From what I’ve read the Air 3 uses a backside illuminated (BSI) stacked CMOS sensor while the Mavic 3 cameras use a frontside illuminated (FSI) CMOS. Ignoring the stacked aspect for the moment, a BSI CMOS design allows double the amount of light compared to an FSI CMOS. That can more than make up the difference in pixel size and lens aperture size. The stacked aspect doesn’t affect light gathering but does does make the imaging pipeline more time and energy efficient as it moves more of the image processing computations to the CMOS instead of downstream in a seperate computer. Among the processes which can be moved to a stacked BSICMOS are noise reduction and autofocus. I don’t know if DJI is using the stacked design to do that, but it is a possibility.
What official documentation have you come across that definitively shows the Air 4 has a BIS/Stacked sensor? I have found none despite an exhaustive search. What I have seen is a lot of people claiming this. For reference, the $5,500 flagship Nikon Z9 mirrorless DSLR land camera has a stacked & backside illuminated sensor. I remain suspicious that the Air 3 does not, but can't prove it either way so far. I have also seen a TH-cam video by a guy who claims it does not, but his evidence is not compelling either since he argues from the perspective of "if DJI didn't say it we know it's false", which MAY be true or it may not be. Another video I've seen says the boost image quality for the Air 3 is due to greater internal processing speed in the sensor as opposed to it being stacked or backlit. So far this information regarding the lense aperture combined with the pixel sizes equating to better low-light performance for the Air 3 vs the Mavic 3 Pro has bee the strongest evidence I've seen that pushes the performance of the smaller sensor size into at least being in the conversation with the more expensive drone, especially if low light performance is important. But if you do have some actual documentation regarding the existence of this new sensor technology on the Air 3 I'd appreciate it if you can post a response & a link to it...thanks.
One BIG thing that you missed is this: UHD 4k as a container is about 8.3mp size frame. The Air2-S shoots in 5.4K! That's: 5472×3078 = 16.8 mp video!! That's about DOUBLE the container size over 4k!! So,...you have the Air 3 with 2,4 micron photosites and the Air2-S with TWICE the number of 2.4 micron photosites! That is a large competitive difference that can't be skipped over. The f2.8 vs f1.7 aperture makes no difference in daylight shooting. Those same 2.4 micron-sized photosites (Air 3 in quad Bayer read) will have a similar light saturation point so the lens only matters when you are shooting in the dark, NOT in daylight flying. (Air 3 will just require higher shutter speeds) The Air2-S produces 2x higher resolution video (potentially) and uses less sharpening and less noise reduction than the smaller 1/1.3 chip. The Air 3 has EXTREMELY high amounts of noise reduction and they amped up the sharpening to compensate for that over-processing resolution loss. The Air2-S has a cleaner sensor in 5.4k and can oversample it's 4k....something the Air 3 cant do.
You bring up some extremely valid points and I would say I mostly agree. The point of this video was not to say the Air 3 has a better camera, but to say the Air 3 has the *ability* to receive more light based on math. When the Air 3 and the Mavic 3P came out, my first instinct was to bash on the 1/1.3 sensors for their ability to receive light due to the sensor and pixel size. In the end, it wasn't enough to make us go buy the Air 3 over the M3. It also wouldn't have been enough to move from the Air 2s in our case. One interesting side note, this sensor will be in the Action 4, and that does actually get me pretty excited. I'm sick of GoPros (even with all their early innovation)
@@CliffKajun also you can say that the Air 2S image resized to 2.5mp (with 4x4 binned pixels) will gather far more light than Air 3 and 2.5mp and are perfectly fine for social media, so all these numbers are completely useless and not related to real life.
Wow...I've been searching the web & looking at TH-cam videos for more than 3 months, scanning spec sheets & looking for even a tiny hint to the rumor that the Air 3 has a stacked sensor & competes more than people realize with the Mavic 3 series & it's 4/3 sensor. This is the first information I have come across that was better than simply a TH-cam review in which somebody claimed this by subjective opinion. At the same time, the lack of DJI documentation made me suspicious that the stacked sensor on the Air 3 was probably false information. I always knew the f.1.7 aperture was a factor but didn't realize it was this big of one. Kudos for going the extra mile to break down the image area with respect to optical measurement as well as the pixel size...most of us are not optical engineers. You just made by decision to buy an Air 3 as a first drone an easier one as opposed to spending the extra money to move up the ladder, which I can do later down the road.
Thanks for comparison, but you missed one factor in your calculation and that's the crop factor effect on aperture. In fact f1.7 on air 3 can't be compared with f2.8 on air 2s directly without calculating the crop factor
I’m still on the fence haha, good news is I doubt you can go wrong with either drone. It really comes down to: do you want a zoom lens? Or better image quality* that can be edited in post. I’m a video editor and zoom doesn’t interest me much so I’ll be going with the mavic classic very soon
I agree, you can't really go wrong. They are all pretty incredible machines lol. If you're into video, you may want to consider the 3x zoom for parallax. It makes for some really dramatic shots. Of course, you will lose a little image quality compared to the M3C and that aperture control. Imo: social media reels: Air 3. For pro work: Mavic 3. It's a tough decision for sure lol.
I get the calculations for low light based on aperture limits, but in general all-light photography in this case there's no replacement for displacement really. But yes, DJI definitely have given their mid range a good boost.
i think you seem to constantly over estimate the value of pixel size in low light performance, which was a big deal prior to bsi sensors. but with bsi sensors thisdoes not matter as much unless you are pushing for a really high 2nd native iso. as well as over sampling and its role in reducing noise. but i see someone else already commented on that part in great detail. but! i really like how you had physical models of the sensors and put a lot of work into your video. cheers!
Air 2s still looks more pleasant to my eyes. Highlight roll-off and shadow fall-off mixed with nicer dynamic range is something the Air 3 cannot trump. Air 3 looks crunchy and over-sharped. Lowlight is excellent though.
Yep thats exactly why I wasn't pleased with my air 2. Looked like a horribly oversharpened smartphone image. Going to the air 2s was an immense difference. Then going to the mavic 3 was like eh. Not a big difference from the air 2. I thought the mavic 3 would have wayy more dynamic range. And the log seems very weird.
Your math is way off. F/1.7 vs 2.8 is a stop and a half - 1.4 is two full stops from 2.8. Light gathering is constant regardless of sensor size so the faster aperture is letting in more light. But the micro 43 sensor is more than three times the size of the air 3’s and the pixel pitch is significantly larger which = better low light performance. Your title is misleading clickbait. The better lowlight image is the M3, the dynamic range difference is obvious and the highlight rolloff is vastly superior as well. The faster aperture just means more light is hitting the sensor, but the larger m43 sensor more than makes up for the difference. Cheers.
He also didn't factor in pixel binning.... It's the whole sensor size that matters. Also even when shooting in low light there will often be bright areas such as street lights, and a larger sensor has more dynamic range to handle that situation. I'd rather they had F2.0 m43 sensor and just one 1/1.3" telephoto lens.
Thanks for sharing. I still have the original mavic pro, 12 megapixels and no zoom. I flew too low over flowing lava in Iceland and it suffered some cosmetic damage + later turned out obstacle avoidance doesn't work anymore, GPS & compass issues occasionally and a non level horizon on the gimbal (some 30 degrees) sometimes and gimbal calibration fails. Long story short, for any next trip to Iceland I'm in for a new drone, preferably with higher megapixel count and/or zoom. I do more photo than video so megapixels and (low-light) sensor quality matters to me.
I am happy to see a channel that speaks with substance and tells the truth. Really thank you very much, I will share your video in my social networks because it is the best explanation I have seen about this.
Thank you 🙏. We just try to give an unbiased take in a world full of paid sponsorships. We are all guilty of it, but we try our best not to fall too far into the trap lol. See you around 🤘
The other factor is the two s is getting pretty old and the in the air 3 might have a more advanced sensor design... I have the Air 2 which has a quad/HDR sensor, but the HDR video mode is oversaturated and you don't have any control over it.
