To find out the key to this problem, it depends on what this equipment is for!
Pixel level has a great influence on the picture quality. Although it is not the only factor that determines the picture quality, it is indeed the basic indicator of high-quality pictures. Machines with low pixel specifications, including drones, also include some cameras. They are actually not used for taking pictures, but more for shooting videos.
So the question is, what is the relationship between video quality and pixels?
The resolution specification of video is related to pixels, but it is far less demanding than that of pictures. Ordinary 1080p high-definition video only needs 2 million pixels to meet the resolution requirements, while the 4k video resolution of 1080, which is now being popularized, only needs 8 million pixels of cmos to fully meet the requirements.
Too high a pixel will affect the video quality. For example, if you shoot with a high-pixel cmos device, the purity of high-sensitivity will be greatly affected, and the poor quality of high-sensitivity is a drawback of high-pixel machines. And if a device is mainly used to shoot video, it is wise to use cmos with low pixel specification. /kloc-Cmos with a specification of more than 0.0 million pixels can not only meet the creation of standard video with 4k resolution, but also take into account the high-sensitivity picture purity. For example, Sony's latest a7s3 Quan Huafu micro-single model expands the use of12 megapixel cmos, because it is positioned for a7 series video use. Similarly, taking photos with drones is less than taking videos. Most drones shoot mainly video material. Therefore, the UAV does not take high pixels as its parameter index.
In addition, the UAV with built-in camera only locates the lower-end civilian equipment, and does not integrate a larger cmos camera. If the pixels of a small-size cmos camera device are too high, it is inevitable that the image quality will deteriorate. It is not high pixels that can bring high image quality, and it must be matched with its size. For example, the theoretical maximum pixel value of the photosensitive camera in Quan Huafu is 50 million pixels at the current technical level, and it is difficult to control the comprehensiveness of the image quality. If the UAV is equipped with a photosensitive element similar to 1/2.3 inches on the mobile phone, then 10 million pixels is just the right level.
To sum up, many UAVs are not equipped with high-pixel shooting equipment due to the size specifications of cmos built-in cameras on UAVs and the main purposes of video shooting. So, what if there is a demand for high-pixel aerial photos? This requires the use of high-specification drones, which can mount larger cameras and load high-pixel cameras for shooting.
Photographic equipment can't just look at pixel values!
Why does the photography circle have the saying of "bottom-level killing" instead of pixel-level killing? That's why.
For CMOS sensors with the same size, the higher the pixel, the finer the segmentation and the smaller each pixel. In terms of manufacturing technology, it is indeed a great progress, but photography is a process of painting with light. Too small a pixel means that a single pixel gets less light, which has a fatal impact on image quality.
Although you can still get better photos with the help of AI algorithm and multi-frame synthesis technology, when you enlarge the photos, you will find that the details will be obviously smeared.
And professional SLR, micro-single and other cameras rarely pursue high pixels. Already large CMOS always has lower pixels (compared with mobile phones) to ensure that each pixel is large enough to get enough light. This layout ensures the details of the photos, and also leaves enough space for later modification.
Back to the field of drones, the newly released Mavic Air2 this year has 48 million pixels, but its CMOS is 1/2 inches, which is the same pixel but the bottom of Air2 is bigger, and the imaging quality is second only to the same pixel mobile phone (excluding the influence of AI algorithm).
Mavic 2 pro bottom 1 inch but only 20 million pixels. What concept? Mavic 2 pro's photosensitive element area is exactly four times that of Mavic Air2, and then it is subdivided into the area of a single pixel. Do it yourself!
Although drones have also introduced high-pixel products, we must also treat them rationally. In DJI, our own China Elf and Mavic series belong to professional photography understanding, while Mavic air and Mavic mini belong to entertainment machines. These machines, combined with stronger AI algorithms, can directly shoot films that are more in line with the public's aesthetics and win the hearts of a group of users who don't understand photography. Why not?
First of all, it needs to be clear that the key factor to determine the shooting quality is not the number of pixels, but the CCD size of the photoreceptor. Knowing this, it is hooliganism to talk about pixels but not CCD contrast.
For example, the same 50 million pixels, it must be a large CCD size, good imaging effect; On the other hand, for the same size CCD, the higher the pixel, the better? Not necessarily. The higher the pixel, the higher the density and the greater the electronic interference between pixels, which will affect the imaging quality.
So you don't have to worry about the nominal pixels of the drone. The key is the size of CCD.
The drone pixel is not low. Okay! Is it still low to shoot 4k video? The photos of DJI Royal Mavic Air 2 have reached 48 million pixels, is it still low? ! The average mobile phone doesn't have this pixel yet!
You can't judge the quality of the picture by the pixels.
Today's big-name drones can also achieve the shooting effect of 4k or even 8kRAW. Basically achieved the effect of flagship mobile phones, such as DJI and Anafi.
The so-called mobile phone pixel number is just a gimmick. Without a large enough photosensitive element as the basis, no matter how high the pixel is, it is just a gimmick.
Why is the 1DX series only over 20 million pixels, and it is also called Canon flagship? Professional camera? If you only look at the so-called pixels, the camera should be eliminated.