Mavic 4 - Canyon

[Mountains]

Just got back from this location (44°13'15"N 15°36'57"E).
What a spot! I came out here to do a long-range test, but the wind kicked in again... 12 hours of travel down the drain…

Honestly, it’s way harder to grab good shots than on mountains (I didn’t expect that...). Canyons feel tight, light’s tricky, and drones have less room to move.
Mountains just let you roam and capture epic views.

But hopefully I still managed to bring the location to your screen. Shot with a 1/4 mist filter - and yep, I’m definitely done using that filter.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Filmarik]

Just got back from this location (44°13'15"N 15°36'57"E).
What a spot! I came out here to do a long-range test, but the wind kicked in again... 12 hours of travel down the drain…

Honestly, it’s way harder to grab good shots than on mountains (I didn’t expect that...). Canyons feel tight, light’s tricky, and drones have less room to move.
Mountains just let you roam and capture epic views.

But hopefully I still managed to bring the location to your screen. Shot with a 1/4 mist filter - and yep, I’m definitely done using that filter.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Since you've posted under Video Critique I assume you expect some CC?
I'd say great effort but to me this is a good example where the 28mm lens on M4P makes most of the shots look constrained and lacking depth and grandeur this location no doubt deserves. Challenging light but you've dealt with that aspect pretty well, IMHO Thanks for bringing it to us who will likely never get there on foot.

 

[Meta4]

this is a good example where the 28mm lens on M4P makes most of the shots look constrained and lacking depth and gradeaur this location no doubt deserves.

It's quite rare to fly in a situation where the drone is so constrained that it can't be flown back to include more of the scene.
In this case, the lens isn't causing what you consider to be a fault, it's where the flyer chose to put the camera.

 

[Filmarik]

It's quite rare to fly in a situation where the drone is so constrained that it can't be flown back to include more of the scene.
In this case, the lens isn't causing what you consider to be a fault, it's where the flyer chose to put the camera.

It is the perspective of the 28mm lens not where the flyer put the camera what's creating the perception of the shots lacking depth. The wider the lens thus more encompassing, especially in constrained spaces like this, the more dramatic the shots are which I thing would be beneficial here. That is what I was trying to say.

 

[Meta4]

It is the perspective of the 28mm lens not where the flyer put the camera what's creating the perception of the shots lacking depth. The wider the lens thus more encompassing, especially in constrained spaces like this, the more dramatic the shots are which I thing would be beneficial here. That is what I was trying to say.

LOL

 

[Filmarik]

LOL

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery

 

[Masterino]

Curious - what made you decide to ditch the 1/4 mist filter for good?

 

[Mountains]

Curious - what made you decide to ditch the 1/4 mist filter for good?

I filmed two videos during golden hour, and to be honest, I wasn’t really happy with the results.
You can check them out if you’d like and see what you think.
For this video, I used a mist filter even though it’s not really meant for daytime, I just wanted to try it out. The footage came out looking kind of pale and washed out (I spent a ton of time in adobe color grading just to get it to look somewhat decent... I don’t have to deal with that much work when I shoot without the filter).

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mountains]

Since you've posted under Video Critique I assume you expect some CC?
I'd say great effort but to me this is a good example where the 28mm lens on M4P makes most of the shots look constrained and lacking depth and grandeur this location no doubt deserves. Challenging light but you've dealt with that aspect pretty well, IMHO Thanks for bringing it to us who will likely never get there on foot.

yeah, I get it; 28mm does feel kind of tight in this scene, but honestly, I like it more than 24mm because it just feels more cinematic, more "intimate".
24mm gives off that action-cam kind of look.
(But yeah, for this setting, 24mm would probably work better)


Most of the time I’m flying in the mountains anyway, and there 28mm works perfectly (for me).
I’ve got to say, I get the most grand and majestic feel of mountain landscapes using 70mm and 168mm lenses, mainly because of the parallax and the sense of depth, but also because of the sheer “size” of the subject in the frame.
We could talk about this forever, but it really just comes down to personal taste, everyone sees it differently, so no point in debating.

