The pros of the 2 Pro

[dannybgoode]

Nice counterpoint to the camera controversy - particularly in respect of the whole sharpness nonsense

People just need to understand the tools in their box...

 

[AeroMirage]

Very interesting.
Myself, I am getting spectacular results with the M2P.

 

[Daggad]

Good video !

 

[dannybgoode]

Good video !

I really rate their videos. Really informative and their technical skills are right up there.

 

[Thoraldus]

Nice presentation. I agree 100%

 

[SteveCA]

Nice counterpoint to the camera controversy - particularly in respect of the whole sharpness nonsense

People just need to understand the tools in their box...

sharpness is easily demonstrated which is why it has been the focus of those that want reasons to dislike the MP 2 Pro. But there is so many other factors that are equally or more important to story telling. For me, the MP 2 Pro is sharp enough, even in Full FOV mode. The lack of a little sharpness has never hurt my videos just as a little more sharpness has never helped any of my lousy videos turn into good videos.

For me, more dynamic range or RAW video capture would be enormously helpful but sharper videos not so much.

 

[dannybgoode]

sharpness is easily demonstrated which is why it has been the focus of those that want reasons to dislike the MP 2 Pro. But there is so many other factors that are equally or more important to story telling. For me, the MP 2 Pro is sharp enough, even in Full FOV mode. The lack of a little sharpness has never hurt my videos just as a little more sharpness has never helped any of my lousy videos turn into good videos.

For me, more dynamic range or RAW video capture would be enormously helpful but sharper videos not so much.

It doesn’t help that a good majority of people who criticise the various technical aspects of cameras (not just drone related) have no idea what they’re talking about and how little the test data actually matters in real world shooting.

Your images for example are testament to that

 

[SteveCA]

It doesn’t help that a good majority of people who criticise the various technical aspects of cameras (not just drone related) have no idea what they’re talking about and how little the test data actually matters in real world shooting.

Your images for example are testament to that

Well there are pixel peepers and technically oriented folks abound that can always poke holes in pretty much anything. But almost none of them actually own the drone and even those that do have no idea how to get interesting high quality material out of them. For them it’s more interesting to find all the reason why something won’t work versus having an open mind to the wealth of creative possibilities these drones enable. Okay, that’s my rant for the day lol...

here’s a video from this crappy drone....

 

[Hedonist222]

It doesn’t help that a good majority of people who criticise the various technical aspects of cameras (not just drone related) have no idea what they’re talking about and how little the test data actually matters in real world shooting.

Your images for example are testament to that

AKA pixel peepers, AKA keyboard warriors

have existed since 2001 when digital cameras became affordable and discussion forums came into existence

 

[dannybgoode]

AKA pixel peepers, AKA keyboard warriors

have existed since 2001 when digital cameras became affordable and discussion forums came into existence

I bought a Sony A77 SLT camera. One if the best cameras I have ever used - would happily have another.

My god the people saying how the translucent mirror basically made every image unusable because people where shooting test shots of balls of fluff in a nearly dark room and pointing out how awful they were.

I was out there actually using it and getting great results. I think a lot of people who criticise the camera probably can’t use it to its full potential by miles.

People also forget that most of the images and footage people shoot with their drones are viewed on mobile devices and YouTube which uses horrible compression algorithms so it really doesn’t matter whether the use an M2P or and I2!

 

[CanadaDrone]

AKA pixel peepers, AKA keyboard warriors

have existed since 2001 when digital cameras became affordable and discussion forums came into existence

Being picky or a stickler for quality has nothing to do with being a "keyboard warrior", in my opinion. The definition of a "keyboard warrior" is simply that of someone who behaves differently online than they do in real life - what does that have to do with appreciating or requiring a certain level of quality? The fact that many of us have chosen a Mavic 2 Pro over a lesser drone is already evidence that higher quality output is of some value. The benchmark for quality does not simply stop at any one person's thresholds, nor does it mean that people who may require a higher level of quality are being ridiculous. People have different uses for the final product, and some definitely require more discretion than others. The most important thing is considering your end usage of the photo or video footage.

I have been a professional photographer for a long time now and consider myself very picky, but I use everything from my smartphone to my drone to a Nikon D850 to capture images depending on the end usage of the files. It's simply a matter of using the right tool for the job.

I do think it's important to consider that people have different benchmarks for quality and different end uses that justify it. We'd all simply be using Sparks and Smartphones if getting an acceptable web-sized image was all that mattered, but the point of diminishing return varies greatly between users and I don't see why that should be frowned upon.

 

[dannybgoode]

Being picky or a stickler for quality has nothing to do with being a "keyboard warrior", in my opinion. The definition of a "keyboard warrior" is simply that of someone who behaves differently online than they do in real life - what does that have to do with appreciating or requiring a certain level of quality? The fact that many of us have chosen a Mavic 2 Pro over a lesser drone is already evidence that higher quality output is of some value. The benchmark for quality does not simply stop at any one person's thresholds, nor does it mean that people who may require a higher level of quality are being ridiculous. People have different uses for the final product, and some definitely require more discretion than others. The most important thing is considering your end usage of the photo or video footage.

