THIS is why the Air 2 is better than the M2 Pro for video!

[Searat290]

As usual, you get what you pay for. If you want to save money, by all means go for the ma2.

 

[Deleted member 94047]

I think these kinds of comparisons are missing the point. Forget the MA2, even the MA1 produces quite stunning videos. Where the M2P really shines is when it comes to stills. Stills from the MA1 don't even come close to what the M2P produces. I have seen some arguing that the MA2 is on par with the M2P in stills but the few pictures I have seen from the former seem to suggest otherwise. There is a lot of noise in stills shot with the MA2 even in moderately low light situations.

 

[dirkclod]

Is funny how some are already putting the M2P to bed when this hasn’t even been out enough to know just what issues it has and it will just like the rest did. I am going to have one to replace the Mini as my back up.Thats what I see it as just
a step over the Mini. I don’t pay the reviewers no mind except when it comes to tutorials and then only a few of them will I watch. Get 90% of my info in here but just don't
take one’s word on It I have to read many with the same conclusion.
Im not a professional photographer and always just use auto. I do use most of the modes though. They always going to roll out new models that do things better than the 1 before it but watch what comes next. It will be even better.
Has always been that way.

 

[thomashall1993]

Remember hdr is a software gimick. Two streams merged. There will be some ghosting errors in the post processing to create the hdr. This is true of hdr in general not just ma2. So the dynamic range of the m2p should still be seen as wider because it is in a raw capture.

You all can argue bang for your buck or 1" sensors but I feel it's more a matter of how your using the tools that either platform offers. The rest is just philosophical bickering. LoL go out and enjoy your expensive toys. No need for a pissing contest every time you fill your bladder.

Just my two cents. Toss them in a well and make a wish.

Very well said. You can buy the best equipment but if you suck as a digital artist, specs don’t matter one iota.

 

[Roamer105]

Apples and Oranges!
The MA2 is a great bang-for-the-buck mini drone with impressive capabilities. However this HDR discussion citing qualitative advantages over the M2P is missing some key points:
Camera optics - no comparison
Video 4K 10-bit log - no comparison
Video 4K HLG - no comparison
Still capture - no comparison.

Probably the most important difference not mentioned is 10-bit Log and native 10-bit HLG (true HDR). Of course the former requires professional post processing to extract and deliver the true quality of the video. For those of us that do that this comparison is a bit silly. I for one would never trade my M2P until DJI comes out with an M3P.

 

[Dan Lee]

Pardon me if I missed someone mentioning this as I read over the post, but no one has said much about the bird itself. Its all been about the camera. The M2 drone is an awesome flying bird. You can tell me all about how the MA takes the wind but The M2 drone is heavier and will take the wind better. Stability has a lot to do with a good video.

 

[Marv McCarthy]

Yes, the M2 Pro's 1" sensor means it's better for low light. But it used to be that the sensor combined with the log profile meant it was also better for dynamic range in videos, when compared to drones with smaller sensors, but no more! With the quad bayer sensor you get hdr in the same way as with photos, with two separate exposures. The result is far better dynamic range than the M2 Pro, as seen here. Combine that with 4k 60fps (albeit not in hdr mode), and really the only big advantage the M2 Pro has is in low light.

The Sony Quad Bayer sensor is really impressive, but I'll stick with my Mavic 2 Pro. While I agree about the depth of field, the more I fly my M2P the more I appreciate having the variable f-stop while in the air for exposure adjustments, primarily for video so I can maintain the 180 rule. I really don't like having to land the aircraft to put another ND filter on for changing exposures. I do a lot of flying during golden hour, I really like sunrises, sunsets, moonrises, etc., so during those times the exposure is constantly changing. It just works well for me.

 

[skyeboysteve]

Yes, the M2 Pro's 1" sensor means it's better for low light. But it used to be that the sensor combined with the log profile meant it was also better for dynamic range in videos, when compared to drones with smaller sensors, but no more! With the quad bayer sensor you get hdr in the same way as with photos, with two separate exposures. The result is far better dynamic range than the M2 Pro, as seen here. Combine that with 4k 60fps (albeit not in hdr mode), and really the only big advantage the M2 Pro has is in low light.

Nice video--I just wish it was legal in the US to get shots in the fog, like he did. This is an example of a beautiful shot ideal for drones, that seems perfectly safe; but unfortunately illegal... (I'm not the drone police--quite the opposite... just wishing I could shoot similar footage is all).

 

[simsurf]

I woul

Apples and Oranges!
The MA2 is a great bang-for-the-buck mini drone with impressive capabilities. However this HDR discussion citing qualitative advantages over the M2P is missing some key points:
Camera optics - no comparison
Video 4K 10-bit log - no comparison
Video 4K HLG - no comparison
Still capture - no comparison.

Probably the most important difference not mentioned is 10-bit Log and native 10-bit HLG (true HDR). Of course the former requires professional post processing to extract and deliver the true quality of the video. For those of us that do that this comparison is a bit silly. I for one would never trade my M2P until DJI comes out with an M3P.

This. And I would also never consider a fixed aperture camera.

 

[DroneCPT]

I have zero regrets on my M2P and I am so glad I bought it when I did. I have been able to capture some awesome stills and video. Anyone seriously into drones for either hobby or work should have at least two so you are not dead in the water should one fail or fly away. I am excited about getting a MA2 as my number 2! Killer combo!

 

[Hiflyer808]

I woul

This. And I would also never consider a fixed aperture camera.

Apples and Oranges!
The MA2 is a great bang-for-the-buck mini drone with impressive capabilities. However this HDR discussion citing qualitative advantages over the M2P is missing some key points:
Camera optics - no comparison
Video 4K 10-bit log - no comparison
Video 4K HLG - no comparison
Still capture - no comparison.

Probably the most important difference not mentioned is 10-bit Log and native 10-bit HLG (true HDR). Of course the former requires professional post processing to extract and deliver the true quality of the video. For those of us that do that this comparison is a bit silly. I for one would never trade my M2P until DJI comes out with an M3P.

As a professional photographer and videographer who likes big sensors, I say you are GREATLY exaggerating the advantages of the larger sensor, log profile, and hlg. First, the sensor is 1", not aps-c or full frame. It is still a small sensor camera. The advantage is thus, somewhat better dr and lowlight performance but not greatly, "no comparison" better, especially since the A2 sensor punches above its weight for its size. Secondly, whether or not we say 10-bit hlg is "true" hdr or not, hdr that is achieved through using two separate exposures as with the A2 will always produce higher dr than hdr produced from one exposure. That's why it is done that way with photography. If I want an hdr photo I'd much rather work with two jpgs at two separate exposures rather than one raw image, even from a larger sensor. Third, I agree about the 10-bit log profile being a pretty big advantage because of how much latitude it gives you for grading, but cinelike does give you some grading ability as well, and multiple reviewers have talked about how surprised they were at how well the A2 image stood up to a heavy grade. Again, the A2 punching above its weight with newer tech. Finally, no way are stills "no comparison" better with the M2. The 48mp stills, under the right lighting conditions, are a useful tool the mp2 doesn't have, the A2 sensor punches above its weight, and again, we are comparing a small sensor with a less small but still small sensor. This is not Gopro vs. full frame.

Add in the 4k60, the 1080p240, and the fact that the m2p video image is relatively soft at the wider option because of the way the image is scaled down, the image quality advantage of the m2p is not huge. Add in the other, newer-tech advantages of the A2 such as the better tracking and oa, and it is indeed quite close to being as good as the m2p, while being half the price.

 

[simsurf]

As a professional photographer and videographer who likes big sensors, I say you are GREATLY exaggerating the advantages of the larger sensor, log profile, and hlg. First, the sensor is 1", not aps-c or full frame. It is still a small sensor camera. The advantage is thus, somewhat better dr and lowlight performance but not greatly, "no comparison" better, especially since the A2 sensor punches above its weight for its size. Secondly, whether or not we say 10-bit hlg is "true" hdr or not, hdr that is achieved through using two separate exposures as with the A2 will always produce higher dr than hdr produced from one exposure. That's why it is done that way with photography. If I want an hdr photo I'd much rather work with two jpgs at two separate exposures rather than one raw image, even from a larger sensor. Third, I agree about the 10-bit log profile being a pretty big advantage because of how much latitude it gives you for grading, but cinelike does give you some grading ability as well, and multiple reviewers have talked about how surprised they were at how well the A2 image stood up to a heavy grade. Again, the A2 punching above its weight with newer tech. Finally, no way are stills "no comparison" better with the M2. The 48mp stills, under the right lighting conditions, are a useful tool the mp2 doesn't have, the A2 sensor punches above its weight, and again, we are comparing a small sensor with a less small but still small sensor. This is not Gopro vs. full frame.

Add in the 4k60, the 1080p240, and the fact that the m2p video image is relatively soft at the wider option because of the way the image is scaled down, the image quality advantage of the m2p is not huge. Add in the other, newer-tech advantages of the A2 such as the better tracking and oa, and it is indeed quite close to being as good as the m2p, while being half the price.

As a professional photographer I would never give up aperture control to save a few dollars. Fixed aperture cameras are for phones and amateurs. Something about the internet where people have to write walls of text to justify their purchases and try and convince other people.

 

[sar104]

As a professional photographer and videographer who likes big sensors, I say you are GREATLY exaggerating the advantages of the larger sensor, log profile, and hlg. First, the sensor is 1", not aps-c or full frame. It is still a small sensor camera. The advantage is thus, somewhat better dr and lowlight performance but not greatly, "no comparison" better, especially since the A2 sensor punches above its weight for its size. Secondly, whether or not we say 10-bit hlg is "true" hdr or not, hdr that is achieved through using two separate exposures as with the A2 will always produce higher dr than hdr produced from one exposure. That's why it is done that way with photography. If I want an hdr photo I'd much rather work with two jpgs at two separate exposures rather than one raw image, even from a larger sensor. Third, I agree about the 10-bit log profile being a pretty big advantage because of how much latitude it gives you for grading, but cinelike does give you some grading ability as well, and multiple reviewers have talked about how surprised they were at how well the A2 image stood up to a heavy grade. Again, the A2 punching above its weight with newer tech. Finally, no way are stills "no comparison" better with the M2. The 48mp stills, under the right lighting conditions, are a useful tool the mp2 doesn't have, the A2 sensor punches above its weight, and again, we are comparing a small sensor with a less small but still small sensor. This is not Gopro vs. full frame.

Add in the 4k60, the 1080p240, and the fact that the m2p video image is relatively soft at the wider option because of the way the image is scaled down, the image quality advantage of the m2p is not huge. Add in the other, newer-tech advantages of the A2 such as the better tracking and oa, and it is indeed quite close to being as good as the m2p, while being half the price.

While I agree that they are both relatively small sensors, the photosites on the IMX586 are one tenth the size of the photosites in the M2P sensor. That is a huge difference.

 

[GtoJon]

I love the HDR .... definitely better than my M2Z!

Cheers, Jon

 

[GtoJon]

I also, had every intention of shooting this with my M2Z .... but .... I decided to do the MA2.
Not HDR, but 4k60 really is nice!

Cheers, Jon

 

[Hiflyer808]

As a professional photographer I would never give up aperture control to save a few dollars. Fixed aperture cameras are for phones and amateurs. Something about the internet where people have to write walls of text to justify their purchases and try and convince other people.

As a professional photographer I also would never give up aperture control to save a few dollars. Aperture control is critical for photographers, mostly because of how you can change depth of field as needed, such as to blur out the background for portraits. As a drone user, I would certainly give up aperture control to save 800 (not "a few") dollars, since this control over depth of field is rarely needed in this case, with small sensors and large distances causing everything to be in focus even at f2.8. I woul miss the other main benefit of aperture control on a drone, which is being able to slow down shutter speed, but to some degree I could use iso control combined with nd filters for the same purpose. That, coupled with the fact that the m2p's image quickly gets softer after f5.6, leads me to not give much weight to its variable aperture advantage. Some weight, but not $800 worth.

As for people writing walls of text to try to justify their purchases, seems like it's mainly m2p owners doing that. I don't have either drone. I have the m2 zoom, and I'm certainly not trying to justify hanging on to it. I'm going to sell it to finance getting the better and cheaper Air 2. I also used to champion the Skydio 2 as the best all-around drone, but had no problem changing my tune when it became clear that the Air 2's tracking and oa had improved enough to give it the edge over all. I strive very hard to avoid motivated reasoning and it bothers me when others do things like cherry picking and exaggeration.

 

[simsurf]

As a professional photographer I also would never give up aperture control to save a few dollars. Aperture control is critical for photographers, mostly because of how you can change depth of field as needed, such as to blur out the background for portraits. As a drone user, I would certainly give up aperture control to save 800 (not "a few") dollars, since this control over depth of field is rarely needed in this case, with small sensors and large distances causing everything to be in focus even at f2.8. I woul miss the other main benefit of aperture control on a drone, which is being able to slow down shutter speed, but to some degree I could use iso control combined with nd filters for the same purpose. That, coupled with the fact that the m2p's image quickly gets softer after f5.6, leads me to not give much weight to its variable aperture advantage. Some weight, but not $800 worth.

As for people writing walls of text to try to justify their purchases, seems like it's mainly m2p owners doing that. I don't have either drone. I have the m2 zoom, and I'm certainly not trying to justify hanging on to it. I'm going to sell it to finance getting the better and cheaper Air 2. I also used to champion the Skydio 2 as the best all-around drone, but had no problem changing my tune when it became clear that the Air 2's tracking and oa had improved enough to give it the edge over all. I strive very hard to avoid motivated reasoning and it bothers me when others do things like cherry picking and exaggeration.

Your doing it again. And you just stated your buying the Air. If you weren't buying the Air you wouldn't have posted anything. You get what you pay for, and this couldn't be more true for photography. I will gladly pay a few extra dollars to get better images and video. If your making good money, $800 isn't really that much for what you gain.

Most lenses have a aperture sweet spot and it isn't F2.8. Futhermore, why anyone calling themselves professional would buy an inferior drone like the zoom is beyond me. Your in the sky, fly closer to the subject. There is your zoom.

 

[dirkclod]

Guys let’s not get Argumentative here .
Debate ,compare ,whatever But stay civil. .

 

[dsjones]

I've had my Mavic Air 2 for two days and I'm absolutely blown away at the quality of the 4K HDR video. I don't make any money from my videography, and equipment doesn't come cheap. For less than $1000 US, you cannot beat the quality of this drone. Sure, you get what you pay for, but don't forget the law of diminishing returns. More expensive doesn't always equate to "better." I have two 4K video cameras in the studio that were several thousand dollars a piece, and I was sorely disappointed at their video quality. Again, more expensive doesn't necessarily mean better.

Pixel peepers can always find something to complain about, but until it crashes, breaks, or flies away, I think that I will be satisfied with the Mavic Air 2.

 

[Hiflyer808]

Your doing it again. And you just stated your buying the Air. If you weren't buying the Air you wouldn't have posted anything. You get what you pay for, and this couldn't be more true for photography. I will gladly pay a few extra dollars to get better images and video. If your making good money, $800 isn't really that much for what you gain.

Most lenses have a aperture sweet spot and it isn't F2.8. Futhermore, why anyone calling themselves professional would buy an inferior drone like the zoom is beyond me. Your in the sky, fly closer to the subject. There is your zoom.

Sure i would have posted something if not intending to buy. I posted a lot in favor of the Skydio 2 without buying it. And if i buy the Air 2 and am disappointed by it, or a Skydio 3 comes along and blows it out of the water i won't try to justify my purchase. Indeed, i could end up not buying the Air 2 if evidence comes out that it has some serious problem people haven't yet noticed. I follow the evidence, not rationalize and justify after the fact.

Sure, if i was depending in a drone to make money my financial calculation would be different. I'd be seeing it as an investment rather than an expense. Even in that case it would be a close call between the Air 2 and the M2P, since the Air 2 is better in several ways. If they were identical except for the variable aperture feature and I were using the drone commercially, yes then the $800 difference would be worth it.

The Zoom, again not an investment but an expense since not using commercially, I wanted the Pro but budget was already maxed out, and yes, a pro photographer would often want to use a telephoto rather than move in closer, because of the flattened perspective. The choices that a zoom lens gives you for a drone are more important than the choices a variable aperture gives you for a drone. I guess using your arguing style I could say "What? You gave up control over focal length AND spent more money?" But yeah, would have gotten the Pro if not maxed out, because larger sensor, 10-bit log and variable aperture outweighed varable focal length.

Sweet spot, actually that's one advantage a fixed aperture lens offers over a variable, they can optimize the lens for that fixed aperture. Other things being equal a fixed aperture lens will be tend to be sharper than a variable set to that aperture, in much the same way that a prime lens will tend to be sharper than a zoom set at the same focal length and aperture. There are always tradeoffs. Stick with your Pro; I would if I had one.