Very well said @andrei193.  You hit the nail on the head on all fronts.  I was trying to make him see the errors of his ways and make amends.  But your direct approach is far better.  He looks like a young lad trying to make a go at being an influencer - but has a lot to learn in his approach and how he comes across.  Not admitting your own errors is a big part of the problem.  Assuming this and that as well.  Hopefully he will learn from this fiasco he created for himself.  He made his bed - he has to sleep in it.

He should have come on here apologizing and asking for forgiveness.  He probably would have got it.  We all make mistakes.

On another note.  Interesting that various comment posts were deleted and some changed a lot.  I think those comments deleted were probably made in error as well.  It seems he did not delete them - the person commenting did.  You know who you are.  And so do I.  Hopefully this thread is done and dusted.  But who knows.  An apology would probably help though.  All about maturity and decorum.

Hi all. when reporting the problem in the video, I did not expect this thread to turn into a small battlefield. Hopefully, we all learn something positive out of it in the reconstruction after the battle, like some humility, diplomatic skills, not making quick assumptions etc. and also learn something new about OA3.
BTW, I do agree with The Hybrid Shooter that dynamic range is sometimes terrible in OA3. All these burnt white areas can be really ugly and seem to affect EIS a lot in my experience.

Thanks for sharing!

andrei193 Posted at 10-8 10:57
Hey man, own your mistake. You maybe have not intentionally lied about it but unintentionally did. Stop with this persecuted and arrogant attitude. Own up your mistake and make a good video about it, not with recycled footage. Action 2 and Action 3 are not the same camera period. They may have the same specs but something is clearly wrong in the calibration department and software. I have watched many videos with Action 2 at the time of it's release and it's clearly better than OA3 in all respects (IQ wise). So what you are not a big youtuber, who cares. The thing is your video comes out as a blatant lie and fanboy dream. At least the insta360 1 inch mod states that the focus is 1m to infinity. No product should say on the label something and not deliver. Give me a break with the compromise philosophy of yours. It does not apply here. Wanna be a big youtuber? Start by being more diplomatic not arrogant when you clearly made a misleading video (intentionally or not). Don't wanna be a big youtuber and you do it for the sake of it? Nobody cares you spent 1 hour or 100 hours with 100 cuts. The end result is what matters and you messed up and you should ignore this thread altogether, it won't affect your reputation.

Calm down, cowboy. Nope, that's not gonna work. I am the one putting the work in, so I won't tolerate this kind of attitude when you act like my boss and try to tell me what I should do and how. Your way of pointing out my mistake is unacceptably rude, so I did and I will speak up. No, my review was not misleading in any way, that still stands.

No, I don't want to be a big YouTuber, it is not my job, but it is definitely a better hobby than criticizing YouTubers Given your attidute, I obviously don't care whether you care.

Feel free to make your own review, gain some following, and I will come to criticise you, although you may find it to be a bit more difficult than mindless criticising and accusing. Until then, I will have to politely dismiss your criticism, I hope that you don't mind.

The Hybrid Shooter Posted at 10-9 01:36
Calm down, cowboy. Nope, that's not gonna work. I am the one putting the work in, so I won't tolerate this kind of attitude when you act like my boss and try to tell me what I should do and how. Your way of pointing out my mistake is unacceptably rude, so I did and I will speak up. No, my review was not misleading in any way, that still stands.

No, I don't want to be a big YouTuber, it is not my job, but it is definitely a better hobby than criticizing YouTubers  Given your attidute, I obviously don't care whether you care.

I don't mind at all. Go and have fun with your hobby. You obviously cared enough to respond. Cheers.
Nobody owes you respect out of the bat because you made a youtube camera video, no matter how many hours you put in. The end result is what matters.

P.S. So the only people who can criticise you are the ones who are also youtubers and make camera reviews? Yeah, nice logic.
P.S. 2 My attitude is reactionary ;)
P.S. 3  My way of poiting your mistake may be unnaceptably rude but 100% true.

