I love the season of flowering trees; sadly, in the northeast, the season only lasts maybe six weeks.
Ornamental flowering trees are commonly planted in many different spaces ranging from residential gardens to corporate office parks. One category that commonly hosts plantings of beautiful trees is cemeteries. While it may seem odd to some people, I’ve seen people of all sorts and ages strolling through cemeteries, even having a picnic. Last weekend, I visited a cemetery in Wakefield. Although the crabapple trees had all dropped their colorful petals, I counted more than two dozen dogwood trees in bloom.
From that short excursion, I wanted to share a comparison of two images of the same tree but photographed with wide-angle lens and a telephoto lens. There are a few reasons why you might choose to use one or the other. When in doubt, shoot them both.
The first reason you might choose a telephoto lens is because you can’t get close enough to your subject. I personally encountered that scenario a couple weeks ago, stopping to photograph cherry trees in bloom at a cemetery where the gates were locked. I photographed from outside the fence using a 100mm lens.
The second reason you might choose to use a telephoto lens is to control the background. The narrow field of view may enable you to exclude elements from the background. And a wide-angle lens can include more background, for more environmental context. In the two photos I’ve shared here, both the telephoto and the wide-angle image do show the environment context, but a telephoto also allowed me to exclude the tombstones entirely.
A third reason to choose either telephoto or wide-angle is depth perception. Wide-angle lenses commonly exaggerate distance; multiple subjects in the photograph appear to be farther apart, compared to using a longer/telephoto focal length. Conversely, telephoto lenses tend to compress distance, making multiple subjects (at different distances from the camera) appear closer together.
Lastly, when you have multiple subjects at very different distances, a telephoto lens combined with a small aperture may allow blurring the background – if that’s the effect you’re seeking to create. Both the images here employ an aperture about f\4.5.
With all digital cameras, my general practice is to capture RAW images instead of JPEG. Particularly when photographing with DJI Mavic 3 aerial drone, I not only capture RAW but additionally I frequently utilize exposure bracketing and HDR post-processing.
Portland Maine
The image shown here is the result of post-processing with Adobe Photoshop.
Having used the original DJI Mavic Pro, Mavic 2 pro, and Mavic 3, all have exhibited similar difficulty holding fine details in the highlights. This commonly occurs with architectural details under full sun; highlight details are easily lost. My solution is to use exposure bracketing and HDR post-processing; this means the original capture includes the best exposure, then two other exposures, one that is a bit brighter and one that is a bit darker. For the example, the photo here. I expected in advance that the highlights were at risk of getting lost; in retrospect, yes it was true.
The original three exposures are shown below. The best exposure is in the middle. As has been typical of Mavic 1,2, and 3, architectural details in white buildings have not been fully captured. The second problem is that the green trees are too dark. That second problem can be remedied in post-processing without much difficulty. However, if details in the highlights are blown out, recovering this can be difficult or impossible.
Initially, I perform basic adjustments in Adobe Lightroom and then open all three using “Open as layers in Photoshop”. That opens the three separate files as ProPhoto RGB (16-bit color depth) and with the adjustments made in Lightroom. Once opened in Photoshop, select all three layers and choose “Auto-align layers” in case the drone may have moved slightly between exposures. The best exposure I move to the bottom layer. From the other two exposures, I select specific parts of the image and these are overlayed over the bottom layer, effectively replacing problem areas.
Because the darkest exposure has retained all details in the highlights, I select the brightest areas from this exposure. Typically, this can be accomplished with either Photoshop’s built-in “Color range” selection. Once that selection is made, I often need to tweak it a bit, manually deselecting some areas that were selected but I don’t want those areas selected. Then feather the selection and convert it to a layer mask.
