1.  Is it possible to fit a better camera to the Mavic?

2.  Are there any "rumours" that DJI might be considering a better camera with a future model of the Mavic?

The Mavic is a great platform for both video and still photography.  The size, weight, portability, simplicity of operation and scope of functionality provide most of what one needs even for professional results.  The frustrating reality is that the entire package is let down by a camera that is only suitable for "holiday pics" (and those are not my words, they are the words of DJI Support).  I am still confused as to why it is called the Mavic Pro when the camera is definately not up to a Pro standard.

The Mavic is a bit like a Ferrari with a Ford Focus engine.....

T.

Is it possible to fit a better camera to the Mavic?

No.

Are there any "rumours" that DJI might be considering a better camera with a future model of the Mavic?

I haven't heard any rumors to that effect, but it does often get mentioned by people listing things they'd like to see in the next generation Mavic. And since DJI knows people want the best possible videos and photos there's a good chance that it will happen.

I am still confused as to why it is called the Mavic Pro when the camera is definately not up to a "ro" standard. The Mavic is a bit like a Ferrari with a Ford Focus engine.....

As you said, the Mavic's size, weight (which greatly affects flight time), and portability are outstanding and maintaining those qualities while also having a high-quality camera are conflicting goals. My personal opinion is that they did a good job with the camera, but of course there's probably room for improvement and like you I'd love to see it happen.

I think it is obvious with the next Mavic, the camera will be better. For most people, the Mavics camera is good enough

Of course the next Mavic will have a better camera, just as the next iPhone will have a better camera.

What most people miss is that a camera doesn't take the picture, a photographer does.  A photographer who doesn't understand cameras will take crappy photos on the best of cameras. See this Flickr group for examples of photographers who manage to take great shots with the current Mavic's camera: https://www.flickr.com/groups/mavicpro/pool/with/34672750875/

As for replacing the current Mavic's camera, I suppose that's possible but it would depend upon what the camera stack requires, it would be unlikely if a newer camera had different processing requirements or was physically incompatible.

Thanks DroneFlying for your feedback...

Perhaps DJI could have clarified naming if they had brought out two Mavic's.  A Mavic with this camera and a Mavic Pro with a Pro camera.  The two products could have been technically identical, the only difference being the quality of the camera and obviously a price difference.  There is absolutely no need to develop two separate products - the Mavic is a fine product, and as a flying platform it can certainly serve to capture professional grade images - if it was equipped with a Pro camera.

I look forward to that day.....

T.

I still don't understand why it was/is called a Mavic Pro.  Why is the first version out a Pro?  Why not bring out the Mavic or Mavic Standard?  That gives you room to grow and improve the same model and bring out a Mavic Advanced, followed by the super-duper Mavic Pro!  Someone in marketing is messing up by jumping the gun.  Where will the upgraded version go for a name?

Ex Machina, thanks for your reply and the link.

Yes the photos at that link are very nice.  But that is not the point of my question or my comments.  It does not matter how good a photographer you are, a camera is simply a light-processing machine and as with any machine every camera has its limitations.  And in photography those limiatations are most apparent when the image is enlarged.  Images obtained from a camera of a certain specification will enlarge to a certain maximum and retain quality.  A camera of a higher specification will permit greater enlargements whereas a camera of a lower specification will permit lesser enlargements.

I have sold images that have been used on high-end magazine covers, that were taken with a 10mp camera and kit lens....... but, they needed a lot of post-processing work.  I would much preferred to have had my 24mp camera with a quality lens at hand when I took those shots, which would probably have been usable out the box with just a crop and nothing more.

T.

I rather had a more robust gimbal.

AG0N-Gary Posted at 2017-5-15 09:07
I still don't understand why it was/is called a Mavic Pro.  Why is the first version out a Pro?  Why not bring out the Mavic or Mavic Standard?  That gives you room to grow and improve the same model and bring out a Mavic Advanced, followed by the super-duper Mavic Pro!  Someone in marketing is messing up by jumping the gun.  Where will the upgraded version go for a name?

AG0N-Gary , Look at the Phantoms , I'm unable to tell them apart , but I have noticed inside the Mavic
                   battery compartment on the ID sticker it says Model MP1, this leads me to believe there
                   will be other upgraded Mavic's to come .
FlySafe-FlyFree

Tabvla Posted at 2017-5-15 09:18
Ex Machina, thanks for your reply and the link.

Yes the photos at that link are very nice.  But that is not the point of my question or my comments.  It does not matter how good a photographer you are, a camera is simply a light-processing machine and as with any machine every camera has its limitations.  And in photography those limiatations are most apparent when the image is enlarged.  Images obtained from a camera of a certain specification will enlarge to a certain maximum and retain quality.  A camera of a higher specification will permit greater enlargements whereas a camera of a lower specification will permit lesser enlargements.

Megapixels is not the problem/solution. Mavic is a small compact drone => the camera can't be that big.

I agree camera can be improved, but more megapixels is not important in my opinion. Actually it might only make the camera worse. But DJI need better balancing of noise reduction in the camera (or offering a setting to control it). And then there's the "hot spot" problem. And ugly video at high fps. Also bitrate should be higher for video.

The name "Mavic Pro" ? Common' the "pro"-part is marketing. Don't tell me seriously if you are a pro and bought the  super-compact Mavic because you are a "Pro" taking "pro pictures". Sorry to say, but you are naive if you think something takes "pro quality" photos and video just because it has "pro" in the name...

But having said that. And despite all the camera issues... As a hobby photographer who wanted a drone to bring traveling, there's no competition. Mavic is the drone I've been waiting in years for. If a compact travel friendly drone with "good" camera is what you want, nothing currently comes close to the Mavic. It's in a class of its own. But if you are doing pro-work (drone photography or filming is your living) I would definitely go for something else with a bigger camera/sensor.

