I think that stills in good weather conditions are better in the p2v+ than the p3...that's a point that I hoped to be better in the p3, more resolution mostly
Hands on experience Phantom 3 - 4K plus Inside the hood Pictures
- Thread starter mohan
- Start date
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,305
- Reaction score
- 9,247
You need to look again at some examples from the P3.
The resolution (number of pixels) is slightly less but not enough to make any practical difference.
But the photographic quality is a huge improvement over the rather poor results offered by the P2V+.
Well I do not agree about the "poor" results. I've taken epic shots with my p2v+ and I've seen pictures from p3 that don't impress me at all. As I told I'm talking about good light condition, I know that the new cam has more options and better low light management.
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,305
- Reaction score
- 9,247
If the camera was a step backwards people wouldn't be falling over themselves to put in orders.
You're welcome to your epic P2V+ shots but I can't wait for a camera that shows detail rather than mush and that has enough dynamic range to show clouds as well as ground detail rather than burnt out white patches in the sky.
You're welcome to your epic P2V+ shots but I can't wait for a camera that shows detail rather than mush and that has enough dynamic range to show clouds as well as ground detail rather than burnt out white patches in the sky.
Raw pictures has all the detail you need. Anyway we will see when p3 will be delivered and users can take pictures to show.
PS: can you show me a great picture taken with p3?
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,305
- Reaction score
- 9,247
Look at the results that have come from the Inspire.
The very long delay between images when shooting Raw on the P2V+ makes it unsuitable for a lot of shooting.
No particularly stunning photos here, but check for some ideas of how the cameras compare, including a side-by-side comparison of raw images from P2V+ and P3.
http://flytpath.com/dji-phantom-3-first-look-and-review/
The P3 is going to be a lot more usable than the P2V+ and it's got a better camera.
Last edited:
Hi, I agree with this. I remember my "old" gopro hero3 black (replacing a HERO2). Video performance... impressive, huge improvement. Photo performance, really worse than previous model (photos taken with hero2 were a lot better than Hero3 Black).
I agree for the delay even if is not a big problem for me, I don't need to take sequences of photo in raw mode, the comparison on that site seems imho a false, I'm sure that with correct settings on the p2v+ the shot token wouldn't have been so bad. This shot seems with +2 exposure and spot metering. Seems done only to show how better is the p3 over p2.
There as thread here that show some breathtaking still taken with p2v+...
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,305
- Reaction score
- 9,247
Point me to the breathtaking P2V+ photos - I'm always interested in seeing good work.
I've taken some nice ones myself but am always frustrated by the limitations of the camera and the failed shots that would have been great with a better camera.
I'd like to see the evidence that helped you come to the conclusion that the 2 is better than the P3.
I've taken some nice ones myself but am always frustrated by the limitations of the camera and the failed shots that would have been great with a better camera.
I'd like to see the evidence that helped you come to the conclusion that the 2 is better than the P3.
12mp is not enough nowadays imho and the still I've seen from p3 are nothing special both for quality and details. Moreover there is evident noise.
The best thing in pictures for the p3 is the possibility to catch 8mp shots from 4k footage.
Look here.
http://www.phantompilots.com/index.php?threads/16761/
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,305
- Reaction score
- 9,247
Still nothing to convince me to cancel my order and nothing to indicate the P2V+ camera is better.
If you look at my photos you can see that I have given the P2V+ a pretty good workout and have a reasonable idea of what it can/cannot do.
12MP is fine as long as the quality is there.
How would taking 8MP stills from video be a way to get better images than shooting stills?
If you look at my photos you can see that I have given the P2V+ a pretty good workout and have a reasonable idea of what it can/cannot do.
12MP is fine as long as the quality is there.
How would taking 8MP stills from video be a way to get better images than shooting stills?
Last edited:
No one want to convince you to cancel your order, maybe me too will buy a p3 later, I'm just a little bit disappointed that for stills could've been done something better. Obviously 8mp stills from video will not be better than shooting stills but is interesting because if you find a nice shot in your video footage it will be at 8mp that is not so bad for most use...
More pixels doesn't mean better quality, in my experience optics and how the data is processed has a bigger impact.
But to be honest I don't know why everyone is getting hung up on proving which camera is the best, you could give a box brownie to a true artist and he would probably kick some guys *** wielding 20mp. There is so much more to a picture than pixels.
The problem is not the pixel itself I know, the problem is the not impressive quality of details, noise clearly visible and then after all 12mp. Nowadays phones has at least 16mp lens, that would have been a good size for p3 imho.
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,305
- Reaction score
- 9,247
The basic premise that 12MP is too low and 16MP would be better shows a lack of understanding.
The potential improvement due to such a difference in resolution isn't enough to have any significant effect.
Read this about the Megapixel Myth to get some idea.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm
ps .. still wondering why you think the P2V+ is a better camera.
All you've come up with is that you've seen some good photos taken with it.
The potential improvement due to such a difference in resolution isn't enough to have any significant effect.
Read this about the Megapixel Myth to get some idea.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm
ps .. still wondering why you think the P2V+ is a better camera.
All you've come up with is that you've seen some good photos taken with it.
Composition, optics quality, the sensor, and the gimbal are all much more important than pixels, at least in my opinion...
Hi, I saw some samples (maybe pre-production units) and don´t like as p2v+. Really I don´t think p2v+ will be better camera (we need see more final production photos to compaer), but I for sure that p3 don´t need be better in photo because, only, it´s newer model (hero3 black, to me, worse than hd2 in photos). Maybe yes, maybe no (for video, I for sure YES). Of course more options, but really p2v+ takes great photos and great look to me.
but I would buy p3, even worse "photo" camera (I saw hero3 black "photos" was worse than hero2, but I prefered it.... no problem).
Regards
Apart from lens, gimbal and electronics sensor size is a most important factor.
The bigger the sensor, the bigger the individual photosites (pixels), lesser noise, better dynamic range an colour gamut.
Alas, the size of the sensor of the P3 (aps-c) is very small. Putting more pixels in it then 12Mb makes absolutely no sense as the overall picture quality will not increase.
My ground-based camera has only 16MB but a full frame sensor and that makes all the difference.
That is my opinion based on what I've seen but now I understand, you have to justify yourself money spent and don't accept who argue about p3.
PS: OK 4milion pixel more, 1/3 pixel more, is useless. OK you're right and p3 has no defect, is the perfect machine to shot. Now hope you're happier for your bought.
Similar threads