Using the brightest exposure, I similarly selected the green trees. That proved to be more difficult and I spent much time tweaking that selection. This selection is also converted to a layer mask. This replaces the overly dark trees in the base layer with a brighter version. Of course, you might use tools such as brightness or tone curve to lighten the trees in the base image, but the underexposed trees are more prone to luminance noise. Leveraging the brighter exposed trees does not suffer from noise, but is a bit more work to achieve.
There are alternative methods. I sometimes use Raya Pro by Jimmy McIntyre.
The final image is a composite assembled from three separate exposures of the same scene. I save this layered file as TIFF, but you can also save it as PSD (Photoshop format). I may merge all layers and export a JPEG file, but I keep the layered file. Commonly, I do return to this file and make further adjustments. For example, I may decide later that one or more of the exposures has noticeable noise or is not sufficiently sharp. The layered file allows me to make adjustments to the individual exposures.
Every year, I see some images shared online that viewers believe to be real but are digital creations that are not real. In many cases, the digital artist wasn’t trying to fool anyone but the image is shared without stating that it is digital art.
A friend showed me a “photo” that impressed him … reported to be a blue whale passing under a cable-stay bridge. As the length of the whale was similar to the length of the bridge, I did not believe it and suggested this was not a real photo. My friend seemed offended and asked “why would you question this photo?” Even the largest whale on earth simply isn’t that big. Later looking up details online, an adult blue whale may grow to a length of 100 feet. The bridge in the photo is the Samuel De Champlain Bridge and the section of the bridge in the image amounts to a length of approximately 1800 feet.
On several occasions, friends have share photos online of a bright red owl, sometimes identified as a Madagascar Red Owl. Commonly people believe they are sharing a real “photo” and are stunned by the beauty of the bird. The immediate problem is that owls are birds of prey and will not be highly visible to their prey; an owl should blend into its environment. To this point, at least seven years ago, I modified one of my own images and declared it to be an Aquitane Owl with blatant caption explaining that the coloring isn’t real and should never be misrepresented as real.
Some tropical birds are brightly colored; as a general rule, owls are not.
I have seen a few images that raised doubts, but a little research told me that the colors are not untrue, but perhaps digitally amplified. For example a black leopard with distinctive spots (not entirely black). And then there is a brown zorse (zebra horse) – apparently completely real.
Although the Mavic 3 includes some groundbreaking new features, many reviewers will render their opinions about such things and I will not do so here. I am only analyzing the photo quality from Mavic 3 with comparison to the predecessor Mavic 2 Pro.
Mavic 3 includes two cameras. I am comparing the main camera to the camera of Mavic 2 Pro. The Mavic 3 main camera has a fixed-focal-length lens, 4/3 image sensor, and variable aperture.
The Mavic 3 supports capturing photos in either JPEG format or JPEG & RAW. While I almost always capture photos in RAW format and I do not need a JPEG, the initial release of MAVIC 3 will always save a JPEG. That could possibly change in a future firmware update.
See the end of this post for a link to my 2018 comparison of Mavic 2 Pro image quality, compared to original Mavic Pro.
Testing the Mavic 3 at sunset … f\3.2, ISO 100
The main camera of Mavic 3 uses a 4/3 image sensor; this has implications.
The image rectangle has an aspect ratio of 4:3, which is same as Mavic 2 Zoom but is different than Mavic 2 Pro and Mavic Air. For me personally, this implies that I must crop each image and discard some pixels to obtain a final image of 3:2 aspect ratio.
Four-thirds and Micro Four Thirds (MFT) are established standards. The diagonal measure of a 4/3 sensor can vary but is typically around 22mm. Compare this to Mavic 2 Pro and Mavic Air 2S, which each have image sensors with diagonal measure around 16 mm.
A larger sensor can allow for either more pixels or larger pixels. The Mavic 3 pixel resolution is not significantly different than Mavic 2 Pro. Likely the individual dot elements (pixels) are larger. Potentially that might translate to better ability to gather light, potentially reducing the signal-to-noise ratio. But that is theoretical. As the old saying goes, the proof is in the pudding.