OK, I'm glad that you don't mind and that we were able to sort out this issue. I care enough about my work to speak up, I specifically don't care whether you care how may hours did I spend on that video. The end result is completely fine as well, as I have explained.  In most civilised societies, the work actually does earn you respect. Criticising and bashing people who put the work in doesn't, but you may have a different opinion on that, I'm not judging you.

P.S. It would certainly make your criticism more reasonable if you tried to make at least one complex review yourself.
P.S. 2 Perhaps too reactionary.
P.S. 3 No, your technical part stating that using Action 2 clip specifically to demonstrate close focus distance is a huge overstep is actually 100% wrong, it makes no difference at all. Action 2 IQ is defitniely not better in every way, that is technically a lie as well, but despite that I won't say that you are dishonest... Do you see the difference?

But you all guys, lets focus on what is the problem with OA3 in other topics here on the forum and just let us all be friends
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romania%E2%80%93Slovakia_relations

The Hybrid Shooter Posted at 10-9 08:10
OK, I'm glad that you don't mind and that we were able to sort out this issue. I care enough about my work to speak up, I specifically don't care whether you care how may hours did I spend on that video. The end result is completely fine as well, as I have explained.  In most civilised societies, the work actually does earn you respect. Criticising and bashing people who put the work in doesn't, but you may have a different opinion on that, I'm not judging you.

P.S. It would certainly make your criticism more reasonable if you tried to make at least one complex review yourself.

The thing is you don't basically see any fault with your video. Not seeing why that is a huge overstep is a huge problem, and I'm saying this as a friendly advice. But it really doesn't matter as you are not after the youtuber life. It's ok to be proud of your work. I don't have to be a music composer to recognise sh*ty music and say it out loud. I know what it takes to make a video. In most civilised societies were not everybody gets a trophy, mediocre work is brushed to the side and ridiculed when stated otherwise by the author. Praise and respect it's earned not given automatically.

P.S. Oh no, I was really being civil with my reaction trust me. Go and read your responses again.

johansenfoto Posted at 10-9 08:27
But you all guys, lets focus on what is the problem with OA3 in other topics here on the forum and just let us all be friends
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romania%E2%80%93Slovakia_relations

Hey johanes, I see his passive-agressive behaviour and subtle insults and really don't want to lower myself to that level. He is young and certainly can't take criticism well so don't want to stir the knife in the wound.

andrei193 Posted at 10-9 08:29
The thing is you don't basically see any fault with your video. Not seeing why that is a huge overstep is a huge problem, and I'm saying this as a friendly advice. But it really doesn't matter as you are not after the youtuber life. It's ok to be proud of your work. I don't have to be a music composer to recognise sh*ty music and say it out loud. I know what it takes to make a video. In most civilised societies were not everybody gets a trophy, mediocre work is brushed to the side and ridiculed when stated otherwise by the author. Praise and respect it's earned not given automatically.

P.S. Oh no, I was really being civil with my reaction trust me. Go and read your responses again.

Whether it is an overstep or not is a technical matter. I have measured minimum focus distance of both and it is the same. Again, it makes no difference at all, that is why I have left the video as it is. The text is explained in comment #14. Comparison between Action 2 and Action 3 will also be available on my channel and it will clarify some of the topics that are being discussed in that video as well.

I'm sorry that you can't take my alleged passive-aggressive behaviour, but since you stared your whole involvement in this matter by calling me dishonest and then continued to not so subtly insult me and my work, you have definitely set the level low enough, there is no need to be worried about that.

The Hybrid Shooter Posted at 10-9 08:52
Whether it is an overstep or not is a technical matter. I have measured minimum focus distance of both and it is the same. Again, it makes no difference at all, that is why I have left the video as it is. The text is explained in comment #14. Comparison between Action 2 and Action 3 will also be available on my channel and it will clarify some of the topics that are being discussed in that video as well.

