Is the Mini 3’s photo quality as good as the Mavic 2?

[Droning on and on...]

The only data you get from the pixels is the luminance (brightness), and as I said previously, I do believe you can get that from the DNG files. The color comes from simply knowing what color filter is over each pixel. So, I think it should theoretically be possible to do your own debayering, but I don't know of any software that will let you do that -- I think it would take some coding.

I don't think so.

You get a 24 bit RGB triplet for each of 48 million pixels... that's 3x the data actually produced by the sensor. In other words, it debayers in creating the "raw" data, and synthesizes 2 of the 3 values RGB for each pixel.

A truly "raw" 48MP image from the sensor would be 48MB in size, and would display in grayscale. To display in color the application would have to know the color filter pattern (Bayer, Quad Bayer, etc.), which of course it doesn't.

Now, if we know the filter pattern, and if the native color channel for each pixel is passed through by the debayering algorithm unaltered, then it would be a pretty simple matter to extract the actual raw 48MB of "bayered" image data. Then we could really see the best that can be done with that camera.

Control over the debayering algorithm is huge. Image content can affect that choice – for example an image with lots of sharp edges, vs. mostly soft texture. Even the direction of edges (horzontal, vertical, angled, random) can influence how to best debayer.

Heck, even just being able to try different methods and picking the one that looks best would be immensely valuable, especially in professional applications. Can save a lot of cleanup in Photoshop.

Might hack it up, if someone hasn't done it yet.

 

[RogerDH]

I don't think so.

You get a 24 bit RGB triplet for each of 48 million pixels... that's 3x the data actually produced by the sensor. In other words, it debayers in creating the "raw" data, and synthesizes 2 of the 3 values RGB for each pixel.

A truly "raw" 48MP image from the sensor would be 48MB in size, and would display in grayscale. To display in color the application would have to know the color filter pattern (Bayer, Quad Bayer, etc.), which of course it doesn't.

Now, if we know the filter pattern, and if the native color channel for each pixel is passed through by the debayering algorithm unaltered, then it would be a pretty simple matter to extract the actual raw 48MB of "bayered" image data. Then we could really see the best that can be done with that camera.

Control over the debayering algorithm is huge. Image content can affect that choice – for example an image with lots of sharp edges, vs. mostly soft texture. Even the direction of edges (horzontal, vertical, angled, random) can influence how to best debayer.

Heck, even just being able to try different methods and picking the one that looks best would be immensely valuable, especially in professional applications. Can save a lot of cleanup in Photoshop.

Might hack it up, if someone hasn't done it yet.

I've been reading up on this, and it seems that RAW (and DNG) files contain sensor readings of light intensity for each pixel and just a description of the color filter array (CFA), so RAW file viewers and converters must always do their own demosaicing.

 

[Droning on and on...]

I've been reading up on this, and it seems that RAW (and DNG) files contain sensor readings of light intensity for each pixel and just a description of the color filter array (CFA), so RAW file viewers and converters must always do their own demosaicing.

News to me... thanks for doing the research! So is this s standard for "raw"? I always thought there wasn't one...

 

[RogerDH]

News to me... thanks for doing the research! So is this s standard for "raw"? I always thought there wasn't one...

The only standard I know of is DNG, which Adobe introduced. Apparently Adobe software allows some different demosaicing algorithms

 

[Cymru]

There is no standard for RAW - each manufacturer has their own and it often changes with each camera module.
DNG is a wrapper and Adobe open standard that can adhere to if they want but its NOT necessarily full RAW.
There is an option to embed the original raw file but that isnt always used (as is the case here).
Anecdotally with DJI, some processing happens with all their DNG "raw" files.

 

[Chapperz]

We can go through it as often as you like; you're simply wrong.

This is the camera that DPReview thinks is used in the Mini 3 Pro, and it does seem to have identical specifications:

OV48C

OV48C | OMNIVISION

www.ovt.com

These sensors have 48 million 1.2 micron photodiodes which can be binned in groups of four to produce the equivalent of 12 million 2.4 micron pixels. Please put aside your preconceived assumptions and read for comprehension.