Some online articles suggest that the larger image sensor “gives Mavic 3 higher resolution and dynamic range” but …. higher resolution is a dubious claim and higher dynamic range is theoretical.
DJI drones have historically employed Sony Exmore image sensors; DJI/Hasselblad cameras are no exception. I must guess that the Mavic 3 is using the Sony IMX472-AAJK, but I have not confirmed this. That sensor can capture all 20 megapixels at 120 frames-per-second. Notably, this sensor uses “stacked CMOS” technology and is the first ever stacked CMOS sensor in the 4/3 size. This sensor diagonally measures 21.77 mm.
The Mavic 3 user guide (available online) includes this disturbing note: “Before shooting important photos or videos, shoot a few images to test the camera is operating correctly.” I shudder to imagine what might have happened during initial product testing to warrant such a warning.
Pixel Resolution
If you want a final image to have3:2 aspect ratio, then any 3:4 image must be cropped and that includes Mavic 3. Technically, you end up with fewer pixels than Mavic 2 Pro and Mavic Air 2S.
Mavic Air 2S @ 3:2 aspect ……………… 5472×3648 = 19.9 million pixels Mavic 2 @ 3:2 aspect ……………………… 5464×3640 = 19.88 million pixels Mavic 2 @ 4:3 aspect (crop from 3:2)… 4852×3640 Mavic 2 @ 16:9 aspect (crop)…………… 5464×3070 Mavic 3 @ 4:3 aspect …………………….. 5280×3956 = 20.88 million pixels Mavic 3 @ 3:2 aspect (crop from 4:3)… 5280×3520 = 18.58 million pixels Mavic 3 @ 16:9 aspect (crop)…………….. 5280×2970
Color
Opening RAW images in Adobe lightroom, the color is a bit green. That’s correctable but really annoying; I’m guessing this problem is because Lightroom/Photoshop/CameraRAW do not yet include a camera profile for Mavic 3 (Hasselblad L2D-20c).
Looking at the JPEGs, the color looks good – not vibrant, but good.
Sharpness
Comparing images from Mavic 3 and Mavic 2 Pro, at aperture f\3.5 and f\4.0, the two are equally sharp at center of the lens. However, away from center, toward the edges of the image, Mavic 3 exhibits improved sharpness over Mavic 2 Pro.
High-magnification crop from the original RAW image
Image noise
Considering all ISO 100 through 3200, Mavic 3 shows less luminance noise than Mavic 2 Pro. However, at any ISO, low light situations can result in considerable chroma noise in both shadows and midtones. It is worst at IS0 800, 1600, 3200. While it can usually be mitigated using noise-reduction in post-processing, the 4/3 image sensor should not exhibit this problem.
As the camera saves both RAW and JPEG, I looked at the JPEGs. Luminance noise is reasonably mitigated through ISO 1600; mitigation can be dicey at 3200. Chroma noise is essentially eliminated. However, not surprising, this noise reduction comes at a price – loss of sharpness.
Luminance noise in shadows … ISO 400, daylight with ND4 filter … N0te: ambient light and altitude are not identicalMavic 3 … chroma noise in low light … ISO 1600
Chromatic aberration
In some situations with high-contrast fine detail, Mavic 3 can suffer from chromatic aberration similar to the first-generation Mavic Pro. Although Mavic 2 Pro significantly reduced chromatic aberration, Mavic 3 is a step backward. This is observed with the clear DJI lens cover; I haven’t tried it yet with the naked lens.
Mavic 3 (RAW image) shows improved sharpness, but also shows chromatic aberration in railing balusters
Shadow detail
Considering detail in the darkest shadow areas, Mavic 3 has a slight advantage to reveal details that Mavic 2 Pro cannot. The difference is quite small.
DJI has stated that the Mavic 3 main camera has 12.8 stops of dynamic range, which is not significantly greater than Mavic Air 2S or Mavic 2 Pro.
