Will the zoom Mavic do more harm than good?

[PeteS2017]

In a nutshell:

1. I can't see how a zoom lens can make for better aerial videos in most cases (but maybe that's just me).

2. More seriously, the biggest weapon we can use against charges of invading people's privacy, looking at kids, etc is the fact that the Mavic has a camera that cannot make people look much bigger than ants when it is flying at a reasonable height. A zoom lens will take that protection away from us.

 

[lmel2005]

Almost every camera out there (billions if we take into account the smartphones) have optical or digital zoom.

Should we ban every camera from earth?

By the way, professional drones, can have on them cameras with zoom lenses.

 

[PeteS2017]

Almost every camera out there (billions if we take into account the smartphones) have optical or digital zoom.

Should we ban every camera from earth?

By the way, professional drones, can have on them cameras with zoom lenses.

But it's drone pilots who are the targets of the malicious claims I mentioned, not ordinary photographers.

 

[Vilco]

In a nutshell:

1. I can't see how a zoom lens can make for better aerial videos in most cases (but maybe that's just me).

In regard to this question, the answer is "work": while filming the gutters of a house, as I did a couple of times with the Mavic (didn't know all the rules back then) and many times with the Spark (now I know the rules and took the Spark and brougth it to 300 grams and can fly almost anywhere), in order to have good detail in important spots one needs to zoom in or, if no zoom available, get closer and closer and risk to hit something, expecially when there's some wind and/or the metal in the roof is disturbing the compass. The zoom fo the Mavic is fantastic at that, I really miss it when I use the Spark

 

[gnirtS]

A 24-48 is a fairly useful zoom range generally.
I can see it being useful for getting images that dont need cropping whilst remaining far enough away from people to be (i) legal and (ii) not irritating them with the noise and proximity.
You'll also be able to get (slightly) compressed perspective type shots for a bit more drama.

But yes, i can see "evil zoom telescope pervert drone" being used by people who hate them. In reality 48mm isnt really "zoom". Once you start talking 400mm then its into that territory.

FWIW 43mm is roughly human eye field of view so fully zoomed in the image will be roughly what you'd see with the naked eye.

One issue i can see drone wise is the stability of the drone and gimbal will have to be a hell of a lot better than the mavic v1 or you're going to get quite a lot of movement in the shot from tiny fluctuations.

But it's drone pilots who are the targets of the malicious claims I mentioned, not ordinary photographers.

Photographers get it too. They ignore people with phones as "normal" but if you're in an area like a beach or even tourist attraction with a big DSLR and long white lens hanging off you do get people coming up to you with some abuse.
Yes the reality is its far easier to take a sneaky dodgy shot with a phone (and new phones like the pixel 2 or p20 have fantastic cameras) than standing there with a really obvious monster camera setup but people don't think of that.

That said, 1" sensor and a hasselblad interests me more than zooming in. I cant see the normal camera having the same dynamic range, image quality or anything else.

 

[lmel2005]

But it's drone pilots who are the targets of the malicious claims I mentioned, not ordinary photographers.

And maybe they will be targets, until drones become common pieces of technology, and ignorants understand what a "drone" is.

I don't think that everyone who screams about his "privacy", while been in common view, can detect a zoom lens, against a fixed focal one.

 

[gnirtS]

And maybe they will be targets, until drones become common pieces of technology, and ignorants understand what a "drone" is..

That and when a large section of drone operators stop flying them like spoilt 12 year old kids without a seconds thought to the disturbance or effect on others.
It works both ways.

 

[lmel2005]

That and when a large section of drone operators stop flying them like spoilt 12 year old kids without a seconds thought to the disturbance or effect on others.
It works both ways.

There are laws, for them who invade someone's bedroom with a camera, or drone, or their smartphone, or nothing in their hands.

Don't know if the majority of drone pilots fly the way you said, maybe you have reliable statistics, but I personally never was disturbed by a drone.
Instead, some times, someone suspicious or just curious, has approached me, asking about my flying machine. Many of them, after a short demonstration, understood how fun and/or useful is a drone, and wanted to instruct them how they can buy one.
Ignorance is the main problem.

 

[gnirtS]

Laws aren't everything. Just because you CAN do something legally doesn't always mean you should.

 

[PandaCheese]

Nothing against the OP but #2 to me shows how screwed up our society has become that even “looking at kids” is automatically viewed with suspicion.

 

[lmel2005]

Laws aren't everything. Just because you CAN do something legally doesn't always mean you should.

We CANNOT violate someone's privacy, or abuse someone's private data. In most organized communities.

People claiming about drones, don't know what a drone is, what it can do, and the fields of this technology.

 

[gnirtS]

You can fly perfectly legally and still irritate people in an area with the sight and in particular the noise of the thing. So yes its legal but doesn't mean you should do it.

 

[HVYMTL]

To stick to the Subject "Will the zoom Mavic do more harm than good?"
I myself try not to fly around people. That way I can't be accused of being a "peeping Drone'er". A zoom lens would be nice and allow me to get better closer shots of the wildlife without feeling like I'm molesting them..

 

[lmel2005]

You can fly perfectly legally and still irritate people in an area with the sight and in particular the noise of the thing. So yes its legal but doesn't mean you should do it.

Yes. And when I drive my car, I must stop every minute, and ask everybody around, if there is someone who gets crazy with the shape or the noise of the car. By the way, I have a dash cam in my car, maybe the driver in front of me, maybe thinks that I violate his privacy filming the highway.

Sorry, but disagree with the logic "there are people who dislike or hate technology ". Technology is part of human culture. We have to live with it.

If I fly legally, that means that none has the right to stop me from doing my hobby. If he does so, HE is illegal and his actions violate my freedom.

 

[gnirtS]

Its hardly disliking technology. Its disliking having a really annoying buzzing thing above your head for a period of time. The same as loud music, people with body odour and everything else. All legal but all can be anti social.

The "its legal so im going to do it and screw anyone else" attitude is selfish and in part responsible for the backlash against drones and the bans from lots of places in the first place.

So yes, a zoom can be useful for keeping the swarm of bees on steroids noise further away and irritate them less.

 

[lmel2005]

Its hardly disliking technology. Its disliking having a really annoying buzzing thing above your head for a period of time. The same as loud music, people with body odour and everything else. All legal but all can be anti social.

The "its legal so im going to do it and screw anyone else" attitude is selfish and in part responsible for the backlash against drones and the bans from lots of places in the first place.

So yes, a zoom can be useful for keeping the swarm of bees on steroids noise further away and irritate them less.

If authorities have banned drones from an area, because of their noise, it is illegal to fly there. So, this conversation is without subject.

And by the way, I dislike having an annoying motor noise from the road out of my house. Now I understand that all these people passing this road, have an antisocial attitude, and some day, because of this attitude, cars will be banned off my neighborhood. Great.

 

[FlyGuy8675309]

As pointed out above, the Mavic already has a 2x zoom, digital and in 720p, but it's there and works well. It's better than nothing.

My question is if the Mavic Zoom with have 2x optical AND 2x digital. THAT would be cool.

And no, not for "spying": There's a ton of uses: Roof and other types of inspections, wildlife observation, search & rescue, and yes, legitimate security tasks.

 

[dvarapala]

2x zoom is almost worthless - I don't know why they even bothered.

 

[aokusman]

2x zoom is almost worthless - I don't know why they even bothered.

I feel the same with my iPhone. Never use the zoom lens.

 

[Jack Daw]

I think you guys are missing something: if you're photographed by someone with a camera or a phone, and you can see it, then you know who the photographer is, and can use that information as you want. I think that part of what bothers people about being around drones isn't so much the camera, as such, as it is the fact that you usually can't tell who's operating it, or even where they are. Of course, this is true of superzooms, too -- but people generally don't know they're being shot with a superzoom. A drone has the double fact of visibility and anonymity, and I think *that*'s what gets people upset.

I'm not saying it's rational or fair, but I do understand it.