Looks pretty cool!

Had to laugh at this bit though:

> “My girlfriend and I can simply enjoy our time together making memories and leave the rest to Mavic Mini.”

... followed by a lengthy video of them either centering their entire attention on the drone taking the video, or standing to "enjoy nature" while discretely flying the drone at the same time, so that it can take a video of them serenely enjoying their perfect moment in nature.

I see the same thing with selfies on vacations - at Machu Picchu, the Scottish Highlands, Iceland, Florence - people spending the entirety of their visit to some tourist spot trying to get the perfect selfie, to the exclusion of nearly everything else.

Yes, I also carry a camera and take a lot of photos, but I don't run off the tour bus or out of the car, in an effort to get a shot before anybody else gets there (various waterfalls in Iceland). Nor do I get verbally abusive when people wander into a shot, which I encountered repeatedly at Machu Picchu.

> people spending the entirety of their visit to some tourist spot trying to get the perfect selfie, to the exclusion of nearly everything else.

There is a sweet spot, since I'm at the far extreme other end of the spectrum, and have my own regrets.

I don't take pictures. I just looked, and there's probably between 10 and 20 a month in my phone over the last few months, but the vast majority of those are for stuff I got or sent in an message from my wife or a family member, and a few I took to document my MPOE after new equipment was installed.

I used to just say to people that I don't really see the point of pictures to remember something. Then I got a little older and realized that I have a crap memory for events, but unfortunately my ways are mostly set, and I'm just not the kind of person that thinks to take a picture (and I'll never post it on social media, that's for sure).

The downside is that unless someone else is around to document it for me, there's not much visual evidence to remind my of past events or help me reminisce. I've missed it at times.

I realized I could never capture a place the way a trained photographer with the proper equipment would, so it was useless to try. When I visit a place I take pictures of the people I'm with who make it memorable but don't try to overdocument. Often these snaps unlock the memory of the place. If I really want a great panorama photo I look online.

I'm somewhere in the middle. I enjoy taking photos, especially on trips, but will rarely pull my phone out during an event, and almost never post anything on social media in any case.

One way that has perhaps been personally helpful in moderating the amount of photos taken is that I mostly use a film camera. This has its downsides, but one upside is that you're limited by the amount of film you physically brought, and so you take a single photo of something rather than 20 (which, incidentally also cuts down on the amount of time you spend picking the "perfect one" -- you either got it or you didn't, and that's it).

That being said, as phone cameras have gotten better, I have found myself taking more photos with those devices as well... but perhaps due to habits developed with a film camera, I still manage to find a balance between just looking at what's around me, device in pocket, and taking it out to snap a nice picture here and there.

Saw this in Greece this summer, went for a walk on my own (I like to walk around new places) at a truly beautiful headland against the sunset, I was the only one who sat and just watched it, everyone else had their back to it, framing shots, getting friends to check images...

They have the photo, I have the memory, I think I prefer my way.

Yea I also wonder what do ppl do with "these 10000s of photos" Can't remember last time I print a photo, or look at it after I posted it on IG or FB(ppl still do that ?).

Lol the one to respond to my comment might be the 1/100 ppl that actually print their photos and hang it in their house.

I don't take selfies, and rarely family snapshots either.

I do consider myself a photography hobbyist. I try to find neat shots - some are fairly standard shots that pros have all done better (look, another shot of Machu Picchu from the Sun Gate!). Others are simple street scenes, or flowers and landscapes, or whatever other random stuff I happen upon on vacation. Sometimes I try portraits as we're moving through vacation (though that's biggest weakness - most are crap). I like to think looking for unique shots forces me to experience my surroundings, but I won't claim that's true for all people.

I've printed a few shots, like to share my better shots with friends & family, and will go back and look at albums occasionally. And also try to ID what I did poorly and work to correct it on upcoming trips. Some of my favorites end up as desktop backgrounds, screen saver, etc. I should really consider getting a very high quality LCD display to rotate through some - maybe a project of the future.

Google Photo is good at this, picking past photos from these thousands and surfacing them at random times.

This effectively motivates to also take photos of mundane day to day moments, that will feel so far away in 5 or 10 years.

Indeed, a large part of my wall decorations is photos from travelling... not a single selfie, though, most are entirely devoid of people :)

Technology has been great for this, for me. I no longer travel with a camera (aside from phone) or my drone on group vacations. Everyone already has one. So I just let them take all of their photos and after the trip ask for the iCloud or Drive share link or whatever. It's great.

People always prioritize the remembering self over the experiencing self :). Like someone else pointed out, you can strike a balance between the two.

A few weeks ago I went to see Haystack Rock off the Oregon coast and I just stood there in the tide looking at this giant rock sticking out the water, absorbing the salt water, brisk air and sounds of crashing waves. It was magical. Everyone else around me was only looking at their camera, I'm not sure what they absorbed.

One supposedly significant reason Betamax was beaten, was the sex recordings were best found on VHS format video tape.

If DJI can better hook into porn industry than other drones - that could be a boon for them.