Yeah, the older drones and camera systems have their drawbacks for sure (even if only a few years old lol). I completely agree, HDR on DJI is more of a neat toy than a useful tool 😅
True, but do you NEED it? 😅 I once bought the probe lens for product vids, only to find out it needs a ton of light (f14-22). So, I bought the FX3 for that reason, then tons of lights. Two months later I decided I didn't need the lens. That's a lot of cash to spend on what was mostly hype lol. After years of GAS, I mostly use an old a7iii, and phones anymore. Back to the Air2s and some FPV in the air. If you just WANT it, that's a different story 🤣
Thanks for sharing your video. I'm trying to decide which one to buy between Air3 or M3P and my concern is the Air3 has a fixed aperture. Having a fixed aperture limits what I can do or not between both? I mean I can do things on Mavic 3P that I couldn’t do on the Air3?🤔
The Mavic 3 Pro is a far superior drone, but it is also substantially more expensive. I still run the OG Mavic 3, and love the adjustable aperture. Having aperture control made me sell my Air 2s a while back and buy a used Mavic 2 Pro instead. Being able to adjust the light in a video without sacrificing shutter speed or having to land to change an ND filter is very useful. Of course, adjusting the aperture has other side effects, but they are pretty minimal when it comes to video. Personally, If I had $2,500 to spend and no current drone, I would buy the M3P with the DJI RC (screen), care refresh and one battery. If my budget was limited to $1,500, I would do the same on the Air 3 and be just as happy. It's a beast, especially if you aren't doing higher-end pro work. ($2k+ per gig) What I wouldn't do is buy the Air 3 fly more combo with care refresh for $2k, when the base kit of the M3P is within reach. You can always add batteries later.
You’re comparing two different technologies using sensor size. The reason it gets more light is because in the sensor stack the cmos component is closer to the top of the stack.
You have a point, but the main comparison we wanted to show is the light vs pixel area. While the Air 3 receives more light, it does not mean it ends up with better low-light.
Cool video, but it means absolutely nothing. What matters is real examples of low light shots of the same thing at the same time with the two drones comparing them.
You are 100% correct on the comparison. The point of this video is to stop us sensor snobs from judging too quickly just because of the size. 😅 My first reaction was to consider it a downgrade from the 2s, but now I believe it's an upgrade in nearly every way.
Nonsense. Not at all clickbait. He is trying to demonstrate a point while you are defending a legacy drone.This information put into context with so many other comparisons on the Air 3 to the Air 3 and MP3 tells us that it is a no brainer to go with the Air 3 IF you are upgrading say from a Mavic 2 Pro or Air. The value equation gets too complex if you are comparing the Air 2 and M3P to the Air 3 to explore if you should buy it or not. Each person's use cases and financial arguments are just too complex and drifts into opinions. A person who needs to present to a group of people using a 52 inch screen is so utterly different than a person who does TH-cam videos to 99 percent of views on screens less than 22 inches. On the other hand, a person who is wealthy and not subject to any financial affect can buy the best an not give a damn.
@@mikkoleivonen2905 Forget what the video was about exactly. But It's all speculation based on statistical analysis based on sensor size and crap. Means nothing. It all comes down to REAL WORLD examples of side by side comparisons of the two drone shots side by side. Science would study the amount of grain, contrast, color, clarity, etc. in low light of two of the exact same drone shots. Cool video though, nonetheless.
