Mavic 3 domestic prices out

[Mavic-Master88]

Most companies do not cater to niche markets with cheaper products because that isn't where the money is. The cheaper, lower margin products are intended for volume sales and niche products are usually high margin and high cost because sales volume is much lower. The electronics world is full of examples like this. Take Nikon for example - they make 80% of their revenue from the $500-800 DSLR kits you find in Costco, WalMart, BestBuy, etc. Their $4000-$7000 flagship cameras have enormous margin and sell in dramatically fewer numbers. Features almost always trickle down from the top of the range to the bottom, but they need to pay off that R&D first. To your point, if a company wants to make maximum profit, this is exactly what they do and what most of them do already.

That is highly flawed and even non-sensical thinking. According to your logic, Tesla would only produce the Model X and sell it for $125K at maximum per-unit profit and forget about the Model 3 or model S since those are cheap units that don't generate cash flow. Apple would only sell the flagship iPhone for $1400 and offer no other models year to year. Makes no sense.

Besides, you contradict yourself when you readily admit DJI will likely sell a lot more A2S because of the high price of the M3. But if you were in charge, why even bother since they are making so little profit on the A2S?

I personally think the market for a tiny sensor 8K drone full of serious compromises to keep the price at $1500 would be far too small to be worth perusing. I also think it's important to reiterate that not all 8K is the same. If it's highly compressed with a really low bitrate coming from a tiny sensor, there is nothing attractive about that beyond the fancy symbols they can put in their marketing material. Good quality 8K from a large sensor with a high bitrate is incredible, and would cost well above the current M3 even without a 10X optical zoom. The processing power a drone would need to handle that would also be no small feat.

To be fair, I haven't personally tested the Autel Evo II 8K but there are reputable retailers like B&H Photo who have reviewed it and like it a lot. Seen a lot of Amazon customer reviews to the same effect. You seem to be putting a high-end bias viewpoint on the current state of 8K drone sensors and that doesn't serve the hobbyist market very well. If you intend your comments for only the high-end commercial market, then it makes more sense.

As for 8K TV's, current market projections show about 3% of households to have one by end of 2023. That number is around 40% for 4K (which have been available roughly since 2012), and the majority of the population is still using 1080P or less. These are all USA figures. For the foreseeable future anyway, 4K is going to be enough for the overwhelming majority of people in terms of playback resolution. Like I said earlier though, 8K does have plenty of other benefits, mostly on the editing side of things, but if the quality isn't there and it's just 8K for the sake of being 8K, those advantages go out the window.

We could argue about this for days but I'm already seeing sub-$3000 8K sets at Best Buy and I would imagine at that price point and in the coming years they will sell a ton of units. Netflix is rumored to be offering 8K movies in 2022 so that would be a powerful driver of TV sales.

Rest assured DJI has done their market research and knows far more than you or I ever will on the subject. If they thought a $1500 drone of some kind would make them the most money, that is exactly what they would have done. It's also very possible that they have priced the M3 such that they are expecting the price to end up around $1500 after 2-3 years, rounding out their product line and making room for the next big thing.

Neither one of us can claim victory on this argument because neither of us works in the accounting department of DJI and have full access to their balance sheets when it comes to various models of drones they sell. Gut feeling tells me they will regret losing out on the $1200-$2000 market when they drop the M2Z and M2P.

 

[thispilothere]

Even with the 4X digital zoom in my MA2 it starts to show how much the drone is drifting around - while unzoomed looks rock steady. I thought part of the reason for the wider angle lens is that they don't reveal the drone movement as much?

Has anyone flown a drone with high zoom? Is the footage steady?

 

[CanadaDrone]

That is highly flawed and even non-sensical thinking. According to your logic, Tesla would only produce the Model X and sell it for $125K at maximum per-unit profit and forget about the Model 3 or model S since those are cheap units that don't generate cash flow. Apple would only sell the flagship iPhone for $1400 and offer no other models year to year. Makes no sense.

You sound upset for some reason (sorry if anything I said was interpreted as offensive) so I am not going to dissect your reply and respond to everything but I will reply to this.