Wow, very cool! As others have pointed out, being under the weight limit set by the FAA is basically THE selling point.

Ethical question: are DJI the good guys here working within the rules set out of the FAA, or are they running afoul of the spirit but staying within the letter?

This is how all laws work though. Rifle minimum barrel is 16" so they make 16" barrels. Wifi can only put out X watts max, they put out the maximum by law. There are no ethics in following a laws minimum or maximum.

It's a great reason to exercise caution when setting up rules and definitions. Whatever distinction gets established, however arbitrary, casts a tint on everything else on either side of it, for better or worse.

This is true even in things as routine daily chit-chat and conversation. Think about how often tacitly express your opinion through the way you frame a discussion and how often those environmental cues bias other parties to respond in particular ways. Then, consider how often marketers, salespeople, and other manipulators intentionally frame interactions to provoke a specific biased response.

The light touch and the small nudge are grossly undervalued.

I'll just note that laws and regulations can get struck down for vagueness. If there's no hard rule about what kind of drones are regulated how, then it becomes more burdensome- or even impossible- to know whether you're complying with the law.

Or the law is perfectly clear, but the police and prosecutors pick and choose which cases they put forward.

Or the intensity of enforcement varies in the first place.

And chances are you’re doing something else illegal anyway.

Or can be followed until you do.

And if you don’t, there’s always the routine traffic stop.

> the police and prosecutors pick and choose which cases they put forward

someone has to decide which cases to bring, unless you fund the police and prosecutors so they can bring every plausible case, which sounds like a strictly worse universe to live in. Is this discretion abused? Yes, all the time. But bringing every case seems more like a police state than a free society.

"For my friends, everything. For my enemies, the law." -Benavides

> It's a great reason to exercise caution when setting up rules and definitions.

This is (part of) the reason people spend hours debating seemingly mundane aspects of rules & regs, legislation, corporate bylaws, etc. Eventually someone will have a [dis]incentive and try to get around something.

Usually more like 16.1" or 16.25" barrels. Since non-compliance can result in jail time, they give a bit of a compliance buffer.

See also: "baker's dozen".

The FAA is usually better about things like this though. At least in the past, they've had the advantage of making good contact throughout the small group of people they regulate.

Only if companies do it. If a person continuously seeks the boundaries of the law, that person is generally called an asshole.

Depends on the law - nobody disapproves of people driving at the legal speed limit, or filing your taxes at the last minute.

Testing the boundaries of murder and rape laws is, of course, a different matter.

I assume the "spirit" of the law is safety. If the FAA has determined that 250g is where the risk of a person, or plane, or something else being hit by a drone is diminished so as to not require the same regulations as drones over that weight, I'd say that keeping drones under that weight limit to avoid those regulations (and their associated safety issues) is well within the "spirit" of the law.

Agreed. They could have put other limits in place easily. I have to assume they figured battery technology would get better allowing for these advances.

Soon the FAA is going to require a knowledge test for recreational flyers to fly UAS heavier than 250g.

The part 107 commercial UAS exam that already exists requires a lot of studying and costs $150 to take, and this falls on the easy end of your typical FAA exam.

DJI is hedging that the recreational flyer test is going to be a massive barrier for recreational pilots, which is why they're pushing a <250g UAS into the market.

Just to make a note it seems that this one has two types of batteries one that weights 50g and one that weights 100g.

If you use the heavy battery you go over 249g I’m also not sure if their flight stats were measured with the heavy one or the light one I’ll bet that they are with the 100g battery.

This means that under most conditions you’ll likely have 8-10min of flight time with the light battery since the advertised max flight time is often 30-50% over real world scenarios with these drones.

Also, I imagine flight characteristics will change dramatically with a 100g battery. Heavier payload, same motors, doesn't bode well. May as well get a real drone rather than use the 100g battery.

But for toy drones, the 50g battery is fine. Especially since that pack lets you carry 3 of them. Plus I'm sure the next generation will be lighter still with still greater flight time. And the generation after that. Etc.

Future seems pretty bright for these "family pictures" type drones. But they aren't competitive with the big boys for certain use cases right now.

Eh I’m not sure they’ll be lighter look at mobile phones they aren’t getting lighter...

Battery technology is maxed out currently, plastics and composites aren’t going to change much...

Not much weight shedding to be done here my bet is that they’ll add more collision sensors as they become cheaper but not much else they can do.

They shouldn’t add any weight and you’ll offset their weight with the removal of the material from the chassis.

As for the flight characteristics I’m pretty sure they did everything with the heavier battery you go from 18W to 8W in exchange for losing 50g which is only 16% reduction in weight form 299 to 249.

If anything the loophole battery would perform considerably worse given the power output of the cell compared to the full one.

It also looks like the S mode isn’t available for the smaller battery I have a feeling that once reviews will start popping out the FAA approved config will be called gimp mode.

Is Vespa working outside the rules/spirit of law of state DMVs by selling scooters that are 1cc under the requirement for motorcycle registration/tax/license? It seems like a pretty good analogy to me, with the main difference being a federal/state authority.

