The Mavic Pro Could Become The New De Facto Commercial Drone

December 9th, 2016

mavicproThere are a couple of recent articles over at that seem very significant to real estate drone photography.

The first is one titled Five Reasons Why The Mavic Could Become the New De Facto Commercial Drone, by Mike Winn. Mike argues that the new DJI Mavic Pro due to start shipping in January has some important features that will contribute to making the Mavic a new standard in commercial drones:

  1. It is very portable. The Mavic will be the first truly portable commercial drone.
  2. The Mavic is the least risky drone ever because is only weighs 734 grams (47% less than the DJI P4).
  3. It is very simple to fly. It has a precision landing system which automates landings.
  4. It has better streaming which will allow it to operate more reliably in noisy radio environments.
  5. It will be half the price of the DJI P4.

The second article titled GoPro’s Bad Karma: Lawsuit Claims Violations of Securities Exchange Act, by Miriam McNabb, describes the recent financial problems that GoPro has had that prompted the recall of the long-awaited Karma drone. The Karma was expected to be a competitor to the Mavic Pro but for the immediate future appears to be grounded.

If you are just getting into drone photography these are things you need to consider.

Share this

14 Responses to “The Mavic Pro Could Become The New De Facto Commercial Drone”

  • Supposedly, the Mavic Pro also flies significantly quieter than the Phantoms and won’t draw as much attention when in the air – would be a clincher for me if this can be confirmed.

    The portability (being able to pack it with the rest of your camera gear) is a major plus.

  • I have both drones and here is the difference in the size of the bags:

    The Phantom 4 has an infinity focus camera where the Mavic Pro has a tap to focus camera. If you forget to tap for focus your footage might be unusable, but you do capture more cinematographic footage with the Mavic. The Mavic Pro is quieter and so much more compact. People think you are flying a toy so it draws a lot less attention.

  • From the creators of “I´m stick to a DSLR instead a more portable and lightweight mirrorless because the size and appearance makes me seem more a Pro” comes a new movie based in real events -sad-but-true- called “Maybe i will keep my big DJI Phantom because look more professional than the tiny toy looking of the Mavic”. I don´t want to explain to every new client that ask me for drone photography that the Mavic is not a 100$ toy.

  • I’m waiting until the local cliental are wiling to pay a reasonable amount for aerial photos and then I will be looking for a craft that will lift a much higher quality camera. Something like a Sony a6000 or a Canon G series. Shooting RAW with much better glass would make the system more flexible for other than RE jobs. I’m thinking about commercial work where the customer might be looking for a large print to hang on the wall or higher quality files for glossy corporate brochures.

  • It lands itself. That’s nice. When they take off themselves take the pictures themseleves and fly back to my apartment themseleves i just may consider getting one. Maybe i am crazy but it seems to me there should be far more drone specialists.

  • Held one at the commercial UAV expo a few weeks ago. A very impressive drone they’ve got there. It is small. Very small when folded up. The phantom isn’t exactly huge though and I carry it around in a backpack. I’m leaning toward the P4 Pro which was just released. Larger and improved sensor is more helpful than size for my needs.

  • The P4 has a wider view then the Mavic. So when you’re flying for real estate you will have to go higher or further to get the save wide shots. Also the P4 picture quality is alot better then the mavic.

  • I preordered the Mavic.. but once the P4 Pro was released, I canceled order and bought the pro. Bigger sensor, 4k 60p, mechanical shutter, and a built in screen. I really didn’t want to use my phone as a screen. Also I think the Tapfly feature will be very useful for creating dynamic moves.

  • Does anyone know if the image is corrected automatically for the fish eye effect? The GoPro 5 has that option but it also crops the image necessarily. I wonder if the field of coverage of the Mavic will be reduced when a fish eye filter process is applied unless it is already applied automatically. ProDRENALIN has one that I use which make a big difference and allows the drone footage blend more with the regular video used at ground level but it does reduce the coverage real estate as it makes the correction. So I have to fly further away than I normally would to anticipate that loss. So the question has to also be asked of those who have used the P4, is the footage shot also automatically corrected for fish eye?

  • @ Peter,

    Neither the mavic or phantom use a fish eye lens. Mavic is I think 28mm and the Phantom is 24mm.

  • Anyone waiting for clients to “pay properly for aerial footage” before they jump on board will be in the same boat as those people that used to say “I will switch to digital once clients start to pay properly”. Drone are now just seen as another tool such as your digital camera. Not before long and you will need to offer an aerial photos as part of the package for the same price you simply won’t get the job.

    The only photographer able to ask for more money will those that can fly in location which are offlimits to none licensed drone pilot such as areas close to commerical airports, locations under flight paths, locations close to large gatherings etc. But I suspect even those will see limits in how much clients are prepared to pay due to sheer number of already qualified and licensed operators.

    The biggest loosers will probably be operators of helicopter or fix wing aircraft based aerial photography services providers.

  • Matt, I believe I called it the “the fish eye effect”. My Phantom2+ has that effect. I had not read that subsequent Phantoms had changed lenses. Have they? I would be most interested.

  • Peter, yes subsequent Phantoms significantly improved the lens. I’ve had both P2V+ and P3Adv and P3 is much better. I have no experience with other models.

  • Scott thank you for that information. I made a large investment in several V2’s and all the batteries and extras so I have stuck with that model as one after the other dropped out of the sky first with the poor shielding of the GPS antenna and then batteries going bad while showing 80% charged. But the last ones off the production line had had the changes made to them that us early purchasers had made from copper foil over the GPS antennas to 3rd party antennas thicker but with much more sensitivity. But I am on my last one, it’s mate coming afoul of both a newly bad batter and strong doppler radar signals that interfered with the wifi. Such fun.

    So I was interested in the Mavic as well as the new GoPro version since I just bought a GoProBlack5. Thought I’d be half way there on price. But thanks Larry for posting this topic and the warning about the GoPro copter! I am not sure that my investments have paid off on being able to charge for the investment but as others have said, it gets me more clients so it increases the income potential by offering that service. I fly low so for me it is more of a floating but tall tripod.

    I know this is not a chat room. However, I hope that the comments and counter comments will help others making choices.

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply