Good Drones for Cruisers?

[GTom]

Originally Posted by weavis

A Drone rescue

...

Looks good! However, salt water is much more problematic, and I usually sail in deeper water, which would complicate the recovery. Still, if one adds a life jacket to the Mavic and keeps a bucket of deionized water on board, it might have a chance...

Other drones, like the H2O series are too bulky for me. As for image quality I'd love of course a top dog, but these things are heavy both to fly and to buy, I think I might get something cheap from banggood to practice... I wouldn't pay heavy $$ for something that cannot land on water (I mean sea, not a flat pool...) and it doesn't have a 1" sensor+zoom lens.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by GTom

Looks good! However, salt water is much more problematic, and I usually sail in deeper water, which would complicate the recovery. Still, if one adds a life jacket to the Mavic and keeps a bucket of deionized water on board, it might have a chance...

Other drones, like the H2O series are too bulky for me. As for image quality I'd love of course a top dog, but these things are heavy both to fly and to buy, I think I might get something cheap from banggood to practice... I wouldn't pay heavy $$ for something that cannot land on water (I mean sea, not a flat pool...) and it doesn't have a 1" sensor+zoom lens.

Yeah, I think I've settled on the Mavic. Appears to be competent enough, and the issue of storage space and portability is huge. Not only will I need to find some place to stow it, but I will need to carry it on hikes in remote areas.

[GTom]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Yeah, I think I've settled on the Mavic. Appears to be competent enough, and the issue of storage space and portability is huge. Not only will I need to find some place to stow it, but I will need to carry it on hikes in remote areas.

Don't have one, but saw bikers carrying them. Portability is crucial, when you are on anything less than 4 wheels The next step would be an Inspire or something similar, that carries a 1" or 4/3" camera but for that you need a mule.

[Thalas]

For the Mavic, I built these floats out of a 3" pool noodle. They have enough buoyancy to easily float the Mavic (not tested in crash conditions to see if there is no splashing yet thankfully), have very low windage, and enhance visibility. The bottom half is rounded to maximize surface area, but the top is cut to a point to minimize downwash drag.

I lose about 3 minutes of flight time, but gain some peace of mind and a much easier grab point since they are so securely attached. The foam slots into 3rd party landing gear extenders and is secured with straps around the foam and arms.

When I'm not using the floats, I have 1" clear grip tape attached to the sides of the Mavic just below the battery line to make landing grabs easier.

[Thalas]

Also, to anyone considering the Mavic Air over the Mavic Pro... in most non-sailing situations, I'd say its a close call. For sailing, however, the extra weight and motor strength of the Mavic makes it less affected by gusts of wind when trying to catch it. There is also a much larger area to grab vs the air.

Mavic Pro all the way.

[mikedefieslife]

After owning a Mavic, I'd now go with the new Air purely for the 100Mbs bitrate in 4k. It should make a huge difference to the quality of the video.

Downsides are slightly less flying time, no Occusync (less range), not as quiet as the new props. Still you get a smaller, cheaper package.

[GTom]

I am not sure, if 100mbps digs more useful information from the tiny 1/2.3" sensor. The real performance boost would be a 1" sensor.

[cyan]

Originally Posted by GTom

I am not sure, if 100mbps digs more useful information from the tiny 1/2.3" sensor. The real performance boost would be a 1" sensor.

Well hold on there, mikedefieslife spoke of 4K. The Mavic Pro at 60 Mbps is absolutely NOT enough for an H.264 codec for 4K, even at only 24 fps. When any sort of moving detail is in frame such as waves or grass, compression artifacts blur the image like Directv from 1997. HD is the sweet-spot mode for 60 Mbps on that camera, however the stills look pretty good in 4K as DNG is used. My Phantom 3 Pro has the same issue, and any video mode beyond HD is simply trash.

Jumping up to 100 Mbps with the same codec would absolutely "dig more useful information", addressing the dominant image problem in 4K: compression. I would guess the 4K sweet spot would be closer to 240 Mbps, though. (4 x the original decent 60 Mbps for HD) Any advantage from the larger photosites and bigger glass of a 1" sensor would simply get crushed by these problems, and would be a waste of money. 100 Mbps is still way to low IMO, but this is certainly the first problem to address in 4K before talking about better sensors.

[Thalas]

Originally Posted by cyan

Well hold on there, mikedefieslife spoke of 4K. The Mavic Pro at 60 Mbps is absolutely NOT enough for an H.264 codec for 4K, even at only 24 fps. When any sort of moving detail is in frame such as waves or grass, compression artifacts blur the image like Directv from 1997.

I swear, sailors love hyperbole even more than fisherman!

NOT enough for who? There are hundreds of 4k Mavic videos on youtube that look gorgeous. DJI Inspire quality? No. But for 99% of us.. hell yes. Would Mavic Pro 2.0 benefit from 100Mbps and a 1" sensor? Absolutely. But come on man... misinformation on these boards doesn't help people make informed decisions. 1997 quality? Please!!!

EVERY camera has limitations, but this drone in this form factor with these specs is an amazing tool for sailors who want to document their lives.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnsE0wmXjqs

[SailFastTri]

Originally Posted by mikedefieslife

After owning a Mavic, I'd now go with the new Air purely for the 100Mbs bitrate in 4k. It should make a huge difference to the quality of the video.

