Last bets regarding image quality vs 2S and Mavic 3

[test2000Anafi]

As of today, May 1st 2022, it appears me, dealsdrone, and Jasper Ellens are like the only people that believe Mini 3 Pro will beat Air2S image quality (not limited to low light), not to mention it will trade blows with Mavic 3. With YouTube compression, dynamic range and resolution will be near indistinguishable from Mavic 3 even. Gimbal angle might be the main differentiating factor. (as well as portrait shots/video).

We all know the sensor is only 1/1.3, whereas the Air2S is 1 inch and the Mavic 3 even bigger.
We also know the mini 3 is the cheapest, with the Mavic 3 being about 3 times more expensive.

So, what are your last bets:

Will Mini 3 beat Air2S image quality?
Will it compete with Mavic 3?

Or will it be a slightly improved Mini 2 version that has worse image quality than even Air 2 (non S) ?

Place your bets as in about a week, the entire world will know.

 

[Skyryder]

My bet, better than the Mini 2, not as good as the Air 2S.

Why would they make the AIR 2S their mid-range redundant? Not a good business move. It's one of their best selling drones right now besides the Mini 2. I am sure they thought about it.

 

[test2000Anafi]

My bet, better than the Mini 2, not as good as the Air 2S.

Why would they make the AIR 2S their mid-range redundant? Not a good business move. It's one of their best selling drones right now besides the Mini 2. I am sure they thought about it.

So DJI had to ask Sony to make their state of the art 2022 IMX sensor a little bit worse so that it would not end up beating the air2s ? Unlikely IMO but that could be a scenario. That same sensor will go into iPhone 14 pro which is the best of the industry so I am afraid the sensor will be too good for what you propose. The 1.7 aperture doesn’t really help with not beating air2s either..

but maybe you are correct! you placed your bet which is brave!

 

[vindibona1]

My take...
There are many here on this forum due to geographic location who are and will be locked into sub 250 gram drones. While the Mini 2 produced decent image quality, it's lacking when compared to the Air2s, Mavic 2pro and M3. I think DJI recognizes that and the Mini 3 Pro, I believe, is meant to catch up or try to catch up with the Air2s image quality. Will it meet or surpass the Air2s in that regard? I think the imagery will come close. But image quality is only one part of the equation.

Just as important as image quality, flight characteristics are as important or more important. Other than added sensors, I don't thing the Mini 3 will match the flying characteristics of the Air2s or Mavic 2 Pro and certainly not the M3. We know that it won't have the same stabilizing power in wind that the Air2s does. But it will be formidable in its own right.

One of our forum members, today I think, posted a video taking with his M3. I really wanted to see if I could see the extra quality that the M3 was supposed to provide. I looked on two different high quality monitors, including a 4k OLED display and honestly, in that presentation (YouTube) could not see any difference in quality than anything I've produces with my M2P. I think we are close to the point that it's not necessarily about the quality of the camera, but the quality of the medium the video is displayed on. Do I think the Mini 3 will be an improvement over the Mini 2? Absolutely. If I had to choose between the Mini 3 and the Air2s, weight aside, 100% I'd buy the Air2s, which seems similarly priced. JMO

 

[Wreckhunter]

As of today, May 1st 2022, it appears me, dealsdrone, and Jasper Ellens are like the only people that believe Mini 3 Pro will beat Air2S image quality (not limited to low light), not to mention it will trade blows with Mavic 3. With YouTube compression, dynamic range and resolution will be near indistinguishable from Mavic 3 even. Gimbal angle might be the main differentiating factor. (as well as portrait shots/video).

We all know the sensor is only 1/1.3, whereas the Air2S is 1 inch and the Mavic 3 even bigger.
We also know the mini 3 is the cheapest, with the Mavic 3 being about 3 times more expensive.

So, what are your last bets:

Will Mini 3 beat Air2S image quality?
Will it compete with Mavic 3?

Or will it be a slightly improved Mini 2 version that has worse image quality than even Air 2 (non S) ?

Place your bets as in about a week, the entire world will know.

Mini 3 very close to Air2S image quality,at least I hope so.
Not a chance against the Mavic 3
If the mini 3 pro has better image quality than my air 2,which I am hoping it
does,and should blow it away.That is a victory right there.

 

[Wreckhunter]

As of today, May 1st 2022, it appears me, dealsdrone, and Jasper Ellens are like the only people that believe Mini 3 Pro will beat Air2S image quality (not limited to low light), not to mention it will trade blows with Mavic 3. With YouTube compression, dynamic range and resolution will be near indistinguishable from Mavic 3 even. Gimbal angle might be the main differentiating factor. (as well as portrait shots/video).

We all know the sensor is only 1/1.3, whereas the Air2S is 1 inch and the Mavic 3 even bigger.
We also know the mini 3 is the cheapest, with the Mavic 3 being about 3 times more expensive.

So, what are your last bets:

Will Mini 3 beat Air2S image quality?
Will it compete with Mavic 3?

Or will it be a slightly improved Mini 2 version that has worse image quality than even Air 2 (non S) ?

Place your bets as in about a week, the entire world will know.

Yup it looks like you are the only three.One question,then why did you get a nano+,if the mini 3 pro
will beat out the air2s and go head to head with the mavic3 ?

 

[test2000Anafi]

Yup it looks like you are the only three.One question,then why did you get a nano+,if the mini 3 pro
will beat out the air2s and go head to head with the mavic3 ?

Because the nano + already does that. Especially at dusk where it far exceeds the mavic 3

 

[Wreckhunter]

Because the nano + already does that. Especially at dusk where it far exceeds the mavic 3

Another question,do you also have the Mavic 3 ?

