Evo II (or upcoming III) vs DJI Mavic 2 or Air2s for performance/handling?

[Vindibona1]

At some point soon it will be time to add/upgrade drones. Leaked pricing of the DJI Mavic 3 seems more than a bit much and probably more than I'm willing to pay to get the extra features that don't come with my Mavic 2 Pro. I also HATE their geofencing and have run into issues on paying jobs with that. My concern with Autel is that the handling and responsiveness won't be as robust with the EVO III (not considering the EVO II) as with the DJI drones. But as I have zero experience with Autel, I was wondering if folks who own both could tell me what I'll gain and lose from adding an EVO III to my aresenal? TIA

 

[MikeReidPhotography]

Well, the Evo 2 camera is already better than the MP2 offering. I've had an Inspire 2 with X5S micro 4/3rds camera and I feel the Evo 2 camera is close to it. So if the MP3 has a 4/3rds camera, it might bring it up to Evo 2 camera levels (detail/lack of shadow noise etc) But you still have a drone with geofencing and lack of video zoom. So I won't be getting one unless the camera is leaps and bounds better than the MP2.

 

[Vindibona1]

Well, the Evo 2 camera is already better than the MP2 offering. I've had an Inspire 2 with X5S micro 4/3rds camera and I feel the Evo 2 camera is close to it. So if the MP3 has a 4/3rds camera, it might bring it up to Evo 2 camera levels (detail/lack of shadow noise etc) But you still have a drone with geofencing and lack of video zoom. So I won't be getting one unless the camera is leaps and bounds better than the MP2.

Does the EVO II and presumably EVO III have zoom? Yeah... I despise the geofencing and with the M3 coming out at ridiculous pricing that's already off the table.

 

[herein2021]

Does the EVO II and presumably EVO III have zoom? Yeah... I despise the geofencing and with the M3 coming out at ridiculous pricing that's already off the table.

To me at this point any current drone camera with a 1" sensor is more than enough for any job I need to do. BTW they are all probably the exact same Sony sensor; what matters far more is the geofencing and for that reason alone Autel is the only option for me for the foreseeable future.

Well, the Evo 2 camera is already better than the MP2 offering. I've had an Inspire 2 with X5S micro 4/3rds camera and I feel the Evo 2 camera is close to it. So if the MP3 has a 4/3rds camera, it might bring it up to Evo 2 camera levels (detail/lack of shadow noise etc) But you still have a drone with geofencing and lack of video zoom. So I won't be getting one unless the camera is leaps and bounds better than the MP2.

I have been saying the same thing for awhile, I had the I1 with the X5S and the differences are so negligible that there is no way I'd pick the I1 over the EVO II.

 

[GeoDrone SRL]

It has been tested, seems that E2Pro is handling better the low light than Mavic 3...and this is a nice but also an ugly surprise.

 

[Saladshooter]

It has been tested, seems that E2Pro is handling better the low light than Mavic 3...and this is a nice but also an ugly surprise.

In this video, Mavic 3 seems to come out on top. The blacks on the EVO II are pretty muddy and grey:

 

[herein2021]

In this video, Mavic 3 seems to come out on top. The blacks on the EVO II are pretty muddy and grey:

I consider videos like these pixel peeping at its finest. To me, any modern drone with a 1" or larger sensor is great at night and they all pretty much have the same Sony Sensor so they should be nearly identical. Yes the Mavic with the 4/3 sensor on paper should perform marginally better but this video is a very poor representation of what the EVO II 6K can do with lowlight conditions.

My biggest problem with these YouTube "testers" is that they typically are not experienced with the equipment they are comparing so their results are dubious at best and downright dishonest at worst if they are sponsored by a competing brand. This video is a great example of that; this tester clearly had their ISO too high with the Autel (probably 1600ISO or even 3200ISO) when the EVO II 6K really doesn't perform well over 800ISO. Also there is no way to tell if the camera's LOG profile was used which will provide the best lowlight performance or how experienced the tester was at color grading; I could turn any camera's footage into an unusable mess within a few seconds of editing in Davinci Resolve.