@@CliffKajun I added to my fleet. Pure and simple. I currently have M3, Mini 3P, and now Air 3. Do I need all 3 drones as they all have similarities, no. I just like flying drones and new technology. I liked your video because you highlight some of the many positives of the Air 3 and new technology. It is refreshing as there seems to be some many that want to do nothing but trash the Air 3 because it was not ‘ground breaking’ revolutionary new technology that apparently a great many were expecting. If people don’ want to buy it then don’t buy it! But stop trashing it and stop making others that buy it feel ashamed for buying it. I personally really like the Air 3. The new RC2 remote with OS4 is incredible. I can finally fly something without out fear of it dropping it signal or video feed. I do most of my aerial photography over the swamps and lakes of Florida. We have vast swaths of land that you can fly great distance without fear of being over people, cars, neigborhoods etc. Just lots of alligators! With the M3 and Mini 3 I always have issues with signal dropping very early on in flight. Not the Air 3. It is a joy to fly! FYI, I did a night flight out and around Downtown Orlando last evening and the light was almost to bright even at 10:30PM! The quality of both video and photo is amazing, just as the M3 is. The difference is that I can fly the Air 3 without loosing signal like I do with the M3.
You got your math wrong because the f1.7 for the 1/1.3 sensor is not the equivalent of full frame aperture. You lose credibility when you don't do your home work.
I've done my homework, but I could have missed something and I'm always open to discussion. From my understanding, the ratio of light flowing through the aperture between f1.7 and f2.8 and hitting each pixel is independent of sensor size. The only way sensor size would make any difference is if the flange distance was incorrect. Again, I may have missed something, so please elaborate. Credibility is overrated 😉
The calculations can be true, but this does not mean it's better in real life. This may be true for a video where 12mp is perfectly fine, but for photography is another story. The only real comparison about the quality will be to print big at the same size and then look at the prints. Both in good light and low light everything else is just clickbait and completely useless information.
I would agree with you mostly, but definitely argue that this isn't useless information. That is to those of us who care about the way these cameras work. I'll admit, it's as close to clickbait as I've ever went, but the math doesn't lie. Unfortunately, the execution doesn't make it hold up to the other cameras.
@@CliffKajun I was thinking and actually the math it's not true, because in the case of Air 2S or Mavic 3 series, you have a 20mp sensor and you use the full width of the sensor at least up to 30 fps and that's downsized to 4K so you have maybe two times more pixels for all this data. Don't know if the Air 3 in 60 fps is cropping and how much is the crop of the Air 2S, but I think that probably will be also with more pixel data. And as I said again, comparison side by side at 100% if it's on screen or print for photos, everything else is pointless.
are you kiding ? 😂 mavic 3 family have MFT cam and large sensor.and 20 MP reso... are 3 smal sensor 12MP reso. ap 1.7 but fix ok ? fix diafragm sure you kiding
When it comes to low light, those of us who fly recreationally should remember is that it's illegal. Sorry, didn't mean to be a Debbie downer. It's just there's a lot of talk about a feature that most of us can't really use legally anyway. Super cool though that DJI is improving all aspects of their quads though.
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.83[2/2] ประสบการณ์ขนหัวลุกจากตำนานวงการผี!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/T_kFecQw7Ds/mqdefault.jpg)
What are your thoughts? Did we miss something, or does the 1/1.3" sensor actually receive more light? (On paper)
From what I’ve read the Air 3 uses a backside illuminated (BSI) stacked CMOS sensor while the Mavic 3 cameras use a frontside illuminated (FSI) CMOS. Ignoring the stacked aspect for the moment, a BSI CMOS design allows double the amount of light compared to
an FSI CMOS. That can more than make up the difference in pixel size and lens aperture size.
The stacked aspect doesn’t affect light gathering but does does make the imaging pipeline more time and energy efficient as it moves more of the image
processing computations
to the CMOS instead of downstream in a seperate computer.
Among the processes which can be moved to a stacked BSICMOS are noise reduction and autofocus. I don’t know if DJI is using the stacked design to do that, but it is a possibility.