I have been a professional photographer for a long time now and consider myself very picky, but I use everything from my smartphone to my drone to a Nikon D850 to capture images depending on the end usage of the files. It's simply a matter of using the right tool for the job.

I do think it's important to consider that people have different benchmarks for quality and different end uses that justify it. We'd all simply be using Sparks and Smartphones if getting an acceptable web-sized image was all that mattered, but the point of diminishing return varies greatly between users and I don't see why that should be frowned upon.

I don’t disagree with anything you said but I think it is also a fair observation that a lot of people that jump on the bandwagon of criticism basically have no idea what they’re talking about. They watch a YouTube video of some bloke pointing a drone at a test chart with no real understanding of the limitations of the test nor of the equipment under test.

I too have very particular expectations of my camera gear - trying to find a P&S to complement the full setup that I was happy with, even taking into account the limitations of the format, was very difficult.

 

[Hedonist222]

Being picky or a stickler for quality has nothing to do with being a "keyboard warrior", in my opinion. The definition of a "keyboard warrior" is simply that of someone who behaves differently online than they do in real life - what does that have to do with appreciating or requiring a certain level of quality? The fact that many of us have chosen a Mavic 2 Pro over a lesser drone is already evidence that higher quality output is of some value. The benchmark for quality does not simply stop at any one person's thresholds, nor does it mean that people who may require a higher level of quality are being ridiculous. People have different uses for the final product, and some definitely require more discretion than others. The most important thing is considering your end usage of the photo or video footage.

I have been a professional photographer for a long time now and consider myself very picky, but I use everything from my smartphone to my drone to a Nikon D850 to capture images depending on the end usage of the files. It's simply a matter of using the right tool for the job.

I do think it's important to consider that people have different benchmarks for quality and different end uses that justify it. We'd all simply be using Sparks and Smartphones if getting an acceptable web-sized image was all that mattered, but the point of diminishing return varies greatly between users and I don't see why that should be frowned upon.

I am a professional photographer myself with a Canon 5d mkii and prime L lenses from 24mm up to 150 mm. Including a tse 24 L and an mpe 1-5 x.

Pixel peepers and keyboard warriors spend more time, literally, pixel peeping and ranting online than actually photographing.

Appreciating quality is one thing, pedantic pixel peeping & temper tantrums is another.
I'm on fred Miranda and similar forums

 

[CanadaDrone]

I don’t disagree with anything you said but I think it is also a fair observation that a lot of people that jump on the bandwagon of criticism basically have no idea what they’re talking about. They watch a YouTube video of some bloke pointing a drone at a test chart with no real understanding of the limitations of the test nor of the equipment under test.

I too have very particular expectations of my camera gear - trying to find a P&S to complement the full setup that I was happy with, even taking into account the limitations of the format, was very difficult.

True, I think you have a good point there, but I also think an equal number of people like to criticize those who do anything outside of the boundaries they have personally set for themselves, as if there could be no other reason anyone would want to do something a different way. An example might be a comment like "nobody needs more then X" or "anyone who needs more than X is just a pixel peeper", where "X" is some arbitrary limit of someone's personal usage or personal ability. There is a lot of that online in general, at least in my observations. An example I see all the time on these forums in particular is Mavic Pro owners sh*tting on Mavic Air owners as if there is no possible reason one would want an Air when the Pro is available - and when presented with said reasons they are quickly dismissed because they are not relevant to that particular individual.

One of the reasons I avoid other online communities like DPreview, for example, is basically because of what you just described - it's (mostly) a giant fanboy circle jerk about gear many of them don't even have experience with. There are some really good members still clinging on there but they're few and far between - most other reputable contributors have left due to what the community has become.

The be completely fair, you don't always need to own the gear to make certain conclusions about it. For example's sake, I know a Ferrari will be faster around a track than a Civic and I don't need to own a Ferrari to be correct. Objective independent testing that has already been completed and published is a good enough source for things like that, and is often far more valuable than internet opinions.

Out of curiosity, what P&S did you decide on or are you still shopping?

 

[dannybgoode]

True, I think you have a good point there, but I also think an equal number of people like to criticize those who do anything outside of the boundaries they have personally set for themselves, as if there could be no other reason anyone would want to do something a different way. An example might be a comment like "nobody needs more then X" or "anyone who needs more than X is just a pixel peeper", where "X" is some arbitrary limit of someone's personal usage or personal ability. There is a lot of that online in general, at least in my observations. An example I see all the time on these forums in particular is Mavic Pro owners sh*tting on Mavic Air owners as if there is no possible reason one would want an Air when the Pro is available - and when presented with said reasons they are quickly dismissed because they are not relevant to that particular individual.

One of the reasons I avoid other online communities like DPreview, for example, is basically because of what you just described - it's (mostly) a giant fanboy circle jerk about gear many of them don't even have experience with. There are some really good members still clinging on there but they're few and far between - most other reputable contributors have left due to what the community has become.

