Mavic 3 Filter quality? (All Densities) vs 3rd party filters?

[Ben_McPhee]

Can anyone comment on if the filters included with the Mavic 3 Combos (and in particular the Cine which has pretty much every density you could ever need), can be improved upon by 3rd party filters from the usual standouts like Polar Pro, Freewell, Pgytech?

I mostly mean optically, but even design wise (quick changing etc).

 

[Dale D]

Can anyone comment on if the filters included with the Mavic 3 Combos (and in particular the Cine which has pretty much every density you could ever need), can be improved upon by 3rd party filters from the usual standouts like Polar Pro, Freewell, Pgytech?

I mostly mean optically, but even design wise (quick changing etc).

I'm waiting to hear from others too- still pondering the M3

 

[CanadaDrone]

Unless they are really terrible, you aren't likely to notice any image quality difference between the major brands. As long as they are using proper multicoated optical glass, which to my knowledge most of them do, the differences between them are trivial. Lens filters are extremely simple and extremely cheap to produce (high margin). Build quality wise, PolarPro is typically the best and they often include tools that assist in the removal of the filters, but optically I don't believe there is a difference anyone could notice between the major brands outside of a lab. You pay a lot just for the name.

The only brand I don't buy is Skyreat because years ago they made claims about being better than PolarPro, then when challenged publicly and pressed for objective data, refused to provide any. They are probably fine, but out of principal I won't buy from a company that can't back up their claims.

 

[Dale D]

Unless they are really terrible, you aren't likely to notice any image quality difference between the major brands. As long as they are using proper multicoated optical glass, which to my knowledge most of them do, the differences between them are trivial. Lens filters are extremely simple and extremely cheap to produce (high margin). Build quality wise, PolarPro is typically the best and they often include tools that assist in the removal of the filters, but optically I don't believe there is a difference anyone could notice between the major brands outside of a lab. You pay a lot just for the name.

The only brand I don't buy is Skyreat because years ago they made claims about being better than PolarPro, then when challenged publicly and pressed for objective data, refused to provide any. They are probably fine, but out of principal I won't buy from a company that can't back up their claims.

I have both good and bad experience with Skyreat. My iPad holder with the M2P is great. However, the ND16 filter for the Mavic Mini 2 was worthless. It never stayed on well and I usually removed it before flying rather than lose it. I sold the Mini 2 recently and threw in the filter for free. Worthless piece of gear.

 

[canadian drone videos]

Can anyone comment on if the filters included with the Mavic 3 Combos (and in particular the Cine which has pretty much every density you could ever need), can be improved upon by 3rd party filters from the usual standouts like Polar Pro, Freewell, Pgytech?

I mostly mean optically, but even design wise (quick changing etc).

I was warned by the dealer who sold me my M3 to not buy DJI filters, wait till Polar Pro and such come out with polarized filters.

 

[Ben_McPhee]

I was warned by the dealer who sold me my M3 to not buy DJI filters, wait till Polar Pro and such come out with polarized filters.

I kind of question this logic...

Polarised filters look great for many shots 9over water for example), but exactly how they look depends on the direction you fly in. The effect will be stronger of the sun is to your left or right than it will be if it's in front or behind.

So if you are trying to match 2 shots on different flight paths, you might find it a challenge. And if you move the angle of your shot mid flight, it will visually change during the shot.

For that reason... I usually stay away from polarisers except if I NEED one. It's never my default filter (And that doesn't just go for drones).

 

[Dale D]

I kind of question this logic...

Polarised filters look great for many shots 9over water for example), but exactly how they look depends on the direction you fly in. The effect will be stronger of the sun is to your left or right than it will be if it's in front or behind.

So if you are trying to match 2 shots on different flight paths, you might find it a challenge. And if you move the angle of your shot mid flight, it will visually change during the shot.

For that reason... I usually stay away from polarisers except if I NEED one. It's never my default filter (And that doesn't just go for drones).

I think McPhee missed the point
This is not about polarizing filters at all but about Polar Pro brand named filters in general versus those supplied by Mavic
Dale

 

[Ben_McPhee]

I think McPhee missed the point
This is not about polarizing filters at all but about Polar Pro brand named filters in general versus those supplied by Mavic
Dale

No I didn't. (I am the OP, so I asked the original question.

My reply was to a user who said "I was warned by the dealer who sold me my M3 to not buy DJI filters, wait till Polar Pro and such come out with polarized filters."

 

[canadian drone videos]

I kind of question this logic...

Polarised filters look great for many shots 9over water for example), but exactly how they look depends on the direction you fly in. The effect will be stronger of the sun is to your left or right than it will be if it's in front or behind.

