Mini 3 Pro as second drone, good?

[Darkabaz]

Well, guys.
With my Mavic 3 on the left hand i got the Mavic 2 pro and Mavic 2 zoom on my right hand. I was thinking about selling both drones with the smart rc i own.

For a lot work i could use M3, so the M2Z/M2P is gonne be faded away in my cases but when it comes to jobs around crowd (like events, partys) i could not use the m3 because of regulations/rules.

So i was thinking about the possibilities to buy a Mini 3, for those kind of jobs. My eyes are just very curious for the 48mp option. I think that size of images are very PRO for a lot of work. Is there any possibility that the Mavic 3 also got any 'superres' option in the near future?

Is it better to get a mini 3 pro and sell my both mavic 2's or better to hold the 2 mavic's up??

 

[Cymru]

Ive just bought one as a compliment to my M2P which i can use without the distance from people etc rules applying.

Remember the 48mp isn't 48. Its a native 12mp sensor with a quad bayer filter (12 x 4 = 48...). So far the 48mp images are nosier and a little softer but there are some quite obvious artefacts on high contrast areas. For example lines on the road which are white go purple etc.

The 12mp images are excellent however.

 

[vindibona1]

You've got 3 drones now. The M2P and M3 are similar in many ways, obviously the M3 having an edge in the image quality category. Perhaps you need a backup. But what's the point of the M2Z? The Air2s has supplanted that one some time ago. For sure sell that one.

There are features of the Mini 3 pro that are very appealing especially if you got it with the smart controller (I wouldn't buy it without). It definitely has a place. I have a M2P and a Mini 2 and like having the large and small options, though the Mini 3's imaging will be head and shoulders better than the Mini 2. If flying characteristics and company support were the same as the Mini 3 Pro. I'd be buying an Autel Nano Lite Plus. The imaging is outstanding and I believe will be better than the Mini 3 which we will see when production models of the Mini 3 are released. The RYYB sensor in the Nano Lite plus, on paper and theoretically would prove to be superior to the RGGB of the DJI drones. But the Mini 3 flying characteristics and DJI support (in spite of geofencing) would seem to outweigh the arguable image quality of the Nano LIte Plus. If Autel ever got their act together....

 

[EsaT]

Unless needing "dolly zoom", Mavic 3 makes both Mavic 2s completely jobless capability wise.
Main camera is better than in M2P and tele camera gives far better close up details than M2Z.

But sub 250 gram mini drone would have place for flying around people.
Though if EASA drone class certifying were available, in Europe Mavic 3 would likely be C1 drone and under same A1 rules...

My eyes are just very curious for the 48mp option.

Don't mix megapixels to Marketing Pee.
Quad Bayer sensor is designed for making 12MP photos either averaging noise, or exposing alternate rows by different amount to increase dynamic range.
But actual colour data is gotten in 2x2 pixel blocks and there's no 48MP images with real detail.

 

[Darkabaz]

.

You've got 3 drones now. The M2P and M3 are similar in many ways, obviously the M3 having an edge in the image quality category. Perhaps you need a backup. But what's the point of the M2Z? The Air2s has supplanted that one some time ago. For sure sell that one.

There are features of the Mini 3 pro that are very appealing especially if you got it with the smart controller (I wouldn't buy it without). It definitely has a place. I have a M2P and a Mini 2 and like having the large and small options, though the Mini 3's imaging will be head and shoulders better than the Mini 2. If flying characteristics and company support were the same as the Mini 3 Pro. I'd be buying an Autel Nano Lite Plus. The imaging is outstanding and I believe will be better than the Mini 3 which we will see when production models of the Mini 3 are released. The RYYB sensor in the Nano Lite plus, on paper and theoretically would prove to be superior to the RGGB of the DJI drones. But the Mini 3 flying characteristics and DJI support (in spite of geofencing) would seem to outweigh the arguable image quality of the Nano LIte Plus. If Autel ever got their act together....