What official documentation have you come across that definitively shows the Air 4 has a BIS/Stacked sensor? I have found none despite an exhaustive search. What I have seen is a lot of people claiming this. For reference, the $5,500 flagship Nikon Z9 mirrorless DSLR land camera has a stacked & backside illuminated sensor. I remain suspicious that the Air 3 does not, but can't prove it either way so far. I have also seen a TH-cam video by a guy who claims it does not, but his evidence is not compelling either since he argues from the perspective of "if DJI didn't say it we know it's false", which MAY be true or it may not be. Another video I've seen says the boost image quality for the Air 3 is due to greater internal processing speed in the sensor as opposed to it being stacked or backlit. So far this information regarding the lense aperture combined with the pixel sizes equating to better low-light performance for the Air 3 vs the Mavic 3 Pro has bee the strongest evidence I've seen that pushes the performance of the smaller sensor size into at least being in the conversation with the more expensive drone, especially if low light performance is important. But if you do have some actual documentation regarding the existence of this new sensor technology on the Air 3 I'd appreciate it if you can post a response & a link to it...thanks.
One BIG thing that you missed is this: UHD 4k as a container is about 8.3mp size frame. The Air2-S shoots in 5.4K! That's: 5472×3078 = 16.8 mp video!! That's about DOUBLE the container size over 4k!! So,...you have the Air 3 with 2,4 micron photosites and the Air2-S with TWICE the number of 2.4 micron photosites! That is a large competitive difference that can't be skipped over. The f2.8 vs f1.7 aperture makes no difference in daylight shooting. Those same 2.4 micron-sized photosites (Air 3 in quad Bayer read) will have a similar light saturation point so the lens only matters when you are shooting in the dark, NOT in daylight flying. (Air 3 will just require higher shutter speeds) The Air2-S produces 2x higher resolution video (potentially) and uses less sharpening and less noise reduction than the smaller 1/1.3 chip. The Air 3 has EXTREMELY high amounts of noise reduction and they amped up the sharpening to compensate for that over-processing resolution loss. The Air2-S has a cleaner sensor in 5.4k and can oversample it's 4k....something the Air 3 cant do.
You bring up some extremely valid points and I would say I mostly agree. The point of this video was not to say the Air 3 has a better camera, but to say the Air 3 has the *ability* to receive more light based on math. When the Air 3 and the Mavic 3P came out, my first instinct was to bash on the 1/1.3 sensors for their ability to receive light due to the sensor and pixel size.
In the end, it wasn't enough to make us go buy the Air 3 over the M3. It also wouldn't have been enough to move from the Air 2s in our case.
One interesting side note, this sensor will be in the Action 4, and that does actually get me pretty excited. I'm sick of GoPros (even with all their early innovation)
Also, that's a good name 🤘 🤣
@@CliffKajun also you can say that the Air 2S image resized to 2.5mp (with 4x4 binned pixels) will gather far more light than Air 3 and 2.5mp and are perfectly fine for social media, so all these numbers are completely useless and not related to real life.
Air 2s doesn't have the extra lens and omnidirectional sensors.
@@AnastasTarpanov can the air 2s bin pixels though? its not quad bayer
Wow...I've been searching the web & looking at TH-cam videos for more than 3 months, scanning spec sheets & looking for even a tiny hint to the rumor that the Air 3 has a stacked sensor & competes more than people realize with the Mavic 3 series & it's 4/3 sensor. This is the first information I have come across that was better than simply a TH-cam review in which somebody claimed this by subjective opinion. At the same time, the lack of DJI documentation made me suspicious that the stacked sensor on the Air 3 was probably false information. I always knew the f.1.7 aperture was a factor but didn't realize it was this big of one. Kudos for going the extra mile to break down the image area with respect to optical measurement as well as the pixel size...most of us are not optical engineers. You just made by decision to buy an Air 3 as a first drone an easier one as opposed to spending the extra money to move up the ladder, which I can do later down the road.
Thanks for comparison, but you missed one factor in your calculation and that's the crop factor effect on aperture. In fact f1.7 on air 3 can't be compared with f2.8 on air 2s directly without calculating the crop factor
I’m still on the fence haha, good news is I doubt you can go wrong with either drone. It really comes down to: do you want a zoom lens? Or better image quality* that can be edited in post. I’m a video editor and zoom doesn’t interest me much so I’ll be going with the mavic classic very soon
I agree, you can't really go wrong. They are all pretty incredible machines lol.
