MAVIC MINI 2 - UPDATE | Latest Leaked Photos and Spec Info

[Craig Notts]

I'd guess that Active Track is the most requested feature, and it doesn't look like it will be there, and apparently no waypoints either. The current Mini actually has a 4K camera, but it downsizes the video to 2.7K. Saving the full 4K is a nice feature if you have a 4K TV to watch them, but if you're viewing the videos on a 1080p monitor anyway, I don't think you'll see any difference. Anyway, it seems clear that these are product placement issues to DJI rather than technical issues in a 249g drone.

You would guess wrong . Ocusynk would be the thing most people are after

 

[canabuc]

I live in Canada and since the law states we have to fly with visual line of sight I don’t see any situation where I would be fine this drone more than 1 km away. As such while yes occupancy would be a much more reliable transmission system, I don’t think I would pay extra for it. The thing I would be most interested for would be things like active track and obstacle avoidance which won’t be coming to the drone.

The one feature that I would be interested on this new drone is the better capabilities in the wind. This would allow me to fly in on more situations and be less afraid of getting the drone home on windy days.

 

[roosta]

Occusync 2.0 - does that mean dji goggles will work with it?

I read this...then I read:

No way, same as for the MA2. The Goggles are running a stripped-down version of the GO4 app and the data protocol is not compatible with the Fly app used for MA2 and Mini 2.

*sigh* ?

What's the point of changing video transmission on an ENTRY level product like this, which is supposed to be a step (or steps) up from V1 - that's not going to work with EXISTING DJI ocusync releases?!

Backwards.

Marginally better flight time, upgrades to sensor capabilities AND being able to use with Goggles RE would've been enough for me to spend the cash on this. Oh well.

RoOSTA

 

[WooZie]

i don't understand the speed, that will be maximum 10.5m/sec? MM has 13m/sec in sport mode

 

[BriEE]

I live in Canada and since the law states we have to fly with visual line of sight I don’t see any situation where I would be fine this drone more than 1 km away. As such while yes occupancy would be a much more reliable transmission system, I don’t think I would pay extra for it. The thing I would be most interested for would be things like active track and obstacle avoidance which won’t be coming to the drone.

The one feature that I would be interested on this new drone is the better capabilities in the wind. This would allow me to fly in on more situations and be less afraid of getting the drone home on windy days.

I'm in Canada as well and sub 250g drones those LOS rules don't really apply. You just have to be safe and not reckless or put in danger out people etc. If you're flying in empty fields and the MM is far enough like 1000m you can't see it anyways and it's still safe and within the rules. Only 250g+ drones like MA2 you can't lose LOS.

Plus right now I get no more than 350-500m before my signal gets disconnected. I like to be able to fly from a distance over some trees/forest areas which we aren't allowed to fly any RPAS (like parks) but can fly OVER it, so that's the main gain with Occusync.

 

[RogerDH]

You would guess wrong . Ocusynk would be the thing most people are after

If that's true, then my second guess is that most people who know they want Active Track already bought a competitor, but I'm pretty sure that Active Track would sell more Minis than OcuSync. Beginners know what that is and most know that the Mini doesn't have it because virtually every review makes a point of mentioning that -- the reason being that it's about the only new GPS drone that doesn't have some version of that.

 

[Deleted member 103366]

i don't understand the speed, that will be maximum 10.5m/sec? MM has 13m/sec in sport mode

I think it means it can hold its own or RTH against winds of up to 10.5m/s, the mini is, I think 8m/s for RTH and P mode

 

[Heindrich1988]

If that's true, then my second guess is that most people who know they want Active Track already bought a competitor, but I'm pretty sure that Active Track would sell more Minis than OcuSync. Beginners know what that is and most know that the Mini doesn't have it because virtually every review makes a point of mentioning that -- the reason being that it's about the only new GPS drone that doesn't have some version of that.

DJI was never gonna please everyone. It's impossible to pack all the features people want into 249g, not to mention the cost implications.

To be honest, I think Active Track is only a gimmick that looks really fun at first glance, but for most drone enthusiasts, the fun part of flying a drone is... well, actually flying it yourself. It may be very important to you, but I would be surprised if it it even came in the top three for the majority of people.

For me, I picked the Air 2 over the Mini for 3 main reasons:

1) Occusync 2.0: I was first intrigued by drones when I watched a Mavic Mini range test by Dustin Dunnill and some "exploration" videos by MilesDeep. I thought it was amazing that such a tiny little machine could fly so far and explore places you cannot easily reach on foot.

2) 4K camera. That's a big deal to most people, because 4K is pretty much the "industry standard" for the next generation of games and other video platforms. It means that your camera won't be obsolete any time soon.

3) Wind resistance. This is perhaps not apparent to those who dive into a purchase without much research. For me, my research quickly revealed that the Mini 1.0 is just too vulnerable to fly-away in high winds. I was sorely tempted to buy a Mini to save money, but then I realized that it would be far more likely for me to lose my Mini than an Air 2, so overall, I felt that the Air 2 was actually more economical once risk is factored in.