How many pro photographers do you see using a camera the size of the one on a Mavic? Common sense would suggest the camera on the Mavic is not going to have the ultimate quality of a camera typically used by a professional photographer.

Whenever they come out with a Mavic 2 itll have a better camera and the hoards that jumped on this one (myself included) will be S*** out of luck

The trajectory of technology across the board is smaller and more robust. I suspect the Phantom 5 will be smaller. The camera on a new Mavic could be smaller, and better. If you're really interested in the photography side of a drone, then go with the Inspire, or the Matrice or even higher up than that, mount your dslr. For the average hobbyist, which I suspect makes up the bulk of users, the Mavic is exceptional. The Phantom 4 Pro has a better camera, but not as good as a dslr mounted on big drone. The same argument holds with 35mm format, ie, full frame, and medium format. Why go with a 50mp 'full frame' dslr when you can have 50mp on a larger sensor, ie, medium format. The answer is because the dslr is good enough, actually quite fine. The same is true between a Mavic and a P4P. The Mavic is good enough, actually quite fine.....

The Mavic is a bit like a Ferrari with a Ford Focus engine.....

Thanks for all the replies, suggestions and comments - allways interesting to learn how others use their Drones.

However, I must apologise to Forum Members for not clarifying how I use a Drone in my first Post at the start of this Thread.  I don't use a Drone for Video.  The Video that I capture is for personal use only and not for commercial use.  For commercial use I use a Drone only for still photography.  My main areas of commercial activity are Landscapes; Seascapes; Cityscapes and Wildlife.

The problem with a machine the size of the Phantom is that in some countries and environments it attracts unwanted attention, occasionally from the police but more often from those who would like to take your Drone home with them - and without asking your permission...!!  The Mavic solves that problem.  It fits in the pocket of a photographer's jacket and the controller is the size of a Smartphone.  Without a Drone images are limited to what can be captured from where one stands.  A Drone provides a whole new world of vision - and it is a lot cheaper than hiring a helicopter.  When it comes to Wildlife photography the Phantom sometimes spooks wildlife whereas the Mavic is largely ignored.

Still images from the Mavic are commercially usable but they need a considerable amount of post-processing and many images are lost because they simply cannot be fixed.

I don't have any issue with the Mavic App.  Whatever can be done through the App can almost certainly be done even better using post software.  But even the best post-processing software can only process what the camera has captured - its not magic.  

T.

StigNygaard Posted at 2017-5-15 14:07
Megapixels is not the problem/solution. Mavic is a small compact drone => the camera can't be that big.

I agree camera can be improved, but more megapixels is not important in my opinion. Actually it might only make the camera worse. But DJI need better balancing of noise reduction in the camera (or offering a setting to control it). And then there's the "hot spot" problem. And ugly video at high fps. Also bitrate should be higher for video.

StigNygaard, If you were to want just a little something better or in-between the Mavic's Camera
                   and the top of the line aerial photo platform what would you recommend ??
I ask because you seem to be very knowledgeable  Photo Savvy - If you don't mind me asking your opinion?     

SkunkWerxs Posted at 2017-5-18 06:54
StigNygaard, If you were to want just a little something better or in-between the Mavic's Camera
                   and the top of the line aerial photo platform what would you recommend ??
I ask because you seem to be very knowledgeable  Photo Savvy - If you don't mind me asking your opinion?

First of all, I've been following the drone market for years looking for the right drone for me to arrive. Something compact and travel friendly, but still very capable. It finally did it when Mavic was announced. But this is my first drone, I have almost no practical  experience with other drones.

But the sensor-size usually tells a lot about photo quality, because a bigger sensor (I'm talking physical size, not nescesarry megapixels) captures more light and is easier to design good lenses for. However bigger sensor also makes camera bigger, heavier and more expensive. Thus also the drone has to be bigger and heavier and probably also more expensive to carry it.

If you are looking for something that can compete with Mavic when it comes to portability/convinience, I honestly don't see any alternatives right now. But if you are ready for something a bit more "bulky", I think DJI Phantom 4 Pro or 4 Advanced with their 1 inch sensor cameras sounds like really good choices if camera quality is high priority. But still, they are approx. 50% more expensive than the Mavic, and I don't know if that would be within your budget?

Also be aware that bigger sensor generally means smaller depth-of-field, meaning correct focusing gets more critical. It is actually often easier filming with a small sensor camera! On the other hand the cameras in 4 Pro and 4 Advanced have variable aperture (unlike Mavic, where it's fixed), and in good light that should make it possible to have a pretty large depth-of-field by chosing a small aperture (high aperture number).

I hope that was a little help/inspiration. If you find something else you think looks interesting, just ask and I'll take a look. You can't read everything from specifications, but I can sometimes see things telling you should avoid it or be sceptical about it.

Mountaindrone Posted at 2017-5-15 20:35
The Mavic is a bit like a Ferrari with a Ford Focus engine.....

Yeah a heavily modified Focus RS engine lol.

Sensor size and image processing chip determines the quality or photo and video. As for marketing strategy, i do not think  mavic will get large improvement as there are no competitor out there. If phantom series use apcs size sensor, that may be a chance that mavic use 1" sensor for future

the next generation of mavic should use 1" sensor just like P4P .

Jason WAI Posted at 2017-9-17 17:14
the next generation of mavic should use 1" sensor just like P4P .

That would be the ultimate Mavic.

I have never before seen anybody take the name "Pro" literally in a consumer product. That's just marketing.
I hope for and expect camera improvements in future versions. I just don't expect a Mavic 2 anytime soon, and while the camera probably will be improved when it happens, it is never gonna be "professional" quality in a drone of that size. You need a bigger drone for that.