100% centre DNG crops for comparison?
- Thread starter Peter Evans
- Start date
The images I posted were DNG straight from the P2V into Photoshop CS6, cropped 800x800, and saved as highest quality .jpg. No sharpening or other processing.Old Gazer said:
After posting them, I tried various techniques of sharpening the originals in CS6 and saw little improvement.
Peter, I reckon your best bet to have your camera swopped is to say yours is a bit soft on one side. I have spoken to a couple of people who have had theirs swopped by their dealers without quibble. I should imagine they get refunded by DJI as it is a known problem. If you look at the image you posted on another thread (the one with your house on) there is possible softness on the right hand side if you look at the trees on the horizon.
MikeON said:
I have been doing my sharpening in raw 8.3 then loading the pic in Photoshop CC. Raw 8.3 seems to be much better for sharpening. I think these cameras do vary in picture quality. So do individual pictures taken by the same camera.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Peter,
This is an interesting thread. I got my vision early December with high hopes. pardon the pun - if you search my posts you will see that I have been banging on about camera quality especially left hand unsharpness since then. At that time we were all hoping that the raw conversion software would drastically improve matters. I had my camera swapped and I have to say it is certainly better though the right hand is now soft but not as much.
I'll hold up my hand and state that I was beta testing the DNG albeit briefly as DJI just released it without giving the various testers any notice even though we had identified various bugs. Why? Who knows!
It's not a high end camera and I was suckered into it by all the marketing hype however I'm enjoying flying it and learning how to fly quads and I know eventually I will move up to something more beefy to lug a decent compact like the sony rx100 as I'm only really interested in stills being an architectural photographer.
And yes whilst not everyone realises that raw files are by nature inherently unsharp and need amounts of post pro to make them acceptable I still think it's a worthy comparative test and will post my sample images later.
Cheers
This is an interesting thread. I got my vision early December with high hopes. pardon the pun - if you search my posts you will see that I have been banging on about camera quality especially left hand unsharpness since then. At that time we were all hoping that the raw conversion software would drastically improve matters. I had my camera swapped and I have to say it is certainly better though the right hand is now soft but not as much.
I'll hold up my hand and state that I was beta testing the DNG albeit briefly as DJI just released it without giving the various testers any notice even though we had identified various bugs. Why? Who knows!
It's not a high end camera and I was suckered into it by all the marketing hype however I'm enjoying flying it and learning how to fly quads and I know eventually I will move up to something more beefy to lug a decent compact like the sony rx100 as I'm only really interested in stills being an architectural photographer.
And yes whilst not everyone realises that raw files are by nature inherently unsharp and need amounts of post pro to make them acceptable I still think it's a worthy comparative test and will post my sample images later.
Cheers
Same here. In reality it's the equivalent of a low-end webcam. While I didn't expect a DSLR, I did expect it to be at least as decent a cam as can be found in any 2013 smartphone. Too bad. The craft itself flies wonderfully.
16 bit. I have since tried converting to 8 bit and sharpening with all 3 techniques, and my conclusions are the same as before.AnselA said:
Bigvern said:
How does this one look so much better than the other examples? Does picture quality vary that much from one camera to another?
Here is another unprocessed 800x800 DNG crop to add to the mix. This is my 2nd camera for my Vision (first one was replaced by DJI). Definitely better than the first one. Overall I've had good & bad results, depending on light, altitude, how far away my subject is, etc. The DNG update makes it easier to adjust the images I'm most happy with. I was hoping for better but I'm still amazed at all the technology built into this thing and how easily it allows me to take decent pictures from the sky. Part of the fun for me is figuring out how to best work with its limitations. Sure, I'd love to have the DJI s1000 and a Canon 5D Mark III attached to it, but I could barely afford the Phantom Vision.
Attachments
That image is the one that gives me hope I might get a better camera if I return mine. Before, I figured the replacement would be just as bad as the original.YeeaaBoii said:
Yes, bigvern seems to have the best camera, I wonder if there is an audit trail so we can work out which operative (almost certainly female knowing China) assembled his 
mikeboruta said:
Here is a link to the full photo (DNG saved as jpg at highest quality), to put it in full context.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1921655/full jpg from dng.jpg
Gotta love how they labeled all the technicals in the camera. :roll:
You gotta lens......
You gotta sensor......
AND even a Processor! And this one is the important part because it is the one that even further destroys your picture.
Usually you point out the extras or the things that stand out or what makes it better than normal.
They pointed out the obvious and the parts that are in all cameras.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2013
- Messages
- 128
- Reaction score
- 1
MikeON said:
Before I start this I know nothing about photography or photoshop.
But does my image just look better because it is nearer ?
I don't know what i'm talking about but my pic is taken alot nearer the subject than some.
I only hope you know what I mean?
Glen
When I told my dealer that's what happened to me, they said, "Well certainly DJi aren't going to tell you its rubbish" and implied that I was stupid to believe it.
AnselA said:
Yes it's been considered. My 'belfry' shot was taken at 1/1150th of a second; you're not going to see camera shake at that speed.
I was concerned about pault's shot as the Exif says it was shot at 1/150 but I've looked at it really closely (magnified) and there's no camera shake there at all.
Similar threads