Highlight detail
Both the original Mavic Pro and the successor Mavic 2 Pro often failed to resolve subtle detail in highlights. This commonly manifests in architectural details that are white,such as clapboard siding and trim mouldings. Mavic 3 does shows a slight improvement.
Images captured with Mavic 2 Pro – particularly images that include architecture – have commonly required a great deal of effort to safeguard highlight details. At the time of capture, exposure bracketing saves an additional exposure wherein the highlights are rendered with reduced brightness. In post-processing, that exposure is developed carefully and specifically for hightlight details. Then those highlights are manually blended into the other exposure. Only time will tell if Mavic 3 eliminates the need for that extra work.
Remote control
Apart from the camera itself, I must mention the remote control. With the Mavic 2 Pro, I have very commonly used the camera control dial under the right index finger. With Mavic 3, the RC-N1 remote controller has no such control dial; exposure settings can only be controlled via touch-screen. The expensive RC Pro controller includes a dial for right index finger, which I vaguely believe controls camera zoom and I do not know if it can be used for exposure purposes. I did not spend the extra $1000 to get an RC Pro.
Mavic 3 … , daylight with ND4 filter, f\4.0, ISO 400
Here is my investigation of the Mavic 2 Pro, back when that was released in 2018:
On multiple occasions, my intended drone flight was defeated because my DJI drone refused to spin-up the propellers. Although the flight is authorized by the FAA, the drone refuses to launch. With proper planning, this problem is avoidable.
DJI drones include a safety feature known as Geofencing, which is intended to prevent flying in areas that are could be unsafe, particularly near airports. There are different systems of understanding the airspace and the DJI system is entirely different that the system employed by the FAA.
Local airport facility grid
Anywhere around controlled airspace, maximum flight altitude is determined a grid layered across a map; each grid-square indicates maximum altitude. As this is local to the facility/airport, it is commonly referred to as the facility grid.
A flight plan that does not exceed the stated maximum altitude can often be approved in seconds by a computer, without need for review by a person. This is made possible by a computerize system called LAANC (low altitude authorization). Submit your flight plan via a mobile app that supports LAANC. If you succeed in receiving authorization, you may need to export that information and then submit it to DJI to unlock your drone.
For years, I used a LAANC-enabled app called AirMap. Recently, that failed (and I found some rumors online why that might be true). Ultimately, I was forced to switch to a different LAANC-enabled app and I now use Aloft (https://www.aloft.ai/), formerly known as Kittyhawk.
If your drone is locked and will not launch, flight authorization from the FAA – by itself – does not unlock a DJI drone.
DJI Geofencing
Based upon the current GPS location, the drone automatically is aware of local flight restrictions. Potentially, it can refuse to take off. In some cases you may be able to unlock it from your flight controller; this is called self-unlocking. In other cases, self-unlocking is not allowed and you must request unlocking DJI Fly Safe (https://www.dji.com/flysafe). FAA flight authorization is a prerequisite.
In advance of your flight, always check the DJI Fly-Safe geofencing map. If you’re flight is either fully or partly in a blue zone or red zone, you will need to manually unlock the drone. DJI GEO system shows approach paths to airport runways and it is these areas that are likely to be considered no-fly zones. DJI did not invent this system; it is based upon LATAS (Low Altitude Traffic and Airspace Safety), which I have read was pioneered by PrecisionHawk.
Do not wait until you arrive at your launch location before checking that your drone will be able to launch. Research in advance: weather, FAA controlled-airspace restrictions, NOTAMs, and DJI GEO restrictions.
In specific geographic locations, your drone controller may display “NFZ”, which means “No-fly Zone”. When locked due to a NFZ, the drone can only be unlocked via the DJI Flysafe website; it cannot be unlocked via self-unlocking.
(I remember a conversation with a police officer in Boston when he asked to check my flight authorization. When I told him the drone would not launch in a specific location, he suggested that the pilot can simply unlock it and I told him that is not always true. Clearly this guy does not have personal experience flying DJI drones within the class-B airspace of Boston Logan airport.)