It is always annoying to me to watch videos where the camera operator tried to turn night into day by cranking the ISO unless they are specifically performing high ISO tests and state that in their video. I immediately click out of camera test videos like that because it immediately tells me I can't trust any of their results. The right answer is to open the aperture, decrease the shutter speed, and raise the ISO very sparingly (in the EVO II 6K's case it should not go higher than 800ISO), if none of that is bright enough then you need more light or need to get closer to the light source not just crank the ISO and continue adding circuit noise.

So with absolutely no insight into the tester's experience with each drone nor the camera settings that were used along with the tester's experience in color grading there is no way to say which one actually performed better. As a reference point in my Explore Your World EVO II 6K video the lowlight footage where there was less light than the light in this video does not look like this video at all. Before I shot the video though I spent a good 3 months truly learning the camera's strengths and optimal settings and used it on commercial production shoots.

 

[GeoDrone SRL]

I consider videos like these pixel peeping at its finest. To me, any modern drone with a 1" or larger sensor is great at night and they all pretty much have the same Sony Sensor so they should be nearly identical. Yes the Mavic with the 4/3 sensor on paper should perform marginally better but this video is a very poor representation of what the EVO II 6K can do with lowlight conditions.

My biggest problem with these YouTube "testers" is that they typically are not experienced with the equipment they are comparing so their results are dubious at best and downright dishonest at worst if they are sponsored by a competing brand. This video is a great example of that; this tester clearly had their ISO too high with the Autel (probably 1600ISO or even 3200ISO) when the EVO II 6K really doesn't perform well over 800ISO. Also there is no way to tell if the camera's LOG profile was used which will provide the best lowlight performance or how experienced the tester was at color grading; I could turn any camera's footage into an unusable mess within a few seconds of editing in Davinci Resolve.

It is always annoying to me to watch videos where the camera operator tried to turn night into day by cranking the ISO unless they are specifically performing high ISO tests and state that in their video. I immediately click out of camera test videos like that because it immediately tells me I can't trust any of their results. The right answer is to open the aperture, decrease the shutter speed, and raise the ISO very sparingly (in the EVO II 6K's case it should not go higher than 800ISO), if none of that is bright enough then you need more light or need to get closer to the light source not just crank the ISO and continue adding circuit noise.

So with absolutely no insight into the tester's experience with each drone nor the camera settings that were used along with the tester's experience in color grading there is no way to say which one actually performed better. As a reference point in my Explore Your World EVO II 6K video the lowlight footage where there was less light than the light in this video does not look like this video at all. Before I shot the video though I spent a good 3 months truly learning the camera's strengths and optimal settings and used it on commercial production shoots.

Why is not good 1600 ISO?
This was almost pitch black, that street is light with less of 1200 lumens, very poor...
The final image is still usable

 

[herein2021]

Why is not good 1600 ISO?
This was almost pitch black, that street is light with less of 1200 lumens, very poor...
The final image is still usable

Not to me, there is way too much noise in the shadows, the color quality is degraded; clarity, sharpness, and most importantly color accuracy falls apart after 800ISO. Is the footage still viewable? Sure. Commercially viable? No, not something I would deliver to a paying client.

As far as I know there are no drones with dual native ISO, maybe because Sony doesn't make a 1" sensor with dual native ISO, but until that happens I have yet to see any good night footage past 800ISO from a 1" sensor. I would take a drone with a 1" sensor and dual native ISO over a M4/3 sensor any day.

I really don't see a need to go past 800ISO, night footage should look like night footage to me, if there is no light then that area should simply be black; ISO is not a magical cure for lack of light, it is simply an increase in circuit gain at the expense of additional circuit noise and to me anything past 800 ISO with the EVO II 6K is unacceptably noisy.