Mavic Pro-2 vs Zoom and P4P - Line Skipping + Sensor Heat?

[Vegasrobbi]

I would say throwing around the Hasseblad name and using the word uncompromising would lead one to believe they are getting the best.


PRO
Hasselblad L1D-20c Camera
Iconic Image Quality

• 20 MP 1” CMOS Sensor
• Adjustable Aperture, f/2.8 – f/11
• 10-bit Dlog-M
• 10-bit HDR Video

Made in Sweden, Hasselblad cameras are renowned for their iconic ergonomic design, uncompromising image quality, and Swedish craftsmanship. Since 1941, Hasselblad cameras have captured some of the world’s most iconic images – including the first moon landing.

Co-engineered in partnership with Hasselblad after two years of tireless research, the Mavic 2 Pro comes equipped with the all-new Hasselblad L1D-20c camera. The L1D-20c possesses Hasselblad’s unique Hasselblad Natural Colour Solution (HNCS) technology, 5 helping users to capture gorgeous 20-megapixel aerial shots in stunning color detail.

 

[Talley]

One thing is for sure... the photos are vastly better than models prior.

 

[Lon Denard]

I would say throwing around the Hasseblad name and using the word uncompromising would lead one to believe they are getting the best.


PRO
Hasselblad L1D-20c Camera
Iconic Image Quality

• 20 MP 1” CMOS Sensor
• Adjustable Aperture, f/2.8 – f/11
• 10-bit Dlog-M
• 10-bit HDR Video

Made in Sweden, Hasselblad cameras are renowned for their iconic ergonomic design, uncompromising image quality, and Swedish craftsmanship. Since 1941, Hasselblad cameras have captured some of the world’s most iconic images – including the first moon landing.

Co-engineered in partnership with Hasselblad after two years of tireless research, the Mavic 2 Pro comes equipped with the all-new Hasselblad L1D-20c camera. The L1D-20c possesses Hasselblad’s unique Hasselblad Natural Colour Solution (HNCS) technology, 5 helping users to capture gorgeous 20-megapixel aerial shots in stunning color detail.

But it is the "best" in this form factor. Name me a camera this small that's better? Read your own clip, they are talking about the pictures which are outstanding! I've said this before, Red is coming out with a phone. Do you expect it to be as good as the Dragon? Porsche designed the motor for the Harley VRod, did that mean that the bike had to be as fast as a 911? My car has the same motor as their truck, does that mean it should tow a 10,000 lb boat? They promised a improvement over the Mavic Pro. It is. They never said it was as good as the P4P, it isn't.

 

[Vegasrobbi]

Okay DJI should have said uncompromising stills the rest ehh.

I'd say FOV my Anafi is right up there if not better at half the price and weight.

 

[Lon Denard]

Okay DJI should have said uncompromising stills the rest ehh.

I'd say FOV my Anafi is right up there if not better at half the price and weight.

Fair enough. I don't doubt it but you're not going to tell me that it's as good of a drone are you? Aww come on....there's more to a drone than just the camera, right? In basically every other metric, the M2P slays the Anafi!

 

[maven4336]

Wow :/ Thank you for bringing this to our attention... REALLY good video, and expertly explained

The launch delay would seem to suggest they found this problem late, but I also agree with you that they want to maintain separation between Mavic and P4/5. I would think this is further evidenced
by the lack of 4K60 on the Mavics.

I have been considering getting the M2P for a while, but this is the first video that has given me some pause for thought...

Do not get it, I’m dissatisfied with the Mavic2pro, My p4p smokes it 1860$ down the drain

 

[maven4336]

Tryed to get refund and I waited to long 14 days is what they said, I’m bummed , only can hope they at least get sharper than the soft crap I’m seeing!!!

 

[sar104]

I couldn't resist doing a few, in my opinion, more controlled chart tests on these issues.

Using a test chart designed to detect aliasing, and with the chart the same distance from the camera for all modes, since the optics don't change and therefor the size of the image on the sensor doesn't change with mode, I acquired DNG images, HQ video in Dlog-M, and FOV video in Dlog-M. For reference I shot the same image with a Sony RX100IV with the zoom set to the same as the M2P. All images were ISO 100 and F4.

The following files are cropped, resampled as explained below, but not processed in any other way, except that the final cropped versions are converted to jpeg (indistinguishable from the DNGs and 16-bit tiff captures from the videos) from a resolution point of view.

Comparison of the M2P DNG with the RX100 DNG shows similar resolution - not unexpected in terms of sensor properties since they presumably have similar sensors, but it means that the M2P lens is not too shabby either.


M2P DNG


RX100 DNG

The slightly angled line pairs are the best indicator of aliasing, and both these images start to show aliasing at about the same line density - level 6. As a sanity check, combining channels and running a line profile on the horizontal line pairs for the DNG produces the following:



This clearly shows the loss of contrast at around level 6.

