I've been talked out of the Mavic 2 for now

[Robert Mitchell]

As I stated up front I may get one after some issues are fixed. My look at early images from the camera do not knock me out... sorry.., that's what I see...

Not trying to talk you into anything, but trust me. On my 4K monitor, the still image quality is impressive and discernibly better. Tonal range and overall quality is getting hard to distinguish from my dslr. Video also.
I’m also a commercial photographer and had been waiting impatiently for this upgrade in imaging ability.

But... if you’re publishing web only or not making larger prints, the original MP is indeed quite capable, and only you can decide if it’s worth the price to upgrade.

 

[VietVet]

Bottom line if it doesn’t fit you’re needs move on. I’m not a professional shutter bug so I like it. Dji keeps updating firmware so wherever it falls short there they will correct.

 

[Samphotom]

I was one of those DJI customers that could not wait for the second generation Mavic, but reading many of the threads up here has really given me pause.

Sloppy assembly, killing useful features, and plenty of reported 'issues' have me really not wanting to upgrade.

My current drone is a Mavic Pro Platinum. It's quiet, stable, and has been reliable.

As a pro photographer I understand the limitations of the camera it has, but doing panos and shooting RAW I can get some breathtaking images.

http://www.azdeepskies.com/_Media/pano000y-pano.jpeg

No precision landing is a non-starter. Sure, I usually land manually, but there are times it's very nice to have, so why take it away?

Jpegs only on panoramas? What are they thinking at DJI? The Mavic 2 is supposed to be a better photography tool than the Mavic 1. Why have a better sensor and then prohibit you from shooting RAW in that mode?

The Zoom model is also another head scratcher. It's basically the same camera (sensor) I have now.

In my view a new model should improve on the old in many areas, but never get behind the model it replaces. That's the apparent mistake DJI has made here.

Some of these things can be fixed in firmware if DJI decides it wants to. Some things, like the camera sensor on the Zoom can't be fixed.

I'm sticking with my MPP, which takes fine pictures, is quieter than the new Mavic 2 according to several reports, and doesn't have crippled RAW capabilities.

I was ready to buy, and maybe in months or a year Q/A will get better and the Mavic Pro 2 will tempt me. But for now, no sale.

I have to chime in here... Precision landing is a deal killer for you? Really? Why exactly, can't you land on a specific spot yourself? Precision landing eats battery life because it takes 2x as long to land and what is the point exactly other than the cool factor the first time you do it?

And your major issue about "Crippled RAW" is somewhat unformed. By definition, RAW files are not edited and therefor can't be stitched together into a pano in camera because, that is what RAW files are, unprocessed by the camera images. They are not crippled, they are exactly what they are supposed to be, unprocessed. It is a simple task to stitch them together yourself using any number of programs, many of which are free. Again, not a deal killer in any way. Name a camera that will stitch raw files together in camera and spit out a raw pano? Are you saying you won't ever buy a camera of any brand unless it will do this for you? Come on, you are a photographer, do some of the work, that is half the fun.

So you are saying, you are willing to give up the ability to have a MUCH better camera (that is really all this class of drone is afterall, a flying camera) because it won't land itself within 2" or it won't stitch together raw files into one image for you? I'm sorry but, you are really complaining about stuff that shouldn't be an issue at all.

Keep you MP with it's vastly inferior camera, that is your business but whoever is talking you out of upgrading based on the comments you have posted here, is giving you really bad advice.

 

[Samphotom]

One report of a detached gimbal leads you to conclude widespread sloppy assembly?



It's nice to have, or the lack of it is a non-starter? Have you ever needed it?



The DNGs are there: Mavic Pro 2 - No RAW in Panoramic mode?



The limitations of physics. Were you considering the zoom, or the Pro?



The only thing I'm seeing as missing on the Pro is the precision RTH, and that's likely just a firmware upgrade to deal with the new sensors. It also has two IMUs and one compass (like the MA), as opposed to one IMU and two compasses on the MP. Hard to say which is better, but it looks like they have been finding two compasses a bit redundant, which is consistent with what we see as failure modes.



