Gopro 4 vs P3A Camera

[brianb87]

After messing with the settings I've came to the conclusion that the video from the GoPro is much better then the P3A Camera. Would anyone agree or disagree?

 

[Dirby]

yeah i think the video from the p3p is better than the gopro.

 

[brianb87]

yeah i think the video from the p3p is better than the gopro.

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't it require a device that's supports 4k? (4k TV)

 

[bbfpv]

Not this thread again.... I'm sure macsoft will be here momentarily.

 

[Chuck Young]

The P3P won it out when I compared raw footage from both. Fisheye correction is easy but who wants to have to do it?

 

[ianwood]

Having used both extensively, I still favor GoPro currently. P3P has gotten much closer but DJI still has to clean up their codecs, exposure and color profiles. When the P3P gets 2.7K, hopefully we'll be even closer to parity still. They share the exact same hardware so there's no reason they can't produce the same quality.

I am curious to see how they implement 2.7K. GoPro had to step down the live output to 480p because the Ambarella processor couldn't do both at the same time. While 720p and even 1080p FPV is great, I'd rather not sacrifice bitrate.

As for fisheye, the GoPro has it bad but both cameras have a noticeable lens distortion. Both require lens correction. It's simple and it's but one step in any post-production workflow. If you want quality, you can't just dump from camera straight Youtube. The GoPro workflow is longer but the results are pretty **** good.

 

[III% Streve]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't it require a device that's supports 4k? (4k TV)

..or any computer on the planet. I'm betting everyone has at least one of those.

 

[brianb87]

Having used both extensively, I still favor GoPro currently. P3P has gotten much closer but DJI still has to clean up their codecs, exposure and color profiles. When the P3P gets 2.7K, hopefully we'll be even closer to parity still. They share the exact same hardware so there's no reason they can't produce the same quality.

I am curious to see how they implement 2.7K. GoPro had to step down the live output to 480p because the Ambarella processor couldn't do both at the same time. While 720p and even 1080p FPV is great, I'd rather not sacrifice bitrate.

As for fisheye, the GoPro has it bad but both cameras have a noticeable lens distortion. Both require lens correction. It's simple and it's but one step in any post-production workflow. If you want quality, you can't just dump from camera straight Youtube. The GoPro workflow is longer but the results are pretty **** good.

Any software that you would recommend ?

 

[III% Streve]

BlackMagic Designs 'Davinci' has a hell of a bang for the buck! Especially when its free!

 

[brianb87]

BlackMagic Designs 'Davinci' has a hell of a bang for the buck! Especially when its free!

Awesome! Thanks Streve!

 

[III% Streve]

I use it and Adobe products. But Davinci is a great place to start

 

[Ingsoc75]

Any software that you would recommend ?

Autodesk Smoke

 

[herein2014]

After much testing, post production work, and side by side comparison it is my opinion that the GoPro wins hands down even over the P3P when the GoPro is outfitted with a custom (non fisheye) lens for both video and pictures. I still use my P2 for photo shoots because the GP4 with the custom lens has zero distortion, much better color reproduction, and higher dynamic range. With the P3P I am spending a lot of time in post trying to just match what the GP4 can do natively.

If it weren't for Lightbridge, the P3P's ability to switch between video and pictures in midair, and of course the range of the P3P, I would have stuck with my P2 and GP4. Its a shame the 3DR Solo debuted with such dismal specs.