M3 v Air2S picture quality

[RonanCork]

Hi Guys.

Hope this is in the correct forum section. I've the Air2S and find the image quality excellent. I've done paid jobs and it's never let me down so far

Re the mavic 3 (with the adjustable aperture etc) - is the photo quality noticeablly superior?

I'd love to get some comparisons and thoughts from someone who switched from Air2S to M3 to see if it's really worth it. The 45m flying time is a clincher too compared to the 24m approx for Air2S

The price is steep for me but if it was worth it..

Thanks Ro

 

[Macinfo]

The camera on the M3 being more adjustable will in some situations give you a better video and pictures.

However, that said, there have been some videos on YT comparing the two models in similar situations and locations where you would be hard pressed to say one was better than the other... ultimately its what you want to spend.. or can afford.

 

[Phantomrain.org]

The picture quality is so close , that should not be a reason to sway you from the Air 2S .
The Flying time is really the deciding factor on the Mavic 3 as many will reference and thus the Excitement of the arrival of the Mavic 3 classic without the Bells .

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly in the Rain, Land on the Water.

 

[TwoSticks]

I think comparing the two without knowing which is which will be difficult. I suspect pushed to the limit the M3 would be the winner but thats a maybe. The adjustable aperture in this case is not going to be like a standard camera with the bokeh. It's more/less to provide you with the ability to adjust light levels without having to land and swap filters while maintaining the shutter speed you want for the 180 rule.

The flight time is really about 10 minutes more which is a difference. The main thing I like is USB-C charging. That is so much easier and faster to do mobile than what we have with the Air 2S. Not really a reason to spend more money but is something I wish the Air 2S had going for it.

 

[karlblessing]

I would have gotten the Mavic 3 if not for the price being more than twice that of the Air 2s.

Mainly because for my desires the micro-4/3 sensor would do a lot of what I want.

But if you're mainly grabbing pics or videos straight out of the drone with a little editing or grading, the air 2s easily fits that bill. If you're trying to push in post, the Mavic 3 has the advantage with its main camera. To a vast majority of consumers, it's not going to be a large difference,and given the price of the air 2s in comparison, it just works. For some even the mini 3 pro would work especially if you're not going to be doing color grading on a desktop pc of the 10bit dlog or HLG footage (and even then the 10bit cinelike-d is good enough for grading to social media deliveries)

 

[tlyons]

Hi Guys.

Hope this is in the correct forum section. I've the Air2S and find the image quality excellent. I've done paid jobs and it's never let me down so far

Re the mavic 3 (with the adjustable aperture etc) - is the photo quality noticeablly superior?

I'd love to get some comparisons and thoughts from someone who switched from Air2S to M3 to see if it's really worth it. The 45m flying time is a clincher too compared to the 24m approx for Air2S

The price is steep for me but if it was worth it..

Thanks Ro

Sensor area:
Mini 2 28 mm²
Mini 3 pro 90 mm²
Air 2s 116 mm²
Mavic 3 225 mm²
APS-C camera 330 mm²
Full Frame Camera 864 mm²

All else equal, the light that can be gathered is proportional to the sensor size. Big step Mini 2 -> Mini3/Air2s and a big step from Mini3/Air2s -> Mavic 3. In practice, its unimportant in bright light but might matter in low light. The sensor technology also matters e.g. BSI is generally better than FSI but not always. It's worth pointing out that these are all small sensors relative to handheld still photography and none will be great in low light compared to even the cheapest DSLR.

The variable aperture? It lets you use a lower shutter speed and a controlled depth of field. If you don't know what that's for, you are unlikely to need or want it.

My advice? If you look at the many Youtube comparisons among Mini 3, Air 2s and Mavic 3 there is virtually no difference in good light. In poor light, the low light mode of the Mini 3 is sometimes surprisingly effective but the Mavic 3 is just better and will have fewer processing artifacts. If I needed that, I would wait for the Mavic 3 Classic. If I didn't, the 47 minute (claimed) flight time Mini 3 is the clear winner but if I already owned the Air 2s I would keep it.

Good luck!

 

[JoshC]

Sensor area:
Mini 2 28 mm²
Mini 3 pro 90 mm²
Air 2s 116 mm²
Mavic 3 225 mm²
APS-C camera 330 mm²
Full Frame Camera 864 mm²

All else equal, the light that can be gathered is proportional to the sensor size. Big step Mini 2 -> Mini3/Air2s and a big step from Mini3/Air2s -> Mavic 3. In practice, its unimportant in bright light but might matter in low light. The sensor technology also matters e.g. BSI is generally better than FSI but not always. It's worth pointing out that these are all small sensors relative to handheld still photography and none will be great in low light compared to even the cheapest DSLR.

The variable aperture? It lets you use a lower shutter speed and a controlled depth of field. If you don't know what that's for, you are unlikely to need or want it.

Good point on the sensor size, but the reference to controlled depth of field is not correct. DOF is only a factor when focusing on subjects close to the camera or with a longer lens, which is hardly the case with a drone. If you use a depth of field calculator, you will see that with a f2.8 aperture, small sensor size and wide field of view, when you focus on a subject at 15 metres the DOF far limit is already at infinity.

Comparing the Air 2S and Mavic 3 in terms of image quality, the difference for photography is not huge when shooting in ideal lighting, but Mavic 3 will outperform in dim light, and high dynamic range. The bigger advantage in video. IMO using fixed aperture for video is not very practical if you do not have a variable ND filter, and you generally don't for drone.

 

[vindibona1]

A lot of the perceived IMAGE QUALITY comes down a lot to which device the viewer is viewing the images or video footage. Someone with a FHD monitor will not notice much if any difference at all. UHD, perhaps a very slight amount, but IMO would require a side-by-side comparison. Photos? Even prints would be pretty much even because much of the quality depends on the lab's ability/software to interpolate the files.

Two main advantages to the M3 over the Air2s: 1) Flight time. 2) Variable aperture. For me variable aperture is a fabulous feature if you need to keep the shutter/FPS ratio at 2:1. I will never have a drone without variable aperture.

It's a pity that DJI doesn't offer the Mavic 3 ala carte without a controller as those of us that already have RCN1 and/or DJI RC controllers would not need another controller, nor the expense which DJI doesn't seem motivated to offer.

 

[FletcherAero]

I use both drones for jobs and they are equally amazing. The adjustable arpeture on the M3 is great for certain situations especially in low light.

 

[Joethedrone]

Hi Guys.

Hope this is in the correct forum section. I've the Air2S and find the image quality excellent. I've done paid jobs and it's never let me down so far

Re the mavic 3 (with the adjustable aperture etc) - is the photo quality noticeablly superior?

I'd love to get some comparisons and thoughts from someone who switched from Air2S to M3 to see if it's really worth it. The 45m flying time is a clincher too compared to the 24m approx for Air2S

The price is steep for me but if it was worth it..

Thanks Ro

I have done extensive research on this and for me it was just too close to call, imo the M3 didn’t provide so much to justify high cost, even though I could have afforded it.

 

[Ralph thompson]

There are some of subtle benefits of the M3 if you are an enthusiastic and experienced photographer and videographer. Benefits of the M3 with a larger sensor (same number of pixels) means larger pixels and likely less digital noise. High ISO with less noise, (an annoying issue with the 1" sensor). Adjustable aperture and shutter speed when shooting fast moving subjects (sports and racing). The M3 Cine allows for prores422 and the M3 & M3Cine have a high bit rate and greater FPS. All these benefits need to be setup correctly, they can be a disadvantage if you don't take the time to use the right settings for the task in hand.

 

[Eagle Eye 62]

I have had all three drones at one time (still have the M3 and Min 3) I would agree that in good light it is sometimes hard to tell the difference between any of them. In low light I would argue the Air2S is the worst of the three though. No body has mentioned the flexibility and creative options afforded by the 7X zoom on the Mavic 3. If you want to create shots with a lot of Parallax, the 7X zoom is great for that and for just getting closer to objects or even scouting locations, etc. If I had to choose the order of preference I would say M3 is number one, Mini 3 number two followed by Air2S. You have to keep in mine both of the 3 series drones are newer technology and both have battery flight time than the Air2S as well.

 

[Capt KO]

A2s

 

[RobW01]

I think comparing the two without knowing which is which will be difficult. I suspect pushed to the limit the M3 would be the winner but thats a maybe. The adjustable aperture in this case is not going to be like a standard camera with the bokeh. It's more/less to provide you with the ability to adjust light levels without having to land and swap filters while maintaining the shutter speed you want for the 180 rule.

The flight time is really about 10 minutes more which is a difference. The main thing I like is USB-C charging. That is so much easier and faster to do mobile than what we have with the Air 2S. Not really a reason to spend more money but is something I wish the Air 2S had going for it.

