Mavic 3 Pro: design elements from inspire 1 are ripe in patent filings

[Ty Pilot]

I agree 100% with what @old man mavic said. There is a gap between systems like the Mavic/P4P and something like the Inspire, in terms of price and capabilities. The now lifeless Yuneec brand produced the Typhoon H which had retractable gear, a 360 degree rotating camera that could be operated by a second controller or even passed to the right joystick when flying automated. In addition it had a dedicated screen built into the controller that was very good. The six rotor design allowed for an engine out situation and with the introduction of the Typhoon Plus and 520 and their 1" sensor, the camera quality became on par with a P4P.

Yuneec was not known for the kind of product refinement of a brand like DJI but even still; the fact that a sub 2000.00 drone had that kind of capability at that price point leaves a hole in the market. If DJI were to create a similar product to stand between the Mavic/P4P and Inspire line it would seem logical. The Mavic was, and still is the top drone when it comes to portability - that's where it stands apart from everything else on the market, it's niche. To loose that aspect reduces it's appeal (at it's current price point) dramatically.

Yuneec was never a threat to DJI but the capabilities of a drone like the Typhoon H, (had it been done right) would certainly have attracted many. I currently Have a Typhoon H Plus as well as a Mavic 2 Pro and even with all of the shortcomings of the Plus it is still the drone I take to work while the Mavic is my 'Go-Anywhere' drone, each having it's strong suite.

 

[Skull Studios]

I want one now so badly

<iframe src='https://www.dronelogbook.com/widgets/stickerDashboard.php?token=66216' width='400' height='163' frameBorder='0' style='overflow:hidden;' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0'></iframe>

 

[AngelEyes]

How is Micro 4/3 marketing wank? It is a larger sensor so better quality! There is a point if they can do it and as a photographer I would buy it.

Like I said before, compare it to the current marketing wank hype of "8K screen on your smartphone". Yes, an 8K video is going to have much higher detail than a 1080 one, that is undisputed. However, the human eye physically cannot perceive the difference on such a small screen - there's no point in having it except for Samsung being able to say "we have more pixels than those guys!". Similarly, I can go out and buy a $5000 Angenieux lens for my DSLR, but if I put a $40 Chinesium UV filter on the front of it, a lot of the image quality that you might have had is thrown out the window because it's being filtered through low-quality glass. So like I said, if they cram a M4/3 sensor behind the relatively lower quality lens on the MP2 (compared to the Zenmuse series lenses), yes, it's marketing wank, as your nice, higher quality sensor is being crippled by the lower lens quality. Now, if they can cram a Zenmuse onto a Mavic, I'll be right in line, credit card in hand.

Don't fall for the classic "bigger number = better" trap, it's a play on people's caveman brain instincts.

 

[Meta4]

Like I said before, compare it to the current marketing wank hype of "8K screen on your smartphone". Yes, an 8K video is going to have much higher detail than a 1080 one, that is undisputed. However, the human eye physically cannot perceive the difference on such a small screen - there's no point in having it except for Samsung being able to say "we have more pixels than those guys!". Similarly, I can go out and buy a $5000 Angenieux lens for my DSLR, but if I put a $40 Chinesium UV filter on the front of it, a lot of the image quality that you might have had is thrown out the window because it's being filtered through low-quality glass. So like I said, if they cram a M4/3 sensor behind the relatively lower quality lens on the MP2 (compared to the Zenmuse series lenses), yes, it's marketing wank, as your nice, higher quality sensor is being crippled by the lower lens quality. Now, if they can cram a Zenmuse onto a Mavic, I'll be right in line, credit card in hand.

Don't fall for the classic "bigger number = better" trap, it's a play on people's caveman brain instincts.

If DJI was going for a marketing gimmick, they'd do something similar to what they did with the Air 2 or what Autel have done.
Going micro 4/3 would mean a genuinely bigger sensor, bigger lenses and bigger gimbal and genuine better photographic ability and cost much more.
It would be expensive and limit their marketing potential rather than opening it up.
It would also be too big and heavy to fit on anything like any Mavic that's been seen so far.

