Mavic 3 Blurry Images

[GadgetGuy]

Some of your claims or expressions are perplexing. Like shooting 3 bracketed JPEGs is much faster than taking one DNG because it takes for ever to write it card. Realy?? I must be using different card from you because it takes maybe 2 sec before my M3 is ready to shoot another DNG. Maybe that's in your language for ever?
As for the amazing DJI JPEGs, the are still only 8bit deep files with much smaller DR then DNG. Any OOC JPEG if well exposed and with accurate WB can look pretty darn good. But as soon as you start pushing and pulling the shadows and highlights you start to see posterization in blue sky pretty quickly and they fall appart pretty quickly. Bracketing is definitely an option for creating a composite image but moving elements can cause issues when doing that.
All in all I personally have not found any drawbacks from shooting DNG only. But each to his own. Shooting both is perhaps not such a bad idea. Some might even addopt it after being convinced and converted by your posts.

With fast moving subjects, 2 seconds between frames is forever, where modern cameras can now shoot 60 full resolution still frames per second, and the Mavic 3 shows no delay between JPG images. Obviously, it depends upon your subject and your intended use of the images. However, if you get the exposure right on the take, or bracket, you won't need to push or pull too much in a composited image from bracketed shots. To be clear, I am not arguing against DNG, but at least take a JPG simultaneously so you get the DJI secret sauce included to match in your 10 bit DNG, if the slow DNG shooting rate is acceptable. The JPG can also quickly tell your which DNG's are worth converting.

With the 360 panos, the previous 12 MP JPG stitch on the M2P served that purpose, while saving the original 20MP files for PTGui stitching at much higher resolution. However, on the Mavic 3, the HiRes 70MB JPG stitch is so good that I rarely need to stitch anything manually. Just need to convert them for web use.

 

[Filmarik]

With fast moving subjects, 2 seconds between frames is forever, where modern cameras can now shoot 60 full resolution still frames per second, and the Mavic 3 shows no delay between JPG images. Obviously, it depends upon your subject and your intended use of the images. However, if you get the exposure right on the take, or bracket, you won't need to push or pull too much in a composited image from bracketed shots. To be clear, I am not arguing against DNG, but at least take a JPG simultaneously so you get the DJI secret sauce included to match in your 10 bit DNG, if the slow DNG shooting rate is acceptable. The JPG can also quickly tell your which DNG's are worth converting.

With the 360 panos, the previous 12 MP JPG stitch on the M2P served that purpose, while saving the original 20MP files for PTGui stitching at much higher resolution. However, on the Mavic 3, the HiRes 70MB JPG stitch is so good that I rarely need to stitch anything manually. Just need to convert them for web use.

I do not know what subjects you shoot where 3 bracketed jpegs intended for HDR in post (to make up for the lost DR) would be a better option than to shoot one DNG which encompasses all what the sensor is capable of and provides great flexibility in post in terms of WB, DR etc. Personally I do not get it. But then again I do not shoot with my M3 subjects where I would need to shoot at the rate of 3 or 5 frames per second let alone 60fps.

 

[GadgetGuy]

I do not know what subjects you shoot where 3 bracketed jpegs intended for HDR in post (to make up for the lost DR) would be a better option than to shoot one DNG which encompasses all what the sensor is capable of and provides great flexibility in post in terms of WB, DR etc. Personally I do not get it. But then again I do not shoot with my M3 subjects where I would need to shoot at the rate of 3 or 5 frames per second let alone 60fps.

Birds in flight, breaching whales, and fast moving boats are just a few examples. Waiting 2 seconds in between shots is an eternity, potentially missing the shot completely. I often give up the resolution of the image to get the shot on video where I then have 30 or 60 fps to choose from, plus video!

In any event, this is only about you adding a JPG to each of your DNG images with the DJI secret sauce included, so you know what your DNG's are missing. The DNG's have none of that, so you are missing information by not including them. Until you include them, you won't know what you are missing.

