I think that I shall pass on the Mavic 3 Pro for an Air 3 now that the lens specs have been revealed.

[rawman001]

Air 2S has a 1" on its 1x, so I'm guessing the Air 3 wide camera would have to at least have that and not a 1/1.3, yeah?

I really wish they'd just release something with a 1" sensor & optical zoom, rather than mating fixed cameras together with varying tech that may or may not shoot d-log depending which cam you're switched to. This lack of consistency between cameras in these dual and tri-cam offerings is kind of lame.

Agreed on all points. 1/1.3 seems like a step backwards from the A2s camera. If I want 1/1.3 I'll shoot with the Mini 3 Pro.

 

[solidhouse]

Does anyone have any idea what the maximum zoom will be in the tele-lens?

 

[Rilot]

Does anyone have any idea what the maximum zoom will be in the tele-lens?

It's not a zoom. It's a prime lens with a fixed 70mm equivelant.

 

[FiShBuRn]

I guess we have to wait for the Air3S to get 1' sensor...

 

[MavicAir2Marc]

6 months from now they'll come out with the Air 3S with the 1" sensor.

 

[jephoto]

I'd love a variable aperture as well! I don't expect it, but it would be nice for sure.

Seriously doubt it will have variable aperture. Thats one of the key features of the Mini line- fixed aperture.

 

[rawman001]

Seriously doubt it will have variable aperture. Thats one of the key features of the Mini line- fixed aperture.

I thought we were talking about the Air 3, not a Mini. Again I agree, I don't expect to see it.. but I would love to see it happen.

 

[VenomXts]

*looks over at air 2 and air 2s (and space where returned Mavic 3 classic sat)*
Should I stay or should I go.... lol

 

[Wreckhunter]

Does anyone have any idea what the maximum zoom will be in the tele-lens?

Probably 3X

 

[karlblessing]

Will just skip to a Mavic 3 if those are indeed both 1/1.3" sensors, since I'd have to buy new batteries and all anwyays, not going to do that on a downgrade.

 

[Chapperz]

Thank you for the info.

Ooooo.... 48mp aeb....

 

[Chapperz]

Air 2S has a 1" on its 1x, so I'm guessing the Air 3 wide camera would have to at least have that and not a 1/1.3, yeah?

I really wish they'd just release something with a 1" sensor & optical zoom, rather than mating fixed cameras together with varying tech that may or may not shoot d-log depending which cam you're switched to. This lack of consistency between cameras in these dual and tri-cam offerings is kind of lame.

@SkywalkerFeng stated that both cameras have the omnivision ov48c sensors.... I have looked into them and they are 1.3. That said. There's not much between the air 2s and mini 3 Pro in terms of image quality but, obviously if you want to blow images up for decent sized prints, 20mp is a bare minimum. However, the aforementioned sensor is 48mp and if you look into the actual sensor and what it's capable of, I think it'll be unwise to write off the air 3 before we see it... And if they can bring it in under 500grms then it's a sweet spot indeed.

That said, I have a funny feeling that the mini 3 Pro has had the same sensor in it from start but just restricted it in software.

 

[Duke_Mulligan]

I’m no photography expert… at first I really wanted a big sensor on the A3, and was a little disappointed to see 1/1.3 on both A3 sensors. That being said, my primary reason for wanting a big sensor was ability to zoom/crop images. So in my mind, the question is, is a 3x zoom on a 1/1.3 better than a 1”? Maybe so, I don’t know.

Also, the sensor on the A2 was technically 12mp with the quad pixel tech that really benefited HDR more than providing actual 48mp quality. Any idea what the comparison with this could be?

In terms of ideal conditions, I’ve been very happy with my A2 (and a slew of Freewell filters) - I’m talking ideal distance from subject and not low light conditions, as a novice those have been the challenges. I’ve heard the 1/1.3 sensor provided a nice improvement in low light, and if the 3x zoom could satisfy my needs, it’ll still be a win.

 

[Rilot]

48mp was never much good on the Mini 3 Pro and was more of a gimmick. I've shot 48mp and 12mp binned stills with the Mini 3 Pro and to my eyes, the 12mp pics are better. The 48mp ones always exhibited weird artefacts around areas of high contrast.
If this is the same sensor, then it will behave the same way. Treat it is a 12mp sensor.

 

[karlblessing]

48mp was never much good on the Mini 3 Pro and was more of a gimmick. I've shot 48mp and 12mp binned stills with the Mini 3 Pro and to my eyes, the 12mp pics are better. The 48mp ones always exhibited weird artefacts around areas of high contrast.
If this is the same sensor, then it will behave the same way. Treat it is a 12mp sensor.

yea it doesn't take much to see the flaws in the "pixel shift" capture especially on a flying camera. Some of the earlier Olympus land cameras did the same, and you can spot some of the little artifacts especially if any portion of the frame is not completely still (water moving, clouds, people, etc).

Hence why I viewed that particular 1/1.3" sensor as being natively 12 megapixels.

 

[Droning on and on...]

I have been trying to understand this release and how there going to separate it action from the Mavic 3 Pro and considering what they did on the Mini 3 Pro was insane to me. I hope I am wrong and this is GOAT but its not making sense they made a 2 headed Snake .

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly in the Rain.