 

[test2000Anafi]

Another question,do you also have the Mavic 3 ?

why would that be? I merely need functioning eyes, an internet connection, and a device capable of playing back YouTube in 4K to come to my above conclusion.

 

[Chaosrider]

With YouTube compression, dynamic range and resolution will be near indistinguishable from Mavic 3 even.

So this "equivalence" results from YouTube suppressing the differences through compression?

Which would suggest that if you have a real live MP4/MOV/RAW file, you could tell the difference, yes?

There really is a world beyond YouTube...

 

[test2000Anafi]

Let’s say professional reviewers will not be able to show differences through YouTube unless they do 200% zoom, slowed down etc. So we have to take your word for it that the mavic 3 really is better. You might even have to add that you own both etc for maximum authority lol

“I owned the mini 3 pro but I sold it because of how much better my mavic 3 is” < something to that extent

 

[vindibona1]

Let’s say professional reviewers will not be able to show differences through YouTube unless they do 200% zoom, slowed down etc. So we have to take your word for it that the mavic 3 really is better. You might even have add that you own both etc for maximum authority lol

Again, that's the thing. If you're making a Hollywood movie or one that you know will show the full resolution, then the maximum detail must be maintained. If your customer is showing it on their screens which themselves are hi res and they are playing the file directly, then it might be critical to have the best of the best. Perhaps it would be better to have an Inspire or something even better? But if everything you shoot shows is sent to YouTube or Vimeo, how critical is it really to upgrade to an M3 when an M2P would provide the same detail to the viewer?

 

[test2000Anafi]

Again, that's the thing. If you're making a Hollywood movie or one that you know will show the full resolution, then the maximum detail must be maintained. If your customer is showing it on their screens which themselves are hi res and they are playing the file directly, then it might be critical to have the best of the best. Perhaps it would be better to have an Inspire or something even better? But if everything you shoot shows is sent to YouTube or Vimeo, how critical is it really to upgrade to an M3 when an M2P would provide the same detail to the viewer?

I agree. If the audience watches it through YouTube then M2P would certainly be sufficient for most cases (unless 4K60 is needed)

 

[EpicFlight]

One of our forum members, today I think, posted a video taking with his M3. I really wanted to see if I could see the extra quality that the M3 was supposed to provide. I looked on two different high quality monitors, including a 4k OLED display and honestly, in that presentation (YouTube) could not see any difference in quality than anything I've produces with my M2P.

It's a serious mistake to try to judge comparative quality from YT videos. You are not seeing what the drone shot.

The only way to test and judge this issue is with a large monitor, and the original, unaltered recordings from the drone's SD card.

Judging resolution/detail, noise, compression artifacts, from a YT video is judging the image processing pipeline on the YT streaming servers, not the camera that took that footage.

EDIT: Sweetened some rhetoric... harshness was not intended

 

[EpicFlight]

So this "equivalence" results from YouTube suppressing the differences through compression?

Which would suggest that if you have a real live MP4/MOV/RAW file, you could tell the difference, yes?

There really is a world beyond YouTube...

Credibility doesn't matter to him.

Weird.

Troll-like.

 

[test2000Anafi]

All currently existing comparison videos between M3 and Nano + show that the later is vastly superior in low light..
If you download gigabytes of 150Mbit video the difference becomes even greater?

If YouTube cannot show the intricacies of your drone video then I am pretty sure it is the footage that is the problem. A lot of YouTube videos which look absolutely excellent, both on my 75 inch ultra HD screen as well as on my 2021 MacBook Pro. Most of the people responding here should be happy if they can ever produce something even half as good. No offence

 

[EpicFlight]

All currently existing comparison videos between M3 and Nano + show that the later is vastly superior in low light..

You seen them all? Every one?

Credibility (or lack thereof )

 

[test2000Anafi]

I have it on good authority that all YouTuber DJI partners = free DJI stuff pre release, aren‘t allowed to make ANY comparison between mavic 3 and competing non-DJI products..

 

[vindibona1]

Don't be a fool and try to judge comparative quality from YT videos. You are not seeing what the drone shot.

The only way to test and judge this issue is with a large monitor, and the original, unaltered recordings from the drone's SD card.

Judging resolution/detail, noise, compression artifacts, from a YT video is judging the image processing pipeline on the YT streaming servers, not the camera that took that footage.

You've entirely missed what I was saying. I'm saying that a lot of folks sole presentation may be on YouTube. When not and viewing directly from the rendered files, it is important to know whether the viewer has access to equipment that can take advantage of the highest resolution and detail possible. Does anyone even canvas what their customers' viewing conditions and apparatus are?

Of course there is a huge range of applications and needs and will make a difference. If I were doing inspections, for sure I'd be flying an M3 and maybe even an Inspires. But if I were doing real estate, I would know that playback speed is going to be important on the internet listings and presume that only a small minority of viewers would be looking at real quality 4k monitors. And personally, I think the issue the difference in still resolution is going to be minimal as, in my experience "pixel count" isn't a major factor, but the result of the entire imaging process. Because of frame rate and mbps transfer I think that video is a bigger issue. And let's face it. While not the best customer service record or comparable flight attributes to DJI's M3, Autel can provide similar quality images to the M3, for 1/2 the price.

 

[RetiredInFL]

I think the only "last bets" (as in thread title) we should be taking is IF this thing actually appears on May 10. Doesn't DJI usually have a teaser on their website for "something new" at least week before as in A 2S? n That would be tomorrow.