So, I just recently got my Mavic 2 Pro (yes, despite the pandemic, but us Germans are still allowed to go outside, so f*ck yeah!) and just now discovered how much loss the Full FOV comes with. However, comparing some footage (in fact, mostly not mine because I didn't fly to get comparison footage yet, but footage that Billy Kyle uploaded to Google drive) I noticed that the difference mostly didn't seem to be in how much detail is really there, but rather just how sharp it looks. So, I just went ahead in Premiere, and without any fancy stuff put +30 sharpness on the Full FOV footage in the Lumetri Color panel. I should also add that Billy Kyle shot these to get a real life comparison, so the framing is similar, meaning the drone is closer in Full FOV mode. But, looking at the results, the softer look is gone, and the HQ shot only shows a tiny bit more detail. If the Mavic 2 Pro did more in-camera sharpening in Full FOV mode, the difference wouldn't be nearly as obvious in the first place. However, the sharpening also increases the noise. Ultimately, it leads to a compromise where you get more sharpness and details, but also noise than in Full FOV without sharpening, but still less of all three than in HQ mode. Higher sharpening values create a sharper look than the HQ footage, but without the necessary detail, so it looks oversharpened, and increase the noise further. Around 30 seems to be the sweet spot where the general look matches and the compromise still makes sense. A matching result can be created by using the standalone sharpening effect with a setting of 12. This comparison was done in Normal color, though, I'll have to go out and get some DLog footage to compare that, too, but I'd expect similar results. My point is: While you will definitely get more details and sharpness with HQ mode, with just a little bit of sharpening in post the look can be very similar, which means Full FOV is not necessarily unusable in comparison. If you, like me, use a preset for lens correction in DLog mode anyway, it's actually quite easy to just add a sharpening effect to the preset and use the footage as usual. I will need to do more testing, but it seems like this simple method will make losses rather insignificant.
I definitely agree that with the right tweaking it can very easily match. In my test with the 2.7K 60fps that actually matches the 4K 30fps video in another video, I applied no Neat sharpening/noise clean up. If you did, the Mavic 2 Pro will comfortably produce 4K 60fps.
@@RICH_Photography I just watched that video, and I think it's still a bit inconclusive. In that video, the 4k does always look that little bit sharper and more detailed, but I think a large part of that is caused by the upsampling that does happen. I don't know if you'd be interested in testing something like this, but what I personally am going to do throughout the coming days is get some footage in the different 4k modes, as well as 2.7k at low and high framerates (probably 25 and 50 as I live in Europe), upscale that to 4k, probably at a ridiculously high bitrate to avoid further losses due to compression, and then compare. I will also try sharpening both the Full FOV and the 2.7k upscaled which should make differences more apparent and match the HQ look better. Furthermore, I just realized that there must definitely still be a difference between upscaling 2.7k and shooting in 4k Full FOV, as the 2.7k only uses 5376 horizontal pixels, which is not the entire sensor (which is why they recommend less lens correction for it). That difference most likely will be tiny, but I'm very curious now.
Man now we going full blown technical, I think it’s a damn great idea!!! I have an idea, you should do the video, tweak the footage and I’ll gladly share it right here on RUclips too in my RUclips Story/post. I’m so amped to check it out!
@@RICH_Photography So, I've finally gotten the chance to fly today and made the video. Unfortunately, I have little to no experience in writing scripts or creating thumbnails and my microphone is just utter garbage (and because of this I didn't really want to put much effort in the edit), but I think the footage comparison is still interesting: ruclips.net/video/l9P3gMNzLkE/видео.html
Very good vidéo. My question was HQ or FOV, and after différent vidéo and web sites, your vidéo is the best for compare and understand the différences.
Thanks for this. The other factor that would put me off FOV is the amount of barrel distortion. I will see how much is the lens quality and test on my Inspire 2 Zenmuse X5s
You’re welcome. Unfortunately you need to fix the distortion in post when filming HLG or LOG. Filming in the standard profile, the barrel distortion is already corrected. The inspire 2 will absolutely destroy the quality of the Mavic 2 Pro, it doesn’t have that really sharp GoPro look.
I did notice that the HQ, although shaper, seems to have slightly more noise (noticeable when you really zoom in 400% or 800%). I wonder how the two would compare after post production adjustments?
Great comparsion! I have the big problem with barrel distorsion. I only have an iPad Pro to edit 4k content. With LumaTouch it didn‘t work to correct. Any suggestions?
Thank you, glad it was helpful. Are you filming in LOG? Also, you should only get the distortion in FOV mode and not HQ mode as it crops more to the centre of the lens where the projection from the glass to the sensor will have almost no distortion.
Unfortunately LOG doesn’t have the correction like the standard H264 so you would need to them use FCPX or Premiere. Sometimes I like the little distortion, makes it seem wider. Have you tried filming in HLG...I can’t remember if it does the exact same thing, I think it does, no correction as HLG is H265 as well.