You misunderstood what I said because if you go back and re-read what I wrote, it's the cheapest products that typically generate the most revenue (see my Nikon example). Your reply suggests you are mixing up margin and revenue which are two very different things. If you want to use your Tesla example, looking at their sedans, the Model 3 outsells the Model S by a factor of roughly 10:1 according to US sales data. That is exactly in line with what I said and also in line with my Nikon example - the cheaper, high volume options are the money makers. Lower volume models (such as the Model S) cost far more to compensate for the much lower sales volumes and still make it worthwhile to produce. The halo products also usually serve as a "look what we can do" statement, and provide insight into what will trickle down into cheaper models over time as things become cheaper to mass produce. Aside from basic marketing principles, comparing the drone industry to the electric vehicle industry is apples & oranges anyway.

This is all very different from your suggestion of a wish-list 8K 10X optical zoom drone for $1500, adding granularity to a lineup that DJI has seemingly determined would not be worthwhile.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

it's the cheapest products that typically generate the most revenue

“Sell to the classes, live with the masses.”
“Sell to the masses, live with the classes.”

DJI make as much profit on their entire range of drone I would bet, but sell a heck of a lot more minis and air2(s) models.

 

[Mavic-Master88]

You misunderstood what I said because if you go back and re-read what I wrote, it's the cheapest products that typically generate the most revenue (see my Nikon example). Your reply suggests you are mixing up margin and revenue which are two very different things.

Yes, I know the difference between margin and revenue but when you say something like "most companies do not cater to niche markets with cheaper products because that isn't where the money is" it sounds confusing because what is a niche market? Some would think it means high-end niche but I think a "niche" is just a particular segment of a consumer market, whether it's low end, mid range, or high end.

My whole thesis in this thread is that DJI is making a huge mistake in selling the M3 at $2500 and the A2S at $999 and nothing really viable in between those price points, and I think it's a very fertile niche market that other drone companies will take advantage of. Maybe DJI is planning on releasing a "Mavic 3 Lite" with compelling features in that price range, but I've heard nothing to suggest that, and waiting for the Mavic 3 to fall to $1600 or so within a couple years is wishful thinking at best, and just another way to jerk customers around.

 

[mschaffer66]

Yes, I know the difference between margin and revenue but when you say something like "most companies do not cater to niche markets with cheaper products because that isn't where the money is" it sounds confusing because what is a niche market? Some would think it means high-end niche but I think a "niche" is just a particular segment of a consumer market, whether it's low end, mid range, or high end.

My whole thesis in this thread is that DJI is making a huge mistake in selling the M3 at $2500 and the A2S at $999 and nothing really viable in between those price points, and I think it's a very fertile niche market that other drone companies will take advantage of. Maybe DJI is planning on releasing a "Mavic 3 Lite" with compelling features in that price range, but I've heard nothing to suggest that, and waiting for the Mavic 3 to fall to $1600 or so within a couple years is wishful thinking at best, and just another way to jerk customers around.

Well, if you read some of these posts its theorized that the base M3 is going to be closer to $2k...not $2500.

So that being said...

If you(DJI) were going to build this theoretical drone that is in that $1500 price range what features would it offer that are better than the A2S, yet lesser than the M3? What features could it offer that make a potential A2S buyer say "Yeah, I need that. I'll spend $500 more." or what would it lack that a potential M3 buyer would say "Its good enough. I don't need the M3, I can save $500"?

 

[CanadaDrone]

Yes, I know the difference between margin and revenue but when you say something like "most companies do not cater to niche markets with cheaper products because that isn't where the money is" it sounds confusing because what is a niche market? Some would think it means high-end niche but I think a "niche" is just a particular segment of a consumer market, whether it's low end, mid range, or high end.

My whole thesis in this thread is that DJI is making a huge mistake in selling the M3 at $2500 and the A2S at $999 and nothing really viable in between those price points, and I think it's a very fertile niche market that other drone companies will take advantage of. Maybe DJI is planning on releasing a "Mavic 3 Lite" with compelling features in that price range, but I've heard nothing to suggest that, and waiting for the Mavic 3 to fall to $1600 or so within a couple years is wishful thinking at best, and just another way to jerk customers around.