 

[Filmarik]

Birds in flight, breaching whales, and fast moving boats are just a few examples. Waiting 2 seconds in between shots is an eternity, potentially missing the shot completely. I often give up the resolution of the image to get the shot on video where I then have 30 or 60 fps to choose from, plus video!

In any event, this is only about you adding a JPG to each of your DNG images with the DJI secret sauce included, so you know what your DNG's are missing. The DNG's have none of that, so you are missing information by not including them. Until you include them, you won't know what you are missing.

DNGs are not missing anything. We need to stick to the facts here. You keep talking about some magic sauce DJI uses when creating OOC JPEG. A good raw converter offers platitude of options allowing to create whatever look you desire by using all those amazing tools, and all of that without loss of IQ. Try manipulating a JPEG adjusting WB if it is off, and tonality, and saturation, and HDR and you soon discover that you can not do much before it starts falling appart. As just one example, Capture One gives you option to either apply the DJI's lens profile to remove lens distortion or ignore it and create your own with more options than the DJI profile, including compensation for loss of sharpness in corners etc.
I like the flexibility DNG provides and the fact that the processing possibilities are almost endless. That is why I shoot DNG. And as such I do not need to rely on any magic sauce from DJI. I can make my own

 

[ClaudioNC]

DNGs are not missing anything. We need to stick to the facts here. You keep talking about some magic sauce DJI uses when creating OOC JPEG. A good raw converter offers platitude of options allowing to create whatever look you desire by using all those amazing tools, and all of that without loss of IQ. Try manipulating a JPEG adjusting WB if it is off, and tonality, and saturation, and HDR and you soon discover that you can not do much before it starts falling appart. As just one example, Capture One gives you option to either apply the DJI's lens profile to remove lens distortion or ignore it and create your own with more options than the DJI profile, including compensation for loss of sharpness in corners etc.
I like the flexibility DNG provides and the fact that the processing possibilities are almost endless. That is why I shoot DNG. And as such I do not need to rely on any magic sauce from DJI. I can make my own

Wow, I have to stick to the facts too, in this case to what I read here in this post.
Man, you are really rigidly stubborn, you wear DNG-branded blinkers and you can't see, imagine and accept anything else!
But if this style completely satisfies you, if you don't recognize the usefulness of fixing it, if you don't feel the need to change a single comma, I certainly won't be the one who will try to undermine your current unshakeable and rock-solid smart beliefs.

 

[Filmarik]

Wow, I have to stick to the facts too, in this case to what I read here in this post.
Man, you are really rigidly stubborn, you wear DNG-branded blinkers and you can't see, imagine and accept anything else!
But if this style completely satisfies you, if you don't recognize the usefulness of fixing it, if you don't feel the need to change a single comma, I certainly won't be the one who will try to undermine your current unshakeable and rock-solid smart beliefs.

And the motivation for your personal attack was? I guess "I feel better now'. You have not contributed with or shared any of your knowledge. If someone wants to shoot JPEG I am not hellbent on a mission to convince him to shoot DNG. But I will not stand by and accept when someone is telling me that JPEG is superior to DNG just because DJI put some 'magic sauce' into the pipeline. And I also, contrary to you, offered my reasons and explained why I believe they are not,.

 

[ClaudioNC]

And the motivation for your personal attack was? I guess "I feel better now'. You have not contributed with or shared any of your knowledge. If someone wants to shoot JPEG I am not hellbent on a mission to convince him to shoot DNG. But I will not stand by and accept when someone is telling me that JPEG is superior to DNG just because DJI put some 'magic sauce' into the pipeline. And I also, contrary to you, offered my reasons and explained why I believe they are not,.