Most reports indicate the M2P is quieter, although I haven't made any measurements yet to confirm that.

EXACTLY! I agree on all points.

 

[offtheback]

I flew my pro 2 with a friend who has a Mavic(1) and a Pro 2.The 2 sounds noticeably quieter to both of us.Aside from pure db measurements,does the sound frequency change the volume perception?

 

[NetDep]

you just go on and not buy it. I'll keep on flying my awesome MP2!

Best. Reply. Ever.

 

[PixelRanchSteve]

Regardless of the drone -- and I have to say that I'll eventually switch to the Mavic 2 Pro -- photo quality is much more dependent on two things; the skill of the pilot and what's done in post-processing. It's just as easy to take lousy aerials with a 1-inch sensor as it is with a smaller sensor.

That being said, I look forward to the higher resolution camera of the M2P for mapping.

Off topic - are you the same Mel Martin I used to work with at TUAW who is a fantastic astrophotographer? If you are -- small world, buddy!

Steve S.

 

[melmartin]

I have to chime in here... Precision landing is a deal killer for you? Really? Why exactly, can't you land on a specific spot yourself? Precision landing eats battery life because it takes 2x as long to land and what is the point exactly other than the cool factor the first time you do it?

And your major issue about "Crippled RAW" is somewhat unformed. By definition, RAW files are not edited and therefor can't be stitched together into a pano in camera because, that is what RAW files are, unprocessed by the camera images. They are not crippled, they are exactly what they are supposed to be, unprocessed. It is a simple task to stitch them together yourself using any number of programs, many of which are free. Again, not a deal killer in any way. Name a camera that will stitch raw files together in camera and spit out a raw pano? Are you saying you won't ever buy a camera of any brand unless it will do this for you? Come on, you are a photographer, do some of the work, that is half the fun.

So you are saying, you are willing to give up the ability to have a MUCH better camera (that is really all this class of drone is afterall, a flying camera) because it won't land itself within 2" or it won't stitch together raw files into one image for you? I'm sorry but, you are really complaining about stuff that shouldn't be an issue at all.

Keep you MP with it's vastly inferior camera, that is your business but whoever is talking you out of upgrading based on the comments you have posted here, is giving you really bad advice.

I didn't say auto land was a deal killer. Try reading my post more carefully. I do feel useful features should not be thrown away. Apparently, DJI agrees with me, as after the uproar they announced they are putting it back in. I land manually about 95% of the time, but it can be a helpful feature. What is worthless to you may not be worthless to thousands of other customers.

I doubt you read the whole thread. What I was complaining about was the apparent loss of the ability to shoot panos in RAW. Several people mentioned it who owned the drone. Had you read the thread, as I did, you wold have learned that DJI changed the method of deleting that option but the feature is there. I'm quite aware of what a RAW file is, and how to assemble a PANO. I do it all the time in Lightroom and ON1.

As it stands now, there are quite a few reports of various failures of the new Mavics that give me pause. As I said in my original post, I may get one when things settle down. New drones often have issues.

Same with the original Mavic, and I waited until December 2017 to buy one. I was rewarded with an extremely reliable drone that has worked perfectly.

I'm happy with the photos I get, and posted an example. Yes, the new camera (not the zoom) should have much better specs. But I still believe it's the photographer that makes the pix, not the camera.

I don't think you made a bad decision to get the 2. I don't think I made a bad decision to hold off and see what is fixed, how the reliability is, and what features are reinstated.

 

[melmartin]

Regardless of the drone -- and I have to say that I'll eventually switch to the Mavic 2 Pro -- photo quality is much more dependent on two things; the skill of the pilot and what's done in post-processing. It's just as easy to take lousy aerials with a 1-inch sensor as it is with a smaller sensor.

That being said, I look forward to the higher resolution camera of the M2P for mapping.

Off topic - are you the same Mel Martin I used to work with at TUAW who is a fantastic astrophotographer? If you are -- small world, buddy!

