New Mavic owner here but long-time amateur photographer. I have to say that I'm really puzzled about the current craze about using ND (neutral density) filters with drones like the Mavic. OK, so the Mavic's camera has a relatively fast f/2.2 lens with a fixed aperture. Possible over-exposure problems with too much light, but I've been flying the Mavic here in sunny California without an ND filter and without noticing any apparent overexposure problems in the pictures or videos. Last time I was flying around noon on a sunny day, and glanced at the shutter speed on my control. It said about 1/1000 shutter speed, which is fine. That certainly wouldn't make me reach for an ND filter if I were shooting my DSLR with the aperture wide open. And if I don't need an ND filter when flying on a sunny California day, when would I possibly need an ND filter?
Curious, I looked on Youtube and on the internet for some examples about the supposed superiority of Mavic pictures taken with ND filters but had a hard time finding any convincing evidence for using such filters. One example of with- and without-filters showed two pictures side by side with the "without-filter" picture clearly being out-of-focus, which of course has nothing to do with having or not having filters. Another example showed two pictures of a bay with some fine water ripples being evident in the picture taken with an ND filter but none in the picture taken without the filter. The problem is that I wasn't convinced that the reason for the difference wasn't really because a slight breeze hadn't picked up between the "with filter" and "without filter" drones flights. In fact, I'm pretty sure that that was the reason for the difference. Finally, another example shows picture shots of an ocean looking directly into a setting sun which, admittedly, is a condition where one might expect to see the most improvement with using an ND filter. However, even there the improvement was, in my opinion, modest. Sure, a little bit more of the reflecting water surface was saved from overexposure, but even an ND16 filter isn't going to completely eliminate overexposure if one is looking directly into the sun.
So my opinion at present is that the whole issue of using ND filters with the Mavic and other drones to get better images may be a little bit overhyped. With rare exceptions such as taking pictures in an area covered by snow or for pictures almost directly into the sun, ND filters (IMHO) are really not needed. I certainly don't have any plans to buy any ND filters for my drone. (And, in fact, with the exception of "specialty shots" such as rare occasions when I want to slow down the shutter speed without decreasing the aperture or ISO for shots of, say, a waterfall, I hardly ever touch my DSLR ND filters, either. I only got my DSLR ND filters many years ago when I was new to photography because of a naive belief that "real" photographers were supposed to have a full set of ND filters.)
Curious, I looked on Youtube and on the internet for some examples about the supposed superiority of Mavic pictures taken with ND filters but had a hard time finding any convincing evidence for using such filters. One example of with- and without-filters showed two pictures side by side with the "without-filter" picture clearly being out-of-focus, which of course has nothing to do with having or not having filters. Another example showed two pictures of a bay with some fine water ripples being evident in the picture taken with an ND filter but none in the picture taken without the filter. The problem is that I wasn't convinced that the reason for the difference wasn't really because a slight breeze hadn't picked up between the "with filter" and "without filter" drones flights. In fact, I'm pretty sure that that was the reason for the difference. Finally, another example shows picture shots of an ocean looking directly into a setting sun which, admittedly, is a condition where one might expect to see the most improvement with using an ND filter. However, even there the improvement was, in my opinion, modest. Sure, a little bit more of the reflecting water surface was saved from overexposure, but even an ND16 filter isn't going to completely eliminate overexposure if one is looking directly into the sun.
So my opinion at present is that the whole issue of using ND filters with the Mavic and other drones to get better images may be a little bit overhyped. With rare exceptions such as taking pictures in an area covered by snow or for pictures almost directly into the sun, ND filters (IMHO) are really not needed. I certainly don't have any plans to buy any ND filters for my drone. (And, in fact, with the exception of "specialty shots" such as rare occasions when I want to slow down the shutter speed without decreasing the aperture or ISO for shots of, say, a waterfall, I hardly ever touch my DSLR ND filters, either. I only got my DSLR ND filters many years ago when I was new to photography because of a naive belief that "real" photographers were supposed to have a full set of ND filters.)