No, once again you're guessing wrong, both because you call it an attack, which is rather ridiculous, and because you think I should feel better.
Maybe sometimes you do this and feel this way when you do it, not me.
Not at all, and now I feel even worse seeing that you still don't understand, distorting what others have already patiently tried to explain to you.
Now, where has anyone here, myself included, written to you and tried to convince you that JPEG is better than DNG? ...so meaning DNG is inferior or useless.
Where?
I, not a native English speaker, have not seen it, but maybe you do have found it, if you have a finer fantasy than others and find what others don't read ...comma point

 

[Filmarik]

No, once again you're guessing wrong, both because you call it an attack, which is rather ridiculous, and because you think I should feel better.
Maybe sometimes you do this and feel this way when you do it, not me.
Not at all, and now I feel even worse seeing that you still don't understand, distorting what others have already patiently tried to explain to you.
Now, where has anyone here, myself included, written to you and tried to convince you that JPEG is better than DNG? ...so meaning DNG is inferior or useless.
Where?
I, not a native English speaker, have not seen it, but maybe you do have found it, if you have a finer fantasy than others and find what others don't read ...comma point

How about re-reading the entire thread and paying attention to what I and others wrote? Maybe you will learn something useful if that is why you are on this forum. But I personally have not learned anything from reading yours last two posts. So, what was your reason for posting this if I may ask?

 

[Filmarik]

How about re-reading the entire thread and paying attention to what I and others wrote? Maybe you will learn something useful if that is why you are on this forum. But I personally have not learned anything from reading yours last two posts. So, what was your reason for posting this if I may ask?

And just to be clear and for you to understand. Writing about someone Quote:
"Man, you are really rigidly stubborn, you wear DNG-branded blinkers and you can't see, imagine and accept anything else!"
is an insult and personal attack.
But do not worry I an not going to sue you for libel

 

[Andarc]

I have the same issue with a Mavic 3 Classic. The leftmost 5% is quite blurred and the left upper corner severely blurred. The center is quite sharp and not an issue. I am a professional photographer, so I know what to expect from a decent lens. I think those that think this is a stabilization, turbulence or technique issue are off-base. Such effects would impact both sides and all the corners of a lens equally. I am disappointed that DJI is not owning up to a defective (or at least, deficient) product.

 

[ImagineLight]

I have the same problem but I have blurry spot almost in the centre of the frame with the replacement I received yesterday.
I went with 5 Mavic 3 Pro units with DJI and all of them had this issue, Some on the right side, some more centered.
There is a quite substancial thread on DJI forum about this problem.
Essentially, regardless what you will do with the camera ( shutter speed, aperture etc ) this blurry spot remains in the same place every time.
Crop attached

 

[Filmarik]

How did this end up for those affected by this issue, I wonder? This thread kind of died off without any conclusion.

 

[ImagineLight]

After 3 replacements received and 3 units opened at the EU centre and test samples sent to me ( where all these units had the same defect ). The DJI representative that was helping me was advised that ''This is in the spec, and I should sharpen these in post''. Which was quite insulting imho. I wrote a massive email asking for an official statement if this is really the level of quality that DJI consider acceptable and what are my options.
I got a reply after a week that I will be offered another replacement but no one will give me the guarantee that another one will be any better.
After all this, I didn't expect anything, but I accepted that option and 4th opened example in DJI centre was good enough for me ( 7th in total ).
So after 3 months I have a decent unit now.

 

[Filmarik]

After 3 replacements received and 3 units opened at the EU centre and test samples sent to me ( where all these units had the same defect ). The DJI representative that was helping me was advised that ''This is in the spec, and I should sharpen these in post''. Which was quite insulting imho. I wrote a massive email asking for an official statement if this is really the level of quality that DJI consider acceptable and what are my options.
I got a reply after a week that I will be offered another replacement but no one will give me the guarantee that another one will be any better.
After all this, I didn't expect anything, but I accepted that option and 4th opened example in DJI centre was good enough for me ( 7th in total ).
So after 3 months I have a decent unit now.

Expecting Leica IQ would be foolish but blurry double vision zones in the frame is certainly hard to tolerate let alone accept as normal DJI standard. As long as these issues are managable I guess we need to be prepared to accept this IQ as good enough and move on.