Yes, i had the Mavic 2 pro and Mavic 2 Zoom already. I know the mavic 3 must be way better in several ways in comparing to the mavic 2 pro/zoom, so thats why that is the reason i want to sell my both 2 serie drones. And then - maybe , after the forum guys comments - i like to buy the Mini 3 pro especially for the 48mp daylight photos and fly near public. Got some jobs in the near history where customers ask me for photos with 8000+ pixels. 20mp is not that much for big scaled printwork. It took more time/work because of taking more photos and merge them together in post processing.
I truely dont understand why the heck dji did not put a bit more mp in the maincamera from the Mavic 3..... or that ot has some factory-ready upscaling options, like some superres possibilities or something like that..... missed change imo.

Before I could use the Mavic 2 zoom for it with the super res photo. Still a amazing option but its running out of everything.
I had in mind the Mini 3 pro could the same work because of the 48mp option, only better (because better lens) was my idea.

 

[cah]

The mini 3 doesn't have a 48mp sensor, though - it's a 12mp sensor upscaled to 48mp. You'll almost certainly get better results with your Mavic 3 .. however of course the Mini can go places the Mavic can't which might open up options.

 

[Darkabaz]

De mini 3 heeft echter geen 48mp-sensor - het is een 12mp-sensor die is opgeschaald naar 48mp. U zult vrijwel zeker betere resultaten behalen met uw Mavic 3. Maar de Mini kan natuurlijk plaatsen gaan waar de Mavic niet kan komen, wat mogelijk opties opent.

Hi you think the Mavic 3 does have better inage when scale to 100%? My opinion is that the mavic 3 does have good image, but take a look at the youtube comparison video between mini 3 12mp vs 48mp. There is a huge difference.

 

[globetrotterdrone]

I do have to say, upon a very quick, only 2 mins lasting "flight", which was basically just going to 100 m, take some shots and descend again, I am pretty astonished of the 48 MP files. They clearly satisfy some pixel peeping as details way more details are recognisable from the 12 MP.

Yes, they are a bit noisier, but I mostly stick to ISO 100 anyways, and there are some artefacts, which might, to some extent, get addressed in a firmware fix, but still, I am quite happy with these basic results in my 5 mins break of rain.

 

[WorkHardFlyHarder]

But sub 250 gram mini drone would have place for flying around people.
Though if EASA drone class certifying were available, in Europe Mavic 3 would likely be C1 drone and under same A1 rules...

Under generic EASA rules maybe, but countries are free to extend this regulation and add additional requirements. Most countries do that, some even more stringent then others. Also, if I'm not mistaken, drones heavier then 249 grams need to have remote identification, while sub 249 gram drones don't (but many vendors like DJI implement that anyway without it being strictly required).

 

[globetrotterdrone]

Under generic EASA rules maybe, but countries are free to extend this regulation and add additional requirements. Most countries do that, some even more stringent then others. Also, if I'm not mistaken, drones heavier then 249 grams need to have remote identification, while sub 249 gram drones don't (but many vendors like DJI implement that anyway without it being strictly required).

And especially not after 1st January, 2024 ... ok, it has been extended another year from 2023 to 2024, but I highly doubt the Mavic 3 will be retrofitted with a C label so therefore will render legacy, ie A3 subcategory.

I think the Mini 3 Pro is DJI's answer to all of the hassle with legislation which will fit most needs of consumers all over world.

 

[vindibona1]

The mini 3 doesn't have a 48mp sensor, though - it's a 12mp sensor upscaled to 48mp. You'll almost certainly get better results with your Mavic 3 .. however of course the Mini can go places the Mavic can't which might open up options.