If you're into video, you may want to consider the 3x zoom for parallax. It makes for some really dramatic shots. Of course, you will lose a little image quality compared to the M3C and that aperture control.
Imo:
social media reels: Air 3.
For pro work: Mavic 3.
It's a tough decision for sure lol.
I get the calculations for low light based on aperture limits, but in general all-light photography in this case there's no replacement for displacement really. But yes, DJI definitely have given their mid range a good boost.
i think you seem to constantly over estimate the value of pixel size in low light performance, which was a big deal prior to bsi sensors. but with bsi sensors thisdoes not matter as much unless you are pushing for a really high 2nd native iso. as well as over sampling and its role in reducing noise. but i see someone else already commented on that part in great detail.
but! i really like how you had physical models of the sensors and put a lot of work into your video. cheers!
Air 2s still looks more pleasant to my eyes. Highlight roll-off and shadow fall-off mixed with nicer dynamic range is something the Air 3 cannot trump. Air 3 looks crunchy and over-sharped. Lowlight is excellent though.
Yep thats exactly why I wasn't pleased with my air 2. Looked like a horribly oversharpened smartphone image. Going to the air 2s was an immense difference. Then going to the mavic 3 was like eh. Not a big difference from the air 2. I thought the mavic 3 would have wayy more dynamic range. And the log seems very weird.
I loved the Air2s image. Also love the Pocket 3, which I believe has a similar sensor..
@@CliffKajun Air 2s has always had that ugly magenta tint shift. I hate that honestly.
Your math is way off. F/1.7 vs 2.8 is a stop and a half - 1.4 is two full stops from 2.8. Light gathering is constant regardless of sensor size so the faster aperture is letting in more light. But the micro 43 sensor is more than three times the size of the air 3’s and the pixel pitch is significantly larger which = better low light performance. Your title is misleading clickbait. The better lowlight image is the M3, the dynamic range difference is obvious and the highlight rolloff is vastly superior as well. The faster aperture just means more light is hitting the sensor, but the larger m43 sensor more than makes up for the difference. Cheers.
Nothing about this guy's channel screams good content nor good math ! Total crap, haven't disliked a video in a while !...
Very true. One thing I noticed after getting the mavic 3 from the air 2s is the dynamic range wasnt really that impressive though.
He also didn't factor in pixel binning.... It's the whole sensor size that matters. Also even when shooting in low light there will often be bright areas such as street lights, and a larger sensor has more dynamic range to handle that situation.
I'd rather they had F2.0 m43 sensor and just one 1/1.3" telephoto lens.
this is why I got amazing low light footage from the air 3 wide angle lens.
Thanks for sharing. I still have the original mavic pro, 12 megapixels and no zoom. I flew too low over flowing lava in Iceland and it suffered some cosmetic damage + later turned out obstacle avoidance doesn't work anymore, GPS & compass issues occasionally and a non level horizon on the gimbal (some 30 degrees) sometimes and gimbal calibration fails. Long story short, for any next trip to Iceland I'm in for a new drone, preferably with higher megapixel count and/or zoom. I do more photo than video so megapixels and (low-light) sensor quality matters to me.
I am happy to see a channel that speaks with substance and tells the truth. Really thank you very much, I will share your video in my social networks because it is the best explanation I have seen about this.
Thank you 🙏. We just try to give an unbiased take in a world full of paid sponsorships. We are all guilty of it, but we try our best not to fall too far into the trap lol.
See you around 🤘
The other factor is the two s is getting pretty old and the in the air 3 might have a more advanced sensor design...
I have the Air 2 which has a quad/HDR sensor, but the HDR video mode is oversaturated and you don't have any control over it.
Yeah, the older drones and camera systems have their drawbacks for sure (even if only a few years old lol).