So if you are trying to match 2 shots on different flight paths, you might find it a challenge. And if you move the angle of your shot mid flight, it will visually change during the shot.

For that reason... I usually stay away from polarisers except if I NEED one. It's never my default filter (And that doesn't just go for drones).

Your logic may work for you but I can’t apply it to my videos. My drove videos are not shot on the same day, I typically gather footage over a period of time then create a video. Sometimes it’s overcast, sometimes it’s early morning or late afternoon. It’s not that I’m looking for no glare on water, I’m looking for hi lights to pop, or get more contrast from snowy spots, that kind of thing.

ND filters do nothing except allow for a different aperture setting while using a slow frame rate, which I never do. I do advanced editing so slow frame rates limit what I can do in post, while using higher frame rates ND filters are never required for video.

I know your going to probably disagree with my logic, but if your not going to do advanced edits then why would you ever require 5k footage?

I have no use for filters that are not polarized, and since DJI screws up this lens package on the M3 this bad with the green ghost why would I trust them to sell me a good filter at $250 or so? There is no way the Hasselblad company we knew made that camera or the elements inside it. DJI bought that company, that is not a Hasselblad camera and those DJI filters are not Hasselblad filters.

 

[Ben_McPhee]

Unless they are really terrible, you aren't likely to notice any image quality difference between the major brands. As long as they are using proper multicoated optical glass, which to my knowledge most of them do, the differences between them are trivial. Lens filters are extremely simple and extremely cheap to produce (high margin). Build quality wise, PolarPro is typically the best and they often include tools that assist in the removal of the filters, but optically I don't believe there is a difference anyone could notice between the major brands outside of a lab. You pay a lot just for the name.

The only brand I don't buy is Skyreat because years ago they made claims about being better than PolarPro, then when challenged publicly and pressed for objective data, refused to provide any. They are probably fine, but out of principal I won't buy from a company that can't back up their claims.

I can see how it might be hard to tell the difference, but I come from a traditional film and photography background, and once you see the flaws in certain cheap filters, you can't unsee them.

I know we're talking about drone ND filters right now, but have you ever seen a cheap vs expensive vari-ND side by side? This video is outstanding for showing all the problems with almost ALL various-ND's, and why I try not to use them (or Polarisers) anymore. I wish I'd seen it before I trusted a trip to my "good" tiffin Vari-ND, only to find that all my wide angle shots had variations across the sky because the left and right side of the frame was polarised at a different angle (And no polariser or Vari-ND is going to prevent that - it's just physics).

I forget where I saw it, but I did see a side by side of a Pgytech filter vs a PolarPro, and I can't remember if they gave either the thumbs down, I do remember that the PGYtech had a little color cast, and was consistently a little darker than the Polar Pro. Not really a problem if you know about it and correct for it, but it was there.

There's even variations in color at each density within the same brand. (Trying to find a link to it. It was vy Shane Hurlbut), but every 0.3 in this Tiffen Comparison video I saw cut a little more IR than the last. So by the top of the range, it was very "Purple". But they had new filters out with a coating to minimise this and keep it more similar. Side by siding each of the densities, you could see them drifting further and further apart.

So, an ND might be easier to make and pretty close, but... if Skyreat was too scared to actually put their product to the test but thought they could get away with that claim, doesn't that kind of suggest that not all ND's are created equal?

I'm sure there's a way to bugger them up, or improve them, so I'm curious if DJI saved some money here or included good glass to go on the Hassleblad on their $7000 drone...

 

[canadian drone videos]

I can see how it might be hard to tell the difference, but I come from a traditional film and photography background, and once you see the flaws in certain cheap filters, you can't unsee them.

I know we're talking about drone ND filters right now, but have you ever seen a cheap vs expensive vari-ND side by side? This video is outstanding for showing all the problems with almost ALL various-ND's, and why I try not to use them (or Polarisers) anymore. I wish I'd seen it before I trusted a trip to my "good" tiffin Vari-ND, only to find that all my wide angle shots had variations across the sky because the left and right side of the frame was polarised at a different angle (And no polariser or Vari-ND is going to prevent that - it's just physics).

I forget where I saw it, but I did see a side by side of a Pgytech filter vs a PolarPro, and I can't remember if they gave either the thumbs down, I do remember that the PGYtech had a little color cast, and was consistently a little darker than the Polar Pro. Not really a problem if you know about it and correct for it, but it was there.