A niche market is simply a smaller subset of a larger market that may have unique needs or preferences. It is, by definition, not where the most sales will happen and generally not where a lot of profit is made (relative to the larger markets). Any meaning beyond that would be a misunderstanding. Ultra-luxury products are typically niche markets just because they are very tiny relative to the larger markets, with price being the obvious differentiator. Selling cheaper, probably lower margin products into a niche market is not a good strategy if your goal is maximum profit/sales and is why most companies avoid it altogether.

Another clue that DJI is following these marketing principles is we can see they have no fewer than 4 drones inside the $300 to $1000 price range (excluding fly more combos). There is obviously a much bigger market there compared to the more expensive products.

Another thing to consider is that people shopping for cheaper products generally have less tolerance for price fluctuations. What I mean by this is someone who can only afford a DJI Mini 2 at $449 for example is unlikely to stretch their budget to $799 for the Air 2. That is nearly an 80% price increase even though the dollar amount of that difference is small ($350). That is why you see so many options on the entry level side of things. People shopping for much more expensive products typically have a much higher tolerance for price fluctuations, for example if someone is looking to spend $3,000 on a drone, they are far more likely to raise their budget to, say, $3,500 if it's something they want as that is only a 16% increase, even though the absolute value of the difference is higher ($500). If we use the automotive industry as an example again, someone looking to spend $20K on a vehicle is probably going to be far more sensitive to option packages costing say, $2,000, than someone buying a $40K vehicle. This tolerance is also what makes it less worthwhile to offer multiple, slightly different options with similar prices in smaller or niche markets.

The M3 is not expected to be $2,500 USD, I am not sure where you are getting that figure. All information so far points at a starting price of $2049 USD (apparently that is what is in the retail portals). It is common practice for pricing points to become less granular as you move up in a product range - generally speaking anyway - because the markets are way smaller and that customer's spending tolerance is much higher. You will always be able to cherry pick examples that may be different but that is a common strategy. Above the M3, an Inspire 2 package can easily cost more than $10,000 and as far as I know they have no plans to position any products in between. Different customer bases there though.

I understand your point about pricing, but there just isn't that big of gap to fill from a performance/technology standpoint. Pricing aside, the performance gap between the Air 2S and M3 looks to be nearly perfect, and I honestly don't know what they could add in between that wouldn't have most people saying to themselves "I'll just spend a little bit more more to buy a M3 and get the best" or "I'll just save $500 and buy the Air 2S because does nearly everything I want anyway". There are no commonly produced image sensors between the 1" format and the 4/3 format either, and sensor size is arguably the single biggest way DJI currently differentiates their product categories, especially now that 4K/60P and 5K are becoming the norm.

Another bit of insight into DJI's thinking might be to look at the M2P/M2Z. This time around, they are ditching the 2-model approach (at launch anyway) and seemingly combining it all into one model. Maybe the M2Z didn't sell as well as they hoped, or maybe it's cheaper for them to only have a single production line - who knows. Or maybe they are going to wait a little while to gauge market reception, and add another variant if it looks like there is a market for it. I would expect them to at least do something like the Enterprise model, especially since uses like S&R and equipment inspection will benefit more than many other types of usage from the longer flight times.

I think the biggest 'issue' for your desire to have a drone priced between the Air 2S and M3 is simply how good the Air 2S is for the price. I view that as a positive thing for the customer. It performs well past the point of diminishing return for most casual users/hobbyists (it's more/less a better M2P but without a variable aperture for $500 less), and the M3 appears to be positioned upmarket, towards serious hobbyists with money to spend and professionals. Also, everything is just more expensive now due to global shortages, and the larger image sensors in particular are very expensive - I'm sure all of that is priced in as well. A couple years ago, the price may have been $1899 or something instead.

I think the new pricing will make existing M2P owners evaluate their needs a little more closely as they will have to decide if their usage case will really benefit from the 4/3 sensor and/or the dual camera setup. I don't see anything wrong with that and it is by far biggest difference between the drones. If someone just wants 4K/60P, the Air 2S is a great option as well, albeit more of a lateral move. There's nothing wrong with M2P owners hanging onto their drones for another year or two either until either their needs change or the M3 pricing comes down a bit.

