Geebax Posted at 1-6 13:15
There is no "should have". DJI did not offer these other features in the advertising for the Mini, they did not make any promise to add them later. The specs for the Mini were advertised on their web site, so you look at the information, you make your choice, and that's that. You act as if you have some God-given right to expect more features to be added to the aircraft via updates - you don't.

This argument and way of thinking is a thing of the past.  First let me be clear.  I am someone that does my research and and fully understands what it is I'm purchasing.  I fully understand that there are no promises that there will be any new features added to this MM drone.  But, in this day and age where everything is becoming more "smart", connected and receiving updates multiple times throughout it's life-cycle, the consumer is going to move towards products and companies that consistently show that they will update and add features that were not marketed or advertised during the initial time of purchase.  It will/is becoming the norm to get updates that not only fix issues, but also add features to the connected items that are available.

As far as AT goes, there's nothing about the drone that limits it's ability to do that.  I actually think in time they will add a somewhat limited version of the AT feature to the MM.  And if they don't, that's fine too.  I knew what I was buying.

Jestered Posted at 1-6 13:40
This argument and way of thinking is a thing of the past.  First let me be clear.  I am someone that does my research and and fully understands what it is I'm purchasing.  I fully understand that there are no promises that there will be any new features added to this MM drone.  But, in this day and age where everything is becoming more "smart", connected and receiving updates multiple times throughout it's life-cycle, the consumer is going to move towards products and companies that consistently show that they will update and add features that were not marketed or advertised during the initial time of purchase.  It will/is becoming the norm to get updates that not only fix issues, but also add features to the connected items that are available.

As far as AT goes, there's nothing about the drone that limits it's ability to do that.  I actually think in time they will add a somewhat limited version of the AT feature to the MM.  And if they don't, that's fine too.  I knew what I was buying.

"This argument and way of thinking is a thing of the past."

But of course you would think that way. How convenient for you.

"As far as AT goes, there's nothing about the drone that limits it's ability to do that."

You know that for certain do you? You know execlty what model image processor is in the aircraft and can authoritavely state from expert knowledge that it is capable of being upgraded?

Geebax Posted at 1-6 13:15
" should have been available on the Mini from the launch."

There is no "should have". DJI did not offer these other features in the advertising for the Mini, they did not make any promise to add them later. The specs for the Mini were advertised on their web site, so you look at the information, you make your choice, and that's that. You act as if you have some God-given right to expect more features to be added to the aircraft via updates - you don't.

NO. It SHOULD HAVE BEEN there from the launch, because other drones have it and it's considered standard nowadays.

Why do you even post here? Don't you want active track? Fine. Now go away.
This is for people that want active track and many explained already why is doable, why they think it's needed, and why it should have been there from the start, like in fact it is, just too limited.

Do you disagree? Great, open you thread "Why mavic mini should not have active track" and post there. So long.

Johnny Danger Posted at 1-6 14:49
NO. It SHOULD HAVE BEEN there from the launch, because other drones have it and it's considered standard nowadays.

Why do you even post here? Don't you want active track? Fine. Now go away.

No, it was not there at launch. That's it, end of story. It was not there because DJI created a cheap drone to appeal to non-discriminating buyers and designed it with very few features in it. If you read the sales hype and understood it (doubtful) then you would know it did not come fully featured for the price. Its like walking into a Jeep dealer, ordering and buying the cheapest Wrangler and then going back later and asking them to upgrade it to the Rubicon model for no extra cost.

I don't have a Mini, because I worked out it was a cheap minimally featured aircraft, so I bought an M3Pro instead. And no, I won't go away just because you want me to. On the other hand, I am tired of seeing entitled millenials on here who want everything for nothing. And just because there are people on here saying the aircraft is able to be upgraded via software does not make it so. Most do not have a clue about the technicalities and processes necessary. I, on the other hand, do.

Johnny Danger Posted at 1-6 14:49
NO. It SHOULD HAVE BEEN there from the launch, because other drones have it and it's considered standard nowadays.

Why do you even post here? Don't you want active track? Fine. Now go away.

I agree with you. We need add active track feature.

I 100% agree.

OkosTobias Posted at 1-6 03:31
I guess it won`t get active track ever. Why? Not because of lack of necessary image processing and object recognizing capabilities (it does it in quickshot) or because of fear from collision with obstacles lacking avoidance sensors.

