Is the Inspire 3 series dead? Or still king of Pro drone?

[Ben_McPhee]

Spec for spec, the Mavic 3 Cine makes most aspects of the Inspire 2 look tired, except possibly for speed, controlling the camera separately and shooting backwards or to the side, as well as some aspects of the camera(s) like interchangeable lenses, and the Super 35 on the X7. I'm not sure how the sensors stack up after so many years, but they still look nice.

But, for $13,000-$19,000 (Australian) extra (depending on camera and options), and features straight out of 2016 that have been surpassed for some time now, and with what the Cine can do for 1/2-1/3 of the price, that's only just enough for a select few.

But even they must kind of be wishing for at least an upgraded airframe/transmission system by now. The X7 at least has the Super 35 + RAW thing going for it, but the Mavic 3 Cine looks to compete nicely with the X5s with lots of advantages, and only a few shortcomings that a pro would notice.

So:
1. Will medium/high end clients get used to seeing the Mavic 3 Cine as a genuinely "Professional" drone and pay accordingly (Perhaps even equally for a skilled pilot/DP)? Or will the Inspire Pilot or owner/operator be able to command a higher fee because their drone cost 3x more and can chase cars and get long lens shots?

2. Even if the Inspire guys cost more, should the Mavic 2 Pro guys who upgrade to the Mavic 3 Cine be raising their prices now? And will clients accept it?

(As I say that, I feel like the answer to both questions is that the Inspire 2 will still be the go to for a Pro because of its speed, and ability to orient it's camera the way it does, and the pilots and operators deserve to paid more. But... Mavic 3 Cine guys should be able to close the gap a bit. Even regular Mavic 3 guys can now improve their imagery a noticeable amount, so it seems fair to think about pricing too.)

3. Would the Inspire 2 (as is) make more sense if price was lowered? (2016 Tech should get cheaper, and 1TB of Storage should NOT cost $2700 etc. For say, $11-12K for what cost $18K today... I'd think about it if I was in need of a Pro Drone...)

 

[SethB]

For higher-end cinematography there are some differences. The I2 X5s or X7 has a solid camera, interchangeable lenses, and a very robust two-operator mode 360 gimbal with DJI-branded and integrated high brightness displays.

It also has greater lift for different payloads.

It does some things the M3 can’t.

Does the M3 do 85% or more of what the I2 does for 1/3 the price? Yes. But that last 15% is super important to some projects.

I don’t track “what is professional?” when selecting a camera or a drone. There are the project requirements and there are the supporting functions/technologies. There isn’t, in my opinion, a camera or drone for all seasons and reasons. Many/most professional DPs do not own high-end cameras, it’s all rentals, which supports bringing the right tools to the job.

 

[Ben_McPhee]

Good an

For higher-end cinematography there are some differences. The I2 X5s or X7 has a solid camera, interchangeable lenses, and a very robust two-operator mode 360 gimbal with DJI-branded and integrated high brightness displays.

It also has greater lift for different payloads.

It does some things the M3 can’t.

Does the M3 do 85% or more of what the I2 does for 1/3 the price? Yes. But that last 15% is super important to some projects.

I don’t track “what is professional?” when selecting a camera or a drone. There are the project requirements and there are the supporting functions/technologies. There isn’t, in my opinion, a camera or drone for all seasons and reasons. Many/most professional DPs do not own high-end cameras, it’s all rentals, which supports bringing the right tools to the job.

Good Answer. It does sound like the I2 has significant value to some Pro's. And it doesn't really have a competitor that I know of. (Above the Mavic, but below the point where you start flying Hollywood Cine Cameras).

But, I put my mind to work and thought of 25 "shortcomings" of the I2 by Modern standards, or improvements it could have. (I nearly posted it here, but it was an essay). Most weren't fantasy. They were catching up.

And being a 5 year old drone now... if I was in the market for an Inspire, I'd be really hesitant to spend $20K (Or more) on machine from 2016 that really needs some modernisation and hasn't really seen a price drop.

Just one easy example... $2700 for 1TB of storage, and $519 for a reader to be able to download it... That's an area where the current drone could drop it's price and a future drone could lower its price point.

 

[SethB]

Well, yes

Though, the I2 is really for a different market which is not demanding those updates. The heavy-lift Matrice series also do not get platform updates very often. It seems like it’s the payloads that get the updates.

