i have used a modified phantom 2 vision, modified the camers for nadir image collection, was curious if the phantom 3 pro will have better, equal, or less detailed results. any opinion?
Apart from the flying options, The main difference for 3D modelling between pv2 and the p3 is the lens. P2v has a fusheye, which is good because you can observe facades even with nadir images. The p3 has a persoective lens, not such a wide field of view but a better resolution. Flying both at the same altitude will give you higher resolution and more accuracy for the p3. On the other hand you need more pictures to have the same overlap.
At 50m the p2v gives you already about 2-3cm accuracy and you can see the facades. It is already a good mapping tool.
I am curious to really compare both in the next weeks, when the capture app suports both and the inspire1.
Just for curiosity I did a manual flight with my Phantom 3 Pro and processed the images in Pix4Dmapper. I flew at 50m elevation and compared the results to a flight done with the P2V+ and the Capture app. The P3 came out with an average GSD of 2.14cm, where the P2V+ had 1.97cm. This wasn’t a very accurate comparison though, my manual flight did not have very consistent spacing. However, I was surprised with the amount of facade detail in the 3D view with the P3. I thought without the fisheye lens it would have more missing information than it did. But it turned out better than I thought. It will be interesting to try this when the app supports the P3.