IMO it is because a dji drone supposedly uses the informations of the front obstacle sensors while performing a follow me flight to keep the distance, not just the image informations from the camera. It cannot be done properly without it. How should the drone know the correct flight direction if you move? It could analyze the size of the tracked object and keep distance to keep it the same all the time but my guess is that this method would not be reliable enough for a "seamless user experience" dji is aiming.

First of all. It obviously does have some sense of distance. If you use the orbit quickshot, the drone does a pretty darn good job of keeping its distance from the subject. No, you can't just point towards GPS or having a set power input into the motors for a certain distance. You don't set the distance for an orbit. It tries to keep the object at a set distance just through the camera.

Second, if what you stated was an issue, then they could just have GPS tracking like on the Phantom 3, as all Phantom 3 pilots know, but then simply adding a dumb-downed active track that keeps a highlighted subject in the frame. You set a certain altitude, so you bear all responsibility if the drone crashes. No one can argue that the Mavic Mini isn't capable of this. It's GPS is excellent and it's able to do this form of active track in quickshots.

They just don't want to give it to us.

Geebax Posted at 1-6 13:59
"This argument and way of thinking is a thing of the past."

But of course you would think that way. How convenient for you.

We can be almost certain that the Mavic Mini can do the following:
1. Keep a subject in the frame. All the quick shots exhibit this ability. You can't argue that. Many videos show this and I will gladly show it to anyone who denies this simple fact.

2. GPS track. The Phantom 3 line was released 4-5 years ago and was able to GPS track. If you're saying that 4-5 years worth of tech improvements isn't enough to make the Mavic Mini, which already has many GPS features, I don't even know what to say. Even IF they gave the Mini a slightly less powerful processor, which I highly doubt looking at the rate of how much tech improves, it's current capabilities show that it is capable.

So, at the very least. If the Mavic Mini has a hardware bottleneck somewhere that prevents full active tracking, then give us GPS Tracking + keeping a subject in the frame. It works for most applications and I know that I will be pretty pleased.

Geebax Posted at 1-6 15:05
No, it was not there at launch. That's it, end of story. It was not there because DJI created a cheap drone to appeal to non-discriminating buyers and designed it with very few features in it. If you read the sales hype and understood it (doubtful) then you would know it did not come fully featured for the price. Its like walking into a Jeep dealer, ordering and buying the cheapest Wrangler and then going back later and asking them to upgrade it to the Rubicon model for no extra cost.

I don't have a Mini, because I worked out it was a cheap minimally featured aircraft, so I bought an M3Pro instead. And no, I won't go away just because you want me to. On the other hand, I am tired of seeing entitled millenials on here who want everything for nothing. And just because there are people on here saying the aircraft is able to be upgraded via software does not make it so. Most do not have a clue about the technicalities and processes necessary. I, on the other hand, do.

I'm not a millenial (far from it, unfortunately) but I fail to understand your point and why you're so upset about this thread.
QuickShots seem to indicate that the MM is capable of visually tracking a subject (in one of your replies you talk about "Follow Me", but that's something else, based on GPS coordinates of the mobile device). You're right that nobody here has the technical knowledge to say that Active Track could be enabled with a simple firmware upgrade, but the same applies to you: do you know for a fact that this is not the case and the MM's hardware cannot support Active Track?
How do you know that "DJI did not put an image processor of the required power in the Mini because it is a cheap drone. It does not, and will not get the AT feature...". Actually, who said that the image processing required for Active Track is done in the AC, rather than in the app, or a combination of both?
It won't be the first time that product features are disabled in software/firmware for marketing or positioning reasons. It's possible that DJI will never enable Active Track on the MM because of hardware limitations, it's possible that they will never enable it to differentiate their products, it's possible they already planned to enable it in version 2.0 of the firmware. We simply don't know. This thread is simply to show DJI that we would all love for the MM to have Active Track, nothing more, nothing less.

ICDroneSE Posted at 1-6 21:09
We can be almost certain that the Mavic Mini can do the following:
1. Keep a subject in the frame. All the quick shots exhibit this ability. You can't argue that. Many videos show this and I will gladly show it to anyone who denies this simple fact.

