Also, I think you'll find the OP purchased a Pro.. Just "(see above)"
You're definitely another username in the "ignore that one / clueless moron" list..
Advance v Pro - Camera Options
- Thread starter Specialist
- Start date
Also, I think you'll find the OP purchased a Pro.. Just "(see above)"
You're definitely another username in the "ignore that one / clueless moron" list..
Keyboards fights apart, I would love to see two fpv screenshots from a pro user @10 Mbps and @2Mbps of the same scene to compare... ☺
Forgive my noob question..
2 Mbps
Yes, it was me!
Again, i'm trying to choose the best phantom for my needs, and again i agree that 4K capability for me it's not an essential feature.
2.7K for me it's more than enough; actually i'm planning to use it mostly for full HD videos and aerial photography.
I'm thinking to buy an advanced and spend the extra money to build some essential add ons, like:
- batteries
- case/backpack
- good filters
- props guards (does it came with or w/out?)
- etc etc
As far as the "future-proof" i think that these are expensive toys, and the tech keeps evolving at an amazing pace, and in few months we possibly could have, better cameras, longer lasting batteries, and who knows what more, so i don't really believe that the 4K will be enough to make a P3P still "interesting" in any near future, when other drones from DJI an other will came out soon..
My plan is to buy a phantom to learn and play with aerial photography, knowing that for a serious/professional use, as i intend to step up to, in that case i'll definitely need more expensive and professional gear...
Again on topic, please someone share two comparative screenshots of the fpv feed at different bitrates, pleaseeeeee!
7Thanks again to all of you, i'm learning a lot!
Stefano
Oso
Premium Pilot
Ciao Stefano. As I noted to you in another thread, for your use case the downlink bit rate should not be a huge deal. Certainly nothing you could see well enough with a motionless screen shot. Like I said, most of the complaints that I have seen posted are from goggle users.Forgive my noob question..
2 Mbps
Yes, it was me!
Again, i'm trying to choose the best phantom for my needs, and again i agree that 4K capability for me it's not an essential feature.
2.7K for me it's more than enough; actually i'm planning to use it mostly for full HD videos and aerial photography.
I'm thinking to buy an advanced and spend the extra money to build some essential add ons, like:
I'll keep read this forum trying to learn the most from all you more experienced pilots/owners, and i thank you for that!
- batteries
- case/backpack
- good filters
- props guards (does it came with or w/out?)
- etc etc
As far as the "future-proof" i think that these are expensive toys, and the tech keeps evolving at an amazing pace, and in few months we possibly could have, better cameras, longer lasting batteries, and who knows what more, so i don't really believe that the 4K will be enough to make a P3P still "interesting" in any near future, when other drones from DJI an other will came out soon..
My plan is to buy a phantom to learn and play with aerial photography, knowing that for a serious/professional use, as i intend to step up to, in that case i'll definitely need more expensive and professional gear...
Again on topic, please someone share two comparative screenshots of the fpv feed at different bitrates, pleaseeeeee!
Thanks again to all of you, i'm learning a lot!
Stefano
For what you want to do, I think it might be more important for you to research whether or not you are okay with the 2.7k of the P3A. I have read mixed feedback of how well the 2.7k works since it was added to the P3A after the P3S was released. Some had noted poor performance once it was added, but in fairness I don't recall seeing that complaint recently so it may no longer be an issue. In my experience, my P3A struggled with 2.7k when it was added, so I switched back to 1080. This to me is something you'd want to check out more than the downlink. Just my opinion sir.
Last edited:
Oso
Premium Pilot
Again on topic, please someone share two comparative screenshots of the fpv feed at different bitrates, pleaseeeeee!
Ciao. FYI - here is a link to one the discussions in the RC forum about the max 2Mbps of the P3A. There are screenshots. Keep in mind again though that a motionless screen shot is not a good way to judge video.
Blurry Pixelation in outdoor settings with Phantom 3 Advanced - RC Groups
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2015
- Messages
- 548
- Reaction score
- 123
- Age
- 58
Good point.
I own an advanced because the pro was almost 30% more expensive and the AC and the camera are identical. Only the datarate is higher. Futureproof is not a strong argument, because also the pro will be replaced by a newer model (P4?).
I use 1080p (not 2K7).
I do wonder how still images compare. Can some post a single frame out of a video in 1080 and 4K? Has the 4K a sharper image?
The more i read forums the more i have doubts...
I want to use this bird mostly for photography and for 1080 videos, so i'm gonna buy an advanced.
