M3 Tele at 28x versus 5k shot at full resolution of a sign under a street lamp at night. Edit: DAYTIME Comparison added below.

[cgmaxed]

I took 2 images at 4 am at night of a stop sign under a street lamp. One image is the Tele at 28x, The other is the 5k lens cropped to the size of the Tele lens shot. The Tele lens at 28x destroyed the 5k cropped image in detail. The 5k cam picked up more color and light, but failed in obtaining the detail of the Tele lens at 28x zoom. See Pics below. First is the Tele lens at 28x, the second pic is the 5k lens cropped to the approximate size of the tele shot. On the Tele lens you can read the "One Way" sign clearly. The 5k cropped image fails and pixilated the "One Way" sign so much, it is unreadable. The distance of the M3 drone from the sign was 130ft vertical and 190ft horizontal.

 

[calmar81]

Wow, thanks for the comparison! I only wish we can adjust (at least most of) the settings of this little lens soon! *fingers crossed*

Pretty please, DJI?!

 

[JustName]

Ok, but where is the surprise? For the distance better adjusted tele-lens will always return better results then a wideangle lens.

 

[cgmaxed]

Ok, but where is the surprise? For the distance better adjusted tele-lens will always return better results then a wideangle lens.

I'll edit out the surprise part.

 

[calmar81]

Ok, but where is the surprise? For the distance better adjusted tele-lens will always return better results then a wideangle lens.

I still think it's cool to see in comparison ... even if it's not a surprise ;-)

 

[cgmaxed]

HERE ARE DAYTIME 28x and the 5k images compared against each other: 1st image is the Tele 28x, 2nd Image is the 5k image zoomed by cropping. Images taken at 125 ft altitude and 1,250ft distance

 

[mavic53]

QED as my old maths teacher would have said. Thanks for that. The zoom lens IMO is a ground breaker.

 

[OkDrone]

During a lot of my reading here it seems that most feel shooting in 4k or 5k will give a better result in post shooting processing than zoom does when flying. These pictures show a different story. What gives?

 

[Howard70]

During a lot of my reading here it seems that most feel shooting in 4k or 5k will give a better result in post shooting processing than zoom does when flying. These pictures show a different story. What gives?

Empirical data versus opinion?

Howard

 

[CanadaDrone]

During a lot of my reading here it seems that most feel shooting in 4k or 5k will give a better result in post shooting processing than zoom does when flying. These pictures show a different story. What gives?

Those people are correct, as it seems you are talking about two completely different things. The example in this thread shows us that the image that has been cropped less aggressively looks better - more resolution = sharper image, all else equal. That is all you are seeing here and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

The video (or image) quality you get from the main 4/3 sensor compared to the 1/2" sensor in the telephoto camera is night and day. You cannot even shoot log footage, use manual settings, or shoot beyond 4K with the telephoto camera. The intention of that camera is to "explore" different shooting locations, rather than be used as a primary source for photos or videos. With regards to post-shooting processing leeway, the 5K 10bit log footage from the 4/3 sensor has an incredible amount of flexibility - the 8bit 4K footage from the 1/2" sensor that can only be used in full-auto mode on the other hand does not.

The M3 also does not have a zoom lens, it had two fixed focal length lenses (or "prime" lenses) and it applies up to a 4X digital crop to both to achieve the advertised "zoom" levels. The exact same thing can be done in post if you wish.

 

[collins]

I would be quite interested to see the difference between the 7x 'zoom' 'cropped' and the 28x 'zoom' uncropped. My guess is there would be little difference.

 

[mavic53]

all Editing programmes have different ways of cropping. There will never be an absolute answer. Either way the result is excellent. IMO.

 

[VenomXts]

Cool comparison, thx for putting in the effort to post.

 

[EsaT]

Those people are correct, as it seems you are talking about two completely different things. The example in this thread shows us that the image that has been cropped less aggressively looks better - more resolution = sharper image, all else equal. That is all you are seeing here and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

Degree of cropping is irrelevant.
Already math shreds it to pieces and pees on its grave, if we start comparing possible angular resolution/smallest detail of main camera to tele camera.

Main camera has 20MP resolution and 24mm FOV.
Using cropping (digital zoom is scam term) to match just 48mm's FOV would leave only 5MP of data.
While tele camera has 12MP and FOV is 162mm.
Meaning that 12MP is captured from area whose dimensions are only ~30% of that 5MP image.
Whose cropped to match FOV area would have only ~0.5MP worth of information vs that 12MP.

"Digital zoom" is simply complete scam and cropping can match only minor optical zoom and needs lots more of pixels to start with.

So while Mavic 3's tele camera is definitely lackluster for artistic uses, for any inspection/documenting uses it gives lots of extra ability.