I'm sorry that you can't take my alleged passive-aggressive behaviour, but since you stared your whole involvement in this matter by calling me dishonest and someone who is blatantly lying, you have definitely set the level low enough, there is no need to be worried about that.

Haha, good one mate. You justify a lie by saying it makes no difference. You were dishonest. You lied man, that's the truth. You labeled your Action 2 footage with Action 3 and the voiceover saying and I quote: "minimum focus distance is 30 centimeters so it is perfectly usable for vlogging". How in the world in the editing phase you didn't see that you used old Action 2 footage when syncing them together. And let's say you intended to label it Action 2 footage - how in the world you can say the minimum focus distance in a camera is good when showing another cameras footage. Your justification is that it is the same? It's a blatant lie. You might not meant it to be but is still a lie. If you came with a more humble attitude in your explanation I might have been more understanding. I was not in the wrong for saying you were dishonest and a blatant liar. You have no idea what this kind of mistake would mean if you were in the editorial world. It would literally end your career. Thank God you are a hobbyist for your own sake.  I would honestly trust you more if you said you were lazy. I will end this conversation here. You made your bed, you sleep in it. Make all the videos you want. You can manipulate your content and even use Action 2 footage and claim it's Action 3 - not saying you will do this (see how your credibility is tarnished now?). I can take your passive-agressive behaviour and subtle insults just fine. It's not my first rodeo ;) when dealing with arrogant know-it-all people.

You obviously can't take it, which is why you are resorting to more riddiculous accusations and insiluts with every comment. Shouldn't you ask that before you came to the conclusion that I am dishonest? That is actually how this whole dicussion should have started. As I will explain, you are completely clueless, which is the whole issue that I am pointing out. I did not intend to use Action 2 label I intended to use Action 3 clip.

- I make multiple videos at the same time, I am making Action 2 comparison simlutainously. I have done minimal focus distance test on Action 3 with that Sony camera, I do that with every action camera so that I can compare it.
- I have imported it into upcoming Action 2 vs Action 3 video, that is how I know that the result is the same with Action 2 and 3 and therefore I know that it makes no difference (for the evaluation of the camera) if Action 2 or Action 3 clip is used for minimal focus distance sample.
- I make the voiceover first, then I add video clips. The text about 30cm minimal focus distance was copied from Action 2 reivew (to save writing time, because I saw that it is the same), the recoding is new.
- I copied the wrong clip from Action 2 vs Action 3 video and pasted Action 3 label on it...

A lie is a lie, mistake is a mistake. I hope that you understand the difference.

You are just proving your own arrogance and ignorance. You are also not the first random internet hater that I am dealing with, you can trust me on that I already wrote that it is a clip from upcoming comparison video in comment #9, at least read more carefully next time.

The Hybrid Shooter Posted at 10-9 10:02
Shouldn't you ask that before you came to the conclusion that I am dishonest? That is actually how this whole dicussion should have started. As I will explain, you are completely clueless, which is the whole issue that I am pointing out. I did not intend to use Action 2 label I intended to use Action 3 clip.

- I make multiple videos at the same time, I am making Action 2 comparison simlutainously. I have done minimal focus distance test on Action 3 with that Sony camera, I do that with every action camera so that I can compare it.

This thread is being destroyed by an argument over a video. Doesn't really help the cause and has stopped discussion dead. DJI won't take us seriously seeing things like this.

You are right, and I am sorry about that, but I hope that you will understand, that I can't let somebody wrongfully accuse me of such things without a response.

The Hybrid Shooter Posted at 10-9 10:02
Shouldn't you ask that before you came to the conclusion that I am dishonest? That is actually how this whole dicussion should have started. As I will explain, you are completely clueless, which is the whole issue that I am pointing out. I did not intend to use Action 2 label I intended to use Action 3 clip.

- I make multiple videos at the same time, I am making Action 2 comparison simlutainously. I have done minimal focus distance test on Action 3 with that Sony camera, I do that with every action camera so that I can compare it.