GPS Track, or Follow Me is an imperfect method of following someone around, hence the reason that Active Track was developed. In previous models, it relied on the GPS device in the phone or tablet attached to the RC controller to pass back information to the aircraft. It works a lot better if there is a dedicated device held by the person being followed, as in the case of the Skydio 2. But when used with normal phones, the limitation was the relatively poor quality GPS receiver in the phone. And this would apply again if it was added to the Mini without supplying a hand held device, like Skydio's.

The difference between Quickshots and Active Track is that Quickshots is a relativley short duration sequence and can mostly be achieved without having any obstacle avoidance, but Active Track cannot. As soon as you provide some sort of useful implementation of Active Track, it will need obstacle avoidance to be any real use, and the aircraft does not have it.

120ccpm Posted at 1-6 21:11
I'm not a millenial (far from it, unfortunately) but I fail to understand your point and why you're so upset about this thread.
QuickShots seem to indicate that the MM is capable of visually tracking a subject (in one of your replies you talk about "Follow Me", but that's something else, based on GPS coordinates of the mobile device). You're right that nobody here has the technical knowledge to say that Active Track could be enabled with a simple firmware upgrade, but the same applies to you: do you know for a fact that this is not the case and the MM's hardware cannot support Active Track?
How do you know that "DJI did not put an image processor of the required power in the Mini because it is a cheap drone. It does not, and will not get the AT feature...". Actually, who said that the image processing required for Active Track is done in the AC, rather than in the app, or a combination of both?

"Actually, who said that the image processing required for Active Track is done in the AC, rather than in the app, or a combination of both?"

I said it. And that is correct, the number of images and computational processes performed every second could not be done in the app and by deduction, over the radio link. It requires such a high level of image computations that the only device that can properly perform the work is the image processing SoS in the aircraft.

"it's possible that they will never enable it to differentiate their products,"

And that is most likely the case. DJI positioned the Mini at the bottom of the price chain to suck in people with less many to spend, and it seems they were very successful in doing that. and having done so, they are not going to take the legs out of under thier higher priced products by giving the bargain basement item advanced features.

Oh, and by the way, I am not upset about anything, I just like stirring controversy.

Geebax Posted at 1-6 21:42
GPS Track, or Follow Me is an imperfect method of following someone around, hence the reason that Active Track was developed. In previous models, it relied on the GPS device in the phone or tablet attached to the RC controller to pass back information to the aircraft. It works a lot better if there is a dedicated device held by the person being followed, as in the case of the Skydio 2. But when used with normal phones, the limitation was the relatively poor quality GPS receiver in the phone. And this would apply again if it was added to the Mini without supplying a hand held device, like Skydio's.

The difference between Quickshots and Active Track is that Quickshots is a relativley short duration sequence and can mostly be achieved without having any obstacle avoidance, but Active Track cannot. As soon as you provide some sort of useful implementation of Active Track, it will need obstacle avoidance to be any real use, and the aircraft does not have it.

I'm not sure you read my post completely. You basically restated what you said earlier. I don't care if GPS tracking is inferior, it obviously is, as seen in the Phantom 3 line. It just "guesses" where to point the camera with limited accuracy.

What I'm saying is that you can just combine limited GPS tracking with the part of activetrack that keeps the subject in frame. No need for OA for distance measurement. This would already be a big bonus

Geebax Posted at 1-6 21:46
"Actually, who said that the image processing required for Active Track is done in the AC, rather than in the app, or a combination of both?"

I said it. And that is correct, the number of images and computational processes performed every second could not be done in the app and by deduction, over the radio link. It requires such a high level of image computations that the only device that can properly perform the work is the image processing SoS in the aircraft.

Again, unless you're a DJI engineer that is intimately familiar with the MM architecture, your technical considerations about Active Track are, at best, educated guesses. And even if the MM hardware is not capable of supporting full Active Track, they could implement a simplified version. As for whether DJI will ever want to add Active Track (or a simplified version) to the MM, it's pure speculation. They need to protect their higher-priced models, but they also need to keep an eye on the competition: if other brands come up with similarly priced drones that have better capabilities, they might be compelled to squeeze everything out of the MM. That means we might see Active Track on the MM 6 months from now. And if instead the hardware is not capable enough, we'll never see it, no matter how many people make noise about it. As I said, it's pure speculation. Just take it the right way, it's all for fun, no need to stir controversy for stuff like this...