On mobile devices (e.g. smartphone), the Fly-Safe website reports that unlocking is not supported on the mobile website. The solution is to use a full-screen computer. Do this at home before you drive off to your launch site.
For custom unlocking via the DJI Flysafe web page, you probably need a computer.
Upon submitting your request, two things happen. You will receive an email that states “Unlock application is created.” The web site shows you that the request is “Pending review.”
If all goes well, two things will happen. You will receive a subsequent email within less than 10 minutes stating “Unlock application is accepted.” The website shows you that the request is “Accepted.”
Your login username must match: Flysafe web site & the mobile app.
Import the unlock certificate to the aircraft
What happens next is not entirely obvious and requires a bit of care. You launch the app for piloting (e.g. DJI Go 4 or DJI Fly) and find the menu item “Unlocking License” (DJI Go 4 app) or “Unlock GEO Zone” (DJI Fly app). The app retrieves any unlocking authorizations via the Internet. This requires two things. You must be connected to Internet data (e.g. Wi-Fi or cellular data network). Whenever you launch the app, you must be logged-in and the username must match the username that you used when requesting the unlock. (I have once stumbled because I had inadvertently used a different login, the unlocking license could not be found, and my intended flight did not happen until after I solved the mystery.)
If all goes well, your unlocking authorization will be listed. You’re not quite done yet; there are two more steps to unlock the drone. Though the license is recognized by the remote controls, the license must be copied to the drone. Look for “Import to Aircraft”. Do that and the app will then show that the drone has the license and it appears with a on-screen enable/disable switch. As the default is “disabled”, you must slide it to “enable” before the drone will finally unlock the NFZ. The display on remote controller will change from “NFZ” to “Ready”.
NOTAMs (Notice to AirMen)
Mobile apps that support LAANC will show you both the boundaries of controlled airspace (class-B, class-C, class-D, class-E ground level) and all local facility grids. However, most of these apps do not show active NOTAMs. To see active NOTAMs, simply look at Skyvector.com. Active NOTAMs appear as red circles.
In addition to visiting Gloucester this weekend, I also ported all my photography and tools to a new computer. As I imported new images from a camera drone, I took the new computer on a test drive to verify that my tools were all in good order.
This scene had both very bright highlights and very dark shadows; I doubted that a single exposure could contain both the highlights and shadows. As you likely know, such situations are known as high dynamic range (HDR). I captured a bracket of three exposures. In retrospect, it was a wise choice. The middle exposure was spot on, however the foreground was nearly black and some background highlights were blown out – white boats and white buildings. The darker exposure provided correction for the blown-out highlights. The lightest exposure was used to replace the black foreground water with dark-blue water.
Initially, I processed each of the three in Lightroom and then combined them together using Photoshop. From Lightroom, open the three images using “Edit In” -> “Open As Layers In Photoshop”. Once opened in Photoshop, select all three layers and choose “Edit” -> “Auto-Align layers”. Here, there are six Projection options; I chose “Reposition” because the three images were identical composition that varied only by exposure.
A selection of the highlights was applied as a layer mask on the darkest layer, such that only the highlights are used from that layer. A selection of the foreground dark water was applied as a layer mask to the brightest layer such that the foreground is lightened. The resulting image is shown here on the right.
From there, I applied three image filters by Alien Skin. First was Bokeh, to blur the image – except for the schooner. Then I used two different variations of Snap-Art. All this was done through Photoshop. Upon saving all of this (TIFF file), I was back in Lightroom. Judicious use of brightness, clarity, and color saturation enhanced the simulated brush strokes. The end result is shown here on the left.
For some folks, the annual blooms of flowering trees are highly treasured. While other trees – magnolias, crabapple, etc – are spectacular, ornamental cherry trees are commonly deemed to be the pinnacle of flowering trees. In Japan, the word Hanami means the viewing enjoyment of flowers (hana), but specifically the blossoms of cherry trees.