No my friend, we judge by what we see, by the end product. We cannot read your mind. You should have came and explained in a diplomatic manner. Our assumptions were justified. So you made that comparison shot so exact that you got it confused. You clearly said you mislabeled so who is clueless. I guess this is another mistake which is not a lie. You just make yourself look worse and worse the more you respond.

End of discussion from my end also. I won't entertain such buffoonery any longer.

You said that I am dishonest and lying long before I even wrote anything on this forum, so quit your nonsense. You are also not first arogant internet hater that I am dealing with. You had and have absolutely zero justification to call me a lier, besides your apparent need to compensate for whatever insecurities by harassing people on the internet.
Also, what part of "It is a clip from upcoming comparison video" is so hard to understand....
Sure, go and find someone else to harass, your nonsense won't work on me. Signing out as well.

To maybe resolve all the varied concerns and angst generated in this thread:

“The text about 30cm minimal focus distance was copied from Action 2 reivew (to save writing time, because I saw that it is the same), the recoding is new.”

All that is really needed is “an original 4K clip or original DNG photo” showing that the OA3 - can or cannot - focus at 30cm.  To this date - there has been no example provided on this forum where the 30cm close focus has been achieved.  Even at 50cm - close focus has not been achieved.

Seems so simple and should hopefully end the distractions about lies or truths on this matter.
Thx

Here is a video specifically talking about focus.  He sent back his original OA3 as it could not focus good enough and is planning to test another one in a couple of days.

It will be in my GoPro comparison, probably on Wednesday. At 30cm, it is not completely in focus, 40cm is acceptable, 50cm is completely sharp. Tested with 2x OA3, 1x A2, same results.

Ok.  So at 30cm it is not completely in focus.  This is in keeping with all the examples uploaded to this forum.  That is what DJI Support tried to address in the beta firmware.  But failed.  Are you personally ok with that result - or are you planning to use the beta firmware in an attempt to make 30cm focus sharp?

It may be that certain OA3 owners are completely ok with their devices not being in focus - as they do not care - it is good enough for them.  That is perfectly ok.  

I don't have an access to beta FW, so that makes the decision very simple. I am OK with the result, as I already wrote, that is what happens, when you combine fixed focus and relatively large sensor. It is basically a compromise between the low light performance and minimum focus distance (assuming that we don't want autofocus on an action camera). I was OK with it for a year on my Action 2 and I am OK with 1m on One RS 1" because that is how it works. IMO, DJI should just change the value in the specifications list. Or not list it at all, like GoPro which isn't much better

Ok.  Hopefully that resolves the matter of how this thread started and why.  How certain forum assumptions were made about your credibility.  Why you got so upset from specific comments posted about you deleting viewer posts etc.  Now deleted btw.  How this thread went sideways thereafter.  Makes some sense.

Guessing - if you came on here and just stated that you made a mistake by putting an old clip from the Action 2 - instead of the OA3 clip - in the video, that would have helped.  Then adding what you just noted about 30cm not being in complete focus - would have helped also.

Anyways this helps solve the mystery - as most - myself included were not aware what was exactly happening on Youtube.  This brings a lot more into context.  Pretty sure that everyone involved has learned something positive from this.

I don't know about 50cm (around 20 inches) being completely sharp.  I didn't see that at all in my unit.  This is the example photo I posted in a different thread but here all three cameras were held at far arm length (I have long arms so I'd say at around 2 feet) and you can clearly see there is an optical issue at least compared to the other cameras.

I made a small test yesterday. In case it is useful, here it is. It was overcast. 1 picture, 3 frames taken out of video clips 4K60 without stab. The ruler touches the cam and extends to 30 cm.
I am not a pro but it looks like my copy is not bad at all. I probably got one of the very first copies of Japan because I ordered it 2 days after announcement and the shop had it in stock on Day 1.