 

[fGene]

Like I said before, compare it to the current marketing wank hype of "8K screen on your smartphone". Yes, an 8K video is going to have much higher detail than a 1080 one, that is undisputed. However, the human eye physically cannot perceive the difference on such a small screen - there's no point in having it except for Samsung being able to say "we have more pixels than those guys!".

Not a good example, actually. High-resolution screen on a smartphone is very beneficial if you use your smartphone as goggles. It is nice to have a full HD area for each eye in FPV.

 

[brett8883]

DJI has yet to demonstrate they can get a 1” sensor to record video without pixel binning or sensor cropping on a Mavic. What makes anyone think they can do it right with a MFT sensor on a Mavic?

 

[Meta4]

DJI has yet to demonstrate they can get a 1” sensor to record video without pixel binning or sensor cropping on a Mavic.

Despite whatever technical stuff they do to make the Mavic 2 pro camera work, I don't see many complaints about the results it produces.
Only a few pixel peepers complaining about how the results are achieved.
Is it really that bad?

What makes anyone think they can do it right with a MFT sensor on a Mavic?

DJI have been selling micro 4/3 cameras for longer than they've sold 1" sensor cameras.
How have they done with their X5/X5S cameras?

But all the discussion around a micro 4/3 camera for the Mavic line is probably irrelevant, I can't see them fitting such a big camera and gimbal to any Mavic.

 

[brett8883]

Despite whatever technical stuff they do to make the Mavic 2 pro camera work, I don't see many complaints about the results it produces.
Only a few pixel peepers complaining about how the results are achieved.
Is it really that bad?

So if you have an M2Pro you’ll know that you can select either FOV or HQ mode in video mode. You’ll know that FOV mode is substantially lower quality than HQ mode and HQ mode crops your video to a tighter FOV.

What’s happening is that in FOV mode the camera is reading out the full area of the 1” sensor, or at least cropped to 16:9, which is normally how cameras do video. However, to simplify, the camera is only averaging the read out of pixel groupings producing much less sharp video.

In HQ mode the sensor is doing a full read out of the sensor, which is what you’d expect, but it is only using a small area of the sensor which is why you get the cropped image. In photography terms it’s as if a full frame sensor camera is only using an APS-C sized area of sensor to record the photo.

The reason for this is that they packed too large of a sensor in too small a package and they could not dissipate enough heat generated by using doing a full read out of the full sensor.


The M2Pro takes pretty decent video for a small drone but they have work to do to work out the heat issues of putting larger sensors into small packages which was my point. If M2Pro can’t read out the full sensor on a 1” sensor why would we think they can read out the sensor properly of MFT sensor that is almost twice the size of a 1” sensor

How have they done with their X5/X5S cameras?

I have the X5R and it properly reads out the full sensor but to your point and mine the X5/X5R/X5S itself is almost as large as the entire Mavic. How on earth are they going to miniaturize it to put it on a Mavic? It would seem anybody who thinks this is a real possibility has never used a Zenmuse MFT camera.

It takes two 6s 4280 mAh batteries and 7.5 lbs of drone (not including camera) to keep this camera airborne for 27 mins.

 

[brett8883]

I agree 100% with what @old man mavic said. There is a gap between systems like the Mavic/P4P and something like the Inspire, in terms of price and capabilities.

There really isn’t the gap being talked about because the Inspire has cameras like the x4s which is the step up from the M2P camera with 4k/60p and mechanical shutter. The cost difference isn’t all that missive until you start needing more batteries.

Really the P4Pv2 is the model inbetween the M2Pro and inspire. I just don’t see the gap. Where’s the gap exactly?


The

 

[Ty Pilot]

The P4P is the model inbetween the M2P and the Inspire in DJI's current line-up. Yes.

The gap I am speaking of is in terms of functionality of the camera. The P4P like all the Mavics and the Phantoms before it, as well as a huge chunk of the consumer drone market has a camera that is limited to facing in the direction of the aircraft for all intents and purposes while having the ability to tilt. In addition there is no facility to separate the pilot and camera operator on those platforms. I realize that not every consumer drone pilot needs the capability to have unrestricted 360 camera movement independent of the aircraft or have a dedicated camera operator but some do and not all of them necessarily want to jump into an Inspire cost category.