I wouldn't get hung up on the megapixel count. The LENS is the weak link in this chain. You're not getting a glass lens and at best it's made of high index polycarbonate. I'm not sure where technology has brought DLSR's and Mirrorless cameras, but not very long ago on the high end DSLR's it was known that the best lenses might be able to support a bit more than 15 megapixel sensors. I suspect that you can only take lens resolution so far. While the Mini 3 has good specs I doubt that it will produce better photos than the M3.. and the M3 in terms of photos is a bit of overkill because even with the best photo printers the paper can only take so much detail. Everything else can be tweaked by the photographer in Photoshop. I still marvel at the quality of prints that I've made almost 20 years ago with 2.75 and 6.3 megapixel cameras. That's why I'm not ditching my M2P yet. Even with the high res video of the M3, I would speculate that 90% of the viewership doesn't have the equipment to see the full quality of the files. If you're a Hollywood studio and need ProRes and the best quality money can buy chances are you wouldn't be shooting most of your footage with an M3 anyway. But one day I may upgrade to one, if only for my own enjoyment on my own gear. And chances are that I'll get a Mini 3 down the road, not even considering an image comparison with my M2P for reasons stated. If I wanted the best image in a similarly small package, flight characteristics aside, I'd be looking at the Autel Evo Lite Plus with the RYYG sensor. But the Mini 3 will out-fly the Autel, which is probably why I'd stay with DJI.

Speaking of Hollywood... There is a documentary on YouTube about Michael Bay's film "Ambulance" and (one of) the drone pilots is an incredible 19 year old pilot flying FPV for the film.

 

[KS-6]

I also get requests for some really big files, just finished a mural job that has finals going to the printer at between 7’ to 12’ feet at 300dpi, they average 2-3GB a pop.

Currently I am using an M2P which has been great, may keep it, may not. Basically it is becoming bloated in start up with numerous custom unlocks that I need to deal with when shooting jobs and I have one client in particular that pays a decent $2000-$3000 a week for vertical content so the Mini Pro 3 is worth shelling out for.

I spent the better part of two weeks trying to convince my self to upgrade to the Mavic 3 but kept seeing all kinds of image quality problems in the DNG files I could find, mostly really poor corners and a fair bit of image circle de-centering.

But in one case with the Mini 3 files even at 48MP, the overall IQ was quite excellent with details a fair bit more represented than an upscaled 12MP of the same scene. So if I get a good version of this bird, it will start to push the needle toward selling the M2P.

Since I gave up on the Mavic 3, I went ahead and ordered an EVO II Pro Enterprise kit, it arrives tomorrow. I figure even if the image quality is the same and the flight characteristics not quite as good as my M2P, the lack of DJI’s darn NFZ hoop jumping will make a huge difference in productivity.

So I could very well end up with three birds, the Mini 3 Pro, M2P and EVO II Pro. If you pull in good income from it, well compared to building a good mirrorless or MF digital system, these things are still fairly cheap and backups are a real good thing when it comes to things flying around other things.

 

[KS-6]

I'm not sure where technology has brought DLSR's and Mirrorless cameras, but not very long ago on the high end DSLR's it was known that the best lenses might be able to support a bit more than 15 megapixel sensors.

With all your touted experience, how in the world do you not know where technology has brought DSLR’s and Mirrorless???

You keep saying this thing about lenses falling short beyond 15 MP at the time and it is wrong, have not replied to a single thing I have said to you in other posts. I have Nikon, Leica and Hasselblad lenses from the 90’s that *easily* give 30-50MP sensors a run for their money. For example, my Nikon 105mm 2.5 AIS sings as adapted on my Z7II and Z9. My 100mm 3.5 CFI is very much still held back by even a 50 MP CFVII 50C back, it will handle 100MP with aplomb.

Why go on and on like this? In the big print game, billboards, 8’ foot+ high POP displays, murals in hotels, etc both MP count and lenses matter.

 

[RogerDH]

Ive just bought one as a compliment to my M2P which i can use without the distance from people etc rules applying.

Remember the 48mp isn't 48. Its a native 12mp sensor with a quad bayer filter (12 x 4 = 48...). So far the 48mp images are nosier and a little softer but there are some quite obvious artefacts on high contrast areas. For example lines on the road which are white go purple etc.