 

[ImagineLight]

Expecting Leica IQ would be foolish but blurry double vision zones in the frame is certainly hard to tolerate let alone accept as normal DJI standard. As long as these issues are managable I guess we need to be prepared to accept this IQ as good enough and move on.

I owned most of the DJI drones by know. I roughly know what to expects from these little camera systems and as far as physical disadvantages of having tiny wide angle system which exhibits sharpness fallout on corners, vignette etc. blurry spots almost in the centre of the frame are not what I would consider in spec.
Also, having in mind that I've seen good samples from other Mavic 3 Pro users and now I have a decent one shows that this is not a specification of the lens but a deffect. Not mentioning that Mavic 3 ( not pro ) has the same Main camera system and I had 2 of these and none of them had any issues like that.
As you said, this is what we have to be prepared with DJI.
It is a pity that it is so difficult for them to admit that something is defective and you have to fight the incompetence of the CS.

 

[Filmarik]

I owned most of the DJI drones by know. I roughly know what to expects from these little camera systems and as far as physical disadvantages of having tiny wide angle system which exhibits sharpness fallout on corners, vignette etc. blurry spots almost in the centre of the frame are not what I would consider in spec.
Also, having in mind that I've seen good samples from other Mavic 3 Pro users and now I have a decent one shows that this is not a specification of the lens but a deffect. Not mentioning that Mavic 3 ( not pro ) has the same Main camera system and I had 2 of these and none of them had any issues like that.
As you said, this is what we have to be prepared with DJI.
It is a pity that it is so difficult for them to admit that something is defective and you have to fight the incompetence of the CS.

The main problem as far as I can see this is that this issue seems to be pretty common. I went through 4 M3 and during that time I have seen samples from owners all over the world and could see various degrees of these issues in all of those samples. You went through 7. That is certainly worrying. Nobody really knows how prevalent these issues really are but I refuse to accept that I was just "unlucky" as told by the retailer I got the drones from.
Anyway, I am pleased to hear that you finally got a decent one. That proves that decent ones indeed do exist

 

[ImagineLight]

The main problem as far as I can see this is that this issue seems to be pretty common. I went through 4 M3 and during that time I have seen samples from owners all over the world and could see various degrees of these issues in all of those samples. You went through 7. That is certainly worrying. Nobody really knows how prevalent these issues really are but I refuse to accept that I was just "unlucky" as told by the retailer I got the drones from.
Anyway, I am pleased to hear that you finally got a decent one. That proves that decent ones indeed do exist

They do exist but even that I have a decent copy my Mavic 3 ( not pro ) had better sharpness uniformity across the frame.
On the other hand you have to pixel peep at this stage so Im half happy considering my battle lol

 

[dre8688]

Unless you shoot brick walls for a living, this doesn't replicate real world photography in flight, which is what the camera optics are optimized for.

Yes, but it will indeed tell you if a lens is able to achieve critical focus in the same way that people test the back focus of a lens via a focus chart.

 

[GadgetGuy]

Yes, but it will indeed tell you if a lens is able to achieve critical focus in the same way that people test the back focus of a lens via a focus chart.

If you are that obsessed with image quality then you shouldn't be buying a consumer drone. You need a heavy lifter drone that will carry a traditional camera and lens that those charts were designed for. Get out your wallet. They aren't cheap!

 

[dre8688]

If you are that obsessed with image quality then you shouldn't be buying a consumer drone. You need a heavy lifter drone that will carry a traditional camera and lens that those charts were designed for. Get out your wallet. They aren't cheap!

I’m aware, I use them in production. Anything from Mavic 2 Pros to heavy lifters with ronin 2 or Movi setups. Now I use the Mavic 3 Pro Cine in productions and don’t see what the problem is when people notice a lens isn’t sharp in the middle or off center.

At this point it’s a well documented issue. Sure all lenses have flaws do you have but it’s silly to discount someone for caring about getting top quality when it’s very clear that some of these aren’t manufactured or assembled to the same quality as others. I understand your overall point though, I just don’t think DJI is off the leash given how widely documented this is.