The be completely fair, you don't always need to own the gear to make certain conclusions about it. For example's sake, I know a Ferrari will be faster around a track than a Civic and I don't need to own a Ferrari to be correct. Objective independent testing that has already been completed and published is a good enough source for things like that, and is often far more valuable than internet opinions.

Out of curiosity, what P&S did you decide on or are you still shopping?

I started avoiding DPR a long time ago . And yes - completely agree that the needs of the user need to be taken into account - I am one of the MA flyers who specifically chose it over the MPP at the time.

P&S - Canon G7X mkII. Brilliant camera but the RAW files are a bit of a nightmare to work with. Crikey if people thought there was a little distortion OOC from the M2P they would explode if they saw the G7X II RAW OOC. DxO is the only RAW editor I've found that quickly sorts it although I am sure LR would if I could be bothered to play with it properly.

 

[CanadaDrone]

I started avoiding DPR a long time ago . And yes - completely agree that the needs of the user need to be taken into account - I am one of the MA flyers who specifically chose it over the MPP at the time.

P&S - Canon G7X mkII. Brilliant camera but the RAW files are a bit of a nightmare to work with. Crikey if people thought there was a little distortion OOC from the M2P they would explode if they saw the G7X II RAW OOC. DxO is the only RAW editor I've found that quickly sorts it although I am sure LR would if I could be bothered to play with it properly.

Nice choice. I went with the Sony RX100 VA because I wanted the pop up EVF and PDAF, but you sure do pay a healthy premium for it (the fact that I could buy a D610 or D7200 for about the same money was always on my mind). At least they seem to hold their value well when I inevitably change my mind about what I want haha. No UHS II Card support is my biggest complaint (24FPS RAW shooting and a huge buffer is of limited use when it takes so long to write files), other than that I am extremely impressed with it for the size.

Adobe should have a profile for the G7X II, most likely all you need to do is check the lens correction box, but I don't have the camera to try myself.

 

[dannybgoode]

Nice choice. I went with the Sony RX100 VA because I wanted the pop up EVF and PDAF, but you sure do pay a healthy premium for it (the fact that I could buy a D610 or D7200 for about the same money was always on my mind). At least they seem to hold their value well when I inevitably change my mind about what I want haha. No UHS II Card support is my biggest complaint (24FPS RAW shooting and a huge buffer is of limited use when it takes so long to write files), other than that I am extremely impressed with it for the size.

Adobe should have a profile for the G7X II, most likely all you need to do is check the lens correction box, but I don't have the camera to try myself.

The Sony was my other choice - same sensor (albeit the one in the Canon may be a generation behind) but as all my other kit is Canon and I get on with it that's what I went for. That said I'd love an A7 III...

 

[CanadaDrone]

The Sony was my other choice - same sensor (albeit the one in the Canon may be a generation behind) but as all my other kit is Canon and I get on with it that's what I went for. That said I'd love an A7 III...

Yeah the RX100 V / VA / VI all use the newer stacked version of Sony's 1" sensor which is how they get readouts fast enough for 24FPS RAW with full AE/PDAF between frames (wouldn't it be nice to have that in the M2P?). The G7X II is using the same sensor in the earlier RX100 models but it's still very good, especially for the price. There are so many good cameras out there these days, the consumers really are the ones winning with all the competition.

 

[dannybgoode]

Yeah the RX100 V / VA / VI all use the newer stacked version of Sony's 1" sensor which is how they get readouts fast enough for 24FPS RAW with full AE/PDAF between frames (wouldn't it be nice to have that in the M2P?). The G7X II is using the same sensor in the earlier RX100 models but it's still very good, especially for the price. There are so many good cameras out there these days, the consumers really are the ones winning with all the competition.

I was looking through my archives and I miss my Sigma DP3 Merrill. That was a beast. Really want another but the secondhand prices on eBay are silly! Love the Ricoh GR as well - insanely likeable little thing and perfect for street.

 

[CanadaDrone]

I was looking through my archives and I miss my Sigma DP3 Merrill. That was a beast. Really want another but the secondhand prices on eBay are silly! Love the Ricoh GR as well - insanely likeable little thing and perfect for street.

Sigma's Foevon sensors were special, but they needed more R&D investment. They produced phenomenal color but things like ISO performance suffered compared to modern CMOS. I almost wish a huge company like Nikon/Canon/Sony bought the technology so we could see what it was really capable of. I had a Nikon Coolpix A which was very similar to your Ricoh GR - loved that camera as well but the lack of PDAF meant it was limited to stationary subjects only so I was eager to upgrade when PDAF became more mainstream in the P&S realm. I actually had a deposit on a Nikon DL, which were basically RX100V's at half the price, but Nikon ran into manufacturing issues and cancelled the whole line at the 11th hour. I hope they revive it because even now 2 years later it would still be extremely competitive, especially at the prices they had.