I think that it is that sensor because omnivision uses DCG which as far as I know, nobody else does. I think you'll find it's proprietary technology.

I Think it's just too much of a coincidence and I personally suspect that dji have deliberately hashed the processing in 48mp mode to strangle it's capabilities in order to make them available in the air 3.

OV48C

OV48C | OMNIVISION

www.ovt.com

 

[Chapperz]

Maybe someone else can get through to you,I know I am done.

He 100% isn't wrong.

 

[Wreckhunter]

I've had hands-on experience with Autel products (the Nano+). The camera with it's RYYB sensor is the bare-bones of an absolute beast... low light it is phenomenal. But and it's a BIG but... The Autel drones I've had have all been mechanically unreliable and on top of that, Autel really fumbles the ball regarding getting their 80% finished products up to the same release specs you can rely on with DJI drones. Their firmware improvements are woeful and they still haven't tamed the RYYB sensor's proclivity for returning some pretty funky colour interpretation. Autel? Caveat Emptor. That's why I gave Autel a fair crack of the whip and finally (after the second Nano+ on the trot died before take-off) got a refund and forked out for the drone I should have bought in the first place... the Mini 3 Pro.

Guess you did not try the Lite+ then.I have it and it is a great product.The quality from the 1"
sensor is great.The nano+ is not even close to the Lite+Flight and the sky app.super no issues.
Yes the nano+ has issues.I do own a DJI product,but wanted to try Autel 'the Lite+ has many benefits
that even the Air series can't touch.I know this is a DJI forum,but I am responding to your Autel bashing.

 

[Felix le Chat]

Guess you did not try the Lite+ then.I have it and it is a great product.The quality from the 1"
sensor is great.The nano+ is not even close to the Lite+Flight and the sky app.super no issues.
Yes the nano+ has issues.I do own a DJI product,but wanted to try Autel 'the Lite+ has many benefits
that even the Air series can't touch.I know this is a DJI forum,but I am responding to your Autel bashing.

"Autel bashing".... That's a bit knee-jerk isn't it? The comment was honest, measured and based on direct personal experience. And you are correct - I didn't try the Lite+ then. Like the mini 3 pro that replaced them (plural) the consecutively owned and identically mechanically faulty Nano+'s were bought to fulfil a very specific purpose, the Lite series being too big and too heavy for case use. On top of that, I'm quite happy to call DJI out for releasing their new drones in an incomplete state and letting their first purchasers act as unpaid beta-testers to identify the bugs they eventually iron out.

 

[Wreckhunter]

He 100% isn't wrong.

"Autel bashing".... That's a bit knee-jerk isn't it? The comment was honest, measured and based on direct personal experience. And you are correct - I didn't try the Lite+ then. Like the mini 3 pro that replaced them (plural) the consecutively owned and identically mechanically faulty Nano+'s were bought to fulfil a very specific purpose, the Lite series being too big and too heavy for case use. On top of that, I'm quite happy to call DJI out for releasing their new drones in an incomplete state and letting their first purchasers act as unpaid beta-testers to identify the bugs they eventually iron out.

Yes you are Autel Bashing,what else would you call it.And so DJI is no good in other words
also.The mini 3 pro is far from a perfect drone,and no I do not have one for the vary reason
of all of the horror stories I am hearing.So in all of your whinning ,who in fact makes a good drone
in your eyes?
All done here

 

[Chapperz]

Yes you are Autel Bashing,what else would you call it.And so DJI is no good in other words
also.The mini 3 pro is far from a perfect drone,and no I do not have one for the vary reason
of all of the horror stories I am hearing.So in all of your whinning ,who in fact makes a good drone
in your eyes?
All done here

I never bashed anybody, I just know for a fact that he's 100% correct about binning and that the mini 3 Pro most likely does have a omnivision ov48c sensor.

Moreover, I'm actually considering an Autel for my next drone.

 

[Felix le Chat]

Yes you are Autel Bashing,what else would you call it.And so DJI is no good in other words
also.The mini 3 pro is far from a perfect drone,and no I do not have one for the vary reason
of all of the horror stories I am hearing.So in all of your whinning ,who in fact makes a good drone
in your eyes?
All done here