I'm really not sure; and I could see arguments either way.

Similarly all the boats with mooring(?) motors that are 9.9HP.

DJI is selling a heavier battery that does put it over the 250g limit so it's a bit greyer than the vespa version.

Are they?

I see 249g/199g (JP) for takeoff weight in the specs, which suggests to me that with the 100g battery it's 249g grams, and with the 50g battery it's 199g (presumably in Japan, which seems to be a 200g limit where others are 250g).

Care to share a link?

Is it unethical to drive just under the speed limit?

Yes, because you're likely the only one on the road going so slow :)

unless you live in a country where speeding isnt common place ;) in Aus, atleast where i am, most people stick absolutely on the speedlimit.

Just to clarify, by Aus are you referring to Austria and not Australia? In Australia the road culture is so bad that they make dramatic TV shows about it and relative Youtube channels sharing dash cam footage of bad drivers are actually source of entertainment to many.

But Aussies don't speed as much as those in the US from my experience!

That’s only because we regularly get very steep fines and penalties for exceeding the limit. Even by as little as one kph.

Or their idea thereof... when I use my GPS it surprises me how low my car actually reports my speed compared to reality. It probably explains all the slow drivers in the right lane over here.

Go on the M4 though and 10 over is too slow for many!

How are you checking the real speed? Most GPS receivers display more accurate speeds than car speedometers do.

I'm assuming the GPS is accurate. I've driven through speed traps with it just on or over the limit and been fine. My car on the other hand is reporting around 5 kmh higher, depending what angle I'm holding my head at.

The FAA is free to change the rules based on what happens in the real world, if the FAA is doing their job well they will have considered the implications of someone creating something just on the other side of the limit as is common with regulations like that. If the limit is set correctly, there will be a margin of safety between where the limit is and the point where risks being mitigated matter.

So no, I don't think DJI are being "bad guys" by kissing up to the limit because the rules were made by people who do think things through very thoroughly.

I mean the idea of the weight limit is that at some weight the drone just does not pose as much of a public safety issue. I don't wee why the regulators should change the weight limit unless there's evidence that 249g is still too much of a risk. Incentivizing companies to hit a weight limit is a good thing. If the drone is the size of a songbird and the loudness of a bumblebee, I'm not sure I care if they're unregulated.

Not mention if the legal limit is 250g then it's incredibly likely whatever testing or studies the FAA looked at (I'm being generous here by assuming they didn't pull a number out of thin air) showed the danger spiked well above that.

They removed the forward facing obstacle avoidance system. It might not hurt as bad when it drops on your head, but it seems a lot more likely to fly into your face with the props still spinning.

I want to know how big the motors are going to be compared to the Mavic Pro. I've flown 5" race quads that were <250g and working against the wind can be a constant battle if you have gusts >10mph.

Traditionally DJI drones have had very underpowered motors so they can get those high flight time numbers; seeing the 30 minute flight time quote here doesn't give me much confidence that it will fly well with anything other than perfect wind conditions.

I can't wait to tear one apart and see what kinds of compromises/trade offs they've made compared to their larger drones.

It's not a race drone. That's a completely different audience. What do you mean underpowered? Compared to what?

Let's say you're flying a race drone in windy conditions. you're aiming for a gate that you're going to fly straight through when a large gust of wind hits. You now have to compensate for that wind to correct your trajectory, and that can take a LOT of thrust depending on how large the gust was and how fast you need to correct the trajectory.

It's possible for the maneuver to require so much sideways thrust that you will bleed some altitude and start to fall to the ground (granted on a racing drone this is probably measured in centimeters for most maneuvers, but you get the idea)

Racing drones usually have a thrust:weight ratio of 8:1 or so, but the large Mavik Pro has a thrust:weight of 2.5:1, and their smaller Spark a ratio of ~2:1. You need a minimum TWR of about 2:1 to be flyable.

If the Mavic Mini has a similar TWR as the spark, then it's very unlikely you'll be able to fly it in any sort of windy conditions.

ok and what does all of this looks like when you're not comparing it against a race drone? Parent comment makes a good point I think, in that the Mavic line has never been geared towards "race drones" so comparing/judging those models based on a certain category that they qualify themselves out of is kind of moot.

I'm in the market for a drone at the moment (eyeing the mavic air over the mini to be honest) for holiday type shots, all this racing stuff is pointless as far as I'm concerned. I can't figure out based on your comment whether the wind will screw a wide shot or not, it might not make it through a circle, but i'll never get this drone through this sort of activity anyway.....

If I have a drone with 8:1 TWR and I have to bump my throttle by 20% to compensate for wind, a drone that has a TWR of 2:1 is gonna lose altitude and fail to maintain position.

I realize now that the way I described it in my parent post doesn't make very much sense

I don't think you can do anything about the wind in a <10kg design.

I saw some quads with lateral DOFs that used swashplates and piston engines in the 40-50kg class, but then you basically have a helicopter with 4x the problems of a helicopter.

possibly to hold position in wind?

