Got my Nano Plus. Compared to the Mini 2:

[Mantrain]

I really do like this aircraft and I have a few drones now that I can compare it to but obviously its most relevant comparison is the Mini 2. Overall this Nano Plus is a nice flying machine and drones < 249 grams have a special place in my lineup for sure but it is no time to discard the Mini 2. The most salient impression of the two is that Autel sacrificed flight characteristic to gain a larger camera and sensors. So it is most obvious to me the Mini2 zips around the sky a lot more quick while the Nano plus is comparatively sluggish. I would prefer this Nano without sensors since it is a small craft and it appears to be weighed down by them. With my Mini 2 I am able to attain speeds up to 35MPH in sport mode and when in the right air current. I feel like the Nano could never do that and I was not able to ever exceed 25mph. Speeds may not be a deal breaker for anyone but it is fun to have the zippy little Mini2. The reason why I purchased the Nano Plus was for the larger camera, at .8 inches it has a lot lot more ability in lower light conditions and for the imaging more distant objects. The camera is better in every way since the sensor is larger. I also went for the Nano Plus so I can have something without the geofencing as a couple times my DJI drones have failed in RTH and required my intervention as they transitioned from open sky zones into authorization zones. In any case, regarding the sensors, I am not sure there is a real need for sensors on a small drone but I suppose Autel performed their marketing research and found that consumers want that. I like my sensors in my larger drones, like the Mavic 3 and Air2s because they have the capacity to carry them plus they are expensive craft and I appreciate the safe guards. So I have to say if one's interest is more for flying, then the Mini2 prevails. However, for many pilots, imaging is king and there the Autel Nano Plus clearly wins out with its 1/1.28 sensor. It also wins out because one does not have to deal with geofencing. It will be interesting to see where DJI will go with their upcoming Mini 3. and will Autel pick up any market share as consumers prefer less restrictive geo-fencing? I tend to think DJI is such a large, international company they will remain restrictive to preserve their place in the mainstream and prevent regulatory backlash. But will the Mini 3 come with three way sensors? I think the word out is yes. But then to what extent will it weigh the craft down?

Edit

I also need to add that since the Nano is slower, it has a shorter range I think. at least that is my impression. I also feel that the Mini 2 Ocusync 2 may be yet superior to the Autel Skylink system as in a few occasions my Nano seems to lose reception where my Mini 2 does not. But more testing would be needed.

 

[db4476]

Thanks for the review. The Nano plus just may be my next drone. As for the sensors, I don't rely on them, but some pilots like to have them. The DJI geofencing scheme is a big issue with me so that's another plus for the Nano Plus. Enjoy the new member of the family and happy flying.

Cheers!

 

[Frosty Of The North]

Thanks for posting this. I'm very curious about the image quality of the Nano.

If you have a chance to post comparison photos shot by both units, that would be brilliant!

 

[Saladshooter]

With my Mini 2 I am able to attain speeds up to 35MPH in sport mode and when in the right air current. I feel like the Nano could never do that and I was not able to ever exceed 25mph.

The top speed of the Nano+ is listed at 33mph. There have been a number of reviews online that the actual speed is much lower as you experienced..... but there are already a few reports of folks that reinstalled the software and found the speed limitation was gone. Hopefully this means its just a temporary hiccup.

 

[RogerDH]

... The reason why I purchased the Nano Plus was for the larger camera, at .8 inches it has a lot lot more ability in lower light conditions and for the imaging more distant objects. ...

Not really, at least not because of its size. The Nano's sensor is about 3.2 times larger than the Mini's, but it has more than 4 times as many pixels (50 MP vs. 12), so each pixel is smaller. That would make for more detailed images, but not more ability in low light.

 

[Saladshooter]

Not really, at least not because of its size. The Nano's sensor is about 3.2 times larger than the Mini's, but it has more than 4 times as many pixels (50 MP vs. 12), so each pixel is smaller. That would make for more detailed images, but not more ability in low light.