I have access to an I2 at work, it’s the last drone to come off the shelf… only for use when it’s really needed because it is BIG. Its case takes up all the cargo space in my mid-SUV, and don’t forget to use your knees when you lift it!

And, yes, the media costs are a problem.

Flying it is different than a Mavic, here’s a handy chart:
Mini 2 - motorcycle
Mavic 2 - sports coupe
Inspire 2 - vista cruiser! (A big ol’ station wagon of the 1960s, a living room on wheels)

 

[vindibona1]

Does DJI geofence the Inspire series???

 

[brett8883]

Does DJI geofence the Inspire series???

Yes but it’s easily defeated.

 

[brett8883]

When comparisons to the I2 are made what gets over-looked are the professional features. Yes the camera is one thing and it is still better than the M3 but the camera quality is only one part of the equation. If you are a professional using this tool day in and day out hour after hour there are things you are going to want that the M3 doesn’t offer.

Hot swappable batteries:

The I2 takes 2 (two) TB50 per flight and you change the batteries one at a time without turning off the aircraft. That means you can land, change batteries, take off, and continue filming within 10 seconds without any of your settings changing. You could probably do it in 5 seconds if you really need to. Honestly the 20 minutes of flight time you get is plenty. No take is going to be that long and if you have to do another take it will take longer for the rest of the crew to reset then it will for you to land and change batteries.

Advanced Settings:
On the Mavic series DJI only lets you control a handful of parameters. Even less on the more recent ones that use the fly app. Here’s a series of screen shots from one of the gimbal settings page. You can see there are way more options to fine tune the gimbal parameters. You can also save up to three different configurations for future use.

There’s also much more you can control with the remote without having to use the app which a is a PITA if you are using it for long periods of time. You can set any the buttons to do practically anything you want.
My favorite is the levers on the side. These can be used to make smooth adjustments to a parameter on the fly. I set the right one to aircraft yaw speed and the left one to gimbal speed. So on the fly I can make the aircraft react like sport mode or tripod mode and anything in between without having to take my fingers off the sticks.


You also get a waveform monitor and focus magnification.

Among other things you get the FPV camera which is great as a single operator. I can have the FPV live view in the corner of the screen so I can keep an eye on that I’m not about to hit something while the main camera is looking a totally different direction. If the M3 had that people would go nuts over such a cool feature so maybe that 2016 tech isn’t so out dated as everyone says.

Swappable Media: They are expensive but at least with the I2 you can take out the ssd, put in a new one and continue filming. With the M3 if you fill the card that’s it you are done until you get the footage off the ssd. Try explaining that to a DP on location inbetween takes. For that reason alone makes it a non starter for use on a film or TV set.

Size and occusync are the only things I see as the only two real advantages of the M3 over the I2. Mastershots and all that are just gimmicks if you ask me. Do people really even use that?

Having said all this I will probably get an M3 to use on small projects where the I2 isn’t needed or it’s a high risk situation.

 

[SethB]

Recently got my hands on a DJI Ronin 4D, which has the new x9 camera. Super35! Full Frame! (edit) Can’t wait to see that show up on an over the counter drone. Inspire 3?

 

[brett8883]

Recently got my hands on a DJI Ronin 4D, which has the new x9 camera. Super35! Can’t wait to see that show up on an over the counter drone. Inspire 3?

It will be interesting and that would be great but there’s reason to believe it will be a different camera for the I3 not the X9. DJI would have a home run if they did that but I have some doubts about how that could be feasible.

The X9 is full frame btw not Super35

 

[SethB]

It will be interesting and that would be great but there’s reason to believe it will be a different camera for the I3 not the X9. DJI would have a home run if they did that but I have some doubts about how that could be feasible.

The X9 is full frame btw not Super35

I stand corrected - full frame it is, I’d mixed up a couple recent cameras.

A Zenmuse X9 is certainly speculative on a factory configured DJI drone. I’m *guessing* yes, but that’s only a guess. It does disconnect from the camera body with a similar twist-lock as the X5/X7 on an Inspire 2. I think it would be huge as a new standard in an intermediate cinema drone, but really have no idea if there would be a sufficient market to justify it.

But, is there even a large enough market for the Ronin 4D? I think it helps if some of the same tech goes into the terrestrial cam as goes into a new aerial platform.