 

[Rchawks]

 

[Mavic-Master88]

A niche market is simply a smaller subset of a larger market that may have unique needs or preferences. It is, by definition, not where the most sales will happen and generally not where a lot of profit is made (relative to the larger markets). Any meaning beyond that would be a misunderstanding. Ultra-luxury products are typically niche markets just because they are very tiny relative to the larger markets, with price being the obvious differentiator. Selling cheaper, probably lower margin products into a niche market is not a good strategy if your goal is maximum profit/sales and is why most companies avoid it altogether.

Once again, you're hung up on semantics about what is or what is not a niche market. When it comes to consumer drones, every model is in it's own niche market. You seem confused when you say "selling lower margin products into a niche market is not a good strategy" as if someone wants to sell the Mini 2 for $2,000? Who would suggest something like that? You're taking this semantic argument into strange territory.

Another thing to consider is that people shopping for cheaper products generally have less tolerance for price fluctuations. What I mean by this is someone who can only afford a DJI Mini 2 at $449 for example is unlikely to stretch their budget to $799 for the Air 2. That is nearly an 80% price increase even though the dollar amount of that difference is small ($350). That is why you see so many options on the entry level side of things. People shopping for much more expensive products typically have a much higher tolerance for price fluctuations, for example if someone is looking to spend $3,000 on a drone, they are far more likely to raise their budget to, say, $3,500 if it's something they want as that is only a 16% increase, even though the absolute value of the difference is higher ($500). If we use the automotive industry as an example again, someone looking to spend $20K on a vehicle is probably going to be far more sensitive to option packages costing say, $2,000, than someone buying a $40K vehicle. This tolerance is also what makes it less worthwhile to offer multiple, slightly different options with similar prices in smaller or niche markets.

Not sure why you went off on this tangent about price fluctuation tolerance in different niche markets. Whatever the case, it's strictly your opinion on whether someone who is willing to pay $2000 for a Mavic 3 will happily pay $2500 for it if that ends up being the retail price. I don't happen to agree with that opinion since a $500 price increase is hard to stomach unless the added features are really compelling.

The M3 is not expected to be $2,500 USD, I am not sure where you are getting that figure. All information so far points at a starting price of $2049 USD (apparently that is what is in the retail portals). It is common practice for pricing points to become less granular as you move up in a product range - generally speaking anyway - because the markets are way smaller and that customer's spending tolerance is much higher.

I'm getting my figure directly from the original photo in this thread. The Chinese price tag shows 13,388 Yuan, which converts to roughly $2,300 USD. I added $200 because of the global chip shortage which will undoubtedly jack up the suggested retail price for it's U.S. debut but that is just a guess. If you can post your links to suggested price of $2049 then I'd love to see them, but I can't verify any reliable source quoting that figure.

I think the biggest 'issue' for your desire to have a drone priced between the Air 2S and M3 is simply how good the Air 2S is for the price. I view that as a positive thing for the customer. It performs well past the point of diminishing return for most casual users/hobbyists (it's more/less a better M2P but without a variable aperture for $500 less), and the M3 appears to be positioned upmarket, towards serious hobbyists with money to spend and professionals.

I think the Air 2S is a great product that delivers a lot of features for $999, but there is definitely a lost opportunity to market a DJI drone in that all-important $1200-$1800 price range if they plan to discontinue the M2Z and M2P. For example, it wouldn't be that difficult to put an 8K camera on an A2S and develop a beefier "OcuSync 4.0" that can transmit true 1080p video up to 5 mile range through denser foliage and such. A bigger battery could add 7-10 minutes of flight time. They could innovate with a better controller that allows activation of add-on accessories like drop devices and floodlights. I'd also gladly pay more for a robust waypoint mission app that incorporates USGS topographic datasets and faster flight speeds. All these features could easily justify a $1500 price that would make it worth every penny to a serious hobbyist like me.

