Mavic 2 Pro, at night....awesome images

[Physopto]

From my experience of SLR and DSLR cameras, if you want a good depth of field you usually need to shoot at between f5.6 upwards to f11. But it depends upon the light and the distance to the objects you want in focus and of course the actual lenses used. Diffraction effects usually are not so noticeable in darker images and allow larger f numbers to be used to great effect. It has born me out over the last 45 years of photography with all sorts of cameras anyway, with some decent shots. just my two pence worth anyway.

 

[wco81]

I've been able to get a sharp image with the M2P at 4.0 sec exposure. It's absolutely absurd. Most will miss at that speed and have shake but to get a usable image is insane.

View attachment 105367

It's hard for the drone to stay steady. Even in low winds, hyper lapses I take show shake.

Maybe Tripod mode helps?

 

[offtheback]

I had the same question. The shot is great, but also wondering why not a wider aperture. I should most of the time in the day at 4 or 4.5 because its the shapest. I come from using an SLR so I came into flying drones not wanting to go that wide but know I do after learning its actually sharper.

Same here.Last few years I shoot Olympus.They make great lenses and they are optimized for near wide open.A 2.8 lens is nearly as sharp as it gets at F/4

 

[offtheback]

From my experience of SLR and DSLR cameras, if you want a good depth of field you usually need to shoot at between f5.6 upwards to f11. But it depends upon the light and the distance to the objects you want in focus and of course the actual lenses used. Diffraction effects usually are not so noticeable in darker images and allow larger f numbers to be used to great effect. It has born me out over the last 45 years of photography with all sorts of cameras anyway, with some decent shots. just my two pence worth anyway.

The 1" sensor has much more depth of field than a full frame or even APS-C sensor.With the 28mm lens on the 1" sensor at 100'+distance not much to worry about I assume.Also important to keep shutter speed up on a drone and ISO down
.I do however find the M2P amazing in pulling off slowish shutter speeds(depending on wind).Not consistently but I have gotten sharp shots at 3 seconds.

 

[offtheback]

It's hard for the drone to stay steady. Even in low winds, hyper lapses I take show shake.

Maybe Tripod mode helps?

I'm not 100% sure but I believe tripod mode doesn't steady the drone any better.Just limits speed and I think stick sensitivity.

 

[offtheback]

I got hired to photograph a bunch of resorts in Mexico and several looked better at night than they did in the daytime...so, the Mavic 2 Pro really came in handy!

Kirk

Cool shot!

 

[Drone4]

I got hired to photograph a bunch of resorts in Mexico and several looked better at night than they did in the daytime...so, the Mavic 2 Pro really came in handy!

Kirk

Nice photo Kirk. Awesome job. Turned out amazing.

 

[caryg]

Hi Kirk--
Beautiful work. Here's a question you may not want to answer, but I'll ask anyway. I'm an architectural and real estate photographer in the SF Bay area. I recently got my FAA 107 license and have been trying to figure out how to get into shooting resorts, spas, hotels, etc. COVID hasn't helped the situation, obviously, but that aside, I still don't know how to reach the right people for this kind of work. Any sage advice?

 

[Fred Garvin]

...The 1" sensor has much more depth of field than a full frame or even APS-C sensor...

How can a sensor have "Depth of Field"? A sensor just gathers light. That's it. It's the lens that focuses the light and determines the Depth of Field, onto that sensor.

I "think" you're mixing in Hyperfocal Distance....and the position of the aerial camera being high up enough, or far enough away from the subject, that HFD is what is really coming into play here.

I think to effectively demonstrate the Depth of Field ability of the camera, you'd have to setup a shot no more than say, 30' deep, place the subject about 10' and open up the aperture....then judge the circles of confusion in the background. Typical aerials just wont cut it. Infinity kicks in too early.

 

[Mykie]

It's hard for the drone to stay steady. Even in low winds, hyper lapses I take show shake.

Maybe Tripod mode helps?

Out of 10 pictures I took hovering there at 4 sec, one was sharp. Tripod mode yes, just to fine tune the position, but I don't think it makes a difference in terms of the steadiness of the hover.

 

[615Images]

I've been able to get a sharp image with the M2P at 4.0 sec exposure. It's absolutely absurd. Most will miss at that speed and have shake but to get a usable image is insane.

View attachment 105367

That's a great photo! I am still working on the night shots, as we are starting to get a few calls for twilight real estate pics.

 

[OliverDrool]

I've been able to get a sharp image with the M2P at 4.0 sec exposure. It's absolutely absurd. Most will miss at that speed and have shake but to get a usable image is insane.

View attachment 105367

This is a great shot. Where is it?

 

[Johnmcl7]

How can a sensor have "Depth of Field"? A sensor just gathers light. That's it. It's the lens that focuses the light and determines the Depth of Field, onto that sensor.

While technically the sensor's size is not related to depth of field, in practice it is because a smaller sensor will have a smaller focal length to maintain the same field of view and smaller sensor devices don't have the much wider apertures that would be needed. The Mavic 2 Pro is listed as having a 28mm equivalent lens which means it's actually a much shorter 10.5mm focal length which means in turn, compared to a full frame sensor if both are at F2.8 the 1in sensor will have much greater depth of field. It's roughly three stops difference between a 1in sensor and a full frame sensor so the Mavic 2 Pro would need around an f1.0 sensor to match the FF sensor at F2.8.

The Mavic 2 Zoom which also starts at 28mm with an F2.8 aperture has a much greater depth of field than the Mavic 2 Pro because the far smaller sensor means a much shorter focal length at around just 4mm.

The post you posted is correct that the M2P's short focal length and long focal distance even with a semi-wide aperture will mean in practice depth of field is large. Even the RX100 which the M2P shares its sensor with and is over a stop faster at F1.8 struggles for shallow depth of field at 28mm.

 

[Fred Garvin]

A sensor does not have a "focal length". A sensor simply senses light, that is all. Everything you've posted has to do with the lens and the distance from the sensor that lens is. It's all about the design of the lens and the distance that lens is from the "focal plane", which is the surface plane of the sensor. (or film, or whatever) That measured distance, between the lens and the focal plane, is the "focal length".

But I understand where you're going with this. It's easier to "understand" or grasp the concept when approached this way. Trying to conceptualize this as a function of lens design, sensor size and distance between the lens and focal plane makes most people's eyes glaze over. I like where you're going with this better than where I'm going because it's just too granular....too nit picky. (on my part)

 

[Johnmcl7]

A sensor does not have a "focal length". A sensor simply senses light, that is all. Everything you've posted has to do with the lens and the distance from the sensor that lens is. It's all about the design of the lens and the distance that lens is from the "focal plane", which is the surface plane of the sensor. (or film, or whatever) That measured distance, between the lens and the focal plane, is the "focal length".

But I understand where you're going with this. It's easier to "understand" or grasp the concept when approached this way. Trying to conceptualize this as a function of lens design, sensor size and distance between the lens and focal plane makes most people's eyes glaze over. I like where you're going with this better than where I'm going because it's just too granular....too nit picky. (on my part)

I never said a sensor has a focal length because they don't but the reality is the two are intrinsically linked since the same field of views are used across different sensor sizes and to do that means a shorter focal length and in turn means a greater depth of field at the same aperture exactly as the original person posted.

offtheback's original post is correct in practical terms, the Mavic 2 Pro's 1in sensor will have much greater depth of field than an APS-C or FF sensor at a 28mm focal length and F2.8. There's no need to try and endlessly confuse the matter.

 

[Deleted member 129058]

I got hired to photograph a bunch of resorts in Mexico and several looked better at night than they did in the daytime...so, the Mavic 2 Pro really came in handy!

Kirk

WOW! Outstanding photography!

 

[shutterguy]

Beautiful shots!!

 

[sar104]

I never said a sensor has a focal length because they don't but the reality is the two are intrinsically linked since the same field of views are used across different sensor sizes and to do that means a shorter focal length and in turn means a greater depth of field at the same aperture exactly as the original person posted.

offtheback's original post is correct in practical terms, the Mavic 2 Pro's 1in sensor will have much greater depth of field than an APS-C or FF sensor at a 28mm focal length and F2.8. There's no need to try and endlessly confuse the matter.

That's correct - holding field of view and f-number constant, the depth of field is inversely proportional to the sensor linear size. Smaller sensor size means larger depth of field.

 

[Mykie]

This is a great shot. Where is it?

Calgary, Canada