DJI Mavic Discussion

Easy way to answer that: If you have ever found cell phone footage to be acceptable for your uses, then yes, the Mavic is worthy. If the answer is no, cell phone footage sux except to shoot Bigfoot and Nessie, then no, you will not like the Mavic. Get a Phantom 4 Pro instead.

It's funny because i actually sold a clip shot with my IPhone7 yesterday! (hangs head in shame) But yes i'm looking for better quality then that. Every system has it's limitations but I at least want usable footage from my £1000+ investment.

I wonder how much Mavic footage gets rejected? I mean just because it's aerial surely doesn't make it exempt from the usual quality guidelines.

I have had a Mavic for a few months. It is very stable and easy to fly. The camera is not very good, very grainy. If you have blue sky you will need to use something like Neat Video. If no sky and minimal shadows then it will work. The Mavic is great due to size and easy to put in your coat pocket. If you are not planning on a lot of travel or carrying it around the Phantom is by far a better camera. Yes you can get sales from a cell phone, but the quality is just not there for everyday use. If this is a hobby then a cell phone, GoPro or Mavic will do what you need.

Thanks for the advice, a toss up between portability and quality.... darn compromises!!

Just out of interest how does the P4P perform in regards to moire and aliasing? I notice the Mavic looks pretty terrible.

Just my 2 cents. IMHO - the best camera is the one you have with you. It's generally agreed that a Mavic doesn't take as good video as a P4P. My ole runnin' buddy Don shoots from a Mavic. I missed several clips that he has captured because I'm busy setting up my 3DR Solo. while he is already in the air with his Mavic. I'm not a bit embarrassed to admit that I have taken and sold several clips with a Galaxy S6. I readily admit that they aren't the quality of Don's 1DX M2 or even my GH4 but they were shot with what I had with me at the time and, danged, if they didn't sell. And, yeah, I have sold GoPro clips from my Solo too.

So, are you more likely to have a Mavic with you than a P4P - your call, not mine. And, are you more likely to get the Mavic airborne sooner when that fleeting opportunity arises. I guess the ideal solution is one of each.

Too true Dandeemann, in fact one thing I found the other day walking across muddy silty beach is that I could deploy the Mavic not only without breaking stride (yeah, did stop to actually launch) but I did so without having to set anything down. Not possible with the P4P.

There's no reason to be embarrassed or shamed to use any camera, and certainly none to scoff at sales .. in this case, the question was asking for subjective input regarding the quality of the camera.

Stopped_clock ... it's not so bad moire'/aliasing IF you:

-Get ND filters to keep your shutter speed proper (not as necessary with the P4P due to it having an iris and better lens/sensor - I have yet to see aliasing on that) Too fast shutter speed enhances the flicker, too.
-Use a flatter color profile (I use D-Cinelike at this point)
-be cognizant of the type of scene you are shooting and adjust the sharpness to suit. You won't be able to tell on the phone, so it's a matter of learning which kinds of scenes require more or less sharpen. Too much sharpen makes ugly, and flicker, too little makes ugly.

Chicks dig the Mavic. Photographers dig the P4P.

I find the Mavic to be cooler, funner, cuter than anything I've flown. I'm about to head out today ... and I'm taking both.

Also: Mavic can fly forward fast with little or no props in the shot. Phantom can't unless it's looking slightly down.

I think the fact the Mavic will be an addition to my bag not another bag to carry is the deal breaker, I already have an inordinate amount of gear to carry. The P4P will be a take or leave scenario especially when travelling.

Your right Mizamook the footage shot with ND filters looks a lot better. The polar pro cinematic ND filters in particular look decent.
I think the Mavic is the right choice for me being a complete drone novice, the limitations of the camera will hopefully make me better in the long run..hopefully! At which point an upgrade to a more capable system will feel justified.

Chicks dig it you say?..... Sold!

Thanks for all your advice much appreciated.

I accidentally had ordered the Polar Pro "regular" filter set, then, when I ordered the ND filter set for the P4P, they accidentally sent me the "Cinema Series ND's for the Mavic. While I have not done an actual test, one thing that struck me is that the diameter of the glass is larger on the Cinema series. Almost 2mm wider diameter, at least on the outside.

Is that a drone in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?

I've been using the Polar Pro Cinema 3 lens set for a couple months. It helps but it is also impossible to rotate the polarization after you take off unlike on a DLSR. Different sun angles will cause either good or a bad exposure and affects. My suggestion is don't use them unless it's very bright. Even the n8 causes the blue sky to darken at a different level. Yes they are needed ... sometimes but I think most people over use them. I see way over kill with the six lens set.

I have never had to do a re-calibration of anything with the Mavic. The lenses are small and light enough they do not cause any issues.

Yep, unless for specific shots/angle, polarizers on a sUAV are kinda nuts. Never tried it, actually, but had a use for them occasionally (trying to cut glare chasing underwater critters) but only when the thing is airborne, so that' s no use. Be pretty slick when they figure out how to create a rotating variable ND/polarizer.

Nanofilters?