 

[projectarjun]

Holy Smokes

I can wait

 

[CanadaDrone]

Once again, you're hung up on semantics about what is or what is not a niche market. When it comes to consumer drones, every model is in it's own niche market. You seem confused when you say "selling lower margin products into a niche market is not a good strategy" as if someone wants to sell the Mini 2 for $2,000? Who would suggest something like that? You're taking this semantic argument into strange territory.

I have a Master's degree in Marketing and I have worked in the industry for over 2 decades. These aren't semantics, they are facts. You are either confused or not reading what I am writing. You keep trying to move the goal posts by either putting words in my mouth or suggesting ridiculous hypotheticals which may be fun to discuss, but are not realistic.

Low-margin products are generally not sold into niche markets. Niche markets are by definition much smaller and often specialized or catering to a unique need - if a manufacturer is going to make a low-volume product to cater to these people, they will usually not do so at a loss. Low volume production is much more expensive and margins need to be higher to cover costs.

Nobody has ever suggested the Mini 2 should be $2,000 and if you had read my last post, I described how the lower price market is large enough to sustain at least 4 models of drones, including the Mini 2. Above that, choices are much fewer. If you still want to use your ridiculous example, if the market for the Mini 2 was (hypothetically) a lot smaller than it is, then the price for a Mini 2 would be higher if DJI even bothered to make it. How much higher would depend on many factors and how many they produced. The drone has to be designed/engineered, tooling has to be made (this can be extremely expensive), production lines have to be modified, testing has to be done, regulatory filings have to be done, staff has to be trained, QA has to be done, distribution has to be set up, packaging has to be designed & sourced, etc. You don't do that if you are only going to sell a handful of units, and if you do, the price needs to be high enough to recoup costs + turn a profit.

Not sure why you went off on this tangent about price fluctuation tolerance in different niche markets. Whatever the case, it's strictly your opinion on whether someone who is willing to pay $2000 for a Mavic 3 will happily pay $2500 for it if that ends up being the retail price. I don't happen to agree with that opinion since a $500 price increase is hard to stomach unless the added features are really compelling.

It wasn't a tangent, it was relevant information that sheds light on why prices generally become less granular as the price increases, and a customer's tolerance for price fluctuations is something that is well researched and widely studied for these exact purposes. The simple fact that a large global company like DJI (and many others) are running their product marketing strategies exactly as I am describing rather than what you are suggesting I think speaks volumes. A $500 price increase on an expensive product is easier for a typical customer to stomach than an $500 increase on a cheap product - that is a fact. The great thing about something that has been studied extensively over time and observed in the real world over many decades is that it doesn't matter what your opinion is, it's still correct. DJI doesn't care about the opinions of an individual, they care about broad market trends and objective data.

I'm getting my figure directly from the original photo in this thread. The Chinese price tag shows 13,388 Yuan, which converts to roughly $2,300 USD. I added $200 because of the global chip shortage which will undoubtedly jack up the suggested retail price for it's U.S. debut but that is just a guess. If you can post your links to suggested price of $2049 then I'd love to see them, but I can't verify any reliable source quoting that figure.

It's common knowledge, and has even been explained in this thread, that you cannot take foreign prices (especially for electronics) and directly convert them to North American prices. They never match. Taxes are different, shipping is different, marketing strategies are different, tariffs are different, distribution channels are different, local laws are different, regulatory requirements are different, etc. The prices were leaked from the DJI Reseller Portal a long time ago and is therefore the best indication we have for price with regards to a North American price:

Mavic 3 Retail Price Confirmed. Higher Than We Anticipated. | DroneXL.co

The Mavic 3 retail price has been confirmed by industry insiders. While the figures are not yet finalized, we have been informed that the...

dronexl.co

I think the Air 2S is a great product that delivers a lot of features for $999, but there is definitely a lost opportunity to market a DJI drone in that all-important $1200-$1800 price range if they plan to discontinue the M2Z and M2P. For example, it wouldn't be that difficult to put an 8K camera on an A2S and develop a beefier "OcuSync 4.0" that can transmit true 1080p video up to 5 mile range through denser foliage and such. A bigger battery could add 7-10 minutes of flight time. They could innovate with a better controller that allows activation of add-on accessories like drop devices and floodlights. I'd also gladly pay more for a robust waypoint mission app that incorporates USGS topographic datasets and faster flight speeds. All these features could easily justify a $1500 price that would make it worth every penny to a serious hobbyist like me.