There's even variations in color at each density within the same brand. (Trying to find a link to it. It was vy Shane Hurlbut), but every 0.3 in this Tiffen Comparison video I saw cut a little more IR than the last. So by the top of the range, it was very "Purple". But they had new filters out with a coating to minimise this and keep it more similar. Side by siding each of the densities, you could see them drifting further and further apart.

So, an ND might be easier to make and pretty close, but... if Skyreat was too scared to actually put their product to the test but thought they could get away with that claim, doesn't that kind of suggest that not all ND's are created equal?

I'm sure there's a way to bugger them up, or improve them, so I'm curious if DJI saved some money here or included good glass to go on the Hassleblad on their $7000 drone...

I bought some different filters for my x5s, can’t recall the brands? But one was absolutely horrible, put way too much red in the sunset. Not all filters are created equally, there is such a thing as bad filters, and I just don’t trust DJI to sell me good ones... especially when the dealer advises me not to buy them.

I suspect Polar Pro is trying to develop filters with coatings specific to the M3, I trust they are taking their time to do a good job.

 

[Dale D]

No I didn't. (I am the OP, so I asked the original question.

My reply was to a user who said "I was warned by the dealer who sold me my M3 to not buy DJI filters, wait till Polar Pro and such come out with polarized filters."

Ok
My bad

 

[CanadaDrone]

I can see how it might be hard to tell the difference, but I come from a traditional film and photography background, and once you see the flaws in certain cheap filters, you can't unsee them.

I know we're talking about drone ND filters right now, but have you ever seen a cheap vs expensive vari-ND side by side? This video is outstanding for showing all the problems with almost ALL various-ND's, and why I try not to use them (or Polarisers) anymore. I wish I'd seen it before I trusted a trip to my "good" tiffin Vari-ND, only to find that all my wide angle shots had variations across the sky because the left and right side of the frame was polarised at a different angle (And no polariser or Vari-ND is going to prevent that - it's just physics).

I forget where I saw it, but I did see a side by side of a Pgytech filter vs a PolarPro, and I can't remember if they gave either the thumbs down, I do remember that the PGYtech had a little color cast, and was consistently a little darker than the Polar Pro. Not really a problem if you know about it and correct for it, but it was there.

There's even variations in color at each density within the same brand. (Trying to find a link to it. It was vy Shane Hurlbut), but every 0.3 in this Tiffen Comparison video I saw cut a little more IR than the last. So by the top of the range, it was very "Purple". But they had new filters out with a coating to minimise this and keep it more similar. Side by siding each of the densities, you could see them drifting further and further apart.

So, an ND might be easier to make and pretty close, but... if Skyreat was too scared to actually put their product to the test but thought they could get away with that claim, doesn't that kind of suggest that not all ND's are created equal?

I'm sure there's a way to bugger them up, or improve them, so I'm curious if DJI saved some money here or included good glass to go on the Hassleblad on their $7000 drone...

I'm not really sure what you're getting at but I've been a professional photographer for over 20 years as well. I've done countless back to back filter tests in controlled environments across many lenses, even creating ridiculous scenarios that you would never come across in the 'real world' to try and highlight any flaws. I've done this both on drones and my DSLRs. That's where my comments are coming from and I have never had a problem with the major/quality filter brands either in testing or actual use. Third party testing seems to support this as well, including from organizations that have a $200K optical bench. YMMV I suppose.

Nobody said all NDs are created equal - there is plenty of garbage out there too, but they are easy enough to avoid. The difference between quality filters is typically not something you will ever notice unless you are unlucky enough to get a defective one.

Also, nothing on the drone is Hasselblad except a sticker for marketing purposes. DJI bought a stake in the company so they could use their branding, just like others do with Leica and Zeiss. The sensor is a well known Sony 4/3 unit and the lens is a simple mass produced unit. DJI uses Hasselblad's color science, that's about it. Hasselblad's are hand made in Sweden and many of them cost more than a car - most of the people there have probably never even seen a M3 haha.

 

[Dale D]

Ok
My bad

But, Mc Phee, do you agree not agree that the ND filters that are supplied with the M3 are adequate (part of the fly more pkg)? Or would you not order the fly more and just purchase 3rd party (like Plan Pro)? I am still in the holding position on M3 purchase and am very happy with the Mavic 2 Pro and Polar Pro ND filters that I have been using for 2 years.Dale

 

[CanadaDrone]

I was warned by the dealer who sold me my M3 to not buy DJI filters, wait till Polar Pro and such come out with polarized filters.

What evidence did he show you to to support that assertion? Maybe he makes more money selling other brands. If I had to guess, I would think most of these filters come out of the same factory and get rebranded. That is really common for something so simple to make. Just a guess though.