As paradox, the phantom 2 was/is more future proof, the p3 being a close system with no ability to change cameras and stuff it will be shortly (ces 2016?) replaced with some new features and improvements.
Do you have issues with fpv on advanced? Bad fpv videos? Short signal? Other issues?
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2015
- Messages
- 155
- Reaction score
- 44
- Age
- 39
I've got the advanced and mostly use it for stills, couldn't be happier, get the extra juice over the P3P!
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2015
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 8
- Age
- 45
Don't forget about the sensor within the Pro which is capable of over 120fps.. Hopefully the petition in place will have DJI releasing a firmware update to allow this functionality. Not sure the Advance has that same senor. Yes only useful to those shooting video though.
I purchased the Pro in hope that release this firmware at some time in the near future
I purchased the Pro in hope that release this firmware at some time in the near future
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2015
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 8
- Age
- 45
Do they ? .. I'm not clued up on cameras but thought that as Pro was 4k and Advance wasn't then it would be different in some way above and beyond software.
They do have the same sensor... There is no cooling fan on the Advanced gimbal however to support 4K rendering. For me the Advanced seemed to be enough... I ordered it today and the bitrate difference isn't a huge deal to me. It is definitely enough for my needs. Happy flying
Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app
Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app
Rene, That a good question . I have been looking at that too.
So here are some images. Scene chosen because the conifer hedge has a detailed texture, and the shed has smooth shade. So they help to show resolution limit and any compression artifacts. Overcast lighting chosen because its England in January! Phantom on a table to keep it static.
png 4k image is too large for this site, so I've converted to jpg. Also included 2k7.
Last edited:
.7
I have done an UPSCALED match (i.e. increased pixel resolution of the same cropped area to look for differences between the source images).
Because that is nowhere near as conclusive as I thought it would be, I have also made a DOWNSCALED match: basically reducing the pixels back to HD. That would show if the HD is truly HD or actually losing some resolution/sharpness. If so, recording at a higher resolution and compiling down to HD (as many people argue) would make sense. I don't think I will interpret the results. I will leave that to you!
The video these were taken from shows the noise better, as it changes from one frame to the next:
I can put the mp4 file on Dropbox if anyone wants to see the footage before Youtube has crushed it.
But also I think it would be a good idea if someone else tried this with a different camera and scene to see if they get similar results.
I used a 4k camera on a P3A. Not that that should make a difference.
A dynamic scene might look different. But I think that if it was a detail-rich scene like this one, the throttled bitrate on 4k recording could be even more obvious.
One thing I am impressed with is the camera focus. The lines on the shed are very sharp, even at 4k. So that's not limiting the image quality anyway.
HD, 2.7k, 4k image comparison: So I tried cropping a section out of each of the photos to make a closer comparison.
I have done an UPSCALED match (i.e. increased pixel resolution of the same cropped area to look for differences between the source images).
Because that is nowhere near as conclusive as I thought it would be, I have also made a DOWNSCALED match: basically reducing the pixels back to HD. That would show if the HD is truly HD or actually losing some resolution/sharpness. If so, recording at a higher resolution and compiling down to HD (as many people argue) would make sense. I don't think I will interpret the results. I will leave that to you!
The video these were taken from shows the noise better, as it changes from one frame to the next:
But also I think it would be a good idea if someone else tried this with a different camera and scene to see if they get similar results.
I used a 4k camera on a P3A. Not that that should make a difference.
A dynamic scene might look different. But I think that if it was a detail-rich scene like this one, the throttled bitrate on 4k recording could be even more obvious.
One thing I am impressed with is the camera focus. The lines on the shed are very sharp, even at 4k. So that's not limiting the image quality anyway.
Last edited:
So is the take home message that 2.7K is more like native resolution and will usually give best quality?
Must say this chimes with experience of smaller digital cameras which often seemed to look best one down from 'best' quality recording.
May well try it anyway as 4K seems overkill for youtube.
Also I can stream 1440p with minimal buffering - but 4K is still impossible even over the router from main PC upstairs.
Must say this chimes with experience of smaller digital cameras which often seemed to look best one down from 'best' quality recording.
May well try it anyway as 4K seems overkill for youtube.
Also I can stream 1440p with minimal buffering - but 4K is still impossible even over the router from main PC upstairs.
The native resolution of the camera sensor which is fitted to both the Pro and the Advanced is definitely 4k.
So in principle (if the camera optics are good enough!) 4k should be the ultimate quality output. Many owners and potential buyers take that for granted.
