need the best of the best, so bear that in mind.

You are used to spotting problems but 99% of the public out there would not see any problem. Always keep in mind that you are producing for a target audience and not for yourself.
Creating perfection in videography and photography is pretty much the same as throwing pearls to the swines!

 

[tmoerel]

Thanks ... So all these people complaining about the cheesy camera and crummy looking footage is because they have manufacturing defects? One in the same if there are that many complaining about crappy footage. This is the best photo I have taken with it. It came out a little better than the rest of them. I did tune it up a little in iPhoto. The focus just seems off, not sharp like my Phantom.
Oh, and I get great Photos and Video when I download from the Ph3 Advanced on the same computer.


View attachment 10481

That is definitely not the best a Mavic can do. Here is a 100% crop from a picture i took a few days ago. It is a RAW image which i just colour corrected in Lightroom.

Not perfect like what I get out of a DSLR but still very acceptable on the details on both the fur of my dog as well as the grass.
Do not expect your Mavic to get DSLR like results but live with the fact that if you expose and focus well it still can give acceptable results. If you want DSLR like results then get something that can lift a DSLR aloft!