Hello DJI, is there maybe an option to bring RockSteady on the Pocket 3?
I think a combination of the Gimball and Rocksteady would make for much better recordings.

Whole point of a mechanical gimbal is that digital stabilisation is not required and the chipset therefore doesn’t have to work as hard, as well as being able to capture full frame rather then that digital crop to take account for the stabilisation.
Although I can’t see it happening, I wouldn’t mind it as it could iron out the 4th axis!

I shot some private walking video yesterday with the camera and its extra battery inside the Scotty pro case, and the extra weight seemed to help a lot with the z axis problem.  Or maybe I ninja walk without realising it!  

The other problem with EIS is the artifacts it can produce in low light.

IftiBashir Posted at 12-28 10:49
Whole point of a mechanical gimbal is that digital stabilisation is not required and the chipset therefore doesn’t have to work as hard, as well as being able to capture full frame rather then that digital crop to take account for the stabilisation.
Although I can’t see it happening, I wouldn’t mind it as it could iron out the 4th axis!

A combination of both systems could do much better work, then single one.

With pro level gimbal, some people do use optical stabilization or ibis on a camera for better combined result.
So your asking do have some point.

However Pocket 3 in current state is already close to its thermal limit and I suspect there is not much processing margin for additional RockSteady.
Also to mention that Pocket 3's great low light performing low mega pixel 1" sensor does not have much extra pixel to crop off for digital stabilization.


(Some other cheap knock off pocket gimbal camera do add digital stabilization on top of gimbal but end result is not favorable.)
(Because of high shutter speed, crop, poor low light performance and stabilization fighting with gimbal... etc)


In anyway if DJI is to include RockSteady in the next version of Pocket, I wish they add OFF option as well for just in case.

fansfe82067d Posted at 12-28 14:47
I shot some private walking video yesterday with the camera and its extra battery inside the Scotty pro case, and the extra weight seemed to help a lot with the z axis problem.  Or maybe I ninja walk without realising it!  

The other problem with EIS is the artifacts it can produce in low light.

Artefacts are no problem for EIS in combination with a mechanical gimbal. I use my Osmo Action with an iSteady pro gimbal, mostly mounted at the handlebar of my bike. The gimbal enables Rocksteady to work properly even under bad light conditions:

Tide Posted at 12-28 22:07
With pro level gimbal, some people do use optical stabilization or ibis on a camera for better combined result.
So your asking do have some point.

I don't think so. P3 is absolutle not at the thermal limit.
Filming for over an hour in a room without air movement is not the usual use case for Pocket 3, but P3 can now manage that too.
And in such cases, you won't need to use RockSteady.

Outside in motion, on the other hand, it would be good to be able to switch on RockSteady (as with OA4).

Please please DJI - do not listen to this absurd idea from people who clearly don’t understand stabilisation.

JustName Posted at 12-29 06:29
I don't think so. P3 is absolutle not at the thermal limit.
Filming for over an hour in a room without air movement is not the usual use case for Pocket 3, but P3 can now manage that too.
And in such cases, you won't need to use RockSteady.

Well the forum was flooded with overheating issue few weeks ago although that was an regional regulation related but still showed people had various and creative use cases heating up the camera while needing stabilization.

Beside, 12MP sensor wouldn't have much pixel to crop off for stabilization anyway.

JustName Posted at 12-29 06:29
I don't think so. P3 is absolutle not at the thermal limit.
Filming for over an hour in a room without air movement is not the usual use case for Pocket 3, but P3 can now manage that too.
And in such cases, you won't need to use RockSteady.

hallo Helmut
Wiith the isteady pro 4 you can use
the hohem remote

Steph Jant Posted at 12-29 06:45
Please please DJI - do not listen to this absurd idea from people who clearly don’t understand stabilisation.

You can certainly enlighten us as to why exactly this is not a good idea. Surely you will also be able to explain the basics and details of stabilization in detail.

Tide Posted at 12-29 07:50
Well the forum was flooded with overheating issue few weeks ago although that was an regional regulation related but still showed people had various and creative use cases heating up the camera while needing stabilization.

Beside, 12MP sensor wouldn't have much pixel to crop off for stabilization anyway.

Most of these people have set out to overheat the camera.

As I said, if the option comes, it will be variably switchable and if you don't want to use it, just don't use it.

JustName Posted at 12-30 02:19
Most of these people have set out to overheat the camera.

As I said, if the option comes, it will be variably switchable and if you don't want to use it, just don't use it.

Hey I acknowledged that your request have a valid point.
Just pointing out that thermal and crop margin would be the possible limitation.

Have a happy holiday.

Tide Posted at 12-30 02:29
Hey I acknowledged that your request have a valid point.
Just pointing out that thermal and crop margin would be the possible limitation.

Thank you, i wish you the same! :-)

I have to admit the crop margin issue had not occurred to me - regardless of the merits of the suggestion, I don't think it could be made to work in a worthwhile fashion on the Pocket 3 due to that signficant issue.

JustName Posted at 12-30 02:31
Thank you, i wish you the same! :-)

The OP3 has a small number of sensor pixels, so adding locksteady will not maintain the angle of view.
They would have to create and implement a crop mode with resolutions from 1080 to 2.7K, which would result in a 30-50% field of view loss, which would change the usability.