Steve S.

Hi Steve... that's me! Pop me an email sometime.

 

[toddellis]

unless the arbitrary NFZ restrictions are gone or extremely dialed back - it's just another DJI.

 

[STKNRUD]

After reading all these posts about ‘good’, ‘better’, ‘best’, I think I should throw away all my Ansal Adams’ photos. . Justification for buying the ‘next gen’ is usually not about necessity or even observable improvement. I remember when 12 mp was astounding and composition was most important. I started flying RC with rubberband powered escapements with only rudder and 2 engine speeds. In some ways it was more fun then. But that is why this hobby is so great. There is something in it for everyone...photography, RC flying, tech geeks... The words every salesman wants to hear, “I gotta have that.” In a few more days the next ‘gen’ in iPhones, iPads and Watches will be announced. “Gentlemen, start your engines”.

 

[Turn11]

I have read many threads on this. It seems to me that a lot of people perceive the different frequency of the MPP as significantly quieter.

That was my first impression when I took my first M2P flight. After that flight I put my MPP up and IMHO there was a noticeable difference in sound. I could not quantify levels or frequency without instruments.

 

[Peter WEINBERGER]

I was one of those DJI customers that could not wait for the second generation Mavic, but reading many of the threads up here has really given me pause.

Sloppy assembly, killing useful features, and plenty of reported 'issues' have me really not wanting to upgrade.

My current drone is a Mavic Pro Platinum. It's quiet, stable, and has been reliable.

As a pro photographer I understand the limitations of the camera it has, but doing panos and shooting RAW I can get some breathtaking images.

http://www.azdeepskies.com/_Media/pano000y-pano.jpeg

No precision landing is a non-starter. Sure, I usually land manually, but there are times it's very nice to have, so why take it away?

Jpegs only on panoramas? What are they thinking at DJI? The Mavic 2 is supposed to be a better photography tool than the Mavic 1. Why have a better sensor and then prohibit you from shooting RAW in that mode?

The Zoom model is also another head scratcher. It's basically the same camera (sensor) I have now.

In my view a new model should improve on the old in many areas, but never get behind the model it replaces. That's the apparent mistake DJI has made here.

Some of these things can be fixed in firmware if DJI decides it wants to. Some things, like the camera sensor on the Zoom can't be fixed.

I'm sticking with my MPP, which takes fine pictures, is quieter than the new Mavic 2 according to several reports, and doesn't have crippled RAW capabilities.

I was ready to buy, and maybe in months or a year Q/A will get better and the Mavic Pro 2 will tempt me. But for now, no sale.

 

[dsmith76]

I am also a loyal dji owner and have tried allmost all the dji products so far including the mavic pro and the mavic air.
Now i just received the mavic 2 pro and i have used it for a few days so i can say that i know what i am talking about..
Its an amazing machine which is emproved in everything over the mavic pro which i had (i dont have the platinum).
All the things you are saying are not true, it has everything the mavic 1 had plus much much much more..
I mean the Haseblad 1" camera is just amazing.
The precision landing is there with even a led light for the night!!
more sensors .. faster... more flight time... come on now ..
And the quality is exaclty the same as the mavic pro was not better not worse.. just perfect!
Didnt you see the video of a guy hiting the mavic at speed to a tree and nothing happened to it??

I agree with you completely. I also have a Phantom 4 Pro, but doubt if it I will be using it much anymore. The Mavic 2 Pro is awesome, and now I have it paired with RE Goggles, which I will be testing out today.

 

[Peter WEINBERGER]

I think you are missing out on a much better drone with the Mavic 2. The camera upgrade is huge, even without RAW for panos. The details in the shadows, or highlights not blown out, and especially the ability to use in low light, where the old Mavic Pro is terrible. All the functions just work better and faster. From one pro photog to another, I would encourage you to give the M2 a good test. You won’t be disappointed. You literally are shooting images with a Hasselblad! As far as the zoom edition, a 2x zoom is pretty weak with image quality improved but not great.