The fact that the Mini 2.0 address all three of the above for just $50 more blows my mind. ($100 more really, cos I'd always buy the Fly More combo). Honestly, I hate to admit it, but I'm feeling a bit salty that Mini 2.0 users will get 90% of the functionality that I care about for 60% of the cost I paid for my Air 2 Fly More combo. Plus, I always thought the Mini looks cooler too.

Unless I'm missing something big, it looks like the Mini 2.0 is basically an Air 2 minus Active Track and obstacle avoidance.

I've already said what I feel about auto flight modes... Obstacle avoidance sensors is the same thing for me. At first, I felt like it was a big deal. But frankly, I don't want to entrust the safety of my expensive drone to technology and basically fly as if my Air 2 has no sensors at all. In fact, I've heard about so many accidents that were caused by sensors that I'm not sure they offer that much protection overall.

 

[Oakley75]

Don't forget the hdr video ability from the ma2. It has some caveats yes, but it makes for some gorgeous sunset shots that the mini simply can't (4k or not).

 

[Ian in London]

If that's true, then my second guess is that most people who know they want Active Track already bought a competitor, but I'm pretty sure that Active Track would sell more Minis than OcuSync. Beginners know what that is and most know that the Mini doesn't have it because virtually every review makes a point of mentioning that -- the reason being that it's about the only new GPS drone that doesn't have some version of that.

You're certainly right; it's unlikely the Mini will ever get proper Active Track, but in truth, I genuinely don't get the fuss over Active Track. How often do you need it to track you when cycling or walking? I struggle to see what other uses there are. Conversely, OcuSync is a huge improvement given the widespread issues with signal interference, especially in residential areas. So I reckon DJI have hit the right nail here; crap signal was the biggest issue with the mini 1 and that's been fixed now with OcySync. And if this now means it will eventually work with the Smart Controller (as the Air 2 now does), then even better....
Ian

 

[ilovebeermoney]

DJI was never gonna please everyone. It's impossible to pack all the features people want into 249g, not to mention the cost implications.

To be honest, I think Active Track is only a gimmick that looks really fun at first glance, but for most drone enthusiasts, the fun part of flying a drone is... well, actually flying it yourself. It may be very important to you, but I would be surprised if it it even came in the top three for the majority of people.

For me, I picked the Air 2 over the Mini for 3 main reasons:

1) Occusync 2.0: I was first intrigued by drones when I watched a Mavic Mini range test by Dustin Dunnill and some "exploration" videos by MilesDeep. I thought it was amazing that such a tiny little machine could fly so far and explore places you cannot easily reach on foot.

2) 4K camera. That's a big deal to most people, because 4K is pretty much the "industry standard" for the next generation of games and other video platforms. It means that your camera won't be obsolete any time soon.

3) Wind resistance. This is perhaps not apparent to those who dive into a purchase without much research. For me, my research quickly revealed that the Mini 1.0 is just too vulnerable to fly-away in high winds. I was sorely tempted to buy a Mini to save money, but then I realized that it would be far more likely for me to lose my Mini than an Air 2, so overall, I felt that the Air 2 was actually more economical once risk is factored in.

The fact that the Mini 2.0 address all three of the above for just $50 more blows my mind. ($100 more really, cos I'd always buy the Fly More combo). Honestly, I hate to admit it, but I'm feeling a bit salty that Mini 2.0 users will get 90% of the functionality that I care about for 60% of the cost I paid for my Air 2 Fly More combo. Plus, I always thought the Mini looks cooler too.

Unless I'm missing something big, it looks like the Mini 2.0 is basically an Air 2 minus Active Track and obstacle avoidance.

I've already said what I feel about auto flight modes... Obstacle avoidance sensors is the same thing for me. At first, I felt like it was a big deal. But frankly, I don't want to entrust the safety of my expensive drone to technology and basically fly as if my Air 2 has no sensors at all. In fact, I've heard about so many accidents that were caused by sensors that I'm not sure they offer that much protection overall.

Everyone fails to mention a HUGE advantage which is cheaper replacement or spare batteries. The Air 2 batteries are $115 and the current mini batteries are like $45. So with the new mini fly more, you do get 3, but if you want two more batteries it'll be less than the cost of one more Air 2 battery.

It's a much cheaper drone to fly as the batteries wear out fairly quickly. Cheaper per flight or cheaper per minute etc.

 

[darkproximity]

DJI was never gonna please everyone. It's impossible to pack all the features people want into 249g, not to mention the cost implications.

To be honest, I think Active Track is only a gimmick that looks really fun at first glance, but for most drone enthusiasts, the fun part of flying a drone is... well, actually flying it yourself. It may be very important to you, but I would be surprised if it it even came in the top three for the majority of people.