It's a Mavic 3 Standard on the cheap.

Downgraded just enough to keep most of the pros buying the Mavic 3, and the timing of the release of the M3 Pro seems obvious now to be a part of the A3 launch strategy.

It's been a year. Most existing customers that were going to buy a Mavic 3 Standard/Classic have. The Pro keeps that market alive, while the A2(S) owners that just couldn't justify the cost for a Standard/Classic despite the attraction of 360 OA and multicamera will be pushed over the line with the A3.

This can't work without the M3 Pro out there already.

 

[Droning on and on...]

48mp was never much good on the Mini 3 Pro and was more of a gimmick. I've shot 48mp and 12mp binned stills with the Mini 3 Pro and to my eyes, the 12mp pics are better. The 48mp ones always exhibited weird artefacts around areas of high contrast.
If this is the same sensor, then it will behave the same way. Treat it is a 12mp sensor.

Nope.

It's all in the demosaicing. Quad Bayer sensors at full-resolution require more sophisticated debayering than simple Bayer-pattern filters. The basic nearest-neighbor averaging used in real-time to create RGB triples at each pixel location is inadequate to get results good enough for professional use.

However, raw DNG output can be processed with much better demosaicing and produce stunning 48MP results.

Keep in mind there's nothing "gimmicky" about any of this. The 12MP output needs to be demosaiced too... it's just a lot easier algorithmically, and therefore a much lighter compute load on the GPU.

 

[karlblessing]

Nope.

It's all in the demosaicing. Quad Bayer sensors at full-resolution require more sophisticated debayering than simple Bayer-pattern filters. The basic nearest-neighbor averaging used in real-time to create RGB triples at each pixel location is inadequate to get results good enough for professional use.

However, raw DNG output can be processed with much better demosaicing and produce stunning 48MP results.

Keep in mind there's nothing "gimmicky" about any of this. The 12MP output needs to be demosaiced too... it's just a lot easier algorithmically, and therefore a much lighter compute load on the GPU.

12MP Doesn't require the rest of the world to remain completely still as it uses 8 sensor moments to create it's image. Not just a matter of demosaicing, the sensor has to shift in each direction 8 times to produce that 48mp image which creates artifacts between either movement of the ground below or the drone's position itself. At the lower resolution single sensor capture you might primarily get a little motion blur based on the shutter speed.

So no, it's not as simple as you said, even with DNG processing on a computer(Which isn't available for 48MP mode) won't get rid of those kinds of artifacts. So yes it is a bit gimmicky.

 

[Droning on and on...]

What are you talking about, Karl? None of that is true.

48MP images are captured exactly the same as 12MP (non-HDR) images. Single exposure.

The artifacts occur because the quad bayer sensor results in larger errors when reconstructing the two missing color channels at each photodiode location.

The same errors occur in 12MP mode, they're just not as great in magnitude – usually. An image deliberately selected to amplify these errors will look bad in 12MP too.

Are you familiar with demosaicing algorithms and why artifacts occur? Did you know that the sensor in the Mini3P has demosaicing built-in, it's simple nearest neighbor averaging, and that RGB triples per pixel are read out directly from the sensor then compressed into a jpg, or encoded into a P, B, or I frame for 264 or 265 video output?

This is why there are artifacts in both 12MP and 48MP captures. There's no mechanical offsetting of the sensor with 8 multiple captures. That's crazy.

It's also why you can take the raw output, which contains a specification for the color filter pattern over the raw photodiode values, and put it through a much more sophisticated, compute-intensive demosaicing process, like Adobe's Enhance Details feature in lightroom, and produce a much more accurate, and higher resolution, result. Even with the 12MP output from the Mini 3.

And that's not even mentioning that to include servos in the gimbal that could accurately position in increments of the photodiode pitch on the sensor would cost like twenty grand

 

[Wreckhunter]

What are you talking about, Karl? None of that is true.

48MP images are captured exactly the same as 12MP (non-HDR) images. Single exposure.

The artifacts occur because the quad bayer sensor results in larger errors when reconstructing the two missing color channels at each photodiode location.

The same errors occur in 12MP mode, they're just not as great in magnitude – usually. An image deliberately selected to amplify these errors will look bad in 12MP too.

Are you familiar with demosaicing algorithms and why artifacts occur? Did you know that the sensor in the Mini3P has demosaicing built-in, it's simple nearest neighbor averaging, and that RGB triples per pixel are read out directly from the sensor then compressed into a jpg, or encoded into a P, B, or I frame for 264 or 265 video output?

This is why there are artifacts in both 12MP and 48MP captures. There's no mechanical offsetting of the sensor with 8 multiple captures. That's crazy.

It's also why you can take the raw output, which contains a specification for the color filter pattern over the raw photodiode values, and put it through a much more sophisticated, compute-intensive demosaicing process, like Adobe's Enhance Details feature in lightroom, and produce a much more accurate, and higher resolution, result. Even with the 12MP output from the Mini 3.

And that's not even mentioning that to include servos in the gimbal that could accurately position in increments of the photodiode pitch on the sensor would cost like twenty grand

Here we go ,the arguing starting on a drone that has not even been released yet.
The camera even not being 1" may surprise everyone.All the technical crap on sensors
impresses no one.Lets leave it up to the reviews to see what modern technology is capable
of.