 

[Chimilinga]

Sorry, but you are in error. DJI has already confirmed it does not have precision landing. It's not a feature of the Mavic 2. Also, Panos can not shoot in RAW. Therefore, the new Mavic 2, as nice as it is in some respects, is still missing features that the Mavic 1 had. Plus, my MPP is less noisy. So that's another missing, or deprecated feature on the Mavic 2.

Precision landing confirmed in the next firmware. RAW mode works for me.

 

[moonlitnite]

Whew, what a thread. Of course whenever someone posts in a fanboy group a litany of reasons they won't drink the Kool Aid, stuff inevitably starts hitting the fan.
A few points - for those who are professional photographers, meaning that most of their annual income comes from the trade, it would make little sense to "cheap out" (sic) on anything less than an Inspire 2. It amazes me how many professionals will settle for a shared GoDaddy webserver for their ecommerce business or try cutting corners that hurt their brand and quality.
Regarding sound levels, 3dB is generally considered the minimum auditory distinction that is perceptible to the human ear. But as others have pointed out, there are more factors at work here, especially the frequency of the auditory signal. Further, the associated wavelength of the frequency will have different attenuation characteristics depending on the medium (airspace and impairments). Then there is our flawed human ears. Most "information" that we hear is from 500 - 6K Hz (cps). In telephony, our C weighting power (dB) measurements was from 300 - 3.2K Hz, at which point filters greatly attenuated the signal on the telephone 4 KHz channel. Bottom line, if a UAV motor is spinning faster or has a different prop design, the perceived signal will sound different to a human.
Finally, let's not forget how important distance is in what we hear. Doubling the distance between the transmitter and receiver will quadruple the amplitude/power/dB of the signal. So if we double the distance the signal isn't one-half (3dB), but is instead one-fourth(6dB). So while one MP may sound somewhat louder or quieter during takeoff at 25 feet away, when taking photos at 200 feet from subjects, the signal is one-sixteenth (-24dB) the amplitude!!!

 

[Kingram]

Not trying to talk you into anything, but trust me. On my 4K monitor, the still image quality is impressive and discernibly better. Tonal range and overall quality is getting hard to distinguish from my dslr. Video also.
I’m also a commercial photographer and had been waiting impatiently for this upgrade in imaging ability.

But... if you’re publishing web only or not making larger prints, the original MP is indeed quite capable, and only you can decide if it’s worth the price to upgrade.

I need to get a 4K monitor which one do you recommend ?

 

[moonlitnite]

I need to get a 4K monitor which one do you recommend ?

Good idea to consider and explain your requirements (photos, gaming, watching cinema...). Refresh rates, contrast ratio, HDR, screen characteristics (affordability), monitor size and ratio (22:9), input devices, extras (like smart-TV apps)... blah, blah, blah... Now then, are you sorry you asked the question?

 

[STKNRUD]

Whew, what a thread. Of course whenever someone posts in a fanboy group a litany of reasons they won't drink the Kool Aid, stuff inevitably starts hitting the fan.
A few points - for those who are professional photographers, meaning that most of their annual income comes from the trade, it would make little sense to "cheap out" (sic) on anything less than an Inspire 2. It amazes me how many professionals will settle for a shared GoDaddy webserver for their ecommerce business or try cutting corners that hurt their brand and quality.
Regarding sound levels, 3dB is generally considered the minimum auditory distinction that is perceptible to the human ear. But as others have pointed out, there are more factors at work here, especially the frequency of the auditory signal. Further, the associated wavelength of the frequency will have different attenuation characteristics depending on the medium (airspace and impairments). Then there is our flawed human ears. Most "information" that we hear is from 500 - 6K Hz (cps). In telephony, our C weighting power (dB) measurements was from 300 - 3.2K Hz, at which point filters greatly attenuated the signal on the telephone 4 KHz channel. Bottom line, if a UAV motor is spinning faster or has a different prop design, the perceived signal will sound different to a human.
Finally, let's not forget how important distance is in what we hear. Doubling the distance between the transmitter