Picture (Wide or Dewarp... forgot, ISO100; 1/100s). I did not try to adjust exposure time so it is overexposed.

Frame of  4K60 without stab; Wide:

Frame of  4K60 without stab; UltraWide:

Frame of  4K60 without stab; Dewarp:

Quick question - has the photo taken or 4K video frames extracted been edited or sharpened in any way - or are they all original DJI files?

Here's another comparison I did between the Action 1 and Action 3... Again it's not horrible but definitely lacking compared to the first version.

djiuser_i82mY6tgH5DN Posted at 10-9 21:25
Here's another comparison I did between the Action 1 and Action 3... Again it's not horrible but definitely lacking compared to the first version.

[view_image]

Expecting Action 3 with much larger sensor to be able to focus as close (or even achieve the same magnification) as Action 1 is not reasonable. Both have the same aperture, so Action 3 naturally has shallower depth of field. It wouldn't be reasonable to expect the Action 1 to perform as well as the Action 3 in the low light either.

As I wrote, the only issue that I see here, is incorrect value in the specs sheet. I don't blame the Action 3 for not being able to focus any closer, that is a compromise. I don't really consider the Action 3 to be a direct successor of the Action 1. That FoV and type of lens basically puts it into a slightly different category. It is mainly intended for PoV / mounted use, it isn't particularly suitable for point-and-shoot use.

10-Bit Posted at 10-9 20:55
Quick question - has the photo taken or 4K video frames extracted been edited or sharpened in any way - or are they all original DJI files?

No edit at all.

Yaman-Python Posted at 10-9 23:16
No edit at all.

Very interesting.

This is probably the very best news yet - for every OA3 owner.  As this looks to demonstrate to DJI Support that the device is fully capable of “reasonably acceptable sharp” - close focus at 30cm with its fixed lens and 1/1.7” sensor size.  Any concerned OA3 owner should point to this thread and your post.

My Action 2 also had similar close focus capabilities at around 30cm - as has been shown in my photos.  It was plenty sharp enough for me.  This might make it now very difficult for DJI Support to deny any warranty claim against poor focus “issues” claimed by that owner.

My guess - is that the OA3 focus was initially developed to match what was achieved on my Action 2.  Then a bean counter informed upper management that production costs could be reduced - if lower cost components were installed.  That is what most may be seeing here.  Pure speculations.  But might match up to why most all OA3 units cannot achieve sharpness similar to yours without any blurriness.

Resolution and IQ look perfectly acceptable to me.  If this were my unit I would definitely keep it.  You got a good one.  If the OA3 has focus like this in the future - I would buy one.  Even though my Insta360 X3 is arriving in a couple of days.  I personally really liked what the Action 2 could produce - but the OA3 offered selfie stick removal and 10-bit colours.  Both enticing enough for me to order.

djiuser_i82mY6tgH5DN Posted at 10-9 21:25
Here's another comparison I did between the Action 1 and Action 3... Again it's not horrible but definitely lacking compared to the first version.

[view_image]

Yeah your OA3 is soft.  Whereas your Osmo Action 1 is sharp.  My Action 2 matched your Osmo Action 1 sharpness.

My testing still shows no difference in IQ between A2 and two units of OA3 (no beta FW, not pre-production units). The only differnce is that the edges of the frame look better on the Action 3 if you use Standard (dewarp FoV). Other than that, it is impossible to tell the samples apart. OA3 will never have the same close focus capabilities as the OA1. That IQ improvement on the edges of the frame was a part of FW update (public) so it would be nice if the Action 2 got the same update.

It may be that your Action 2 has a defective 30cm short focus “issue”.  My Action 2 was perfectly sharp at 30cm.  The Sony letters were clearly not in focus in your Action 2 clip - so this looks to confirm all the constant focus problems you are having.  Makes perfect sense then - why you are constantly repeating they all cannot close focus to 30cm.  We get it.

