Just wondering if there are plans in the pipeline for the capture app to be able to utilise the the full 3:2 sensor size of a DJI P4P rather than 4:3?
I would say that a new Phantom will probably come out before that happens. Here’s the last discussion on the topic and why there’s really no benefit.
Many thanks Michael. New Phantom? Larger sensor, interchangeable lenses? I live in hope but not optimistic. I wonder what specs the Mavic 3 will have?
I think the Phantom brand has pretty much run its course up to the 4v2 and I am really hoping something comes along that is in between it and the Matrice/Inspire size. A smaller hexacopter would be ideal for us. As it stands now the Mavic is way to small for the jobs we fly, the Phantom is barely big enough and the price tag on the bigger copters is stupid. There’s no reason why they should be 5x the cost. The Yuneec H520 is ideal, but I don’t see Yuneec doing anything any time soon.
I just saw a teaser article a day or two ago about the Mavic 3 and I can’t imagine it is going to change much. I bet they do go after more sensors and better AI that can navigate itself like the Skydio.
Map Pilot allows the use of the full sensor in case you really want it. I agree it has probably fallen off of DD’s road map at this point.
I did the same in DD , until I realised the following :
1.When planning your flight make sure enhanced 3d is OFF.
2. Click advanced tab where you can set a lot of options, like overlaps
direction etc. etc.
3. Down the bottom of all the options set the exposure to MANUAL in DJIGO 4
4. Then before you fly your plan make sure you USE DJIGO4 FIRST to set IMAGE SIZE etc
In djigo4 there is an option of 3:2 image size to get the largest image being about 7.5 megs each.
5. Then go back to DD and fly your plan - bingo full image size.
There are a lot of other options available in DJIGO4 also. Just play with it to get the best solution for your purpose. DD seems to use these settings in the GO app automatically.
Thanks for the update. I’ve tried this myself and it does not consistently work for me. I wish we could get together a group to process 4:3 versus 3:2 with a true study on accuracy to see what we’re getting. In my experience the three two images just provide too much garbage on the edges to be worth it.