And doing so without losing altitude.

A drone needs to tilt to work against the wind, but this also increases its wind loading.

Can’t speak for this one, but I have the Mavic 1 and 2 and both can handle very high winds well IMO.

The full size Mavik drones benefit from having much more mass holding them against the wind. The amount of drone surface that interacts with the air scales roughly squared, and the mass scales roughly cubic.

A simpler way of stating it is that when you have a heavy drone and a light drone with the same thrust to weigh ratio, the heavier drone will be able to hold its position much easier than the lighter drone in a gust.

Sure, but it's a super-lightweight drone targeted at Instagrammers mucking around with it. I think giving up performance against strong wind would be a given. Their demo shots all look reasonably close to the ground.

I was responding to: "Traditionally DJI drones have had very underpowered motors" - I'm sure there are tougher drones out there, but underpowered for what? I shoot video and photo for commercial purposes with mine and find that it handles wind very well, rain too. Incredible given the size means you can fold it down into a backpack and not lug around a Pelican case.

Great, it's a toy! Seriously, with 249g, drone laws do not apply (start with 250g) and you can do whatever you want with it in public.

Well it's great that you don't need to get a permit in order to fly this drone, but that doesn't mean you should do whatever you want with it in public.

it's five dollars and filling out a web form. its not exactly onerous requirement.

What they are referring too is that you still shouldn't operate these drones where they are not allowed just because they weight less than some FAA weight limit.

And I know people are like, "Well, just follow the rules!", and they should... some people fly drones stupidly.

BUT - it's worth pointing out that if you live in some cities like Boston, that it is nearly impossible to fly a drone in city limits. Or Cambridge. Or Somerville. Check out the maps on Skyvector; it's 70/SFC, until you're in Watertown, parts of Quincy of north of Lynn. The FAA says to call the tower for permission; and I've spoken to the tower at Logan, and they said the FAA told them to not grant anyone permission (this was 2 years ago admittedly).

So having a little micro drone that you can fly 30 ft in the air around your house legally since it's under the weight limit? Pretty neat.

So even though it’s under the limit, would one recommend not being overly cautious by registering it since that could be used against a registrant if they fly it where drones requiring registration aren’t allowed to fly?

I'm not sure. This feels a little like 49cc scooters (most states have 50cc license/registration requirements). The DMV in many states will look at you funny if you try to go register one to get a plate. It's literally 1cc under, purposefully, because it's "not a motor vehicle" - despite it having a motor and being a vehicle. Using the same logic, I'd argue this "isn't a UAV/drone", despite by all other metrics it looking just like one.

But I could see people going either way.

AFAIK, it used to be that you needed to notify the airport (not to ask for permission) if you were flying within five miles of it. It looks like now you use LAANC.

As a Somerville resident thanks for the info!

Does it just need to pass the FAA requirements or are there local police requirements?

No idea. IANAL

Are you sure about the "do whatever you want" part? Just because there is no need to register with the FAA doesn't mean the FAA rules do no apply.

Can you fly it in cities? Even if they're near airports?

Uh, not so fast. My state as well as others do not permit any drone within state parks and some exclude most public areas. So while you might slip under a Federal Law don't assume the state just doesn't have a blanket restriction.

Can one fly it in National Parks?

No. That restriction is not based on weight or size.

No.

One thing about light weight drones is that they do struggle with wind.

Oh man, been waiting for this. Unfortunately, no active track :(

Still conflicted on spending $1000 on the new skydio for what would mostly be a toy for me.

I currently have a Mavic Pro, and I don't plan to replace it until a Skydio, or something with equivalent AI and automation is available.

My dream for my Mavic was capturing new angles of family activities. However, the truth is that the effort required to capture those activities with a Mavic ruins the enjoyment of many of them.

Say I wanted to get video of my kids biking. I've got to make sure the drone is charged, have my kids wait around on the trail while I launch it, and then compose the shot and stand there looking at my phone, worrying about running into stuff while they bike.

The Skydio's pathfinding and sensors take a good chunk of that hassle away. I could theoretically hand the beacon to one of them, and say, "Ok, great, go ride." And for 20-minutes, the drone would do all the work of getting video, while I rode with my kids.

Assuming real-world reviews of the Skydio 2 come back positive, I think that'll be my Mavic's replacement.

There are some great vids of the Skydio 2 in action on YouTube. One guy on a pit bike getting scared shitless about the abandoned area he drives around is pretty good.

Theres a certain predatory element to the flying the Skydio does while operating in trees that is awesome and creepy at the same time.

Edit: video in question - https://youtu.be/2UbRP5YsjuY

Flying starts around 4:30. Definitely watch it negotiate through the trees a bit then fast forward to the riding at the end if you get bored.

I own a mavic pro 2 and I almost always use it in the AI modes like circling, following, point of interest and what not. I often let it follow friends and really enjoy having it with me. Just wish it was a bit smaller but I really like the camera so probably won’t switch anytime soon

The skydio 2 says the quantities are limited. I’m not sure if I can invest $1000 in something that could be out of support in a couple years.