I’ve actually seen both saying that it’s 10bit and 8bit, I know for a fact it’s like HDR so it’s on a rec 2020 timeline so the hyper log gamma has almost the same range as normal Log footage. I prefer HLG actually. No luts needed, just basic colour grading.
you don't have to fly it, lol, just put it on tripod without props and shoot same target on the wall. but this fov vs hq testing was done already few times in detail, and don't know what you expect to resolve, what haven't been already? it's great if not the best filming and photo tool in small package, period. phantom4pro has full true 4k, mechanical shutter and all that, if you really need it, but you also need big backpack for it to move it around.
Technically you do have to fly it, as when you switch between HQ and FOV the crop changes significantly, so the drone needs to be much further back in HQ mode, so putting it on a tripod or one spot will not make an equal comparison.
@@RICH_Photography again, it can be on tripod and something and you can move tripod (or wall) closer or further away, so you fill the fov with target in both cases. it is just camera with propellers in the end.. but i like the test, don't get me wrong (just not sure why this have to be repeated, what's already have been done in very fine details). p.s.: just to add, what i would really like see dji to do(via firmware etc), is to just make option, so you cab live switch between fov and hq mode in flight , you youe get some kind of zoom. i repeated that few times on dji forum, they acknowledged it, but that's about it..
The crop is so significant that moving a tripod so far back, you would need to hunt for a perfect location. As an example, if you had to do it on a house, the yard would not be large enough to move back, or even crossing the road won’t be enough. So definitely easier to fly :)
@@RICH_Photography thats why you print out some test target or put some poster on the wall (as usual testing for cameras and lenses, since it's much easier to get same conditions etc. just as recommendation, i don't want to looks like i'm trolling. will check your other video, too, thnx.
If I’m shooting in h265 d-log and switching between fov and hq mode is there any affects on bit rate? Because I always want to shoot 10bit to get the most out of my drone.
![Mavic 2 Pro Sharpest Settings & Best Focus Method [4K]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A45YBhsPqy8/mqdefault.jpg)
Can't wait for the next one. This is super cool
🙏....is 4K FOV VS 2.7K...but with a special twist 😉
So, I just recently got my Mavic 2 Pro (yes, despite the pandemic, but us Germans are still allowed to go outside, so f*ck yeah!) and just now discovered how much loss the Full FOV comes with.
However, comparing some footage (in fact, mostly not mine because I didn't fly to get comparison footage yet, but footage that Billy Kyle uploaded to Google drive) I noticed that the difference mostly didn't seem to be in how much detail is really there, but rather just how sharp it looks.
So, I just went ahead in Premiere, and without any fancy stuff put +30 sharpness on the Full FOV footage in the Lumetri Color panel. I should also add that Billy Kyle shot these to get a real life comparison, so the framing is similar, meaning the drone is closer in Full FOV mode.
But, looking at the results, the softer look is gone, and the HQ shot only shows a tiny bit more detail. If the Mavic 2 Pro did more in-camera sharpening in Full FOV mode, the difference wouldn't be nearly as obvious in the first place.
However, the sharpening also increases the noise. Ultimately, it leads to a compromise where you get more sharpness and details, but also noise than in Full FOV without sharpening, but still less of all three than in HQ mode. Higher sharpening values create a sharper look than the HQ footage, but without the necessary detail, so it looks oversharpened, and increase the noise further. Around 30 seems to be the sweet spot where the general look matches and the compromise still makes sense. A matching result can be created by using the standalone sharpening effect with a setting of 12.
This comparison was done in Normal color, though, I'll have to go out and get some DLog footage to compare that, too, but I'd expect similar results.
My point is: While you will definitely get more details and sharpness with HQ mode, with just a little bit of sharpening in post the look can be very similar, which means Full FOV is not necessarily unusable in comparison. If you, like me, use a preset for lens correction in DLog mode anyway, it's actually quite easy to just add a sharpening effect to the preset and use the footage as usual.
I will need to do more testing, but it seems like this simple method will make losses rather insignificant.
I definitely agree that with the right tweaking it can very easily match. In my test with the 2.7K 60fps that actually matches the 4K 30fps video in another video, I applied no Neat sharpening/noise clean up. If you did, the Mavic 2 Pro will comfortably produce 4K 60fps.
@@RICH_Photography I just watched that video, and I think it's still a bit inconclusive. In that video, the 4k does always look that little bit sharper and more detailed, but I think a large part of that is caused by the upsampling that does happen.
I don't know if you'd be interested in testing something like this, but what I personally am going to do throughout the coming days is get some footage in the different 4k modes, as well as 2.7k at low and high framerates (probably 25 and 50 as I live in Europe), upscale that to 4k, probably at a ridiculously high bitrate to avoid further losses due to compression, and then compare. I will also try sharpening both the Full FOV and the 2.7k upscaled which should make differences more apparent and match the HQ look better.
Furthermore, I just realized that there must definitely still be a difference between upscaling 2.7k and shooting in 4k Full FOV, as the 2.7k only uses 5376 horizontal pixels, which is not the entire sensor (which is why they recommend less lens correction for it). That difference most likely will be tiny, but I'm very curious now.