HQ video is a simple crop of the central 4k pixels of the chip, read out fully. It displays similar resolution to the full-chip DNG - expected since it is not sub-sampling - it's fully sampling a portion (3840 x 2160) of the full chip.


HQ video, Dlog-M

FOV video is some kind of sub-sampling, and shows some very strange artifacts:


FOV video, Dlog-M

Note, in particular, the fact that level 4 shows much more aliasing than levels 5, 6 or 7. That levels 6 and 7 are resolved at all suggests to me that it is not pixel-binning or sub-sampling the sensor sites, but that some kind of spatial filtering is happening on the sensor chip before readout - sort of consistent with some of the comments coming out of DJI on the subject.

For comparison I took the full-sensor DNG and downsampled it to 4k resolution:


DNG downsampled to 4k

The result is interesting, but not unexpected relative to the HQ video/DNG. Level 4 is much better relative to the FOV video, while levels 5, 6 and 7 all show more aliasing. So in some ways, DJI's processing of the FOV video brings out more detail, but at the expense of some strange artifacts at intermediate spatial frequencies.

I also shot some real-world images and video and it seems to me that the problems seen in the resolution chart results are really difficult to discern in real video. The DNG still images are competitive with the RX100, which I would count as a significant success.

CAVEATS:

This only presents data from near the center of the field of view, and at ISO 100, F4. Subjectively there was not a significant problem with edge softness, but I haven't done resolution chart tests at the edges. Noise seems well controlled at ISO 100, but I did not test higher-gain settings.

 

[Vegasrobbi]

Fair enough. I don't doubt it but you're not going to tell me that it's as good of a drone are you? Aww come on....there's more to a drone than just the camera, right? In basically every other metric, the M2P slays the Anafi!

The M2's are fine machines but not better in every way. Do they have 90* look up ability? Proper follow like high speed or behind obstacles?

 

[Lon Denard]

I couldn't resist doing a few, in my opinion, more controlled chart tests on these issues.

Using a test chart designed to detect aliasing, and with the chart the same distance from the camera for all modes, since the optics don't change and therefor the size of the image on the sensor doesn't change with mode, I acquired DNG images, HQ video in Dlog-M, and FOV video in Dlog-M. For reference I shot the same image with a Sony RX100IV with the zoom set to the same as the M2P. All images were ISO 100 and F4.

The following files are cropped, resampled as explained below, but not processed in any other way, except that the final cropped versions are converted to jpeg (indistinguishable from the DNGs and 16-bit tiff captures from the videos) from a resolution point of view.

Comparison of the M2P DNG with the RX100 DNG shows similar resolution - not unexpected in terms of sensor properties since they presumably have similar sensors, but it means that the M2P lens is not too shabby either.

View attachment 48181
M2P DNG

View attachment 48182
RX100 DNG

The slightly angled line pairs are the best indicator of aliasing, and both these images start to show aliasing at about the same line density - level 6. As a sanity check, combining channels and running a line profile on the horizontal line pairs for the DNG produces the following:

View attachment 48185

This clearly shows the loss of contrast at around level 6.

HQ video is a simple crop of the central 4k pixels of the chip, read out fully. It displays similar resolution to the full-chip DNG - expected since it is not sub-sampling - it's fully sampling a portion (3840 x 2160) of the full chip.

View attachment 48183
HQ video, Dlog-M

FOV video is some kind of sub-sampling, and shows some very strange artifacts:

View attachment 48184
FOV video, Dlog-M

Note, in particular, the fact that level 4 shows much more aliasing than levels 5, 6 or 7. That levels 6 and 7 are resolved at all suggests to me that it is not pixel-binning or sub-sampling the sensor sites, but that some kind of spatial filtering is happening on the sensor chip before readout - sort of consistent with some of the comments coming out of DJI on the subject.

For comparison I took the full-sensor DNG and downsampled it to 4k resolution:

View attachment 48186
DNG downsampled to 4k

The result is interesting, but not unexpected relative to the HQ video/DNG. Level 4 is much better relative to the FOV video, while levels 5, 6 and 7 all show more aliasing. So in some ways, DJI's processing of the FOV video brings out more detail, but at the expense of some strange artifacts at intermediate spatial frequencies.

I also shot some real-world images and video and it seems to me that the problems seen in the resolution chart results are really difficult to discern in real video. The DNG still images are competitive with the RX100, which I would count as a significant success.

CAVEATS:

This only presents data from near the center of the field of view, and at ISO 100, F4. Subjectively there was not a significant problem with edge softness, but I haven't done resolution chart tests at the edges. Noise seems well controlled at ISO 100, but I did not test higher-gain settings.