I feel like an old man, when I say this (and maybe I am), but I'm starting to feel increasingly annoyed by drones in public. You hear the whirring of drones on a nice day by the lake, and sometimes even on some more popular mountain peaks here in Switzerland. For me it's almost as annoying as a mosquito in your bedroom.

I live in the northeastern United States. I have literally never seen a drone (consumer or otherwise) anywhere other than a Best Buy (or similar electronics retailer) still in its packaging.

Yeah. I'm in Canada, I have a couple drones. I've seen someone else flying one... once. While I was out finding somewhere to fly.

I think what we're running into though is the sheer size of North America. Even within the city here, there are a fair number un(der)developed areas with no/few people around. Out of the city, there rest stops or sometimes even just viewpoints. For all of these, with a bit of walking I can avoid annoying anyone.

Somewhere like Switzerland, that might not be possible.

They tend to be used by tourists in touristy areas.

I don't see them in the wild near where I live, but there was a Mavic flying around Alice lake in the Sawtooth National Forest up in Idaho a couple months ago while I was camping there. That's in a wilderness area where drones are prohibited. I've also seen one flying around Mt Roberts up in Juneau, AK.

Switzerland is much smaller than the US, and absolutely jam-packed with gorgeous areas that would work with with drone photography.

I agree in general, but I am torn; while I find drones in parks and natural areas extremely annoying I am utterly fascinated with the technology.

I hear you and feel the same way. I am also a drone enthusiast. I dread flying within earshot of anyone.

You're not the only one. In the US they're banned from most national parks.

Yet I see people fly them all the time in Yosemite. It seems like nothing is enforceable these days.

I live in the Northeastern United States. I've seen drones at attractions such as Centralia and Rickett's Glen State Park (waterfall hike.) I find them really annoying as well.

It’s just like anything else that is noisy, people need to learn to be respectful. Last time I was at the beach a guy would wake up early to fly his drone so he wouldn’t disturb people.

Totally agree. Like taking a leaf blower to a nice natural spot and turning it on.

I will not purchase another drone until I can pull it out of my back pocket and throw it in the air, have it automatically take some fantastic shots of my friends and land back in my hand.

I have the Mavic Pro and have issues with the wind carrying it away and not being able to navigate where I want.

Is a smaller drone going to even more issue with wind or have they improved this?

How windy is it where you live? I've flown the Mavic Pro over the Pacific and Lake Michigan through what I would describe as a "healthy breeze". I think its max wind speed is approx 22mph, but can't find a reference for it.

I'd say rule of thumb is if you wouldn't want to eat a nice brunch in it, you don't want to fly in it.

edit: Pretty sure it uses GPS, compass, and gyro to stabilize itself relative to the wind.If gentle winds are causing it to drift too much, you might be having trouble with one of those. You might want to calibrate compass and make sure you're getting good GPS reception. I've found stabilization is not good in WiFi control mode either.

It was in the desert outside of Las Vegas. It was a pretty strong wind.

You're probably right. Too bad too, probably some good footage to be had out there!

The wind problem is physics. You can't fix that with software. At 250g this thing is a leaf.

I've flown P4P, Mavic Pro, and Spark. Only the big, heavy P4P was stable in strong winds. Even with the larger cross-section the bigger motors in the P4P make a remarkable difference.

Phantom line seems to be killed, DJI doesn't care, so welcome to unstable drones in the future. I still can't understand why did they kill their best drone series a grandpa could fly?

The Phantom was just in a weird space. Too large and expensive for casual flight photography. Not up to snuff of the capabilities of what a pro needs in the Inspire.

I’ve met plenty of photographers who go out on a casual shoot with just the Mavic Pro. The Mavic can be thrown in a photo bag. The Phantom is it’s own bag.

It was in a perfect space for me and for many people. It was still the best-selling drone, despite competition offering smaller drones. Inspire is not easy to fly by a grandpa.

I don't know if this a normal stat to list for drones, but they note the Max Wind Speed Resistance as ~18 mph. They do not list the wind resistance of the Mavic Pro.

The drone will stay where you park it unless you're flying in winds that are unsafe, which the manual recommends you avoid, and the app will actively warn you about.

Is this replacing the Spark?

They still list the Spark on the site but no stock, unless it will have an update shipping soon. Still, this looks good.

Same price as the Spark when it was released. Smaller, lighter, and longer flight time than the Spark. There really is no reason to purchase the Spark unless you need to replace another Spark.

I have a Spark and I'm really looking forward to this and being out from under the thumb of the FAA (<250g). DJI has knocked it out of the park this time.

Didn't the spark have tracking? Not having it on this is pretty disappointing.

You bring up a good point about weight. I guess I was thinking an upgraded Spark would look even nicer, but the weight threshold is a good point. I’ll probably order one of these.

The DJI Spark has more flying sensors enabling it to be flown much more easily.

Yeah you’re right. I just wonder if they’re retiring it or if they’ll push out a new model for the holiday season —it’s getting close to the time they either release or miss out on the sales.