Man now we going full blown technical, I think it’s a damn great idea!!! I have an idea, you should do the video, tweak the footage and I’ll gladly share it right here on RUclips too in my RUclips Story/post. I’m so amped to check it out!
@@RICH_Photography So, I've finally gotten the chance to fly today and made the video. Unfortunately, I have little to no experience in writing scripts or creating thumbnails and my microphone is just utter garbage (and because of this I didn't really want to put much effort in the edit), but I think the footage comparison is still interesting:
ruclips.net/video/l9P3gMNzLkE/видео.html
Thank you! Thoroughly enjoyed it, dropped my thoughts on your video. 👌
Brilliant thank you your amazing, straight to the facts... Easy to understand, love you channel...
Thank you! Really appreciate it! Keep an eye out for the Mavic 2 Pro...4K 60FPS video, you read that right, 4K 60fps.
Very good vidéo. My question was HQ or FOV, and after différent vidéo and web sites, your vidéo is the best for compare and understand the différences.
Very nice, good info!
Thanks for this. The other factor that would put me off FOV is the amount of barrel distortion. I will see how much is the lens quality and test on my Inspire 2 Zenmuse X5s
You’re welcome.
Unfortunately you need to fix the distortion in post when filming HLG or LOG. Filming in the standard profile, the barrel distortion is already corrected.
The inspire 2 will absolutely destroy the quality of the Mavic 2 Pro, it doesn’t have that really sharp GoPro look.
I did notice that the HQ, although shaper, seems to have slightly more noise (noticeable when you really zoom in 400% or 800%). I wonder how the two would compare after post production adjustments?
Thanks for the good comparison
You’re welcome, glad I could help.
Excellent video, many thanks.
You’re welcome, so glad you found it helpful 🙏
You forgot to mention, if you shoot in h265 4k you need to correct corners, so its extra crop to image.
Because it’s H265 on both, you’d essentially need to correct both so the crop for the clarity test would remain the same :)
Great comparsion! I have the big problem with barrel distorsion. I only have an iPad Pro to edit 4k content. With LumaTouch it didn‘t work to correct. Any suggestions?
Thank you, glad it was helpful.
Are you filming in LOG?
Also, you should only get the distortion in FOV mode and not HQ mode as it crops more to the centre of the lens where the projection from the glass to the sensor will have almost no distortion.
RICH Photography yes, I film in DLOG-M. With HQ it‘s only a little bit, but you can see it. i think I need hardware for FCPX oder Premiere Pro...
Unfortunately LOG doesn’t have the correction like the standard H264 so you would need to them use FCPX or Premiere.
Sometimes I like the little distortion, makes it seem wider.
Have you tried filming in HLG...I can’t remember if it does the exact same thing, I think it does, no correction as HLG is H265 as well.
RICH Photography I will try. But HLG istn‘t 10bit I think...
I’ve actually seen both saying that it’s 10bit and 8bit, I know for a fact it’s like HDR so it’s on a rec 2020 timeline so the hyper log gamma has almost the same range as normal Log footage. I prefer HLG actually. No luts needed, just basic colour grading.
you don't have to fly it, lol, just put it on tripod without props and shoot same target on the wall. but this fov vs hq testing was done already few times in detail, and don't know what you expect to resolve, what haven't been already?
it's great if not the best filming and photo tool in small package, period. phantom4pro has full true 4k, mechanical shutter and all that, if you really need it, but you also need big backpack for it to move it around.
Technically you do have to fly it, as when you switch between HQ and FOV the crop changes significantly, so the drone needs to be much further back in HQ mode, so putting it on a tripod or one spot will not make an equal comparison.
@@RICH_Photography again, it can be on tripod and something and you can move tripod (or wall) closer or further away, so you fill the fov with target in both cases. it is just camera with propellers in the end.. but i like the test, don't get me wrong (just not sure why this have to be repeated, what's already have been done in very fine details).
p.s.: just to add, what i would really like see dji to do(via firmware etc), is to just make option, so you cab live switch between fov and hq mode in flight , you youe get some kind of zoom. i repeated that few times on dji forum, they acknowledged it, but that's about it..
The crop is so significant that moving a tripod so far back, you would need to hunt for a perfect location. As an example, if you had to do it on a house, the yard would not be large enough to move back, or even crossing the road won’t be enough. So definitely easier to fly :)
@@RICH_Photography thats why you print out some test target or put some poster on the wall (as usual testing for cameras and lenses, since it's much easier to get same conditions etc. just as recommendation, i don't want to looks like i'm trolling. will check your other video, too, thnx.
Hello I have had a few issues with my mavic 2 pro and was wondering if you or any of your followers have had the same?
What issues have you had?
Thank you for your response. I have a video on my RUclips channel relating to my issues.
If I’m shooting in h265 d-log and switching between fov and hq mode is there any affects on bit rate? Because I always want to shoot 10bit to get the most out of my drone.
Pretty sure it stays in 10-Bit. Only when you switch to h.264 (MP4) does it go to 8-Bit. Stay in .MOV and you'll be in 10-bit.