Question for Photographers

[Neo Mavic]

I'm guessing that your Canon does absolutely everything you need, except for maybe one or two newly added bells and whistles. But, can it fly? Decision made!

I totally agree. I use a canon 5d mkiii and have for about 5 years now and it’s still awesome so I bought a mav as it’s great for Ariel shots instead of a 400ft ladder

 

[SouthernComfort]

I am into photography also used to have the Canon 7d markii, sold it for the Fuji XT2. Love this camera I was going to get the Phantom 4 pro but went with the Mavic. I feel if I got the Phantom I wouldn't take it as much as I would the Mavic due to the size. I would rather suffer some IQ over not taking a picture at all.

I've just purchased an XT2, upgrading from an XE2, and absolutely love it! Fuji cameras and lenses are top notch!

 

[Adamcain112]

I've just purchased an XT2, upgrading from an XE2, and absolutely love it! Fuji cameras and lenses are top notch!

Congrads make sure you buy the booster grip if you want to optimize the AF and frame rate.

 

[SafariMan]

I love 'droning' (well, not on-and-on like most women but the flying kind). And my fav thing about droning is taking pictures. Thing is - I really love cameras and 'ground' photography as well. So much so, that every two years or so, I purchase a new DSLR.

This year it's time to update my Canon camera but for the first time I'm not sure. For about the same price as a great DSLR I can buy a drone with a pretty good camera. Sure - not as good as a hand held but pretty darn good. And with a drone I can take pics from places - obviously - I could never get to with a hand held.

So - do I suffer some pic quality for location quality? That's my question. Maybe I'm the only one that really knows for me but hoping some folks thinking the same way and would like to hear opinions all around.

T

If you already have a good DSLR, what I suppose, instead of upgrading the camera I would either buy a top Lens or a drone. You would get more possibilities for your shots by adding a drone to your photo gear. While sensor quality will never match the one on a DSLR you will be rewarded with new shooting possibilities.

 

[MrsTreat]

Thanks everyone - some excellent thoughts. I have a Sony A57 which is a couple years old. I have some pretty nice lenses to go with it. But it is an older camera and the reason I’m considering an upgrade. I don’t think it’s a bad camera but it doesn’t have Bluetooth or WiFi, etc.. and other advancements. I’d like to have a better drone camera and land camera. Just not enough cash. I’d almost consider getting an Inspire and the best possible camera and just start flying to get snapshots even for land shots. Really- I just need a Mavic with an Inspire camera. Maybe next gen.

 

[lisadoc]

Really- I just need a Mavic with an Inspire camera. Maybe next gen.

Yep... we all need that.

 

[timesnaps]

One thing that wasn't mentioned much, is that regardless of the quality (which is not bad actually) you still be able to use the pictures for most press and editorial work. In fact, specially the press would often be interested in an aerial view of events and situations. If you have the Inspire or even a Phantom, you unlikely to carry it around with you all the time, but you can with a Manic (or even a Spark).

Another thing not mentioned, is that once you stich together a set o images, you get a very good quality picture at a very high resolution. This shot is over 110 MP in size, stitched from 42 single images:

 

[dsd317]

I love 'droning' (well, not on-and-on like most women but the flying kind). And my fav thing about droning is taking pictures. Thing is - I really love cameras and 'ground' photography as well. So much so, that every two years or so, I purchase a new DSLR.

This year it's time to update my Canon camera but for the first time I'm not sure. For about the same price as a great DSLR I can buy a drone with a pretty good camera. Sure - not as good as a hand held but pretty darn good. And with a drone I can take pics from places - obviously - I could never get to with a hand held.

So - do I suffer some pic quality for location quality? That's my question. Maybe I'm the only one that really knows for me but hoping some folks thinking the same way and would like to hear opinions all around.

T

Pic quality is all relative. If you're not going to sell your photos to clients looking to print poster size photos, then you don't need to upgrade your DSLR.

For me, I use the tools that work for whatever I want to capture. I use my 1dx2 for sports...mostly indoor volleyball in poorly lit gyms; 5d3 for portraits/landscapes; olympus omd em5 mark 2 for street photography; and Mavic Pro for anything above 20ft