Thats my guess. The Mavic Air got pretty close to competing with the Spark, Mavic Mini looks like a clear replacement.

Anyone know how to use the video downlink from DJI drones without the rest of the system?

If there is a forum out there for hacking DJI's stuff, I haven't found it yet.

On older DJI Phantom drones you could ssh into the drone and pump the video into ffmpeg or wherever. I think they became more proprietary and locked down so I don't know how easy this is to do nowadays.

What do you mean? On the one hand DJI sell their downlinks separately (Lightbridge and DJI FPV) as standalone products. On the other hand there's a decent modding community for DJI gear:

https://dji.retroroms.info/howto/start

DJI nailed the ideal form factor for consumer drones (and maybe for quadcopters in general) when they came up with the original Mavic Pro. Since then they've been experimenting with incrementally smaller form factors to find a price and size where the truly average Joe will decide to get a drone to bring on his holidays, but I'm not sure that decreasing size will unlock a large number of new customers.

On my personal wishlist for future drones are more sophisticated and precise physical controllers with better pressure gradients, and especially the ability to program flight routes to allow mixed human/automated controls – e.g. "Respond to flight controls normally, but when I press this button 1) increase altitude to 90m over the course of 15 seconds 2) rotate camera downwards by 30 degrees over 15 seconds 3) begin rotating aircraft left by 1 degree per second"

That's actually a surprisingly great price.

Only thing I'd be worried about a bit is if they have the potential to go the same way as GoPro. DJI reminds me a lot of how GoPro was a few years ago.

Do you mind explaining that further? I don't know what happened with GoPro.

I'm not an expert on the market or anything, so just my two cents.

But for a while, GoPro had fairly explosive growth, in my perspective anyway. But after some time they stopped really innovating and some other brands with cheaper products but similar quality began getting some traction. So GoPro kind of dropped the ball. I think they've been getting better again the past year though.

But again, not a market expert; this is just what I can remember seeing and reading about.

I would see DJI and GoPro two completely different kind of company. DJI founders are technologists, they are technology first company. I don't see how they can stop innovating.

This looks nice and I certainly appreciate the battery life.

To the people that are excited because this is outside some regulatory limits. A few years ago there were no or few drone regulations and people abused this; the result was strict national and city regulations to the point that flying a drone is almost impossible (legally) in some cities in the US.

If people abuse the regulatory limits expect more strict regulations. I fly drones and I support such regulations.

BTW, a 249g drone would likely take down a small airplane.

A half ounce hex nut would take down a small airplane in the wrong place.

A half ounce hex nut doesn't fly under its own power.

It will if you attach an engine and fuel tank to it.

Or alternatively, a small bird in the wrong place can take down a plane. Or for that matter, a clog in the pitot tube from ice.

Mavic and its variations are fine, but when will we finally get Phantom 5? Mavic is still far from functionality offered by Phantom 5, whether it comes to stability, ease of use and most importantly video quality. Going to new Mavic feels like downgrade with the only advantage being portability, which is a moot point as one has to carry multiple batteries in a separate bag anyway. DJI, come on, give us something!

Mavic is very far ahead in terms of functionality compared to Phantom 5, given that Phantom 5 does not exist. If you compare Mavic 2 Pro to Phantom 4 Pro, then the only arguable advantage the latter has is the mechanical shutter. No problems with stability, and despite being lighter the smaller aerodynamic cross-section actually helps Mavic to fight the wind. Not sure what advantages P4 has against Mavic wrt ease of use. I sold my P4P and got Mavic 2 Pro and consider that a big upgrade.

>If you compare Mavic 2 Pro to Phantom 4 Pro, then the only arguable advantage the latter has is the mechanical shutter.

Quite false. Although the resolution isn't different, the camera sensor in the phantom is twice the size and has better optics on it. In terms of photography, it's a no-brainer.

We still use a Mavic however due to the ability to upload a CSV of coordinates and camera angles, which is a much better fit for the photogrammetry we use it for.

I am hearing that often from Mavic Pro users, but both video quality and stability in stronger winds is lacking comparing to P4 series. It's good you are happy, many people like me aren't.

2019 - Mavic Mini --> 2020 - Mavic Micro --> 2021 - Mavic Nano --> ... ... ... --> 2049 - Mavic Atom --> 2100: Mavic Dark Matter

the weight reduction is great. More battery runtime is great.

The rest though? DJI had years to improve the Spark and instead they made it worse for photographers. No more panorama? Really?

That was the only way to get a bit more resolution of of that tiny 12MP sensor. Frankly without it there is no point for me to own it.

No DNG support. Of course. Yea so difficult to do. No 24fps for video folks. Sure...

This is pretty good, 30 min flight time and 4km range.

> 4 km for FCC compliant Model (MT1SS5) and 2 km for CE compliant Model (MT1SD25).

DJI and iRobot may be the only companies to date who managed to produce pro/consumer robotic products sustainably.

Is there a standalone controller for these, or can they only be controlled through an iphone / android?