The Hybrid Shooter Posted at 10-10 00:56
My testing still shows no difference in IQ between A2 and two units of OA3 (no beta FW, not pre-production units). The only differnce is that the edges of the frame look better on the Action 3 if you use Standard (dewarp FoV). Other than that, it is impossible to tell the samples apart. OA3 will never have the same close focus capabilities as the OA1. That IQ improvement on the edges of the frame was a part of FW update (public) so it would be nice if the Action 2 got the same update.

Hi,
In fact it appears that DJI just cropped even more to "enhance" the edges. RS Dewarp in in Action2 is wider than RS Dewarp in Action 3 (that is a difference between the 2 cams). Action2 has more fov choices. I discussed this in the thread below. In particular my post #5 explains what I think they did in their firmware update.

https://forum.dji.com/forum.php? ... D781%26typeid%3D781

10-Bit Posted at 10-10 01:21
It may be that your Action 2 has a defective 30cm short focus “issue”.  My Action 2 was perfectly sharp at 30cm.  The Sony letters were clearly not in focus in your Action 2 clip - so this looks to confirm all the constant focus problems you are having.  Makes perfect sense then - why you are constantly repeating they all cannot close focus to 30cm.  We get it.

Uff, that is IMO extremely unlikely. A2 and OA3 have the same specifications, my samples are the same, I am 99% sure that they use the same components, besides the front lens cover and the optical performance is the same. The likelihood of having a manufacturing defect that only affects the minimal focus distance and makes the A2 look 100% identical to OA3 is IMO extremely low. I will give it 1% chance, but I am pretty sure that A2 and OA3 IQ is simply the same.
Also, testing subject makes a huge differnce. Something like that Sony text with clear contrast will it more visible than a human face for example.

10-Bit Posted at 10-10 01:21
It may be that your Action 2 has a defective 30cm short focus “issue”.  My Action 2 was perfectly sharp at 30cm.  The Sony letters were clearly not in focus in your Action 2 clip - so this looks to confirm all the constant focus problems you are having.  Makes perfect sense then - why you are constantly repeating they all cannot close focus to 30cm.  We get it.

He is moving the camera in the clip, and the letters get softer or sharper due to motion blur.

fish sticks Posted at 10-10 01:43
He is moving the camera in the clip, and the letters get softer or sharper due to motion blur.

Definitely not, Action 2 is keeping the shutter speed very high, you won't get any motion blur at that kind of shutter speed. I have made a test with the same camera where I am just holiding it still agains a measuring tape and the sharpness is identical.

The Hybrid Shooter Posted at 10-10 01:45
Definitely not, Action 2 is keeping the shutter speed very high, you won't get any motion blur at that kind of shutter speed. I have made a test with the same camera when I am just holiding it and the sharpness is identical.

I meant the sony camera. You are not holding it perfectly still, the screenshot was from a frame with motion blur, you can see other frames where the "SONY" logo is sharper.
In other words the argument that your samples of the A2 and OA3 have issues based on that screenshot is invalid.

That clip is shot with very high shutter speed, there is no visible motion blur at such shutter speed. The screenshot method may not be valid, but the close focus results between A2 and OA3 from all of my tests (static) are identical.
I would like to upload the samples here, but it won't let me for some reason.

Here are the samples, first one is A2, second is OA3. It is 30cm focus. I will also make a test on my lens testing scene later on.

It is perfectly fine for you to have your own personal differing opinion on close focus.  But it really does not matter much to most owners.  When others disagree with you and return their OA3 cameras outright - or present evidence here on the forum of “issues” present on their devices.  Remember DJI Support actually has already confirmed there is an “issue” for certain devices that cannot focus at 30cm.  It makes no logical sense for you to personally push back on that - and harm the chances of other concerned owners - to have their OA3 devices repaired under warranty.

It is getting very repetitive to try helping you out here - so I may not help you out any further.  Unless you personally apologize to me - for mistakenly attacking me due to your incorrect assumptions.