The Nano+ has much more low light capability than the Mini 2. First it uses pixel binning which combines four pixels into one to effectively create one large pixel. Even though its labeled as a 50mp camera its everyday use is at 12.5 megapixels.

Second it uses a Leica / Huawei sensor with RYYB technology which admits 40% more light for its size than the traditional RGGB sensors which are used on all other drones. The same sensor is used on the Huawei Mate phones and the Autel Evo Lite.

There are a bunch of videos posted online already showing how good the Nano+ is in low light.

 

[RogerDH]

The Nano+ has much more low light capability than the Mini 2. First it uses pixel binning which combines four pixels into one to effectively create one large pixel. Even though its labeled as a 50mp camera its everyday use is at 12.5 megapixels.

Second it uses a Leica / Huawei sensor with RYYB technology which admits 40% more light for its size than the traditional RGGB sensors which are used on all other drones. The same sensor is used on the Huawei Mate phones and the Autel Evo Lite.

There are a bunch of videos posted online already showing how good the Nano+ is in low light.

Ah, that's cool. That would make it much better than the Mini for videography, for not too much more money.

On edit: I'm still a little skeptical about RYYB filters. Yes, they pass 40% more yellow light than a RGGB filter, but to convert the image to RGB, the green must be extracted from that yellow. It's possible, I suppose, that you could get more green than with a RGGB, but since there isn't more red or blue, I wouldn't expect the improvement in low light to be dramatic. On the other hand, I see that it has an f/1.9 lens, which I would expect to noticeably improve low light performance.

 

[Saladshooter]

I'm still a little skeptical about RYYB filters. Yes, they pass 40% more yellow light than a RGGB filter, but to convert the image to RGB, the green must be extracted from that yellow. It's possible, I suppose, that you could get more green than with a RGGB, but since there isn't more red or blue, I wouldn't expect the improvement in low light to be dramatic. On the other hand, I see that it has an f/1.9 lens, which I would expect to noticeably improve low light performance.

I'm skeptical as well but the night videos I am seeing show that they are onto something. Saw a daytime Mini 2 vs Nano+ comparison video yesterday also , where the uncorrected 4K from the Nano+ was stunning. Now if Autel can pull together better customer service and improve the new Sky App there might actually become a competitor.

 

[Mantrain]

I'm skeptical as well but the night videos I am seeing show that they are onto something. Saw a daytime Mini 2 vs Nano+ comparison video yesterday also , where the uncorrected 4K from the Nano+ was stunning. Now if Autel can pull together better customer service and improve the new Sky App there might actually become a competitor.

I think one of the inherent issues Autel has in competing against DJI is the latter has huge amounts of capital to throw at their tech. Saying that I have not seen anything in the SkyApp which is a non-starter. DJI being so large has an entire army of customer service representatives and portals to log in to. Autel, I email them and wait on a rely which has occurred anywhere from 1 to 24 hours. I did find the purchase of the Autel Care Plan for my Nano easier. I just paid $79 and was emailed a activation code with clear instructions on binding it to my new drone. Still I have issues getting my plans activated with both the controller and the aircraft with DJI and my understanding is DJI may not stand behind their care plan if the consumer fails to also bind the RC. This seems like a possible pitiful loophole for DJI.

 

[Coskier]

I've been debating the Nano+ as a purchase before our trip to the French Italian coasts this summer. I'll probably wait and see what the Mini 3 looks like before pulling the trigger, but your review is helpful. Hoping to see some imagery to get a feel for the quality.

Interesting that Ken Herron's review showed GPS issues with the Nano+, but Captain Drone's video showed GPS issues with the Mini 2.

After watching 2 reviews, I am pretty impressed so far.

 

[bridger]

The geofencing / nanny issues are always a concern for me. I fear that with one heavy handed drone law -poof- your drone will be bricked or you can’t fly any more without an update, etc. The more independent / ability to check out of the oversight dependency, the better.

I’m interested to see how DJI counters with Mini 3, camera and such, but doubt they’ll ease off on the back door controls.