120ccpm Posted at 1-7 10:40
Again, unless you're a DJI engineer that is intimately familiar with the MM architecture, your technical considerations about Active Track are, at best, educated guesses. And even if the MM hardware is not capable of supporting full Active Track, they could implement a simplified version. As for whether DJI will ever want to add Active Track (or a simplified version) to the MM, it's pure speculation. They need to protect their higher-priced models, but they also need to keep an eye on the competition: if other brands come up with similarly priced drones that have better capabilities, they might be compelled to squeeze everything out of the MM. That means we might see Active Track on the MM 6 months from now. And if instead the hardware is not capable enough, we'll never see it, no matter how many people make noise about it. As I said, it's pure speculation. Just take it the right way, it's all for fun, no need to stir controversy for stuff like this...

"Again, unless you're a DJI engineer that is intimately familiar with the MM architecture, your technical considerations about Active Track are, at best, educated guesses. "

I have over 50 years experience working in the television industry, and of that, more than 20 spent managing the R&D section of one of the companies. I know about these technologies. So any "educated guesses" are far more accurate than you give credit for. I have also studied the component parts of DJI equipment for some time. We will see who is right....

120ccpm Posted at 1-6 21:11
I'm not a millenial (far from it, unfortunately) but I fail to understand your point and why you're so upset about this thread.
QuickShots seem to indicate that the MM is capable of visually tracking a subject (in one of your replies you talk about "Follow Me", but that's something else, based on GPS coordinates of the mobile device). You're right that nobody here has the technical knowledge to say that Active Track could be enabled with a simple firmware upgrade, but the same applies to you: do you know for a fact that this is not the case and the MM's hardware cannot support Active Track?
How do you know that "DJI did not put an image processor of the required power in the Mini because it is a cheap drone. It does not, and will not get the AT feature...". Actually, who said that the image processing required for Active Track is done in the AC, rather than in the app, or a combination of both?

Honestly it’s not going to come, whether it’s equipped or not and I believe it’s not,

So we all agree that we would like dji to add active track to the MM

ICDroneSE Posted at 1-6 21:09
We can be almost certain that the Mavic Mini can do the following:
1. Keep a subject in the frame. All the quick shots exhibit this ability. You can't argue that. Many videos show this and I will gladly show it to anyone who denies this simple fact.

usually these features used processing power of the mobile phone .... litchi app have done this ... even some guy have done this for Tello drone ... So its very much possible and even MM is very much capable of handling this ... so the people saying its not possible are really dump ...

120ccpm Posted at 1-7 10:40
Again, unless you're a DJI engineer that is intimately familiar with the MM architecture, your technical considerations about Active Track are, at best, educated guesses. And even if the MM hardware is not capable of supporting full Active Track, they could implement a simplified version. As for whether DJI will ever want to add Active Track (or a simplified version) to the MM, it's pure speculation. They need to protect their higher-priced models, but they also need to keep an eye on the competition: if other brands come up with similarly priced drones that have better capabilities, they might be compelled to squeeze everything out of the MM. That means we might see Active Track on the MM 6 months from now. And if instead the hardware is not capable enough, we'll never see it, no matter how many people make noise about it. As I said, it's pure speculation. Just take it the right way, it's all for fun, no need to stir controversy for stuff like this...

I think if you can think logically you will see why AT will not be coming to Mavic mini whether it’s available or not, and it’s simply because there is no OA available, think about this AT works in several different ways fwd back circle etc, so not having OA completely rules out backwards to much of a risk of people walking running straight into it, so your left with half active track, going forward I’m running fast being tracked I stop as I can suddenly Mavic mini needs room to break can’t stop suddenly no OA so it continues in to the back of my head.

Now you live in a country famed for its compensation culture and if there was one successful claim then I can see many idiots trying the same thing, so dji should and have covered themselves.

Why would a company put itself out on a limb by allowing something potentially dangerous on one of their drones while other drones protect this potential danger.

