ITs significantly less after it done its thing than mavic 1. Last time i looked at gimbal angle it showed 15 or 20 degrees not 30.
The in-built sky fill is hideous for an image you want anywhere that isnt facebook and exposures often need to be balanced.
Hence photoshop needed to do it properly - and the extra missing sky is more work.
In hindsight, I think you may be correct about that. Good to know, because that would explain some issues I had, trying to include the top of a building in the top edge of a spherical panorama, and I made sure it was visible in the frame when I elevated manually to 120°, before shooting the pano, but when I got home, it was cut off in the actual pano, and cloned in! Unfortunately, I haven't paid close enough attention to the exact degree of the top row angle. I will on my next Spherical Panorama, though! I know it does a top row
above horizontal. My guess is that a top row that is a full 120° might not contain any horizon, and might ruin the whole stitch, with no common areas to stitch from.
I totally agree that the cloned in area can look very unnatural, depending upon the detail in the sky in the original part. The more even the original sky is, the better the cloned result.
Personally, I only use the final microSD card image as a proof of concept, because I save all the originals as jpg's, and use those to stitch my final pano output using PanoramaStudio 3 Pro, where it simply cuts off the top of the panorama where the top row ends, so no cloning is necessary, but the result is 360x122.8 rather than 360x180, so it is missing the top 57.2° from the zenith down. No one really needs to see the top of the sky anyway. Usually nothing of interest there. PanoramaStudio 3 Pro does a much better job of stitching, while also balancing the exposures, and allows a higher level of zoom, and can plot the pano on a Google Map with the jpg GPS metadata. It's now only $80 and well worth it.
www.tshsoft.com
Looking at the numbers above of 360x122.8, I think I have the solution to making sure I am at a high enough elevation when shooting the pano to just barely include the top of the building in the resulting pano. 122.8° is slightly over 120°, so if I elevate the gimbal to 120°, and put the top of the building in the very
center of the frame, rather than at the
top edge of the frame, the building top will make it into the original pano photos generated by
M2P, which PanoramaStudio Pro 3 will use. I like it! You have solved a major conundrum for me! Thank you!