DJI releases Mavic Pro Platinum with better battery life and quieter flight

If you want ultimate IQ then go Inspire 2 w/ the 4/3 sensor... and if that doesn't satisfy you then get the matrice and fly any camera you desire

true that +++

The DJI news as of late has really turned me off their products (I'm embarrassed that I didn't see it coming) and I don't come back easily. I'll gladly pay more for a GoPro Karma.

Hey Matt, probably a good idea to wait till you find out that the drone you killed with your vengeance stick was being operated by a ranger in the forest service doing a survey of the local area.

Best not to flash to anger and remedy your grumpy self by destroying someone else's technology.

How would you like it if someone surprised you and started the conversation with, "Hey, you takin' pictures of MY WIFE??? What the frack, buster," then slammed your new Nikon 850 into the nearest rock formation?

@PhotoKhan,

Yes, there are plenty of other sources of noise and annoyance, even in the most remote corners of the wilderness. My point is, we as a society are running out of "wilderness solitude", period. And fast.

All because we're terrified of infringing on some ambiguous newfound "liberties" that all citizens magically gain with whatever new techno-gadget that comes along. Yet we already have various other regulations in many wilderness areas that restrict things like off-road vehicles and other craft, for various reasons. And in a lot of these places, such as National Parks, drones are illegal too.

Yet, we toss our hands up as if it's a huge crime against all citizens' rights, just to say "no, you can't fly there, that area is a nature preserve". ...Meanwhile it's a damn miracle that nobody got their DJI sucked into an A380 engine at LAX or something, before the FAA realized that drones should be regulated and pilots should be licensed, etc. (It's still a risk every day.)

BTW, I thought they ended the "noise abatement" nonsense at SNA and other airports, thanks to quieter engines in recent years.

It was a fun ride on liftoff, sure, but I always rolled my eyes at the "elites" down below (Newport Beach) and their whiney complaints. So, point well-taken.

Personally I don't think I'd be so whiney if I lived in the flight path of an airport, but I don't know what it's like to have enough money to throw my weight around with problems like that. I'd rather live in a quiet cabin in the mountains anyways.

@PeteriNova,

I'm not sure I understand your analogy. Is this someone smashing "my D850" because I accidentally pointed my camera in the general direction of their wife, while out in a public place? Hmm. I'd have to think about how that relates to a drone that shows up and buzzes around to ruin my wilderness experience, when I know it isn't spying on me, but merely disturbing the peace.

But, your other argument is very relevant. There are drones operated by all sorts of officials, law enforcement, fire fighting, etc. etc. I suppose I'm currently hung up on the recent experience I had in which I can say with 100% certainty that drone pilots intentionally disregarded a direct order not to fly, because I talked to both them and the rangers beforehand. :-(

I want to preserve my concept of relaxation at the expense of yours? Um, NO. I want to preserve the planet, period.

As I stated, many places are already off-limits to modern tech toys; ATVs, power boats, etc. You can't go ATV-ing on cryptobiotic soil, and you can't blast your 'Miami Vice' boat through marine sanctuaries.

Some of these areas might not be harmed by a drone, others might be too delicate (avian nesting grounds?) and should be off-limits to drones.

Even human foot traffic is highly restricted in some of these places, and I'm fine with that. I've been lucky enough to visit The Wave, a stunningly beautiful place where access is controlled by a lottery system.

Certain places like The Wave, though they might not be directly threatened by a drone's presence, should still be kept free from such things, simply to preserve the experience of the wilderness.

I don't understand why you think YOU should be allowed to fly a drone *everywhere*, even pristine wildernesses.

If anything, we each have an equal right to our own personal pursuit of relaxation. And yes, due to the constraints of time and money, both pursuits may encroach on the other. There is on one "concept of relaxation" that should automatically win by default, though.

That's why it gets put to a vote. The National Parks system decided to not allow drones, period. Many other parks and recreation areas have designated "no fly zones" as well. They've done so either for human safety, or wildlife preservation, or simply for the preservation of that ambiguous thing of which I speak, "the wilderness experience"...

If you firmly believe this "the wilderness experience" is encroaching on your constitutional right to fly a drone around out in the wilderness, fine. Write letters to your politicians and parks officials and let them know! But for now, you're in the minority. Most people prefer "the wilderness experience" to not include loud buzzing noises and blinking lights in the sky.

Most of the nicer, prettier places are already within parks and recreation areas that don't allow drones.

Yes, there's a LOT of land that is fair game, but much of it is boring enough that neither of us cares to visit it.

My point was that people still fly illegally, in the pretty places that are mostly no-fly zones. I've witnessed it numerous times, and it was definitely not parks officials etc.

But that's not the issue. The issue is, once we get out to an ambiguous wilderness with no rules, ...YOU want YOUR toys, at the expense of MY peace and quiet. One of us is going to have to put up with the other.

However it's clear that you don't care for wilderness preservation in general, since to you it's a non-sequitur to even mention that other tech toys are illegal in some delicate areas, plus other areas that aren't necessarily delicate.

Since we cannot agree on who should lose their "rights", ...I'll promise not to throw sticks at your drone if you're in a LEGAL area. :-)

I agree. It is difficult to justify the higher cost of the Mavic over the Spark with the same camera hardware.

The Spark doesn't shoot 4K, doesn't record raw photos, and doesn't have a third axis on its gimbal (which is a problem that DJI solved by sacrificing the other two and doing software rotation, AFAICT). It may be the same sensor, but the camera had a lot to do with my reason for getting a Mavic rather than a Spark. Plus the Mavic folds up a little smaller (in at least one dimension), which is nice for stuffing it in a camera bag. Also, adding a controller to the Spark brings the prices closer...