Yes there are many who would be careful but also some who would have no problem taking advantage .

hallmark007 Posted at 1-8 04:30
I think if you can think logically you will see why AT will not be coming to Mavic mini whether it’s available or not, and it’s simply because there is no OA available, think about this AT works in several different ways fwd back circle etc, so not having OA completely rules out backwards to much of a risk of people walking running straight into it, so your left with half active track, going forward I’m running fast being tracked I stop as I can suddenly Mavic mini needs room to break can’t stop suddenly no OA so it continues in to the back of my head.

Now you live in a country famed for its compensation culture and if there was one successful claim then I can see many idiots trying the same thing, so dji should and have covered themselves.

Maybe DJI can come up with a simplified version of Active Track, similar to Follow Me but using visual tracking as opposed to GPS, so it can follow other subjects than the mobile device connected to the RC.

I personally don't have a strong desire for Active Track nor I'm saying DJI should/must/will implement it. But I don't see any harm in asking DJI to look into it, which is what this thread is about.

120ccpm Posted at 1-8 10:34
Maybe DJI can come up with a simplified version of Active Track, similar to Follow Me but using visual tracking as opposed to GPS, so it can follow other subjects than the mobile device connected to the RC.

I personally don't have a strong desire for Active Track nor I'm saying DJI should/must/will implement it. But I don't see any harm in asking DJI to look into it, which is what this thread is about.

I’m sure they could, but can you imagine an inferior version of AT , I can see the forums lit up with complaints why !!!
I think putting up threads is no harm and I believe dji does listen but I think AT in a dji drone without OA is a step to far.

I do think the future for small drones like mini is big and I do think we will see it one day, but I would rather put my energy into getting improvements in manual settings for camera.

Actually, fly path is more likely to be implemented in the future. I don't think AT will be coming to MM because as I said earlier no OA available. That will cause lots of crashes as hallmark mentioned.

hallmark007 Posted at 1-8 10:44
I’m sure they could, but can you imagine an inferior version of AT , I can see the forums lit up with complaints why !!!
I think putting up threads is no harm and I believe dji does listen but I think AT in a dji drone without OA is a step to far.

You will always have people who want more, but I genuinely think that a simplified AT would be appreciated by most. Personally, I would be very happy with a form of AT where the AC remains stationary and rotates / tilts the camera to keep a subject in the frame. DJI, if you're listening, that should be fairly feasible and completely safe!

As for your comment about OA, it's undeniable that it would make AT safer, but I don't see it as a hard requirement. After all, the MM already has autonomous flight modes (RTH + QuickShots) and no OA, so AT would be no different.

120ccpm Posted at 1-8 14:41
You will always have people who want more, but I genuinely think that a simplified AT would be appreciated by most. Personally, I would be very happy with a form of AT where the AC remains stationary and rotates / tilts the camera to keep a subject in the frame. DJI, if you're listening, that should be fairly feasible and completely safe!

As for your comment about OA, it's undeniable that it would make AT safer, but I don't see it as a hard requirement. After all, the MM already has autonomous flight modes (RTH + QuickShots) and no OA, so AT would be no different.

Well who knows, I’m not hear to rain on your parade, just giving my tupence .

I just purchased the dji Mavic Mini and I must say one of the main reasons I made this purchase outside of it's compact size, is because 2 years ago I rented the dji spark for a couple week for a solo project and one of the main features that I was always using was the active tracking.
Now, to finally get my hands on my own dji drone to find out that it doesn't have this same feature as it's predecessor is beyond disappointing - I may actually return it because it basically defeats the purpose of me evening buying it.

FYI - for everyone saying that it doesn't have the active track feature because it does not have obstacle avoidance and it is too dangerous, that is complete nonsense as the dji spark does not have obstacle avoidance but yet it still has the active track feature (plus I never crashed or had any issues with the active tracking feature during my experience with the dji spark).. what a disappointment!

I just purchased the dji Mavic Mini and I must say one of the main reasons I made this purchase outside of it's compact size, is because 2 years ago I rented the dji spark for a couple week for a solo project and one of the main features that I was always using was the active tracking.
Now, to finally get my hands on my own dji drone to find out that it doesn't have this same feature as it's predecessor is beyond disappointing - I may actually return it because it basically defeats the purpose of me evening buying it.