Very interesting...

Question, I've noticed marked improvement since using ND filters. Can "softness" be partially attributed to higher aperture settings? In other words, if you're running F8-11 all the time?

 

[Lon Denard]

The M2's are fine machines but not better in every way. Do they have 90* look up ability? Proper follow like high speed or behind obstacles?

Oh I forgot about 90 degree look up, my bad. The Anafi does high speed follow me with out the subject carrying the remote? How well does the Anafi dodge things while it's following you at high speed? There's a difference between active track and follow the remote, right?

This guy thought it was pretty good...

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

 

[sar104]

Very interesting...

Question, I've noticed marked improvement since using ND filters. Can "softness" be partially attributed to higher aperture settings? In other words, if you're running F8-11 all the time?

The resolution is diffraction limited above f8 or so, so that's possible. I chose f4 as the likely sweet spot for that camera.

 

[Lon Denard]

The resolution is diffraction limited above f8 or so, so that's possible. I chose f4 as the likely sweet spot for that camera.

That's what I figured and what prompted the question. I think that variable aperture is both a blessing and a curse.

 

[Goof]

Very interesting...

Question, I've noticed marked improvement since using ND filters. Can "softness" be partially attributed to higher aperture settings? In other words, if you're running F8-11 all the time?

Absolutely. This lens is at its sharpest between f/3.5 and f/5.6.

 

[WithTheBirds]

The underlying deep information is used to validate the product from a consumers point of view. Such as, are we receiving the product specification that we paid for? Without this 'carry on' a lot of products that we use today would not have been subject to recalls or improvements etc. With due respect, it's your choice to be a part of this or not. I choose to read it and absorb it as far as I can understand it. I would not go as far to say it's pure speculation. There have always been murmurs of discomfort regarding the M2P resolution. We are now reaching a time when a lot of thorough reviews have been completed by consumers. I feel that this thread has merit in order to give us all a deeper understanding of the 1 inch sensor specifically.

Why would DJI not make full use of the data captured by the sensor in order to achieve a resolution at least as good as the P4P? Full 4k is no big deal these days, especially if you have a 1 inch sensor (!) installed within the device. This leads to Cliff's fundamental question, why are they doing this? Is it a design fault or a genuine limitation of a device this small/portable? I basically paid for the 1 inch sensor as advertised.

Why wouldn’t DJI continue to develop each of their main product lines independently? I’m not saying they shouldn’t share core technology- that would be silly obviously. To expect however that the M2P should, and might Reasonably be, directly compared to the P4P is ridiculous. They are two different products.

DJI never marketed the M2P as a replacement for the P4A/P or V2. They never said it would be better. They don’t have any case to answer here.

Have you considered that the M2P footage appears inferior to the P4P straight off the card because they haven’t applied enhancements in camera? DJI were embarrassed when it was revealed the P4P was applying all sorts of correction to hide the fact the lens had issues. If you want to complain about the 1” sensor not being fully utilised go back and look at the P4.

My prediction is the there will be outrage when the P5 arrives as it will also render 4K without in camera enhancement.

 

[Lon Denard]

Why wouldn’t DJI continue to develop each of their main product lines independently? I’m not saying they shouldn’t share core technology- that would be silly obviously. To expect however that the M2P should, and might Reasonably be, directly compared to the P4P is ridiculous. They are two different products.

DJI never marketed the M2P as a replacement for the P4A/P or V2. They never said it would be better. They don’t have any case to answer here.

Have you considered that the M2P footage appears inferior to the P4P straight off the card because they haven’t applied enhancements in camera? DJI were embarrassed when it was revealed the P4P was applying all sorts of correction to hide the fact the lens had issues. If you want to complain about the 1” sensor not being fully utilised go back and look at the P4.

My prediction is the there will be outrage when the P5 arrives as it will also render 4K without in camera enhancement.

It's not going to help that the YouTube hype train is gearing up already. Gotta get those clicks! Hahaha! Some are talking 4k 120fps, different lenses, optical zoom, true 360 OA, screen in remote, 64 G internal, 65 mph, etc,etc,etc...

 

[WithTheBirds]

I couldn't resist doing a few, in my opinion, more controlled chart tests on these issues.

Using a test chart designed to detect aliasing, and with the chart the same distance from the camera for all modes, since the optics don't change and therefor the size of the image on the sensor doesn't change with mode, I acquired DNG images, HQ video in Dlog-M, and FOV video in Dlog-M. For reference I shot the same image with a Sony RX100IV with the zoom set to the same as the M2P. All images were ISO 100 and F4.

The following files are cropped, resampled as explained below, but not processed in any other way, except that the final cropped versions are converted to jpeg (indistinguishable from the DNGs and 16-bit tiff captures from the videos) from a resolution point of view.