The controller comes in a box. Not sure if you can fly the drone without the phone connected similar to the Mavic, my guess would be yes.

Since this has a range of 4km, it requires a controller. There is now way to get that distance without one.

Good bye drone laws!! 250g is the limit before you need a license in Canada!

Surely this is too lightweight to perform in windy conditions?

AV industry will never be the same.

Considering the registration requirement in the UK is to register all drones above 250g in weight this one seems to have been designed as a loophole.

As it weight 249g you don't have to register with the CAA and as long as you keep it under 400ft altitude and within 150ft from other people and private property you can fly it anywhere where there isn't a local limitation and it's not restricted airspace.

In places where there are limitations e.g. London and other big cities you can fly it on private property.

Please note that in the UK the entity that manages a park or other public spaces can impose its own restrictions e.g. you can't fly drones in Alexandra Palace despite Barnet Council not having a wide ban on drones.

For the most part don't be an idiot the police doesn't enforce these rules for the most part outside westminster where the cops do chase down drone flyers especially around the tourist spots since you aren't allowed to fly anything within 150m of a congested area which is pretty much any spot in central london.

Complying with a deliberately & precisely worded law is not exploiting a loophole, it's complying with the law.

"But your honor. The speed limit is 65 and I was going 64."

"You were exploiting a loophole. You may have been adhering to the letter of the law, but you were in gross violation of its spirit. We don't play games in this courtroom. Your fine is $250 and you owe $437 in court fees."

I believe, according to a drone flyer friend, that the 250g limit applies here too. Just don't fly it near any airports.

Does anybody else fear the annoying future where every tourist attraction, trail, ski run, etc are filled with the buzz of everyone with their personal drones?

Good thing laws aren’t set in stone and can be amended.

They may become a hassle here and there but it won’t last.

If the area is filled with tourists, for me drones would not make it much worse.

I'm on a german IP but don't speak a word of german, however the whole page is in german.

My browser sends the correct headers, accept-language: en-US,en;q=0.9,da;q=0.8.

I'm in Japan and just get a 404. Just shitty web development, nothing surprising.

Chinese must find geoIP really sleek, Alibaba kept serving my Poland IP Russian language version for couple of years.

As someone who wants hardware that does what I instruct it to after I have purchased it, regardless of the manufacturer's wishes, I don't think I can support buying DJI's otherwise-excellent products any longer. The firmware updates and activation locks and flight restrictions imposed by the DJI Go app are too onerous.

If I buy a tool, and the tool now belongs to me, the manufacturer attempting to restrict my use of that tool is morally unjustifiable.

(Yes, I have an iPhone, and yes, I'm pissed off about that, too.)

I've never considered buying a drone however I would certainly not buy one that required an app + required user account to operate a piece of offline equipment.

I had my 1st experience with a Mavic Air this past weekend. It is an amazing piece of tech and the vids are beautiful. I was unaware, however, of it's online requirement. It operated fine where no cell signal exists, so there must be a way to dark comm it. However, I wouldn't give them $ in the first place with such a requirement.

Too bad, I was considering one in lieu of a full frame dslr. Looks like hi-res, poorly shot photos are back on the menu.

You don't have to be online while flying just logged in the app at some point in the past.

Even their handheld video cameras require online activation. It’s madness.

It seems like a pretty reasonable default to prevent people from flying in no-fly zones or impose height limits next to airports I think. As that’s security related and not some artificial limitation so they can up sell something else I don’t see anything wrong with that.

The way the altitude limit is imposed is idiotic. It doesn't factor terrain height, so flying around mountains is impossible.

I've been flying various multicopters for a decade and the mavic pro was the last DJI product I'll ever purchase. Every software update for DJI products restricts their functionality to a subset of what they shipped with. This has been going on for years. People buy dedicated phones/tablets for their DJI product and keep them in airplane mode to prevent this. That's nuts.

> It doesn't factor terrain height, so flying around mountains is impossible.

What do you mean by that? I've been flying around the Austrian alps without any problems but when I'm at home I can't go higher than xxx meters above my town because it's within the flight path of a local airport. Which seems to be a reasonable approach?

The software limits height by allowing 400ft of elevation above the takeoff height. So it's tricky to take off at the base of a mountain and fly up the side because you'll be restricted at 400ft from the start point, despite it actually being totally legal provided you remain less than 400ft from the mountain at the point directly below the drone.

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.

If I buy a tool, the only person preventing me from breaking the law with that tool should be me.

Otherwise it’s not my tool, it’s in service to the manufacturer, the government, or some shade in between. Those aren’t good tools, because they can only be used for certain purposes, in certain circumstances.

I prefer tools that do exactly what I wish them to do, for better or worse.

I upvoted you, not because I agree, but because you raised a reasonable point that clearly generated some intelligent debate. I think the problem is that modern technology has resulted in cheaply available "tools" (to use your term) that have the capacity to cause great and irreparable harm to large numbers of other people (see the comments regarding drones and airplanes, for instance), and consequently must be proactively restricted, not merely regulated after the fact with criminal or civil penalties. Such is the nature of the modern world that produced technologies like the drone. We can no longer afford to leave the use of these technologies up to the good judgment of individuals, because there will always be a minority who can't or won't exercise it.