However as has been well discussed on this forum, the video processing electronics are a serious bottleneck. The tiny circuit inside the gimbal base is being seriously challenged by the 4k stream, even when asked to tackle 60 Million bits per second. Hence the bolt-on fan. 60Mbps is a very low data rate for 4k. If you think that one single uncompressed frame of 4096x2160 = 9 Million pixels, its clear that a lot of image detail is being lost. Another way of looking at it is that the most recent optical media; Bluray, uses 40Mbps to deliver a video image that is only 1/4 the size of 4k. So for the Phantom to deliver a similar quality per pixel as Bluray it would have to process and deliver 160Mbps, not 60Mbps.
Since it was a wet and windy day in England today I stayed home, recorded and measured all of the available video bitrates of the P3A and P3P. (Actually I did skip over the strange 48 fps formats)
The results are in the table below, and include some surprises.
The colour codes are courtesy of Excel 2013 Conditional Formatting Colour Scale; Green is the best and Red the worst.
Just looking at the first two coloured columns first, the 60Mbps ceiling of the 4k circuitry is well known.
Although it is there in the DJI documentation I had not realised until today that it cannot manage 30fps at true 4k (4096x2160).
But it can manage the lower resolution variant that most salesmen are now calling 4k; UHD (3840x2160).
Of course there are no results for the P3A for either of those resolutions because its video circuit is not able to handle them.
Moving on down to 2.7k, it has been claimed that the ceiling of the P3A circuit is 40Mbps.
But from my measurements using both MediaInfo and Bitrate Viewer, this circuit definitely delivers all three available frame rates at 45Mbps. Exactly the same as the P3P.
In fact for every video format that the P3A and P3P have in common, they use the same bitrate.
But ('Full') HD is the real surprise. Someone needs to double check this. I repeatedly found that the P3A circuit delivers 60Mbps with the 1080p60 video format.
In contrast the European PAL equivalent (1080p50) complies with the reported 40Mbps ceiling.
Do we need 60Mbps for FHD anyway? I argue yes.
As a reference, Bluray has a ceiling of 40Mbps to deliver FHD at 60i (2 half frames of 60 fps, which is basically the same demand as 1 full frame of 30fps).
So we can say that both the P3A and P3P process FHD 30fps video data quickly enough to be able to deliver something equivalent to Bluray quality.
If Bluray was asked to deliver FHD at 60p (fullframes, not half frames) it would need 80Mbps. So the 60Mbps that the P3A uses at 60p is not at all extravagant.
I don't know if anyone is interested in capturing at 1280x720 (720p) these days. But even if the video processor could provide a very impressive bits/pixel at this low resolution, it doesn't. The quality per pixel is almost as poor as the 4k and UHD resolutions.
Then just for interest, at the bottom of the table I've put the Live video bitrates streamed to the controller. Both P3A and P3P use 720P for that.
The P3A is locked at a bit more than the 2Mbps spec declared by DJI. And in contrast, although they claim that the P3P can stream at 10Mbps I've not seen it exceed 6.5Mbps.
P3P does have a higher frame rate though (30fps vs 25fps).
MediaInfo also reports the bits/pixel quality of the video. So the right two columns give that info. It is interesting to note that the bitrate per pixel of P3P UHD at 30fps is the same as the live feed!
I am not saying that the image quality of both is the same of course. The recorded UHD image is 3 x 720p resolution in both width and height. But the amount of data available to describe each pixel is the same. If you took a 1280x720 chunk out of the UHD video and compared it to a close live feed it would probably look similar in terms of processing artifacts...in fact I might try that...
Above I raised the comparison with Bluray. We can see from the Green (0.64 bits per pixel) bar in the table at FHD 30p that this is the highest bitrate/pixel that both P3A and P3P deliver.
So 4wd, this post is an awfully long way of saying that the 'sweet spot' of both P3A and P3P is actually just 1080p30, not even 2.7k. No doubt when DJI have a P4 Pro ready to roll they will be able to truthfully tell us that they do really have Professional Quality 4k video recording!
It probably sounds like I am knocking DJI. In reality I think the Phantom 3 is an absolute marvel, ahead of the curve. I love it. But we shouldn't fool ourselves. Just because the wizards have somehow managed to squeeze some form of 4k recording into its tiny frame and price doesn't mean that this is already the ultimate in 4k video quality.
Just as a reality check, look up to the awesome Zenmuse X5R camera that DJI have just launched and puzzle at how that Pro 4k monster could be hung on a Phantom. But technology has a knack of shrinking in size and cost with time.
I've still got my first 1991 Sony tape 'palmcorder' as a reminder of how technology and our quality standards advance.
Enough already.....
Last edited:
Similar threads