As I mentioned the Typhoon Plus gave imagery on par with a P4P but also gave the independent camera capability (retractable gear, 360 camera) of an Inspire for under 2K. Yuneec is all but gone but I believe the viability of something like the Typhoon Plus clearly stood out.

 

[brett8883]

The P4P is the model inbetween the M2P and the Inspire in DJI's current line-up. Yes.

The gap I am speaking of is in terms of functionality of the camera. The P4P like all the Mavics and the Phantoms before it, as well as a huge chunk of the consumer drone market has a camera that is limited to facing in the direction of the aircraft for all intents and purposes while having the ability to tilt. In addition there is no facility to separate the pilot and camera operator on those platforms. I realize that not every consumer drone pilot needs the capability to have unrestricted 360 camera movement independent of the aircraft or have a dedicated camera operator but some do and not all of them necessarily want to jump into an Inspire cost category.

As I mentioned the Typhoon Plus gave imagery on par with a P4P but also gave the independent camera capability (retractable gear, 360 camera) of an Inspire for under 2K. Yuneec is all but gone but I believe the viability of something like the Typhoon Plus clearly stood out.

I see the point you are making and I use to think the two operator set up was very advantageous but in reality there just isn’t enough money to go around to have dual operators unless it’s a big budget gig and in that case you are gonna use a better camera than that. The 360 camera is only beneficial in dual operator mode.

In truth the dual operator is only necessary because the bigger drones are so much harder to control. I see it as a tool to overcome a weakness rather than a benefit. In my opinion the Mavic with a single operator is much more likely to get the shot than dual operators using an Inspire. Every time I go back to flying my Mavic after flying the Inspire I am in awe at how much smoother and easier the Mavic is to fly. Plus the Mavic 2 will yaw the camera in dual operator mode almost 90 degrees both ways right?

Even with the landing gear up you see the landing gear in the frame on the Inspire just as much as you see the props in the frame with the Mavic. I don’t see any advantage there.

If it took the same video quality I’d use the Mavic any day of the week no question about it just based on how much easier is it to fly.

If that’s what you want look at an Inspire 1 or Yuneec does have a new model called the Typhoon H3 that is like $2500. I personally think the Mavic is a better more capable aircraft in every way over the Inspire except camera quality.

 

[cgmaxed]

Bill the Drone Reviewer says the Mavic 3 should be released on September 26, 10:00 am. EST.

NOW IT IS BEING REPORTED THE RELEASE DATE WILL BE AROUND JANUARY 2021. Maybe they will have pre-orders for Christmas sales.

 

[Meta4]

NOW IT IS BEING REPORTED THE RELEASE DATE WILL BE AROUND JANUARY 2021.

Eventually you realise that the people that make these "reports" are just making things up.
They have no idea and no-one else does until DJI announce it themselves.

 

[peterc4]

Wish it would hurry up i will be pre ordering cant wait to see how long it takes before it falls out of the sky ? ? ? i have had a pro and pro 2 both on preorder and both fell out of the sky at some point, why do i keep buying them i hear you say because they fit in my kit bag perfectly and take great pictures and i have adopted a mind set that some point they will fail so it is not so bad when they do..

 

[CactusJackSlade]

i think that DJI's next new drone, will be an attempt to introduce a drone that will bridge the gap between the Mavic range, and the much more expensive inspire
a consumer priced drone, is never going to be able to match the capabilities of a professional drone, at a price the consumer is able and willing to pay

Agreed... that being said the "general public" always wants more for less. I personally will definitely pay more for a quality product that has the features I want.

I really wanted to like the Evo 2, but it flew like a Mack Truck and the (duo) had some issues I could not live with. Waiting for the Mavic 3 and hopefully an upgraded FLIR version that is worth consideration. (Current Enterprise Duo is garbage IMO).