 

[Mantrain]

Here is a sample of some imagery with my Nano Plus. Still have no idea how to speed it up like the zippy Mini2.
But I love the camera; I think it is first rate for a 249'er.

I must admit I clicked the "auto" button in Lightroom so it applied some changes.

 

[Mantrain]

and here are two images taken with the Mini 2 which are not exact in terms of time of day, positioning and elevation but similar.

There was one that could have been 8 inches above the 396" limit and I want to limit the haters so I am not including it.

 

[Mantrain]

No one can dispute that under the right circumstances one can attain an amazing image with the Mini2. Mini 2 image here, not Nano. Some Lightroom manipulation applied.

 

[Saladshooter]

If you zoom in on the night photos of both the Nano and the Mini 2..... the difference is stark. The Nano+ shows low noise and good detail in many areas. The Mini 2 show lots of noise and not one sharp edge.

In daytime the difference is much less as expected.

 

[Mantrain]

If you zoom in on the night photos of both the Nano and the Mini 2..... the difference is stark. The Nano+ shows low noise and good detail in many areas. The Mini 2 show lots of noise and not one sharp edge.

In daytime the difference is much less as expected.

Now that you mention in it I am seeing a lot of grain and noise too in the skyline images of # 13 & #14 though those were taken close to dusk. i think the surface are of the Nano Plus sensor may be up to four times larger so there can me no contest here.

 

[Frosty Of The North]

Here is a sample of some imagery with my Nano Plus. Still have no idea how to speed it up like the zippy Mini2.
But I love the camera; I think it is first rate for a 249'er.

I must admit I clicked the "auto" button in Lightroom so it applied some changes.

Thanks for posting those examples. A few thoughts:

• The daytime Nano+ photo looks nice and sharp in the full view. I think that could partially be because of the high resolution of the image.
• Zooming into that photo to pixel-peep shows what appears to be excessive noise reduction applied. I wonder if the drone is doing that automatically.
• The night photo from the Nano+ is vastly better than any night photo I've gotten with the Mini 2.
• The "daytime" photo with the Mini 2 is more of a dusk image, so there is visible noise. It's not quite an apples-to-apples comparison, but regardless, the Nano+ image quality appears to be significantly better than the Mini 2 image quality.

I'm so tempted to pick one up.

 

[Coskier]

Thank you for sharing the images. Between those and the couple of reviews I have watched on Youtube, the Nano+ is quite impressive, and might be exactly what I am looking for. I'm not racing it, so the speed isn't a big deal. I'd rather have better images. Still going to hold out for the Mini 3 and see what it delivers, and if it delivers it in time (need it in June).

 

[Frosty Of The North]

Thank you for sharing the images. Between those and the couple of reviews I have watched on Youtube, the Nano+ is quite impressive, and might be exactly what I am looking for. I'm not racing it, so the speed isn't a big deal. I'd rather have better images. Still going to hold out for the Mini 3 and see what it delivers, and if it delivers it in time (need it in June).

I've been holding out for the Mini 3 as well, but when the Nano+ out I might not wait.

As for speed, at first I didn't think that was important to me, but I've learned to appreciate the greater speed of the Mini 2 vs Mini 1 when I want to be efficient with my time.

 

[Biscuitbeard]

Here is a sample of some imagery with my Nano Plus. Still have no idea how to speed it up like the zippy Mini2.
But I love the camera; I think it is first rate for a 249'er.

I must admit I clicked the "auto" button in Lightroom so it applied some changes.

I've been on the verge of buying a Nano+ but I'm mostly interested in stills, and nobody is posting samples! So thanks for posting these, very very helpful

To be honest those pics have pretty much killed my interest in it - the details are awful, lots of mushy watercolour effect. Might just be the settings in Lightroom though. Video looks amazing but I'm not convinced it's worth twice the price of the Mini 2 for stills.

Don't suppose you'd be willing to share a daytime RAW file I could have a nose at?

PS: I used Capture One for my Mini 2 raws and the difference in detail is insane! Only downside is I had to make custom lens and colour profiles to get decent results. But the results are great: