Will the zoom Mavic do more harm than good?

[FlyGuy8675309]

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.

People should be much more concerned about the cameras and drones they CAN'T see....

 

[Simmo]

The Pro already has a 'crop' 2x zoom, so the 2x optical zoom is no better apart from 'seamless' in its movement.

 

[lmel2005]

Optical zoom, is far better than digital, in picture quality terms.
Photographers and professionals will welcome it, I think.
IF there is a zoom lens, because we are talking about a supposed drone, and it's supposed capabilities.

 

[Vilco]

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.

My same question: will the 2x opti be in addition to the 2x digital? And in the Mavic Pro 1 it's available also in 1080p and 2.7K, limited but available IIRC, just not available in 4K. And it's useful just for the things you list

 

[Vilco]

The Pro already has a 'crop' 2x zoom, so the 2x optical zoom is no better apart from 'seamless' in its movement.

If it's in addition to the crop zoom, then the 2x opti would be MUCH better, giving a 4x total zooming ability. And the fact that a zoom lens can zoom smoothly is itself important as hell: try showing someone a clip where you zoom in by making 5 "clicks" as the MP: it sucks royally! In post I have always removed the parts where I'm zooming in or out just for that

 

[Thwyllo]

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

Then you have to ask yourself how robust these rules are. It's ridiculous to have a rule, for example, that specifically says that a camera equipped drone can't go within say 150m of a house or a person when no such rule exists for stills photography. I'd love to see that being defended in court when the time comes.

 

[Thwyllo]

My same question: will the 2x opti be in addition to the 2x digital? And in the Mavic Pro 1 it's available also in 1080p and 2.7K, limited but available IIRC, just not available in 4K. And it's useful just for the things you list

So my assumption would be that it's a bit of a cod like the Anafi. In other words they are only freeing up the whole sensor in zoom mode, so it's not a true optical zoom. Saves on production costs as they use the same sensor in both versions of the M2.

 

[Congoblue]

It's ridiculous to have a rule, for example, that specifically says that a camera equipped drone can't go within say 150m of a house or a person when no such rule exists for stills photography. I'd love to see that being defended in court when the time comes.

That is nothing to do with the camera or privacy though, it is a safety rule because it's classed as an aircraft. The same rule applies to a non-camera drone.

 

[Drone on]

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.

Possibly, but then there's this
ATTN YUMA AZ! Missing Person, Help needed!

 

[RaidPW]

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.

That's an incredibly naive viewpoint. That attitude is almost as dangerous to hobbies like this as people flying irresponsibly. You know what the other person has the "freedom" to do? Write to their representative in government and offer their entirely biased viewpoint. The representative then makes up their own mind, and because drone flying is an extremely niche hobby, they act on it with a minimum of public consultation, because there's no political fallout for doing so. Suddenly your being in the right has caused what is right to shift, and now you're in the wrong.

Just use common sense and don't be so belligerent about it. Be reasonable if someone asks you to stop flying near them, regardless of whether you're legally allowed to or not.

 

[Thwyllo]

That is nothing to do with the camera or privacy though, it is a safety rule because it's classed as an aircraft. The same rule applies to a non-camera drone.

I underlined the words deliberately.

Several sources include statements like: "Camera equipped drones should be flown at least a 50m distance away from a person, building or vehicle that is not owned by the pilot.".. or.. "Drones that are fitted with a camera should remain at least 150m away from congested areas or areas that have large groups of people."

Such statements are superfluous and legally contentious.

 

[gnirtS]

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

Because 24-48mm is a really useful focal length to work with. Thats why they did it.

 

[gnirtS]

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

Rubbish. They can be perfectly legal to fly and still annoy people. If there are no or few people around there's no problem. If you're doing it when its full there are more people who will get annoyed.
I cant work out the selfish attitude of "screw everyone else, im doing whatever the hell i want". You'd happily sit on a beach or a nice quiet hillside and be quite happy if someone came from nowhere, sat 20m away and put on loud music? Or started randomly shouting loudly to people?
Anti-social doesn't have to break any law. People need to play nice and remember other people also have a point. Ultimately if the things become more annoying to more and more people then more places are going to outright ban them.

And by the way, I dislike having an annoying motor noise from the road out of my house.

Great. I assume the road was built before the house so you knew EXACTLY what was there and signed up to it. Also, does the road serve a useful purpose and for multiple people? Yes.
Was the drone buzzing around annoyingly clearly sign posted before a bystander signed up to go for a walk? No.
Does the drone serve any useful purpose what-so-ever to the population at large? No. Its the same as someone turning up, sitting next to you with a boombox and pressing play. Unwanted and irritating.

And that's the difference, something that has a clear benefit to a person or better yet, multiple persons or forms an essential purpose vs an RC toy that has no useful purpose in a recreational setting other than the individuals "happiness".

Id argue its exactly your attitude of "screw the rest of you, its my right to be annoying" is exactly why a lot of people hate drones and why lots of parks and areas DO ban them. Because people cant seem to act like civilised human beings and actually consider the effect on others. Its almost like you're going out there to deliberately annoy them because you can.

A large part of the drone community does seem to have an attitude of a spoilt 10 year old child regarding usage and thats a big problem. Its simply not "grown up" enough to realise they need to play nice with people who have an opposite viewpoint and compromise.