I completely agree, HDR on DJI is more of a neat toy than a useful tool 😅
I love your crazy examples :)
Air 3S with a 1” stacked sensor is gonna KILL
True, but do you NEED it? 😅
I once bought the probe lens for product vids, only to find out it needs a ton of light (f14-22). So, I bought the FX3 for that reason, then tons of lights. Two months later I decided I didn't need the lens. That's a lot of cash to spend on what was mostly hype lol.
After years of GAS, I mostly use an old a7iii, and phones anymore.
Back to the Air2s and some FPV in the air.
If you just WANT it, that's a different story 🤣
Thanks for sharing your video. I'm trying to decide which one to buy between Air3 or M3P and my concern is the Air3 has a fixed aperture.
Having a fixed aperture limits what I can do or not between both? I mean I can do things on Mavic 3P that I couldn’t do on the Air3?🤔
The Mavic 3 Pro is a far superior drone, but it is also substantially more expensive. I still run the OG Mavic 3, and love the adjustable aperture. Having aperture control made me sell my Air 2s a while back and buy a used Mavic 2 Pro instead. Being able to adjust the light in a video without sacrificing shutter speed or having to land to change an ND filter is very useful. Of course, adjusting the aperture has other side effects, but they are pretty minimal when it comes to video.
Personally, If I had $2,500 to spend and no current drone, I would buy the M3P with the DJI RC (screen), care refresh and one battery.
If my budget was limited to $1,500, I would do the same on the Air 3 and be just as happy. It's a beast, especially if you aren't doing higher-end pro work. ($2k+ per gig)
What I wouldn't do is buy the Air 3 fly more combo with care refresh for $2k, when the base kit of the M3P is within reach. You can always add batteries later.
Wow ! Thank you so much for your helpful information, I appreciate it ! 😎 I just subscribed to your channel!
i though this is DJI marketing, save the Air 3s for 1 inch sensor with BSI, 1.7 apeture, quadbayer sensor and Stacked sensor ... for the sake of money
They are all good for social media uploads....but if your putting it on a very big screen thats where you will see the difference....
You totally did not absorb the video
You’re comparing two different technologies using sensor size. The reason it gets more light is because in the sensor stack the cmos component is closer to the top of the stack.
You have a point, but the main comparison we wanted to show is the light vs pixel area. While the Air 3 receives more light, it does not mean it ends up with better low-light.
Your production quality keeps going up I feel like I'm watching captain Kirk the new 1 not the Shat😅
Haha thanks! Glad I don't look like 'Shat' 🤣💩
Cool video, but it means absolutely nothing. What matters is real examples of low light shots of the same thing at the same time with the two drones comparing them.
You are 100% correct on the comparison. The point of this video is to stop us sensor snobs from judging too quickly just because of the size. 😅 My first reaction was to consider it a downgrade from the 2s, but now I believe it's an upgrade in nearly every way.
@@CliffKajun blatant Clickbait though haha. But I definitely feel you though on the judging quickly based on sensor size.
Nonsense. Not at all clickbait. He is trying to demonstrate a point while you are defending a legacy drone.This information put into context with so many other comparisons on the Air 3 to the Air 3 and MP3 tells us that it is a no brainer to go with the Air 3 IF you are upgrading say from a Mavic 2 Pro or Air. The value equation gets too complex if you are comparing the Air 2 and M3P to the Air 3 to explore if you should buy it or not. Each person's use cases and financial arguments are just too complex and drifts into opinions. A person who needs to present to a group of people using a 52 inch screen is so utterly different than a person who does TH-cam videos to 99 percent of views on screens less than 22 inches. On the other hand, a person who is wealthy and not subject to any financial affect can buy the best an not give a damn.
@@mikkoleivonen2905 Forget what the video was about exactly. But It's all speculation based on statistical analysis based on sensor size and crap. Means nothing. It all comes down to REAL WORLD examples of side by side comparisons of the two drone shots side by side. Science would study the amount of grain, contrast, color, clarity, etc. in low light of two of the exact same drone shots.
