You are missing out my friend. Here is a hyperlapse taken in 25mph winds last evening.
Did you take this at LAX? Lots of air traffic!
I have both M2Pro and M2Zoom, and had a M1Pro before, and I'm mostly into photography rather than videography.
The M2Pro is generally better, of course. More dynamic range, more resolution, less noise. But you know all that from the specs.
I also tried the M2Zoom for photography, and it has a few more subtle advantages as well. First, it goes to 24 mm on the wide end. So, if you're restricted in altitude, those 4 mm more might be what you need to get the picture you want because the 28 mm of the M2Pro aren't wide enough. Same goes for the telephoto end: You may be unable to descend into a crater or something because you would lose radio connectivity, so you can stay higher and zoom in with the M2Zoom, and end up with more pixels than using the M2Pro and cropping afterwards.
The lens of the M2Zoom has a weak spot, which is corner sharpness at 24 mm, but it's tolerable for most subjects I think. My M2Pro had a decentered lens first, so I sent it back to DJI for exchange, and got a good one back. (Used the M2Zoom in the meantime, and that's my use case indeed: I want to have a backup, and the M2Zoom is a much better backup because it can share all accessories (except filters) with the M2Pro, while the M1Pro couldn't, so I sold that and bought the M2Zoom in addition to the M2Pro.)
Also a major difference: the M2Zoom makes 4:3 photos, the M2Pro makes 3:2 photos. Coming from ground-based DSLR photography, the 3:2 is more my thing, and I often would crop the 4:3 photos from the M2Zoom (and M1Pro before that) to 3:2, further reducing resolution.
Regarding the spec differences: keep in mind that, depending on your style, many if not most subjects don't exceed even the M2Zoom's dynamic range. So, if you would be able to use low ISO most of the time, and 12MP is enough, the M2Zoom is also an option for photography. Still, I'm almost always choosing the M2Pro anyway.
Video is also a series of stills (FPS), but that's not what he's asking for.Hyperlapses are made of hundred of still photos, stitched together. It's not video footage.
Can you please make a couple of side by side photos and share those?
I need to understand: is the difference big enough for me to justify cost and fixed lnse (vs zoom).
Not yet. Will be looking forward your images. Thank youI sold the Zoom just last week and have purchased the 2 Pro, once I receive this I can post a variety of comparison images here (if you haven't already taken the plunge and purchased).
BTW, while we are waiting files from SquizzyD - I've found a few comparison shots (in RAW).
Looking at those - I see zoom as pretty OK for me. What do you say, guys?
Original Files
Being a photographer myself I do understand this and not arguing theory.It depends on your personal standards, but in my opinion the still image of the Zoom is quite poor (just as bad on my Air). There are physics based limitations with 12MP 1/2.3" sensors that you simply cannot overcome when comparing to a sensor 4 times the size with better overall technology and a higher resolution. The reason modern smartphones (which use the exact same sensors as the M2 Zoom) rely so heavily on computational photography, HDR algorithms and image stacking is because the upper limits of their performance are so low and it's pretty hard to get a bigger sensor in a smartphone (it's been done but is not commonplace). The M2P is in another league, which is not surprising looking at the sensor hardware. The lens on the M2P is also better, which is another factor. The M2P is not the be-all-end-all either, to put it further in perspective, modern 1" sensor IQ is quite poor compared to a modern full frame sensor like the one in my Nikon D850. It's all relative, and the same limitations exist everywhere, they just occur at different thresholds.
Like I said earlier, these exact same sensors have been out in the wild for years now in other photographic applications - we already know exactly how they perform and there is a very significant objective difference if each is used to their full ability. If your usage never exceeds web-sized JPEGS with zero post processing, it will make far less of a difference to that particular individual, but then the Pro2 likely isn't the best choice for someone like that in the first place.
how much time does it take for M2Z to take all those pictures for the superres shot?I think you can get good photos on both the zoom and M2P.
Both can save as raw photos, but on the zoom I can get 48MP superresolution.
Dont know if the M2P justifies the price.
I do think on videos the zoom gets more natural colors. I dont really like the M2P colors, they arent natural, but its just my opinion.
Here is a picture taken on my M2zoom on 48MP superesolution. There isnt anything like it on the Pro.
I think you can get good photos on both the zoom and M2P.
Both can save as raw photos, but on the zoom I can get 48MP superresolution.
Dont know if the M2P justifies the price.
I do think on videos the zoom gets more natural colors. I dont really like the M2P colors, they arent natural, but its just my opinion.
Here is a picture taken on my M2zoom on 48MP superesolution. There isnt anything like it on the Pro.
That is a nice composition but when you view it at 1:1 you can see the downfalls of such a tiny sensor. The photo itself is extremely soft, has no fine detail at all (It's completely smeared with a pastel look due to the noise reduction even at ISO 100) and fairly extreme distortion towards the edges. You can extract a much better image (technically speaking) out of the Pro simply because you avoid so many of the limitations of a 1/2.3" sensor. Again this is simply physics, it is not anything anyone did wrong or a problem with DJI's implementation.
If color is your complaint, you're in luck because that has nothing to do with the drone itself, it's simply the RAW converter. You can make the color profile whatever you want with 1 click, the only difference is you have more leeway to adjust color with the M2P. The M2P is also capable of higher than 48MP panoramas with even fewer shots, if getting extremely high resolution images is what interests you. The easiest way to deal with color management is to make profiles with a Colorchecker Passport, and then you can batch process perfect color in post with a single click. Actually that is probably the accessory that has singlehandedly saved me the most time in my entire photographic career - I highly recommend it to anyone.
They're just two different tools that cater to different customers. If you aren't into editing or taking still photos, the Zoom is a fine choice because it's cheaper and has all the benefits of the Mavic 2 chassis. If you need the highest possible quality, highest resolution, and highest file malleability in all scenarios, the Pro is easily worth the premium but in some scenarios it takes more work to extract those benefits (i.e. editing 10bit DLog-M footage).
I believe this topic has nothing to do with 10bit DLog as this is about photos only.
Otherwise - technically it is true, but in fact nobody still couldn't show side by side comparison to demonstrate the huge difference.
I provided couple of side by side shots above, but that went unnoticed, unfortunately.
Not yet. Will be looking forward your images. Thank you
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.