 

[dvarapala]

Because 24-48mm is a really useful focal length to work with. Thats why they did it.

Well, as long as they fix the noise/compression artifacts in the captured video I won't complain about the zoom lens.

 

[RaidPW]

Because 24-48mm is a really useful focal length to work with. Thats why they did it.

I need convincing on that point. It's absolutely a useful range on the ground, but from the air? What's the use case here? Don't get me wrong it's going to be better than nothing (and infinitely better than digital zoom of the same range), but you're not going to be able to fill the frame with your subject - I don't think it's going to lead to dramatically more satisfying images.

 

[lmel2005]

That's an incredibly naive viewpoint. That attitude is almost as dangerous to hobbies like this as people flying irresponsibly. You know what the other person has the "freedom" to do? Write to their representative in government and offer their entirely biased viewpoint. The representative then makes up their own mind, and because drone flying is an extremely niche hobby, they act on it with a minimum of public consultation, because there's no political fallout for doing so. Suddenly your being in the right has caused what is right to shift, and now you're in the wrong.

Just use common sense and don't be so belligerent about it. Be reasonable if someone asks you to stop flying near them, regardless of whether you're legally allowed to or not.

Ok. I will be nice to all non logical statements, and I will never try to explain that my drone is not a devil's machine, capable to see through walls, and leave away running, even if I am legally and peacefully doing my hobby.

I will ban myself, because you are afraid been banned. Logical.
Tell me the difference, if I ban myself, or all this conspiracy story you said, just become true.

 

[lmel2005]

Rubbish. They can be perfectly legal to fly and still annoy people. If there are no or few people around there's no problem. If you're doing it when its full there are more people who will get annoyed.
I cant work out the selfish attitude of "screw everyone else, im doing whatever the **** i want". You'd happily sit on a beach or a nice quiet hillside and be quite happy if someone came from nowhere, sat 20m away and put on loud music? Or started randomly shouting loudly to people?
Anti-social doesn't have to break any law. People need to play nice and remember other people also have a point. Ultimately if the things become more annoying to more and more people then more places are going to outright ban them.



Great. I assume the road was built before the house so you knew EXACTLY what was there and signed up to it. Also, does the road serve a useful purpose and for multiple people? Yes.
Was the drone buzzing around annoyingly clearly sign posted before a bystander signed up to go for a walk? No.
Does the drone serve any useful purpose what-so-ever to the population at large? No. Its the same as someone turning up, sitting next to you with a boombox and pressing play. Unwanted and irritating.

And that's the difference, something that has a clear benefit to a person or better yet, multiple persons or forms an essential purpose vs an RC toy that has no useful purpose in a recreational setting other than the individuals "happiness".

Id argue its exactly your attitude of "screw the rest of you, its my right to be annoying" is exactly why a lot of people hate drones and why lots of parks and areas DO ban them. Because people cant seem to act like civilised human beings and actually consider the effect on others. Its almost like you're going out there to deliberately annoy them because you can.

A large part of the drone community does seem to have an attitude of a spoilt 10 year old child regarding usage and thats a big problem. Its simply not "grown up" enough to realise they need to play nice with people who have an opposite viewpoint and compromise.

First of all, who said about a "screw you, I will do what I want". Not me.

I just say, I will do my hobby, where it is allowed. Period. Not "screw you" screams, not "I don't care about others", and all these nonsense.

As a community member, I must be legal, but I have rights too. And everyone else, has rights too.

I will not fly to bother others. But none can violate my rights, because you are afraid, and call your fear "nice attitude".

If you want to ban yourself from an area, because you are afraid that you will be banned, do so. I think that THIS attitude will ban us all from everywhere.

**By the way, the road outside my home, was made AFTER my house, and the majority of the drivers on THAT road, go for a ride to a site. And I have accepted the necessity of the road, you don't. You accept the attitude "you are making noise! Get out!".

 

[RaidPW]

Ok. I will be nice to all non logical statements, and I will never try to explain that my drone is not a devil's machine, capable to see through walls, and leave away running, even if I am legally and peacefully doing my hobby.

I will ban myself, because you are afraid been banned. Logical.
Tell me the difference, if I ban myself, or all this conspiracy story you said, just become true.

Do you understand what "Be reasonable" means? It doesn't mean capitulate to every single complaint without question. If the law says stay 50m from people and someone complains, don't just state that you're legally allowed to fly there, just pull back to 75m or something. You can appease someone without completely stopping what you're doing.

 

[lmel2005]

Do you understand what "Be reasonable" means? It doesn't mean capitulate to every single complaint without question. If the law says stay 50m from people and someone complains, don't just state that you're legally allowed to fly there, just pull back to 75m or something. You can appease someone without completely stopping what you're doing.

I agree. And if you can hear your drone, just fly a little higher, and the noise will disappear. I never hear my drones while flying, only during takeoff and landing.

But your conspiracy story is not reasonable.

We're talking about zoom lenses on drones, and if they are about to kill our hobby.
I don't believe it. If you think the opposite, it's your opinion.

 

[RaidPW]

But your conspiracy story is not reasonable.

We're talking about zoom lenses on drones, and if they are about to kill our hobby.
I don't believe it. If you think the opposite, it's your opinion.

Yes, it's my opinion, but I'd say it's a realistic, if truncated expectation of modern democracy, at least in my experience.