In Tokyo Japan, the reported peak blooming occurred around March 22. In Washington D.C., it was March 28 this year. But here in the northeast USA, the blooming is just starting.
Here are a few samples from Boston this past weekend. The first photo is of a Saucer Magnolia in full bloom. The squirrel sits upon a Yoshino Cherry tree that has not yet bloomed at all. The close-ups are both Sargeant Cherry as it was just beginning to bloom.
Mid-October 2018, I photographed Wakefield Massachusetts using an aerial drone. As the autumn colors were not well developed yet, I returned a week later to make the same photo again. That’s the first photo here, October 23, 2018.
Some renovation work was in progress that day. You can see scaffolding against the steeple and one of the tall windows is laying on the grass.
In the evening later that day, a lightning storm passed through the area and this presumably sparked the fire that destroyed the First Baptist Church. The next day, I again put the drone in the air to photograph the aftermath of the fire.
Today is the one-year anniversary of that fire, so I returned to again make the same photograph, but without the church.
Rumney Marsh photographed with an aerial drone (sUAS)
I first visited Rumney Marsh in the month of May. Although I discovered some great photo compositions, the marsh was mostly brown. Presuming that the grasses would fully transform the landscape into a greener palate, I vaguely planned to return some weeks later. Shown here below is my first image from the May visit:
Rumney Marsh in the month of May
.
This year, spring in New England has featured more rain than normal. Dry days are a bit like currency – have to spend them judiciously. Five or six weeks later I returned to the marsh on a dry day and found the green grasses covered the land, as expected. Unexpectedly, coastal clouds were lingering and the water reflected white sky (not blue sky).
Rumney Marsh (June) under cloudy skies
While that is a nice image, … I had imagined the water reflecting a blue sky. So, I returned later that same day after the clouds cleared away. That final image is shown at the top of this article.
In all three instances, the image required post-processing for HDR, particularly because the buildings on the horizon were too bright. So each of these three instances is a combination of multiple exposures, simply to control the dynamic range of light.
The day of the new Mavic 2 release one week ago, numerous sites and YouTube channels already had reviews prepared. DJI had judiciously provided new Mavic 2 drones to people who would do these reviews. I have no intention of rehashing that stuff. I am interested specifically in the camera performance. Because I am largely interested in image quality, we’re talking about the Mavic 2 Pro, not the Mavic 2 Zoom. As for video quality, we’ll have to leave that for another day.
For high-quality images, DJI now provides this choice: Phantom 4 Pro, Mavic 2 Pro, Inspire 2 with Zenmuse X5s, Inspire 2 with Zenmuse X7. The unique value proposition of any Mavic is that it folds down to a size that can fit in a camera bag. A Mavic drone and remote controller requires physical space similar to a DSLR camera body and a zoom lens.
For photographers, is the upgrade worth it, from Mavic Pro to Mavic 2 Pro?
Yes, after brief testing this morning, there is no doubt in my mind.
With the advent of Mavic 2 Pro, the camera difference between Mavic and Phantom has been erased. Both the variable aperture (f/2.8 to f/11) and the sensor resolution (5472×3648) are on par with the pre-existing Phantom 4 Pro and superior to the original Mavic Pro. Note that this is a 2:3 aspect ratio compared to a 3:4 aspect ratio of Mavic Pro, Mavic 2 Zoom, and Zenmuse X5s.
Note that camera is new and not exactly the same as P4P. DJI bought a majority stake in Hasselblad a couple years ago and this apparently is the first fruits of that partnership. (Yes, DJI essentially owns the legendary Hasselblad company.)