I still have the Air2 and the quality and performance are good enough for most of what I do, which is for real estate agents, local environmental groups etc for their websites. If I were shooting for roadside billboards etc I would have to step up. I would, however, like a kite with variable aperture, because coming in to land to change or adjust an ND filter is a pain in the bum. Will look at the M3 ‘Classic’ and the Autel Lite+ —perhaps getting one or the other and possibly keep the Air2.

 

[karlblessing]

I still have the Air2 and the quality and performance are good enough for most of what I do, which is for real estate agents, local environmental groups etc for their websites. If I were shooting for roadside billboards etc I would have to step up. I would, however, like a kite with variable aperture, because coming in to land to change or adjust an ND filter is a pain in the bum. Will look at the M3 ‘Classic’ and the Autel Lite+ —perhaps getting one or the other and possibly keep the Air2.

Definitely "good enough" for me especially in giving 10-bit dlog/hlg. Sure it's not even close to using my Panasonic GH5, but for around a grand, it's a lot closer to matching than most other options. I'd love to get the Mavic 3... but 3 grands is 3 grands.

 

[JoshC]

There are some of subtle benefits of the M3 if you are an enthusiastic and experienced photographer and videographer. Benefits of the M3 with a larger sensor (same number of pixels) means larger pixels and likely less digital noise. High ISO with less noise, (an annoying issue with the 1" sensor). Adjustable aperture and shutter speed when shooting fast moving subjects (sports and racing). The M3 Cine allows for prores422 and the M3 & M3Cine have a high bit rate and greater FPS. All these benefits need to be setup correctly, they can be a disadvantage if you don't take the time to use the right settings for the task in hand.

Not to mention improved wind resistance (10.7m/s versus 12 m/s). If you are a professional and need to do jobs according to the time/date set by the client, or a permit, that improves the chance you can fly in rougher weather.
Overall though I would say the biggest difference is adjustable aperture. If you are shooting video for clients, shooting with fixed aperture is not ideal.

 

[RobW01]

Not to mention improved wind resistance (10.7m/s versus 12 m/s). If you are a professional and need to do jobs according to the time/date set by the client, or a permit, that improves the chance you can fly in rougher weather.
Overall though I would say the biggest difference is adjustable aperture. If you are shooting video for clients, shooting with fixed aperture is not ideal.

I find the Air2 is fine in reasonably severe winds—we get plenty of gale and near gale stuff up here. Gusts on landing need to be watched. More important, IMHO, is rain. One drop in the battery compartment of most consumer drones and you are toast. Just purchased a PhantomRAIN kit.

 

[karlblessing]

I find the Air2 is fine in reasonably severe winds—we get plenty of gale and near gale stuff up here. Gusts on landing need to be watched. More important, IMHO, is rain. One drop in the battery compartment of most consumer drones and you are toast. Just purchased a PhantomRAIN kit.

Same here on wind. It was already impressive (relatively speaking) what the mini 2 could tolerate. But the Air 2s does pretty well as well. Flown in winds up to 40mph gust without it seeming like it couldn't handle it (and not using sports mode). But I also had to plan for riding the wind back to me. Gimble kept pretty steady even if you couldn't use automatic functions.

Especially when you consider 10.7m/s and 12m/s are 24mph and 27mph respectively and I have no issues sending an air 2s up at either of those speeds.

The original mini is the main one where their rated wind resistance is pretty much what you want to a observe, the og just can't fight it.

 

[WWF]

I have an Air 2S as my personal drone and an M3 Cine for my work drone. I thought and still do think my Air 2S images and videos are great but the M3 images and video footage blow me away. I'm not a super techy guy but there just seems to be a lot more detail and less noise especially in lower light situations. This gives me much more flexibility when editing. Oh and the smart controller that comes with it is a big step up too. I'm retiring soon and I'm really gonna hate giving it back.

 

[VdoMemorie]

I have a DJI Air 2 S and yesterday got my DJI Mavic 3 Classic. Firstly the USB-C to DJI battery connector cable 50 Cents worth is missing ! Image quality wise the DJI Mavic 3 Classic is far more sharper and clear than Air 2 S. I could zoom the Mavic 3 Classic image 200% in Photoshop, could not even dream of that in DJI Air 2 S The Mavic 3 Classic flew like a lady !
Go get it !
The DJI Air 2 S image did get better after 1.7.8 firmware.