Downsides are slightly less flying time, no Occusync (less range), not as quiet as the new props. Still you get a smaller, cheaper package.

As with anything - trade-offs.

Mavic Air slightly more portable, better image quality...

Mavic Pro better flight time and longer range radio signal. (Stability in wind is perhaps better but we don't know enough about Mavic Air performance yet.) But as pointed out above, the MP's image quality and portability is already excellent. I think the 5+ minutes of extra flight time, and the far superior radio range (more than double the range and more resistant to interference even at close range) makes the MP the clear choice (still) for a boat.

[cyan]

Originally Posted by Thalas

I swear, sailors love hyperbole even more than fisherman!

NOT enough for who? There are hundreds of 4k Mavic videos on youtube that look gorgeous. DJI Inspire quality? No. But for 99% of us.. hell yes. Would Mavic Pro 2.0 benefit from 100Mbps and a 1" sensor? Absolutely. But come on man... misinformation on these boards doesn't help people make informed decisions. 1997 quality? Please!!!

EVERY camera has limitations, but this drone in this form factor with these specs is an amazing tool for sailors who want to document their lives.

LOL, I'm sorry my “hyperbole” was too much for you. In my line of work, the topic of the early days of the DirecTV MPEG2 bitrate issues is simply a running joke that often gets flung at compression artifacts. It's a long story, and not literally 1997, but there's no way you would have known that. My bad. There are very few of us imaging experts in Hollywood, and we all know each other, and we all use the same nerd humor.


The video you posted was indeed gorgeous, though the color correction could use a bit of work. However, it was also riddled with 4K compression artifacts that would not have been there had it been shot in HD at the same bitrate. You might not have noticed, but there are many reasons for this. What type of monitor did you use? Did you force your Youtube player into 4K mode? Did you see any shots that were not slow pans at a high altitude? (I'll answer that for you- nope.)


I realize that my eye will catch subtle things that most won't, simply because I've been doing this for 25 years. However, my point was aimed at the common misconception among non-professionals that 4K is always better than HD. Did you know that most modern movies are NOT shot in 4K? The Arri Alexa is only 2880x2160, but is still the go-to camera in the tent-pole features. (all the biggest box office movies we all watch) The Alexa has NO compression in ARRIRAW mode but delivers the most film-like color.


I'll see if I can grab some simple comparison images for you, and then you'll eventually understand, this I promise. We often do this for studio executives, but the cameras are much different so it will take a little time. (I'm on location, so prolly 2 weeks?)


I understand your “misinformation” accusation regarding random internet info. I'm with you there, brother. It's just that this Cruisers Forum happens to enjoy at least two of us industry experts. (another is just a lurker and new to sailing) I agree that the Mavic Pro is indeed an amazing tool, but you should understand that its 4K mode is NOT ideal for video on this drone.


Cheers,
Cyan

[mikedefieslife]

Originally Posted by Thalas

I swear, sailors love hyperbole even more than fisherman!

NOT enough for who? There are hundreds of 4k Mavic videos on youtube that look gorgeous. DJI Inspire quality? No. But for 99% of us.. hell yes. Would Mavic Pro 2.0 benefit from 100Mbps and a 1" sensor? Absolutely. But come on man... misinformation on these boards doesn't help people make informed decisions. 1997 quality? Please!!!

EVERY camera has limitations, but this drone in this form factor with these specs is an amazing tool for sailors who want to document their lives.

Whilst a nice video, being familiar with the Mavic I can see the 'issues' with ti are the same as mine. It's the wrong type of scenery to get the best out of the Mavic. Trees, water, and small details are where the compression artefacts are most visible. Still I mean i'm sure most would love to have that footage so that's fine. It is good.

But the PP4 has a 100Mbs bitrate, and the difference in clarity is night and day compared to the Mavic. It also has the 1" sensor, so obviously we can't expect the same performance from the tiny Air, but I would expect an improvement.

All are great quadcopters, and it's great that there's a good amount of choice. They are only going to get better with time. I suppose it's a case of pay your money, take your choice, and be happy with that you have.

[GTom]

The current state whether we like it or not, there are compromises to make. There is no easy portable/pocketable drone delivering Zenmuse x7 quality.

The two Mavics seem to be a good compromise, looking forward how the story continues (I'd love optical zoom).

[cyan]

Originally Posted by GTom

The current state whether we like it or not, there are compromises to make. There is no easy portable/pocketable drone delivering Zenmuse x7 quality.

The two Mavics seem to be a good compromise, looking forward how the story continues (I'd love optical zoom).

Yep, GTom, you can spend a ton of money but you still won't get the portability of the Mavic, which I do like BTW. (IF properly set in HD, or maybe 4K but only for for stills and SLOW moves)

Then Zenmuse is cool- I like the ProRes capability. However, when you start to get big and expensive, then why not carry a 5D, RED, or even Alexa Mini in one of those monster octos? (which once almost took my head off on set)

I think the Mavic for a sailor is good, but I like to catch my Phantom 3 Pro by the landing skids- very predictable, without cut fingers or a splash. I suppose you could add something like those skids to a Mavic?

[DavefromNZ]

DJI phantom 4, very good. This YouTube shows me trying to recover in pitching seas at the 8.50 point. Can be difficult but at least a good undercarriage to grab: https://youtu.be/EHYiGH3QTTs

And another one: https://youtu.be/jH1oUdE7cDk