The 12mp images are excellent however.

No, it has a 48mp sensor, but in groups of 4 under each color filter. The 4-pixel groups can be processed together to produce one output pixel, so the output is 12mp. The (theoretical) advantage is less noise and more accurate color, which can (theoretically) reveal more detail, but only in the subtle differences in color -- which is to say, most of the time it doesn't make any significant difference except the noise reduction.

 

[Cymru]

You keep saying this thing about lenses falling short beyond 15 MP at the time and it is wrong, have not replied to a single thing I have said to you in other posts. I have Nikon, Leica and Hasselblad lenses from the 90’s that *easily* give 30-50MP sensors a run for their money. For example, my Nikon 105mm 2.5 AIS sings as adapted on my Z7II and Z9. My 100mm 3.5 CFI is very much still held back by even a 50 MP CFVII 50C back, it will handle 100MP with aplomb.

Yep i don't know where he gets that nonsense from either. Its not ever been true yet alone now.
Plus on modern digital cameras its backwards - on high resolution crop sensors the pixel density is capable of out resolving some very cheap lenses only. But good glass no issues at all.

And there are hundreds of reasons why a client or person would want a high resolution to use where a 6mp or whatever simply won't do.
Not everyone shoots for instagram and only views output on a phone...

 

[Cymru]

No, it has a 48mp sensor, but in groups of 4 under each color filter. The 4-pixel groups can be processed together to produce one output pixel, so the output is 12mp. The (theoretical) advantage is less noise and more accurate color, which can (theoretically) reveal more detail, but only in the subtle differences in color -- which is to say, most of the time it doesn't make any significant difference except the noise reduction.

Thats 12mpixel.
The filter layer is on top. It produces 4 x 12mp images that it then merges. Fairly badly with obvious colour artefacts and noise.

 

[globetrotterdrone]

Thats 12mpixel.
The filter layer is on top. It produces 4 x 12mp images that it then merges. Fairly badly with obvious colour artefacts and noise.

I do have to admit so far, that there are some very slight colour artefacts in some patterns, but it's only noticeable in 48 MP zoomed in and these files feature astonishing detail to be honest. And I got lucky, sharpness is distributed evenly and only slightly falls of to the corner. Better than my M2P actually. But more personal tests to come.

 

[RogerDH]

With all your touted experience, how in the world do you not know where technology has brought DSLR’s and Mirrorless???

You keep saying this thing about lenses falling short beyond 15 MP at the time and it is wrong, have not replied to a single thing I have said to you in other posts. I have Nikon, Leica and Hasselblad lenses from the 90’s that *easily* give 30-50MP sensors a run for their money. For example, my Nikon 105mm 2.5 AIS sings as adapted on my Z7II and Z9. My 100mm 3.5 CFI is very much still held back by even a 50 MP CFVII 50C back, it will handle 100MP with aplomb.

Why go on and on like this? In the big print game, billboards, 8’ foot+ high POP displays, murals in hotels, etc both MP count and lenses matter.

I recently saw a test of some high-end lenses that found they could resolve over 200 line pairs per mm at f/4 or f/5. (None of the lenses tested could do it wide open.) For a full frame 60MP sensor, the article said you only need about 80 lp/mm.

 

[RogerDH]

Thats 12mpixel.
The filter layer is on top. It produces 4 x 12mp images that it then merges. Fairly badly with obvious colour artefacts and noise.

No, that is not correct. It is a 48MP sensor which can output 48MP images, or it can "bin" 4-pixel groups to produce a 12MP image. What I've read so far about using these sensors in phones is that the 48MP images are sometimes sharper, but they are noisier and don't really show much extra detail, so the 12MPs are generally better.

 

[Eagle Eye 62]

I Have a Mavic 3 and purchase a Mini 3 as my second drone. It seems like a great combo and gives the best of both worlds. I just got confirmation my Mini 3 Pro shipped from DJI today. Yay!