According to the numbers, the angle of view is a bit different, though I did not notice during actual use. Mavic 2 Pro provides a FOV equivalent to 28mm lens on a full-frame camera. This is narrower than the original Mavic Pro’s equivalent 26mm and narrower than the Phantom 4 Pro’s equivalent 24mm. Despite being less wide angle, vertical lines can still keystone strongly and you may choose to correct for that in post processing.
Here are the problems with Mavic Pro that I hope are improved with Mavic 2 Pro.
Dynamic range in the Mavic Pro was not very good. In high-contrast scenes, highlights can easily blow out and/or the shadows block up. To mitigate this, I have sometimes captured multiple RAW exposures and then post-processed for HDR.
Using RAW capture, if the highlights do not blow out entirely, the camera still fails to resolve details in the highlights. For example, houses with clapboard siding in full sun – the separation of the clapboards may be entirely absent in the image. This seems surprising to me … if the story is true that the RGB color space has finer granularity in the highlight range compared to the shadow range.
Image noise, particularly in shadows. To mitigate this, I have relied upon heavy-handed post-processing. While noise reduction in Adobe Lightroom is very good, there is a price to pay – higher levels of noise reduction can deteriorate details throughout the brightness range.
With high magnification, images lack sharpness. In post-processing, I have found it necessary to apply twice as much sharpening compared to my hand-held cameras.
Color from RAW images is typically worse than any other camera I have used (except perhaps GoPro Hero3) and the images require heavy-handed post-processing. Of course, RAW images from any camera will always require some degree of post-processing.
Blue/red chromatic aberrations. I commonly see this around white baluster railings. Lightroom’s ability to mitigate chromatic aberration typically fails to resolve the problem.
In summary, the Mavic 2 Pro does achieve small improvements in all of these problem areas. So let’s look at some actual images from the new Mavic 2 Pro compared to the original Mavic Pro.
Harbor photographed with both drones
In high-contrast situations such as this scene with white boats and white houses, Mavic 2 Pro still has difficulty retaining detail in the highlights, but is not so bad that it requires HDR techniques to overcome it. It is still necessary to reduce the exposure by 1/3 stop to protect the highlights (this does not jeopardize shadow details) and also apply highlight reduction in post-processing.
[Click on an image to see the full resolution.]
[Images shown here are all RAW and individually post-processed to the very best of my ability using Adobe Lightroom.]
Detail in highlight areas
Image sharpness
Noise reduction is still necessary but far less than with the original Mavic Pro.
Color of RAW images is much better, requires less correction.
Here’s an example (not a particularly good one) that shows Mavic Pro was unable to resolve the balusters and suffered chromatic aberration. Mavic 2 Pro did not exhibit either of these problems.
Click on the image to see larger version
Finally, a few notes that do not regard image capture.
If you’ve ever fumbled with the gimbal clamp on the original Mavic Pro, or worse yet have forgotten to remove the clamp before powering on the drone, rest assured that the new Mavic 2 Pro does provide an improvement. The gimbal clamp is integrated into the protective dome cover – remove the dome necessarily removes the gimbal clamp. See the photo below showing both the Mavic Pro and the Mavic 2 Pro.
Gimbal clamp
Unlike the original Mavic Pro, the Mavic 2 includes 8GB on-board memory in addition to a micro SD slot. To access this memory from another device, connect a USB cable (included) to the Mavic 2 USB-C port and turn on power to the Mavic 2. (Remember to remove the gimbal clamp before turning on the Mavic.) After having inserted a micro SD card, the DJI GO app prompted whether to use that instead of the on-board memory. I am assuming that we must select one or the other and automatic switch-over is not supported, but I don’t know that for certain.
The transmission system between the drone and the controller is theoretically the most robust of any DJI product to date. Mavic 2 utilized second generation Occusync 2.0, while the Phantom line has yet to adopt the Occusync transmission system. Although Occusync 2.0 reportedly can operate at distances up to five miles, I personally have no need of that. Increased robustness of the signal is welcome, as I have seen unexplainable video signal loss when using the original Mavic Pro.