For me, I picked the Air 2 over the Mini for 3 main reasons:

1) Occusync 2.0: I was first intrigued by drones when I watched a Mavic Mini range test by Dustin Dunnill and some "exploration" videos by MilesDeep. I thought it was amazing that such a tiny little machine could fly so far and explore places you cannot easily reach on foot.

2) 4K camera. That's a big deal to most people, because 4K is pretty much the "industry standard" for the next generation of games and other video platforms. It means that your camera won't be obsolete any time soon.

3) Wind resistance. This is perhaps not apparent to those who dive into a purchase without much research. For me, my research quickly revealed that the Mini 1.0 is just too vulnerable to fly-away in high winds. I was sorely tempted to buy a Mini to save money, but then I realized that it would be far more likely for me to lose my Mini than an Air 2, so overall, I felt that the Air 2 was actually more economical once risk is factored in.

The fact that the Mini 2.0 address all three of the above for just $50 more blows my mind. ($100 more really, cos I'd always buy the Fly More combo). Honestly, I hate to admit it, but I'm feeling a bit salty that Mini 2.0 users will get 90% of the functionality that I care about for 60% of the cost I paid for my Air 2 Fly More combo. Plus, I always thought the Mini looks cooler too.

Unless I'm missing something big, it looks like the Mini 2.0 is basically an Air 2 minus Active Track and obstacle avoidance.

I've already said what I feel about auto flight modes... Obstacle avoidance sensors is the same thing for me. At first, I felt like it was a big deal. But frankly, I don't want to entrust the safety of my expensive drone to technology and basically fly as if my Air 2 has no sensors at all. In fact, I've heard about so many accidents that were caused by sensors that I'm not sure they offer that much protection overall.

Don't forget that the mini doesn't allow shooting photos in RAW or video in d-cinelike. With the mini you're essentially stuck with whatever you get out of the camera.

 

[treehouse1441]

I went to my Best Buy today to check and they unfortunately have frosted glass cases ?

Cant wait til release day! Just a couple days before my bday. They addressed everything I wanted with my main one being the ma2 controller.

 

[lowellton]

I live in Canada and since the law states we have to fly with visual line of sight I don’t see any situation where I would be fine this drone more than 1 km away. As such while yes occupancy would be a much more reliable transmission system, I don’t think I would pay extra for it. The thing I would be most interested for would be things like active track and obstacle avoidance which won’t be coming to the drone.

The one feature that I would be interested on this new drone is the better capabilities in the wind. This would allow me to fly in on more situations and be less afraid of getting the drone home on windy days.

I agree with you re:vlos and how the MM 2 handle the wind. We’ll at least the wind here in calgary ???

 

[Nonprophet]

Specs and price look nice, but, did they do ANYTHING about the flimsy props and unncommanded descent issues of the Mini? Because price and features don't mean a whole when they're dropping out of the sky.......

 

[boblui]

Seriously, I am convinced that these "leaks" are nothing more than planned marketing tactics by DJI to create attention. Have to say they are really good at making use of social media to promote their products.

 

[lee82gx]

When I first got serious to invest in such a toy, it was due to the mini 1 that came in at the price point I considered affordable. Fast forward a bare 12 months later and I've already spent more than I dare to admit to my wife. But put in perspective, this mini 2 addresses every design flaw (hopefully) and costs about the same. I too am sour since I end up now with the air 2.

Active track is a one way ticket to service center, even on my mavic air 2 loaded with front and rear sensor.

To me, well done, provided it really no longer sinks or drops uncommanded.

 

[skunky1]

I have a M2P but needed a compact travel drone. The MM2 now fits the bill perfectly.

By the way any news if the MM2 will have the ability to activate FCC mode on a CE mode unlike the MM?

 

[Heindrich1988]

Don't forget that the mini doesn't allow shooting photos in RAW or video in d-cinelike. With the mini you're essentially stuck with whatever you get out of the camera.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that. Yeah, I can see how that would be a big deal.

I don't really understand the technical side of drone manufacturing... but why doesn't DJI add this feature? Is it really that difficult/expensive? To a layman like me, it seems easier than fixing the range and wind resistance capability of the drone. Is it a camera thing (doesn't the new 4K camera resolve it?) or processing thing?

 

[darkproximity]

Oh yeah, I forgot about that. Yeah, I can see how that would be a big deal.

I don't really understand the technical side of drone manufacturing... but why doesn't DJI add this feature? Is it really that difficult/expensive? To a layman like me, it seems easier than fixing the range and wind resistance capability of the drone. Is it a camera thing (doesn't the new 4K camera resolve it?) or processing thing?

They purposefully do not include that functionality so they can have tiered products at different price points.

Think tesla with its battery limitations. For a given model they all have the same batteries, however on the lower end configurations of each model the range is reduced. You can pay more later to unlock more of your batteries and thus get further range. I recall not long ago tesla was temporarily unlocking battery restrictions in areas that were about to get hit by a hurricane so that tesla owners could get out safely and get further away.