OK, PLEASE take no offense, but this really didn’t impress me much.... Again, aside the from the rare 4K super-slo-mo of a vehicle going through a mud puddle, an XSP could have shot all of this.
1) 1/3 of the footage is Evo following a vehicle. Big deal.
2) Access. Special access got them many of the nice shots. I’m not sure which National Park that was, it looked like Grand Canyon for awhile, but it could be one of several in the general area. All illegal to fly in (I’ve been checking the maps since I’m in AZ now). In fact, AZ forbids flying in ALL state parks too, I think Utah does as well... Autel greased the wheels on this shoot too. None of us could have shot there...
3) Seriously, it’s common knowledge the only time to shoot photos/video in the desert is around dawn, and late in the afternoon until dusk. That’s all I shoot now, it’s a small window. That’s when most of this was shot, unless Evo was following a vehicle (yawn) in transit.
There’s some really nice footage here, make no mistake. But since they had a budget, $$$ ATV vehicles and permissions to do this, why not shoot it with an Inspire, and get MAX quality, rather than above average quality? I guess what I’m saying is — IMHO, there is nothing really blockbustery or uniquely Evo about this video. The Mtn goats were nice, a bit of luck there. Looks like Evo spooked them, which is one of the reasons it’s illegal to fly in NP’s...
I'm not getting all the defensiveness from you and Augustine about the XSP. It's great that you're happy with it but why keep bigging it up when it's not available any more?
It's as if I had posted about how much superior the EVO is to the XSP whereas I've never mentioned the XSP except in response to you. You post as though EVO owners keep attacking your beloved XSP but, AFAIK, they don't. This part of the forum is for EVO discussion and I just can't see the point of bringing the XSP into every conversation. Who is it helping?
Having a coupe of hours to waste today, I have been trawling through the archive of XSP footage on Youtube and there is plenty I could say about its quality, sharpness, color palette, performance, artifacts, etc. But it's the wrong forum and it wouldn't help anyone so I'll keep my counsel.
But the sum total of it is that I much prefer the EVO's camera and its amazingly clean and sharp output, which is why I'm in this section of the forum.
As for the qualities of the Autel Moab video, you and I will have to agree to differ. For me, the follow sequences were dramatic and helped to break up what might otherwise have been a routine high level fly-past (of stunning scenery).
Your point about access is lost on me. Augustine made exactly the same comment about the Autel NZ video and it seems totally irrelevant to the quality of the footage and capabilities of the EVO which are all most people would care about. Great footage doesn't necessarily require stunning/inaccessible locations. Some of the best EVO footage I have seen has been of modest/dilapidated buildings. It's not all about the scenery.
Only you know what relevance your third point has to the quality of the Moab video. Are you saying it was shot at the wrong time of day?
Never having been to the area, I must bow to the comments of others that the colours are not lifelike but based on other videos, much of the color changes with the time of day, angle of the sun, etc. In any event, it doesn't impair the video for those who don't know the landscape. And a colorist may have altered some of the original hues in post. If the only great art was lifelike then Manet, Monet, Degas, Picasso and many others would be considered useless artists.
I agree, it’s the main reason I use CP filters exclusively. They have issue too, but the color is great. The Evo vid just doesn’t look right. My area glows a reddish brown late in the day, more red than brown. For about 5 minutes at dusk, my world turns red!
), and you can gain access. The rest of us? Nope...
