Mavic Pro 3 delayed due to CV?

[zocalo]

But EASA applies to Europe only and as the OP has said that he's Australian, none of this will matter to him.

Not directly, but it absolutely matters to vendors, and thus to everyone who buys their products. As far as possible vendors are going to have to comply with regulations globally scale in a single model, otherwise they lose economies of scale - regional config tweaks in firmware are one thing and probably unavoidable, physical manufacturing differences are much more important to avoid.

Fact is that DJI (and Autel, etc.) *will* have to update almost all of their current models to be compliant with the new EASA regs in 2021, plus whatever the FAA eventually decides to implement for the US (which is probably another reason for any push-back on launch dates). As stands, there are probably a good deal of commercial drone operations in the EU that will not be able to operate with aircraft in the Legacy class, and DJI won't want them going elsewhere. OP was talking about making buying decisions, so that new models are in the pipe and any possible factors relating to when they might ship are absolutely relevant to that.

 

[Ducatinus]

Well........waiting for the new mavic. Keep my money in the pocket. Maybe they will launch an CE version due to new regulations here in Europe. That way i can fly legit after 2022

 

[GadgetGuy]

It would depend on what you intend to use it for and how long you expect to be using it in that way. The M2P does NOT comply with the new EASA regulations and - barring postponement of implementation dates - will be classed as "Legacy" from July 2021, which severely limits what you can do with it, even with additional certifications. Given the lockdown, that could potentially mean it only has a viable operational lifetime of about a year before it's no longer fit for purpose. From a business/finanancial perspective that's a fairly simple RoI calculation - "Can I make back the cost of the aircraft, plus reasonable profits, within 1 year?" But you could also take a slightly different view if you take a roll of the dice; "If I assume that the M3 (or whatever) ships by Autumn, which offers the better cashflow; the M2P in 1 year (as calculated above), or the presumably EASA compliant "M3" with no return until it ships, but an ability to generate revenue for much longer?"

I already have an M2P and am very happy with it, but even it needed replacement before I could fly again then I'd almost certainly take a punt and wait for the M3 at this point. Between the Covid-19 lockdown curtailing travel and flight opportunities for the next month or two (at least), the high probability of an updated and regulatory compliant M3 fairly soon, that's an easy decision for me (it would get a LOT more difficult if I have a big photo trip prior to getting a new drone though), and I suspect many others are coming to a similar conclusion. I'm also pretty sure that DJI knows this and will be watching the sales figures, including that of Autel et. al, very carefully to ensure they whatever they have in development (and they surely do have something in development) is ready at what they judge the most opportune time to generate sales. I'd say there are two options there - either when travel restrictions lift to the point that people can really start flying again (hopefully Summer), or in time to ship for Christmas (e.g. an mid/late Autumn announcement and launch).

My question was for @Ben_McPhee who doesn't yet own an M2P, which is a mature, stable product, and can be bought new or lightly used today without waiting for DJI to do anything. A year's use is certainly a reasonable ROI, even with no income generated. Most photographers buy the newest model camera body when it becomes available, and most drone pilots have been doing the same, buying DJI's newest model annually, without regretting the investment in the drone it replaced, which becomes a backup bird, even if an illegal one!