Well, it says many interesting things and as usual it's a very impartial and well structured unsponsored review.  But it mentions the "low resolution sensor" which I don't recall others mentioning.  This, he says, make the zoom not worth using as it's no different from cropping during editing.  The Pocket 2 had more pixels available on the sensor so it could zoom with higher quality.

Here's the review.  Apparently this is the first of several he's making on the Pocket 3 - great!

It’s a good review and usually is from HS. I’m not sure about the zoom while the P2 was 16 pixel it was on a smaller sensor, where as the P3 has less pixels on a bigger sensor I’m not sure how that works .

Cropping in post usually always give you a better result,   especially with quality tools that will do some upscaling,  but having digital zooming camera is handy for convenience.   I just wish we weren't missing digital zoom on the Pocket 3 in some modes.

I don't see where there is a problem 4K recording and lower resolutions would be at the same pixel densities. It will only make a difference to stills.

Ray-CubeAce Posted at 11-21 08:44
I don't see where there is a problem 4K recording and lower resolutions would be at the same pixel densities. It will only make a difference to stills.

[view_image]

I think comparing photos from the pocket 3 are actually an improvement on the 2 obviously 1 the better light with the bigger sensor and the actual bigger pixels seem IMO to produce better cleaner photos. Using it for photos is probably the last thing people bought it for, but taking panorama’s auto and manually and work in post can produce some surprising results.

Regarding the lower resolution sensor size of the P3 vs P2, I seem to remember reading a lower resolution sensor such as the one used in the P3 is better for video. So it seems the P3 leans more to video than photos.

This is my understanding of the matter - I am open to correction -

If you have surplus pixels on the sensor, then when shooting normal 4K video, some of the pixels (groups of 4 for instance) are being combined to produce the normal 4K output.  When you use in-camera digital zoom in such a camera, then you might get to the point where you cropped into 1/4 of the sensor but now you are using one sensor pixel per output pixel.  So the resolution does not suffer much if at all.  That was how it was done on the Pocket 2, which had more sensor pixels than the Pocket 3.  On the Pocket 3, as you digitally zoom in, you are simply doing it the way it works in the editor - just cropping the sensor and using the reduced number of source pixels to fill the frame.  But using a larger sensor with less pixels gives other benefits, particularly in low light.  So that's the design priority that DJI have chosen.   Therefore, only use the digital zoom if you are not equipped to digitally zoom in editing (or you intend to directly upload to social media exactly what you have shot).

I'd rather have less pixels than more.
Zooming in on the sensor also reduces image quality, because you are using less of the glass and that also impacts the image quality.
I think it is called resolving power for lenses, but it is something similar to resolution, so the less of lens surface you are using, the lower the 'resolution' (amount of details) you will get.
Plus having fewer pixels on a larger sensor (P3) will usually result in less noise and better dynamic range.

Exciting times in the photography world! Just caught the Hybrid Shooter review, and there's a game-changing insight you don't want to miss. Dive into the innovation with digaptics and stay ahead of the curve! For further details, please visit our website: https://digaptics.com/benefits-of-micro-influencers/