Please endure this thread, I have been in the filming industry for a number of years, most of our aerial work has been done out of a R44 or the door on a 172 or 206. For a new project that we have this is just not fesible . We have looked at the inspire and with the Zenmuse camera system it is awsome ...... we then were showed the Phantom 4 pro, looked like a toy....but the footage is exceptional , not just taking price into consideration ... overall it is dam good, it is not better than the Zenmuse and we cant see much quality differance, yes they do look different .... but similar quality ..... light is a factor. Our ground work will be done with EOS R,s using 24-70 L lenses ... a small test has shown that the two fitt well using 30FPS and H.264. This is specifically for a wild life documentry and the drone work is mainly for B roll, the post guys were doubtfull but so far all is fine .... even with a "toy" .....is there something wrong...remember we dont know drones ... but learning fast.... constructive comments please . Paul - South Africa
Is the P4p v2 good enough for comercial work
- Thread starter Tecnam
- Start date
Welcome Tecnam,
That sounds like a great gig you got down there. I like and use the Inspire 2/X5S commercially but the Phantom 4 Pro V2.0 and the Mavic 2 Pro do most of the work around here, both are 4K video /20MP stills. In fact, I prefer the Mavic 2 Pro because it handles wind better and just flies smoother with the right controller settings. It's hard to beat either of them for performance, portability, and price. If you want to change out lenses, though, the Inspire 2 is probably your best bet.
One other consideration that might be in the Mavic 2 Pro's favor is its size and therefore impact on people/wildlife nearby. The Inspire 2's size and sound demands attention from anyone and anything in the area unless it's higher than maybe 100 meters, the Phantom 4 Pro is a bit smaller, while the Mavic 2 Pro by comparison, is quieter and fairly stealthy. This might be important if you don't want to startle any of your subjects.
Good Luck on your project!
That sounds like a great gig you got down there. I like and use the Inspire 2/X5S commercially but the Phantom 4 Pro V2.0 and the Mavic 2 Pro do most of the work around here, both are 4K video /20MP stills. In fact, I prefer the Mavic 2 Pro because it handles wind better and just flies smoother with the right controller settings. It's hard to beat either of them for performance, portability, and price. If you want to change out lenses, though, the Inspire 2 is probably your best bet.
One other consideration that might be in the Mavic 2 Pro's favor is its size and therefore impact on people/wildlife nearby. The Inspire 2's size and sound demands attention from anyone and anything in the area unless it's higher than maybe 100 meters, the Phantom 4 Pro is a bit smaller, while the Mavic 2 Pro by comparison, is quieter and fairly stealthy. This might be important if you don't want to startle any of your subjects.
Good Luck on your project!
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2016
- Messages
- 1,611
- Reaction score
- 973
Well 'milo_r' this is the opinion of a Mavic2 user which is understandable.
But the P4P no doubt has better camera. Your choice (as I suppose) is correct. Go for Phantom. You won't regret.
But the P4P no doubt has better camera. Your choice (as I suppose) is correct. Go for Phantom. You won't regret.
WE are cut between the Inspire and the Phantom , only because the Zenmuse camera just makes sense , however that comes from a long standing career where we use massive cameras and lenses that weigh more than even the Inspire , but we are still blown away by the quality of the Phantom , the Phantom is slightly cheaper than just one of our lenses which is weird to us ...... Ultimately the decision is going to be based on the quality ..... Quietness is a factor but generally buff do not scare easily , well not by a goose sized contraption ......... I think a Phantom is going to find its way into our box of tricks .... simple, easy , cost effective and no quality compromise .
One advantage the Phantom 4P has over the Mavic 2P is the Phantom has a mechanical shutter. For fast moving objects it helps eliminate distortion.
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,300
- Reaction score
- 9,242
The mechanical shutter is only used for still photography
Hi there.
I have a P4P and Inspire 2 with X5s. The main advantage of the X5s is the ability to change lenses. I'm sure you already know this, but putting the 45mm lens on doesn't just magnify things. It flattens perspective and give a totally different look. The other advantage of the I2 set up is the ability to install SSDs and shoot in ProRes or even Cinema DNG, which means you can shoot in log which is preferable for higher end work. You can shoot in log onto the micro SD card but personally I don't feel that 100mb/s is high enough bitrate for the heavy colour grading required by log gammas, so your quality can look worse. For shooting on to the micro SD card D cinelike is a better option.
Having said all this, the video quality from the P4P is really great and quite acceptable for most TV work. I think it has a slight edge over the M2P but only marginal. The down sampled 4k on the X5s is slightly better again but I feel it produces a nicer image in the same way that an Arri Alexa produces a nicer image than a P2 news camera. It's just something about the character of the camera that make a nicer image... But I still use my P4P and I still really like it.
I have a P4P and Inspire 2 with X5s. The main advantage of the X5s is the ability to change lenses. I'm sure you already know this, but putting the 45mm lens on doesn't just magnify things. It flattens perspective and give a totally different look. The other advantage of the I2 set up is the ability to install SSDs and shoot in ProRes or even Cinema DNG, which means you can shoot in log which is preferable for higher end work. You can shoot in log onto the micro SD card but personally I don't feel that 100mb/s is high enough bitrate for the heavy colour grading required by log gammas, so your quality can look worse. For shooting on to the micro SD card D cinelike is a better option.