Cool video though, nonetheless.
This is fine but the eyes don't lie when looking at side by side. Theoretical drops out.
Thanks!
Hey! Thank you very much 🙏🤘
Did you end up trading the M3 for the Air 3, or are you considering adding it to your fleet?
@@CliffKajun I added to my fleet. Pure and simple. I currently have M3, Mini 3P, and now Air 3. Do I need all 3 drones as they all have similarities, no. I just like flying drones and new technology. I liked your video because you highlight some of the many positives of the Air 3 and new technology. It is refreshing as there seems to be some many that want to do nothing but trash the Air 3 because it was not ‘ground breaking’ revolutionary new technology that apparently a great many were expecting. If people don’ want to buy it then don’t buy it! But stop trashing it and stop making others that buy it feel ashamed for buying it. I personally really like the Air 3. The new RC2 remote with OS4 is incredible. I can finally fly something without out fear of it dropping it signal or video feed. I do most of my aerial photography over the swamps and lakes of Florida. We have vast swaths of land that you can fly great distance without fear of being over people, cars, neigborhoods etc. Just lots of alligators! With the M3 and Mini 3 I always have issues with signal dropping very early on in flight. Not the Air 3. It is a joy to fly!
FYI, I did a night flight out and around Downtown Orlando last evening and the light was almost to bright even at 10:30PM! The quality of both video and photo is amazing, just as the M3 is. The difference is that I can fly the Air 3 without loosing signal like I do with the M3.
You got your math wrong because the f1.7 for the 1/1.3 sensor is not the equivalent of full frame aperture. You lose credibility when you don't do your home work.
I've done my homework, but I could have missed something and I'm always open to discussion. From my understanding, the ratio of light flowing through the aperture between f1.7 and f2.8 and hitting each pixel is independent of sensor size. The only way sensor size would make any difference is if the flange distance was incorrect. Again, I may have missed something, so please elaborate.
Credibility is overrated 😉
The calculations can be true, but this does not mean it's better in real life. This may be true for a video where 12mp is perfectly fine, but for photography is another story. The only real comparison about the quality will be to print big at the same size and then look at the prints. Both in good light and low light everything else is just clickbait and completely useless information.
I would agree with you mostly, but definitely argue that this isn't useless information. That is to those of us who care about the way these cameras work. I'll admit, it's as close to clickbait as I've ever went, but the math doesn't lie. Unfortunately, the execution doesn't make it hold up to the other cameras.
@@CliffKajun I was thinking and actually the math it's not true, because in the case of Air 2S or Mavic 3 series, you have a 20mp sensor and you use the full width of the sensor at least up to 30 fps and that's downsized to 4K so you have maybe two times more pixels for all this data. Don't know if the Air 3 in 60 fps is cropping and how much is the crop of the Air 2S, but I think that probably will be also with more pixel data.
And as I said again, comparison side by side at 100% if it's on screen or print for photos, everything else is pointless.
are you kiding ? 😂
mavic 3 family have MFT cam and large sensor.and 20 MP reso... are 3 smal sensor 12MP reso. ap 1.7 but fix ok ? fix diafragm
sure you kiding
i have 2 dron air 3 and mavic 3 pro
but 3 pro is king 👑 drone
Very interesting. Great job. You got a new subscriber. I’m going to pick up the Air 3 as soon as my taxes come in. This helps me justify my choice.
Thank you, and welcome! 🤘
When it comes to low light, those of us who fly recreationally should remember is that it's illegal. Sorry, didn't mean to be a Debbie downer. It's just there's a lot of talk about a feature that most of us can't really use legally anyway. Super cool though that DJI is improving all aspects of their quads though.
In the USA you can now fly recreationally at night. You just need a 3 mile strobe ($20 Amazon).
I agree, it's great to see them make progress 🤘
You might want to brush up on the current drone regulations in the US
Yeeeeaaaahhh!! Science bitch!
🤣
@@DavCro it has to be really sad not to get a Breaking Bad reference..