For the shadows and lighting in the video, I used masking and lifted the midtones... it was pretty tricky, but honestly, I’m blown away by how much D-Log can preserve.
If I’d shot in D-Log M, I wouldn’t have been able to pull anything out of the shadows

 

[Filmarik]

yeah, I get it; 28mm does feel kind of tight in this scene, but honestly, I like it more than 24mm because it just feels more cinematic, more "intimate".
24mm gives off that action-cam kind of look.
(But yeah, for this setting, 24mm would probably work better)


Most of the time I’m flying in the mountains anyway, and there 28mm works perfectly (for me).
I’ve got to say, I get the most grand and majestic feel of mountain landscapes using 70mm and 168mm lenses, mainly because of the parallax and the sense of depth, but also because of the sheer “size” of the subject in the frame.
We could talk about this forever, but it really just comes down to personal taste, everyone sees it differently, so no point in debating.

For the shadows and lighting in the video, I used masking and lifted the midtones... it was pretty tricky, but honestly, I’m blown away by how much D-Log can preserve.
If I’d shot in D-Log M, I wouldn’t have been able to pull anything out of the shadows

Thanks for your reply. Good to hear about the 28mm vs. 24mm from someone who used both in these situations. I often shoot in scenarios when I find myself in constrained spaces (urban environment) and the 28mm would be a real headache to me. But as you say in open spaces like broad landscapes and mountains it comes down to personal taste which lens perspective one prefers.
As for the dynamic range there is apparently this "dual ISO gain magic" DJI cooked in M4P when you shoot videos in D-log M and Auto ISO. Allegedly the dynamic range exceeds dynamic range of D-log footage. You might like to test it if it will render better results next time round and perhaps report back? It might save you time in post if true

 

[Mountains]

Thanks for your reply. Good to hear about the 28mm vs. 24mm from someone who used both in these situations. I often shoot in scenarios when I find myself in constrained spaces (urban environment) and the 28mm would be a real headache to me. But as you say in open spaces like broad landscapes and mountains it comes down to personal taste which lens perspective one prefers.
As for the dynamic range there is apparently this "dual ISO gain magic" DJI cooked in M4P when you shoot videos in D-log M and Auto ISO. Allegedly the dynamic range exceeds dynamic range of D-log footage. You might like to test it if it will render better results next time round and perhaps report back? It might save you time in post if true

yeah, I actually tried that dual ISO trick in d-Log m with auto ISO. It definitely helps shadows and high-contrast scenes look cleaner compared to locking ISO, so I can see why people like it.
But to me it still feels more baked-in than shooting straight D-log.
With full d-log I get a flatter image and way more flexibility in post...
Plus, d-log M can’t record true HDR; only d-log gives you proper HDR footage that youtube recognizes with the HDR tag next to the resolution.
So I’d say Auto ISO in D-log M is nice if you want quicker results and less grading, but for max quality and real HDR output, D-Log still wins for me (That’s just my take though, could be wrong).
And honestly, I just love D-Log; I’m always blown away when I lift the midtones and see how many details are preserved.

p.s. About your 28mm issue, here’s something that might help (by Jake Sloan) --> Coyktonty Wide-Angle Lens/Filter Compatible with DJI Mavic 4 Pro(15.5MM/108° Wide-Angle Shooting Range): Amazon.co.uk: Electronics & Photo

 

[Filmarik]

yeah, I actually tried that dual ISO trick in d-Log m with auto ISO. It definitely helps shadows and high-contrast scenes look cleaner compared to locking ISO, so I can see why people like it.
But to me it still feels more baked-in than shooting straight D-log.
With full d-log I get a flatter image and way more flexibility in post...
Plus, d-log M can’t record true HDR; only d-log gives you proper HDR footage that youtube recognizes with the HDR tag next to the resolution.
So I’d say Auto ISO in D-log M is nice if you want quicker results and less grading, but for max quality and real HDR output, D-Log still wins for me (That’s just my take though, could be wrong).
And honestly, I just love D-Log; I’m always blown away when I lift the midtones and see how many details are preserved.

p.s. About your 28mm issue, here’s something that might help (by Jake Sloan) --> Coyktonty Wide-Angle Lens/Filter Compatible with DJI Mavic 4 Pro(15.5MM/108° Wide-Angle Shooting Range): Amazon.co.uk: Electronics & Photo

The Coyktonty WA attachement has two 1 starr very unflattering reviews on Amazon. But 15.5mm would be way too wide and with too much distortion for what I do anyway. Thanks for the recommendation though.
And I do appreciate your thoughts on the D-log M+Auto ISO vs. the true D-Log. Thanks again