It sounds very much like you are creating your own personal wish list and trying to apply that to a much broader market. That may be a fun exercise, but it doesn't work like that. You also don't seem to understand the sensor design and processing requirements necessary to produce 8K video that is more than a gimmick. If you think you know better than the marketing team of a multi-billion dollar company with over 50% of the entire drone market share, why not contact them about this 'lost opportunity' and let us all know what they say? DJI is making decisions based on data rather than opinions, but maybe you can change their minds.

 

[mschaffer66]

@CanadaDrone why do you continue to waste your time on this guy? He clearly "doesn't get it" and hasn't read a single thing you have posted.

 

[thispilothere]

This thread took a weird turn.

 

[CanadaDrone]

@CanadaDrone why do you continue to waste your time on this guy? He clearly "doesn't get it" and hasn't read a single thing you have posted.

I was bored this morning but I agree it's beating a dead horse at this point. He either isn't reading or is intentionally trolling, I don't know.

 

[mschaffer66]

I was bored this morning but I agree it's beating a dead horse at this point. He either isn't reading or is intentionally trolling, I don't know.

I'd concede that at this point you either know your shtuff or you are a master at googling things. Either way. The argument has been made and ended.

Like it or not this thing is probably priced correctly for what it offers and the market it is in. A drone that somehow fit between the A2S and the M3 would likely steal sales from one or the other, not drum up new sales.

 

[RonBower]

I have a Master's degree in Marketing and I have worked in the industry for over 2 decades. These aren't semantics, they are facts. You are either confused or not reading what I am writing. You keep trying to move the goal posts by either putting words in my mouth or suggesting ridiculous hypotheticals which may be fun to discuss, but are not realistic.

Low-margin products are generally not sold into niche markets. Niche markets are by definition much smaller and often specialized or catering to a unique need - if a manufacturer is going to make a low-volume product to cater to these people, they will usually not do so at a loss. Low volume production is much more expensive and margins need to be higher to cover costs.

Nobody has ever suggested the Mini 2 should be $2,000 and if you had read my last post, I described how the lower price market is large enough to sustain at least 4 models of drones, including the Mini 2. Above that, choices are much fewer. If you still want to use your ridiculous example, if the market for the Mini 2 was (hypothetically) a lot smaller than it is, then the price for a Mini 2 would be higher if DJI even bothered to make it. How much higher would depend on many factors and how many they produced. The drone has to be designed/engineered, tooling has to be made (this can be extremely expensive), production lines have to be modified, testing has to be done, regulatory filings have to be done, staff has to be trained, QA has to be done, distribution has to be set up, packaging has to be designed & sourced, etc. You don't do that if you are only going to sell a handful of units, and if you do, the price needs to be high enough to recoup costs + turn a profit.


It wasn't a tangent, it was relevant information that sheds light on why prices generally become less granular as the price increases, and a customer's tolerance for price fluctuations is something that is well researched and widely studied for these exact purposes. The simple fact that a large global company like DJI (and many others) are running their product marketing strategies exactly as I am describing rather than what you are suggesting I think speaks volumes. A $500 price increase on an expensive product is easier for a typical customer to stomach than an $500 increase on a cheap product - that is a fact. The great thing about something that has been studied extensively over time and observed in the real world over many decades is that it doesn't matter what your opinion is, it's still correct. DJI doesn't care about the opinions of an individual, they care about broad market trends and objective data.