Having said all this, the video quality from the P4P is really great and quite acceptable for most TV work. I think it has a slight edge over the M2P but only marginal. The down sampled 4k on the X5s is slightly better again but I feel it produces a nicer image in the same way that an Arri Alexa produces a nicer image than a P2 news camera. It's just something about the character of the camera that make a nicer image... But I still use my P4P and I still really like it.
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2014
- Messages
- 173
- Reaction score
- 261
- Location
- Denver, CO
- Website
- www.mossphotography.biz
There is also the 'first impression' factor. In the film and TV world, when it comes to gear, more is more. Even if the footage from the little camera looks just as good, a drone that looks like a machine to be reckoned with, will always make a bigger impression.
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,300
- Reaction score
- 9,242
The mechanical shutter can be used for stills but not video.
It makes no difference whether you use the stills for mapping or anything else.
So the weekend was spent analysing footage from various cameras that would need to “interface” with footage from either the Zenmuse camera system and whatever is used on the Phantom 4 pro + .But before delivering our verdicts I need to qualify a few things , I have worked with ARRI,s RED,s, Blackmagic, Sony, Canon … and a few others, initially there was nothing to touch an Arri, but we now are at a time where we can honestly say that the quality of all the cameras is on par when comparing apples with apples, it is just the look that you need to check out , depending on who your audience is, is what will determine what they like , just like wine , it depends what you like . Keeping In mind that the term “Cinematic look” refers mainly to frame rate and aspect ratio and is meaningless in today’s media environment ….
Making sure that the footage in a multi camera environment can easily be colour graded to match everything is the most important issue, and this is only achieved by doing it . And we did! . This is not new to us , how we start is taking the “lowest spec “ camera , whether it be physical settings, lens quality or other aspects, then making sure that the other items can replicate this …… We first do it on a spread sheet which is used to setup all the cameras, then we actually do a test run, and have a look, then give it to the post guys, and see what they come up with.
We then went and had a look at some drone footage in a movie done by Beverly and Derek Joubert , their footage is exceptional, BUT if you want to criticize their product you can pull it apart till it is in tatters , their story carries their product and the two together can’t be faltered, however we were just after an optical comparison (with a human eye) . Guess what, the cheap toy’s footage was better!!! than there footage, we then compared it to the Zenmuse footage from the Inspire …. It was not better ! but definitely not worse ,(And the quality is acceptable to our client) we are sure that in some circumstances where matching of colour and where a broad dynamic range is required that you would be better off with the Inspire but not in our circumstances …. So we went with the controversial option, the Phantom 4 pro + …. And yes we found one, brand new in South Africa …. And we have a few extra $$$ to play with.
Now in saying this we are not saying that the P4p+ is better than the Inspire, What we are saying is that the quality we deliver will definitely not be compromised with the P4p+ footage and will stand up to the scrutiny of any “film” critic ….. it might , and I say this carefully , be criticized with open budget technicians with limited experience in our reality .
Making sure that the footage in a multi camera environment can easily be colour graded to match everything is the most important issue, and this is only achieved by doing it . And we did! . This is not new to us , how we start is taking the “lowest spec “ camera , whether it be physical settings, lens quality or other aspects, then making sure that the other items can replicate this …… We first do it on a spread sheet which is used to setup all the cameras, then we actually do a test run, and have a look, then give it to the post guys, and see what they come up with.
We then went and had a look at some drone footage in a movie done by Beverly and Derek Joubert , their footage is exceptional, BUT if you want to criticize their product you can pull it apart till it is in tatters , their story carries their product and the two together can’t be faltered, however we were just after an optical comparison (with a human eye) . Guess what, the cheap toy’s footage was better!!! than there footage, we then compared it to the Zenmuse footage from the Inspire …. It was not better ! but definitely not worse ,(And the quality is acceptable to our client) we are sure that in some circumstances where matching of colour and where a broad dynamic range is required that you would be better off with the Inspire but not in our circumstances …. So we went with the controversial option, the Phantom 4 pro + …. And yes we found one, brand new in South Africa …. And we have a few extra $$$ to play with.
Now in saying this we are not saying that the P4p+ is better than the Inspire, What we are saying is that the quality we deliver will definitely not be compromised with the P4p+ footage and will stand up to the scrutiny of any “film” critic ….. it might , and I say this carefully , be criticized with open budget technicians with limited experience in our reality .
Last edited:
Unless you're mapping the Mavic 2 Pro or Inspire 2 would be the better offerings from DJI. The 60fps 4k on the P4P is nice, but the gimbal is not near the quality for professional video.
I intercut footage from our P4P and our Sony F55 all the time and get paid well for it. "Not near the quality for professional video" is complete nonsense. And once and for all, the MAVIC 2 Pro's camera is not better than the camera on the P4P for video. Also remember the OP describes intercutting with EOS cameras on the ground so that's where the bar is here.
I guess it could seem like complete nonsense depending upon what you consider professional video. And thanks for cutting out the fact that I was talking about the gimbal. An Inspire with an X7 will destroy a Phantom 4 Pro video. Or a Yuneec H920 with the Panasonic GH4. You must be really good at video editing.
Similar threads