The iPhone is another question entirely, I agree with you there.

I strongly disagree.

as a matter of principle, I don't accept that a device I own should do anything more or less that what I tell it to do.

I don't expect HN to agree with me on this principle, so I will also present a practical argument. these kinds of controls that protect users from wrongdoing tend to be implemented incredibly crudely. my house is close enough to a major airport that it triggers DJI's flight restriction. if the drone happens to get a GPS fix inside my house it will deactivate itself and land. there's no way a small drone can be a threat to the public when it's hovering inside my living room, and I'm pretty sure the legal restrictions don't apply inside of a structure anyway.

This is a fascinating discussion that I think gets to the heart of the matter, but is still missing the key point: can you ever own something with software?

I up voted the sibling comment (diminoten) even though it was a bit aggressive. Leetcrew say s/he doesn't trust the controls programmed "crudely" by others. But the sibling logically points out that leetcrew's actions could be just as crude from the others' point of view.

I think leetcrew's principles are misdirected here. With software, you can't really own the device. Look at the librem5 debacle: you can't control the radios because the FCC doesn't license unlocked radios. If you had a ham license you could buy and operate any radio the way you want (within the rules). What's really missing is disclosure. DJI should be clearly documenting their software controls and all geographic restrictions so you know exactly what capabilities you are paying for.

I'm glad you brought up ham radio licenses. drones can certainly be dangerous if they are misused. although it would be inconvenient for me, I would not oppose stricter licensing requirements for drones and other potentially dangerous products. it could even be required to buy one in the first place. requiring a license says something like "we need to know that you understand the rules and are capable of following them". software controls imply "we don't trust you to follow the rules, even if you understand them". I realize this is a matter of opinion, but I think the second message is just inappropriate for a citizen in a free society.

But the free market is working: there are permitless drones available (with idiot-proofing software), or you can buy or build a "DRM-free" drone, and now the gov't essentially says you need a permit/license to fly it. I've seen youtube channels of the commercial drone pilots (ads/TV/cinema) who had to spend $10K+ to get a pilot's license.

There is still a middle ground of "unlocked" drones that you only need to register with FAA to use, but you still need to follow the rules yourself. But it is in the drone manufacturers interest to self-regulate to avoid being banned altogether. If too many yahoos and others (see Gatwick incidents) cause problems, authorities can easily kill their profitable industry. So I think these "personal-responsibility" drones will quickly be phased out by the industry.

I, as a member of the public, am glad you don't get to decide, with your own judgement, what is and isn't safe to do around an airport in this specific case. Honestly, I wish more laws could be enforced this way.

Your judgement, in aggregate, can safely be assumed to suck, by me, someone who doesn't know you. It may not actually suck, but in situations where you can clearly and obviously harm me (hitting a plane with your drone), I don't want you to have any choices in the matter. Sorry, but others have ruined the fun for both of us.

The potential harm that can be caused by a <2lb quadcopter is utterly microscopic compared to the damage that can be caused by motor vehicles. Yet the regulatory burden on a small quadcopter is an order of magnitude more complex than that of a two ton pickup. You have to juggle the requirements of multiple federal agencies, and state and municipal regulations are a dime a dozen.

In most jurisdictions, the regulatory burden of a small quadcopter is significantly greater than that of an AR-15. The potential harm vs utility argument doesn't even register here.

But is this an argument that quadcopters be regulated less, or that motor vehicles be regulated more? We've lived with the carnage motor vehicles wreak mostly out of blind habit: it's taken as normal. But that was true of many destructive activities in the past that we eventually stopped or mitigated. Certainly that's one big motivation for autonomous vehicles, which are the ultimate example of taking control away from the hands of the user.

Ehh, I don’t think that justifies it. Furthermore, it isn’t illegal to sell drones without these restrictions; DJI has done this voluntarily.

There have always been tools of mass destruction available in our society. You can buy unlimited quantities of gasoline and propane without the nozzle tips doing a cryptographic handshake ensuring that you’re putting it into a car and only a car. Same goes for explosives. They’re readily available, without scrutiny. It’s sufficient having laws against murder and blowing things up.

We don’t need technological restrictions. Indeed, the law does not require them for drones. This is purely DJI being proactive and fucking their customers.

Go buy a plane and complain about all those pesky flight restrictions.

Your plane will fly anywhere you, the pilot, command it to. The enforcement of NFZ is done by the pilot, not the equipment.

I am complaining about the equipment, not the NFZ. You would, too, if your aircraft ignored control inputs under certain opaque, manufacturer-supplied (and signed) network-updated conditions.

The hardware’s job is to obey the operator. The operator’s job is to obey the law.

I know!! As a student pilot I have zero issues with the drone flight restrictions. It's easy to trivialize the rules as a drone pilot, but in an airplane, hitting a drone could be life and death.