Comparison of the M2P DNG with the RX100 DNG shows similar resolution - not unexpected in terms of sensor properties since they presumably have similar sensors, but it means that the M2P lens is not too shabby either.

View attachment 48181
M2P DNG

View attachment 48182
RX100 DNG

The slightly angled line pairs are the best indicator of aliasing, and both these images start to show aliasing at about the same line density - level 6. As a sanity check, combining channels and running a line profile on the horizontal line pairs for the DNG produces the following:

View attachment 48185

This clearly shows the loss of contrast at around level 6.

HQ video is a simple crop of the central 4k pixels of the chip, read out fully. It displays similar resolution to the full-chip DNG - expected since it is not sub-sampling - it's fully sampling a portion (3840 x 2160) of the full chip.

View attachment 48183
HQ video, Dlog-M

FOV video is some kind of sub-sampling, and shows some very strange artifacts:

View attachment 48184
FOV video, Dlog-M

Note, in particular, the fact that level 4 shows much more aliasing than levels 5, 6 or 7. That levels 6 and 7 are resolved at all suggests to me that it is not pixel-binning or sub-sampling the sensor sites, but that some kind of spatial filtering is happening on the sensor chip before readout - sort of consistent with some of the comments coming out of DJI on the subject.

For comparison I took the full-sensor DNG and downsampled it to 4k resolution:

View attachment 48186
DNG downsampled to 4k

The result is interesting, but not unexpected relative to the HQ video/DNG. Level 4 is much better relative to the FOV video, while levels 5, 6 and 7 all show more aliasing. So in some ways, DJI's processing of the FOV video brings out more detail, but at the expense of some strange artifacts at intermediate spatial frequencies.

I also shot some real-world images and video and it seems to me that the problems seen in the resolution chart results are really difficult to discern in real video. The DNG still images are competitive with the RX100, which I would count as a significant success.

CAVEATS:

This only presents data from near the center of the field of view, and at ISO 100, F4. Subjectively there was not a significant problem with edge softness, but I haven't done resolution chart tests at the edges. Noise seems well controlled at ISO 100, but I did not test higher-gain settings.

You won't get a lot of comments here SAR- you haven't included assumption and speculation..... '-)

Thank you for doing this- very interesting indeed.

It would seem DJI has been honest and there is probably no conspiracy to deceive or otherwise cheat their customers.

 

[WithTheBirds]

I would say throwing around the Hasseblad name and using the word uncompromising would lead one to believe they are getting the best.


PRO
Hasselblad L1D-20c Camera
Iconic Image Quality

• 20 MP 1” CMOS Sensor
• Adjustable Aperture, f/2.8 – f/11
• 10-bit Dlog-M
• 10-bit HDR Video

Made in Sweden, Hasselblad cameras are renowned for their iconic ergonomic design, uncompromising image quality, and Swedish craftsmanship. Since 1941, Hasselblad cameras have captured some of the world’s most iconic images – including the first moon landing.

Co-engineered in partnership with Hasselblad after two years of tireless research, the Mavic 2 Pro comes equipped with the all-new Hasselblad L1D-20c camera. The L1D-20c possesses Hasselblad’s unique Hasselblad Natural Colour Solution (HNCS) technology, 5 helping users to capture gorgeous 20-megapixel aerial shots in stunning color detail.

The official comments from Hasselblad management were that they were heavily engaged in the colour profile development. They outright claimed not to have been involved in the lens development- no surprise given Hasselblad sourced their fantastic glass from Zeiss. Interestingly they also said that the image processing SOC is from a third party- NFD.

 

[SteveCA]

Very interesting...

Question, I've noticed marked improvement since using ND filters. Can "softness" be partially attributed to higher aperture settings? In other words, if you're running F8-11 all the time?

That’s precisely why I asked what aperture the tests were shot at. My pixel peeping shows F4.0-4.5 to be by far the sharpest. If the tests were done at F 8-11, It needs to be redone at F4.0. The difference in sharpness is huge compared to F8 while F11 is a complete joke and unusable imho.

Lastly the test need to be done at distances that are more representative of real world Drone shots which in most cases are 100 feet and further. I wish I had a P4pro v 2.0 to test with

 

[Goof]

That’s precisely why I asked what aperture the tests were shot at. My pixel peeping shows F4.0-4.5 to be by far the sharpest. If the tests were done at F 8-11, It needs to be redone at F4.0. The difference in sharpness is huge compared to F8 while F11 is a complete joke and unusable imho.

Lastly the test need to be done at distances that are more representative of real world Drone shots which in most cases are 100 feet and further. I wish I had a P4pro v 2.0 to test with

Now we just need someone with a ground mounted, 200m by 350m test chart...