It's common knowledge, and has even been explained in this thread, that you cannot take foreign prices (especially for electronics) and directly convert them to North American prices. They never match. Taxes are different, shipping is different, marketing strategies are different, tariffs are different, distribution channels are different, local laws are different, regulatory requirements are different, etc. The prices were leaked from the DJI Reseller Portal a long time ago and is therefore the best indication we have for price with regards to a North American price:

Mavic 3 Retail Price Confirmed. Higher Than We Anticipated. | DroneXL.co

The Mavic 3 retail price has been confirmed by industry insiders. While the figures are not yet finalized, we have been informed that the...

dronexl.co

It sounds very much like you are creating your own personal wish list and trying to apply that to a much broader market. That may be a fun exercise, but it doesn't work like that. You also don't seem to understand the sensor design and processing requirements necessary to produce 8K video that is more than a gimmick. If you think you know better than the marketing team of a multi-billion dollar company with over 50% of the entire drone market share, why not contact them about this 'lost opportunity' and let us all know what they say? DJI is making decisions based on data rather than opinions, but maybe you can change their minds.

Canada Drone, I agree with everything you said. DJI knows what they are doing. They clearly understand that there is a substantial market for a drone with these features and capabilities, at this price point, especially with the 4/3 sensor. Units sold will not approach those of the Air and Mini, but margins will probably be higher, and the targeted market is not choosing between the Air and the M3 anyway. I see some similarities between the M3 and the newest and biggest iPhones. Margins are higher (as a percentage of cost) and a substantial market is willing to pay for the features. My aerial photography friends are anxious to get their hands on a camera drone like the M3. Sure the price makes us wince, but the benefits to our businesses and/or serious hobby outweigh that pain. We are part of the target market. Most of us have owned M2 Pros since it's launch. Generally we are still quite impressed with the quality of photos (we don't do video) but realize that there is still room for improvement and the M3 promises to be even better. Our dream is for a drone camera that gets closer to the quality of our DSLRs (within reason of course). I will sell my M2Pro, Smart Controller, and a zillion accessories, which will make the upgrade a bit more reasonable. All of this is just my opinion. I also spent many years in technology marketing.

 

[Johnmcl7]

This company does:

Autel Robotics EVO II 8K Drone

Buy Autel Robotics EVO II 8K Drone featuring Capture 8K Video & 48MP Photos, 12-Sensor Obstacle Avoidance, Up to 40-Minute Flight Time, HD Transmission up to 5.6 Miles, Includes Remote with 3.3" OLED Display, Record HDR Video at up to 4K Resolution, 120 fps Slo-Mo at up to 2K Resolution, 4x...

www.bhphotovideo.com

Technically not 10X but that could be easily upgraded in the next version!

Never mind not technically 10x zoom that drone doesn't have any zoom at all because it's a fixed focal length zoom and while I wouldn't count digital zoom as a zoom, you can crop a 4/3 sensor a lot more than 1/2in sensor. Also it's a quad bayer sensor so the 8K is just marketing since in reality it's a 12MP sensor.

 

[Deleted member 77603]

The Evo ii pro has lossless video 2x zoom which can be useful but no zoom for RAW images. It's sensor is from the Sony RX100 v7 which does a nice job with shadow noise and detail as well as 10bit color. Unless the MP3's camera is a revelation vs the MP2, I'll stay where I am. Still, its a step in the right direction vs having to lug around an Inspire 2 and X5s, which I have done.

 

[Johnmcl7]

The Evo ii pro has lossless video 2x zoom which can be useful but no zoom for RAW images. It's sensor is from the Sony RX100 v7 which does a nice job with shadow noise and detail as well as 10bit color. Unless the MP3's camera is a revelation vs the MP2, I'll stay where I am. Still, its a step in the right direction vs having to lug around an Inspire 2 and X5s, which I have done.

It's not lossless though as that's misleading marketing, even on a high resolution standard bayer sensor you are losing quality because you're cropping out a chunk of the sensor. The lossless claim is because it still has enough pixels but the problem is the number of pixels are not the sole determinant of image quality while sensor size is.

The only true lossless zoom is an optical zoom which very few drones offer.

 

[Johnmcl7]

With the step up to the larger 4/3 sensor and the additional telephoto lens/sensor along with other improvements the Mavic 3 feels more like it's in a higher range. I was initially keen on a 4/3 sensor to get a stop more DR and high iso although as someone pointed out on another thread the difference in DR over the 1in sensor isn't as large so I'll wait and see what the raw images look from the new model.