FYI - for everyone saying that it doesn't have the active track feature because it does not have obstacle avoidance and it is too dangerous, that is complete nonsense as the dji spark does not have obstacle avoidance but yet it still has the active track feature (plus I never crashed or had any issues with the active tracking feature during my experience with the dji spark).. what a disappointment!

bigc357 Posted at 1-9 03:12
I just purchased the dji Mavic Mini and I must say one of the main reasons I made this purchase outside of it's compact size, is because 2 years ago I rented the dji spark for a couple week for a solo project and one of the main features that I was always using was the active tracking.
Now, to finally get my hands on my own dji drone to find out that it doesn't have this same feature as it's predecessor is beyond disappointing - I may actually return it because it basically defeats the purpose of me evening buying it.

Spark does have OA and the information regarding safety is correct, Mavic Air would be a great option it has active track among many other features .

Agree 100 percent

We need active track.. Even $90 Chinese drone it has gps track..

Geebax Posted at 1-6 15:05
No, it was not there at launch. That's it, end of story. It was not there because DJI created a cheap drone to appeal to non-discriminating buyers and designed it with very few features in it. If you read the sales hype and understood it (doubtful) then you would know it did not come fully featured for the price. Its like walking into a Jeep dealer, ordering and buying the cheapest Wrangler and then going back later and asking them to upgrade it to the Rubicon model for no extra cost.

I don't have a Mini, because I worked out it was a cheap minimally featured aircraft, so I bought an M3Pro instead. And no, I won't go away just because you want me to. On the other hand, I am tired of seeing entitled millenials on here who want everything for nothing. And just because there are people on here saying the aircraft is able to be upgraded via software does not make it so. Most do not have a clue about the technicalities and processes necessary. I, on the other hand, do.

LMAO, "entitled millenials" - I mean, you don't even own a Mini so why are you trolling the Mini forum?  This is hilarious.  

Yes, I want some sweet sweet Active Track, who wouldn't?

Cheap chinese $100 drones have tracking with no OA and a quick google search can't find any of them being sued for hitting someone.

Porktree Posted at 1-9 07:52
LMAO, "entitled millenials" - I mean, you don't even own a Mini so why are you trolling the Mini forum?  This is hilarious.  

Yes, I want some sweet sweet Active Track, who wouldn't?

It is not trolling stupid, it is having a differing opinion. And one does not need to own a bad product in order to recognise one.

Sarge Lausage Posted at 1-9 08:38
Cheap chinese $100 drones have tracking with no OA and a quick google search can't find any of them being sued for hitting someone.

I’m certain if Americans got even a whim that they could sue they would be on here lining up some class action or other.
Maybe you can tell us why we don’t have AT .

This is feature that blocks me from buying the mini.

Sarge Lausage Posted at 1-9 08:38
Cheap chinese $100 drones have tracking with no OA and a quick google search can't find any of them being sued for hitting someone.

Anafi, Bebop, and Mantis have it without not just $100 ones. Even my M2P sensor turn off in fast ActiveTrack. It's up to the PIC to make sure they are safe. There is even a video of the Skydio 2 hitting another mountain bike rider coming the other way, can't track fast moving obstacles.

Plus you don't think it can hit something in it's other modes like orbit?

I'd pay another $100 for active track as an add-on to my mavic mini!

I agree, ActiveTrack, Panorama etc should be available on Mavic Mini, even as a pay-extra upgrades.

bigc357 Posted at 1-9 03:12
I just purchased the dji Mavic Mini and I must say one of the main reasons I made this purchase outside of it's compact size, is because 2 years ago I rented the dji spark for a couple week for a solo project and one of the main features that I was always using was the active tracking.
Now, to finally get my hands on my own dji drone to find out that it doesn't have this same feature as it's predecessor is beyond disappointing - I may actually return it because it basically defeats the purpose of me evening buying it.

I’m amazed you’d spend £300/400 on something without even reading up on its features tbh!

I just assumed it would track when I bought it, I'm really surprised it doesn't which really limits its abilities. :/

Hi all... my first post.  Apologies if this has already been asked.  Is there any reason at all why ActiveTrack cannot be added?  hardware / software is capable?

TrevMonster Posted at 1-12 07:48
Hi all... my first post.  Apologies if this has already been asked.  Is there any reason at all why ActiveTrack cannot be added?  hardware / software is capable?

because this drone is not meant to have active tracking!
Go for the higher class of DJI drones.