Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

100% centre DNG crops for comparison?

Discussion in 'Phantom 2 Vision Discussion' started by Peter Evans, Jan 23, 2014.

  1. Peter Evans

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2014
    Messages:
    456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lot-et-Garonne, France
    There have been several discussions, split across several threads, about the quality (or lack of same) in the images produced by the P2V's camera. I have to say that I'm completely dissatisfied with mine and I'm currently communicating that fact to StudioSport.fr from whom I bought my P2V here in France.

    So, I thought it might help various members with similar feelings if we had a thread where we could post images to compare what different cameras were producing. That way we could see if some us just had bad examples, or whether the problem affected the majority of owners. It would certainly help me in my discussions with StudioSport!

    Obviously we'd need some standardisation to be fair to the camera and to make the comparison worthwhile, so this is what I suggest:

    Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to produce an image that should be :

    1. Shot in RAW
    2. Of a subject in which one would expect to see a lot of detail
    3. Shot in sunlight at 100 ISO (i.e. no AUTO ISO)
    3. Be a 100% square(ish) crop from the centre of the image
    4. Be 800 pixels wide
    5. Have NO processing whatosever applied to it, other than to convert it to a high quality jpeg (e.g. 10 in Photoshop)

    Here's my example

    [​IMG]

    This message will self-destruct in......
     
  2. Sledge

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2013
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    3
    Hello Peter, I will try and post one once the weather get nicer here....it's sub-zero here in Chicagoland....yikes!

    This will be a good comparison and most likely, conclusive evidence that the FC200 camera is very low end. Here's hoping they offer an upgrade sometime soon!
     
  3. Old Gazer

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    186
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Oklahoma
    Here' one for you with a link to the fully processed image saved as a JPEG. I really cannot complain too much. Raw converted to JPEG gives a better overall image than the JPEG straight from my camera. If you need a professional quality image , you will need to invest a whole lot more money for professional equipment.

    https://app.box.com/s/m28bs14dckimv0vc5z4f


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
     

    Attached Files:

  4. Old Gazer

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    186
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Oklahoma

    Attached Files:

  5. Shrimpfarmer

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2013
    Messages:
    1,012
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Sussex UK
    Blimey it looks more like a pencil sketch than a photo. :cry:
     
  6. Bigvern

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2013
    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    1
    Another one for you!
     

    Attached Files:

  7. Pull_Up

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    Messages:
    3,684
    Likes Received:
    48
    Location:
    South Oxfordshire, UK
    Get that roof de-mossed, you. You're letting the street down. ;)

    But on a serious note, that's from a dng originally??
     
  8. Bigvern

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2013
    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    1
    I just won't let the wife see it or it could be another job on that long list she has!

    Yes from dng saved as jpg
    Bottom pic is the whole thing top pic is middle section ish at 100%
    Glen
     
  9. pault

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2014
    Messages:
    567
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Liverpool UK
    Here is mine - not full sun
    100 ISO -3.ev 1/151 sec
    Saved in PS at 12





    My camera is very soft on the right hand side so is going back for replacement as soon as the dealer has new stock (I trust this will not be at his cost as he has been very helpful to me).
     

    Attached Files:

  10. MikeON

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    Messages:
    277
    Likes Received:
    29
    Location:
    Pennsylvania, USA
    I'm glad I found this thread, because I'm now convinced my camera is a dud and will return it. These are 800x800 crops from the center. It is even worse on the right side.
    This was advertised as a "high end" 14MP camera with aspherical lens. It doesn't compare to my 8MP iPhone.
     

    Attached Files:

  11. jimre

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2013
    Messages:
    371
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    North Bend, WA
    Really? Looking at RAW images with NO PROCESSING - and then complaining that the images are soft and not sharp? That's like complaining about a RAW EGG because it's so runny! Wow.

    RAW images have NO SHARPENING applied. They are *intended* to be soft - all the sharpening is left up to the photographer, in post-processing. I thought people understood this.

    Here's an example:
    First is a 1:1 small crop from DNG/RAW with NO SHARPENING. Big surprise - it's soft!
    Second is the same image with my normal capture sharpening applied in Lightroom. Not DSLR-quality, but looks reasonable for a highly-zoomed in crop.

    This was the first DNG image I shot the other day after doing the camera update. ISO100, 1/1400 sec @ f/2.8, Daylight WB.
     

    Attached Files:

  12. jimre

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2013
    Messages:
    371
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    North Bend, WA
    And for a sense of scale, here's the full image - you can see the small portion in the upper center used for the previous crops.
     

    Attached Files:

  13. Peter Evans

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2014
    Messages:
    456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lot-et-Garonne, France
    Thanks very much guys!

    This is starting to get interesting, don't you think? However, I'm not going to make any comment until we get a few more samples.

    Incidentally, following my complaint to the seller, in the response I received from them today, they said, "Well of course DJI are going to say its a 'High End Camera' - they're not going to say it's "nulle"

    For those not familiar with the language, "Nulle" is French for useless or hopeless - as in, "Je suis nul dans la cuisine" (which is very true)

    Oh and they also pretty much said that the situation I find myself in is my fault because I should have looked at images on the web before I ordered from them. They seem to have missed the fact that DNG capability didn't appear until three days after it was delivered to me.
     
  14. Peter Evans

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2014
    Messages:
    456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lot-et-Garonne, France
    @ jimre

    RAW has no sharpening applied? OMG I didn't realise!!

    Jeez! The point of the exercise is not to see whether or not the RAW images are 'sharp' but to see the base point of resolution from which we start.

    Can you see the difference between Bigvern's crop and mine, or PaulT's? Or don't you want to?

    OK you made me comment :twisted:
     
  15. pault

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2014
    Messages:
    567
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Liverpool UK
    jimre, how long have you had your PV2 as your image certainly seems better than mine ? I realise you have some lovely light there but even so. I am clinging to straws by hoping that the new cameras are an improvement.
     
  16. jimre

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2013
    Messages:
    371
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    North Bend, WA
    You and I may know this - but 90% of the people on this forum likely don't. They're going to read this thread and think "OMG, THIS IS THE WORST CAMERA EVER!!! EVEN THE RAW PICTURES ARE NOT SHARP!!!"

    As for comparisons, hard to do with such completely different images. If I had to pick, I'd say Bigvern's looks decent and yours doesn't.
     
  17. MikeON

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    Messages:
    277
    Likes Received:
    29
    Location:
    Pennsylvania, USA
    I tried one of the images I posted in Photoshop with 3 types of sharpening, all to different degrees:
    - Unsharp Mask
    - Smart Sharpen
    - High Pass filter.
    All made very little improvement. Further convinces me my camera has an unfocused lens. Some of the other pictures posted in this thread make me believe a replacement camera might be better than what I have.
     
  18. Old Gazer

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    186
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Eastern Oklahoma
    I think it was unclear what MikeOn is comparing to his phone pics. Raw or processed.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
     
  19. jimre

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2013
    Messages:
    371
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    North Bend, WA
    I believe mine is one of the earlier P2Vs. Received it on Nov. 13.
     
  20. Peter Evans

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2014
    Messages:
    456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lot-et-Garonne, France
    Exactly! And especially as my belfry was relatively close.

    Yours looks a lot better than mine too!

    We'd better watch it as this could stray into "Ooh Matron!" territory :D


    EDIT
    And it's not just how well the image is resolved by the lens that I'm looking at, it's noise too. See how there is less noise in Bigvern's image? I wish I had his