If you want to stabilize the z-axis while maintaining as much image quality as possible in OP3, the best way to do this is in editing software like Da Vinci Resolve.
You can also put the OA4 on a gimbal and use it with decent results.

lutzmix Posted at 12-29 11:37
hallo Helmut
Wiith the isteady pro 4 you can use
the hohem remote

Hallo Lutz, ich fürchte, die Osmo Action (1) hat keine Remote-Control Schnittstelle, auf die Hohem aufsetzen könnte. Es gab hier im Forum seinerzeit viele Forderungen nach einer solchen, DJI hat das nie umgesetzt. Der iSteady 4 kann daher wohl nur die Gopros steuern.

JustName Posted at 12-30 02:17
You can certainly enlighten us as to why exactly this is not a good idea. Surely you will also be able to explain the basics and details of stabilization in detail.

Let me answer your question: Rocksteady, as I see it and how I would have implemented it, works by looking into the future, at least for a second or so. The incomming video frames are put into a queue. For each new frame a motion vector is calculated relativ to the previous frame. On the other end of the queue, which may contain 50 or more raw data frames, the stabilization algo processes the videodata. And is able to see the motion the sensor will make in the next second (or even longer). The drawback of this solution: The need of a huge amount of fast memory. Which shurely is not implemented in the Pocket 3, why should it have been?! So, better forget Pocket 3 with Rocksteady.

Drift.dk Posted at 12-30 04:17
The OP3 has a small number of sensor pixels, so adding locksteady will not maintain the angle of view.
They would have to create and implement a crop mode with resolutions from 1080 to 2.7K, which would result in a 30-50% field of view loss, which would change the usability.

The Pocket 3 has, same as Osmo Action 1 - 4, a sensor geometrie of 3000 x 4000 pixel. My OA 1 uses, with Dewarp and Rocksteady on, 3000 of the 4000 pixel of the sensor width, the rest is buffer for Rocksteady. For the OA 4 DJI stated the same here in this forum. 4K in this mode is upscaled 3K, which is known since the OA 1. So why should it be a problem to do the same with the Pocket 3? Where in a gimble camera a kind of "Rocksteady light" may be sufficiend, which uses e.g. 3500 of 4000 pixel...

Helmut Ruch Posted at 12-30 05:24
The Pocket 3 has, same as Osmo Action 1 - 4, a sensor geometrie of 3000 x 4000 pixel. My OA 1 uses, with Dewarp and Rocksteady on, 3000 of the 4000 pixel of the sensor width, the rest is buffer for Rocksteady. For the OA 4 DJI stated the same here in this forum. 4K in this mode is upscaled 3K, which is known since the OA 1. So why should it be a problem to do the same with the Pocket 3? Where in a gimble camera a kind of "Rocksteady light" may be sufficiend, which uses e.g. 3500 of 4000 pixel...

It wasn't until I read your comments that I realized that the Osmo Action has a 12MP sensor.
I also understood why the steady shot range of the Osmo Action is limited compared to the GoPro.

I don't think it would be difficult to provide a steady shot option on the Osmo Pocket 3 that is comparable to the Osmo Action.

I think the people who are against it in this thread are because they think the electronic stabilization option is out of character for the Osmo Pocket 3, with some image quality degradation.

Helmut Ruch Posted at 12-30 05:04
Let me answer your question: Rocksteady, as I see it and how I would have implemented it, works by looking into the future, at least for a second or so. The incomming video frames are put into a queue. For each new frame a motion vector is calculated relativ to the previous frame. On the other end of the queue, which may contain 50 or more raw data frames, the stabilization algo processes the videodata. And is able to see the motion the sensor will make in the next second (or even longer). The drawback of this solution: The need of a huge amount of fast memory. Which shurely is not implemented in the Pocket 3, why should it have been?! So, better forget Pocket 3 with Rocksteady.

Ich antworte dir mal auch auf Deutsch :-)

Abgsehen davon, dass meine Frage ja gar nicht an dich gerichtet war, war meine gesamte Fragestellung eher ironisch gemeint, aufgrund seine Überheblichkeit.

Zu deiner Beschreibung und Argumentation.. der einzige Knackpunkt ist also deiner Meinung nach der wieder deiner Meinung nach nicht vorhandene Speicher..
Recht gutes RockSteady hat ja bereits die OA1 geschafft, ich denke mindestens so viel RAM wird auch die P3 übrig haben. In Verbindung mit dem Gimbal wird ohnehin viel weniger zu "korrigieren" sein, als ohne.

Aber! Ob die P3 es könnte, oder nicht darum geht es nicht und dazu wird sich hoffentlich irgendwann auch DJI äüßern.

Ich merke lediglich, dass die Aufnahmen mit der OA4 (und RockSteady) teilweise deutlich weicher aussehen, als die mit dem P3.

RockSteady would help get rid of the bobbing up and down... so yes we need at least minimal RockSteady option.

Hi there. Thank you for reaching out. The DJI Osmo Pocket 3 does not support the RockSteady feature. The Osmo Pocket 3 already has a gimbal to provide stabilization therefore, there is no need for the EIS stabilization method. We appreciate your understanding.

DJI Paladin Posted at 1-15 23:45
Hi there. Thank you for reaching out. The DJI Osmo Pocket 3 does not support the RockSteady feature. The Osmo Pocket 3 already has a gimbal to provide stabilization therefore, there is no need for the EIS stabilization method. We appreciate your understanding.

It seems like you only read the headline and nothing else

JustName Posted at 1-17 07:08
It seems like you only read the headline and nothing else

We appreciate your feedback and my apologies if you weren't satisfied with the response. We will gather this concern of yours as a suggestion and will forward it to our relevant team for future consideration. If the said request applies to the unit, we will release a firmware update. Please check the release notes of the product on our website. We appreciate your understanding.