A lot of folks, especially those new to drones and/or aerial photography, seem unsure whether to get a Spark or a Mavic (I have both). These aircraft are in fact different enough that the choice should be easy, if you are not also new to photography.
Keeping it very simple: Both are flying cameras. Both are easy to learn to fly, both are very reliable and well made. One is more compact, if that matters, and one is more expensive, if that's an issue. But with those and a few other obvious differences put aside, what matters most is what kind of pictures you need. The analogy to earthbound cameras is simple:
The Spark is like a flying basic smartphone or point-and-shoot camera. You'll get decent pictures and video in the context of those sorts of cameras. More than adequate for any social needs, either on social media or in email/texts to family, etc. Also more than good enough for light sorts of use in blogs, record keeping of ongoing projects, etc. more or less casual advertising, and so on. In other words, if a phone and or simple point-and-shoot is enough camera for you on the ground, it will likely be enough in the air.
The Mavic's camera is considerably more advanced. It's not a full-blown pro camera of course, but rather in the "prosumer" realm. If you do a lot of post-shoot processing and editing, if you need to use filters, if you like to have a lot of adjustable camera settings, etc. etc, then the Mavic is probably best for you.
Beyond the consumer/prosumer cameras themselves, there are some less obvious things that can affect your photography in differing ways. A feature of the Mavic is that it doesn't draw possibly unwanted attention nearly as much as larger drones; the Spark is even better in this regard, the average observer will view it as a toy, it's very non-threatening. But you give up, for the moment at least, a number of cinematic flight modes.
Range and flight times do differ, but many of us never find reasons to fly further away than a few hundred yards, and 15 minutes is more time in the air than you might think.
Another thing that should not be a basis for choice is aircraft stability. Both of these aircraft are very capable of handling quite a lot of wind, so don't think you'll be giving much up in that regard with the smaller Spark.
Bottom line, if you can live with the excellent but modest camera, the Spark is a great choice, otherwise go with the Mavic.
Hope these somewhat random observations/opinions help someone a bit.
Keeping it very simple: Both are flying cameras. Both are easy to learn to fly, both are very reliable and well made. One is more compact, if that matters, and one is more expensive, if that's an issue. But with those and a few other obvious differences put aside, what matters most is what kind of pictures you need. The analogy to earthbound cameras is simple:
The Spark is like a flying basic smartphone or point-and-shoot camera. You'll get decent pictures and video in the context of those sorts of cameras. More than adequate for any social needs, either on social media or in email/texts to family, etc. Also more than good enough for light sorts of use in blogs, record keeping of ongoing projects, etc. more or less casual advertising, and so on. In other words, if a phone and or simple point-and-shoot is enough camera for you on the ground, it will likely be enough in the air.
The Mavic's camera is considerably more advanced. It's not a full-blown pro camera of course, but rather in the "prosumer" realm. If you do a lot of post-shoot processing and editing, if you need to use filters, if you like to have a lot of adjustable camera settings, etc. etc, then the Mavic is probably best for you.
Beyond the consumer/prosumer cameras themselves, there are some less obvious things that can affect your photography in differing ways. A feature of the Mavic is that it doesn't draw possibly unwanted attention nearly as much as larger drones; the Spark is even better in this regard, the average observer will view it as a toy, it's very non-threatening. But you give up, for the moment at least, a number of cinematic flight modes.
Range and flight times do differ, but many of us never find reasons to fly further away than a few hundred yards, and 15 minutes is more time in the air than you might think.
Another thing that should not be a basis for choice is aircraft stability. Both of these aircraft are very capable of handling quite a lot of wind, so don't think you'll be giving much up in that regard with the smaller Spark.
Bottom line, if you can live with the excellent but modest camera, the Spark is a great choice, otherwise go with the Mavic.
Hope these somewhat random observations/opinions help someone a bit.
