Why DJI Keeps Choosing the 1/1.3-Inch Sensor

---

DJI has launched five very different products in roughly two years that all revolve around the same imaging core: Air 3 with its dual 1/1.3-inch cameras, Mini 4 Pro’s 1/1.3-inch 48MP module, Osmo Action 4 and Action 5 Pro with 1/1.3-inch sensors, and even the Avata 2 FPV drone with a “bigger” 1/1.3-inch unit compared to the first Avata. These are not the same customers or even the same form factor, but the silicon is conspicuously similar. (DJI Official)

A size that sits between smartphones and drones

The 1/1.3-inch format sits at an unusual intersection. It is large enough to do real binning (DJI runs to 2.4µm equivalent pixels on Mini 4 Pro and Action 4) and to stay clean in low light, but still small enough for a gimbal that can live under 249 g, or in a crash-prone FPV frame, or behind a fully waterproof front glass. On Air 3, DJI could even run two cameras of the same size at two focal lengths so that colour, noise and HDR all match, which is something you rarely get when one camera is a toy tele with a tiny sensor. (DJI Official)

From an optics point of view, 1/1.3 inch is also the point where you can still use relatively fast lenses (f/1.7–f/2.8) without blowing up the drone’s head or destroying battery life. Anything bigger and you need more glass, more weight, more motor torque on the gimbal, and more heat budget on the ISP. That is why DJI’s fully pro Mavic 4 Pro keeps the huge 4/3 Hasselblad sensor for the main camera, but quietly uses a 1/1.3-inch sensor again on the medium-tele to stay inside its size and runtime envelope. (Tom’s Guide)

The supply-chain math

Globally, 1/1.3-inch 50MP-class sensors are a volume part. Huawei’s P70 line, Honor’s Magic 6 Pro, Vivo’s big foldables and Motorola’s 2024–25 flagships all standardised on OmniVision’s OV50H/OV50N or rival Sony/LYT parts in that exact footprint. That gives sensor makers steady wafer runs and better yields, which in turn gives DJI what every hardware company wants in 2025: a camera part that is not going to get trapped by China’s new export paperwork or Japan’s tightening on higher-end CIS, and that has at least two foundry sources. (Huawei Central)

DJI is under more geopolitical pressure than any other consumer-electronics brand right now; the US NDAA audit due December 23, 2025, could still put it on the FCC’s covered list by default, while China has made exporting some drone-class parts slower and more expensive. Using the same image sensor across drones, action cams and FPV gear is an obvious hedge: the more SKUs you can hang on one optical stack, the easier it is to forward-buy wafers, keep your ISP tuning team small, and swap suppliers if the US or China moves the goalposts again. (DRONELIFE)

Another advantage is firmware. Once DJI has done the hard work of colour, HDR, denoise and D-Log M on a 1/1.3-inch, it can ship the same image pipeline to Mini, Air, Avata, Osmo and even the new Osmo Nano without starting from zero. That is the quiet reason you see vertical video, 4K/100 or 4K/120, and similar night-video behaviour across so many unrelated DJI products. This is not an artistic choice; it is supply-chain amortisation. (DJI Official)

Why not jump to 1 inch everywhere?

Because 1 inch breaks everything that matters in DJI’s mid-range: weight, cost, and heat. A 1-inch stack needs a larger protective dome and more glass, so it blows the sub-249 g category, which is essential for flying in Europe and the US without extra paperwork. The sensor itself also does not ride the smartphone volume curve; phone vendors are now pivoting to 1-inch or 1/1.4-inch in only a few halo models, not in millions of units, so DJI would lose the cost leverage it currently enjoys. And in FPV, 1 inch is simply too big aerodynamically. A single 1/1.3-inch line that can be tuned for drones, for helmets and for handhelds is the pragmatic option.

A parallel in Cupertino

Apple has finally done something that, on paper, looks the opposite: jumped from a 12MP/5P selfie module to a 24MP/6P unit across the entire iPhone 17 line. After years of criticism about iPhone’s stagnant front camera—stuck at 12MP since the iPhone 11 in 2019—Apple delivered what many reviewers are calling the most overdue upgrade in modern iPhone history. Ming-Chi Kuo flagged the change back in January 2024 as a major lens and CIS upgrade. Throughout 2024 and early 2025, Jeff Pu and MacRumors confirmed that all four models would get the new front camera. Apple’s September 2025 keynote revealed an even stranger detail: a near-square front sensor designed specifically to make Center Stage work properly for stills. (AppleInsider)

The reception has been overwhelmingly positive. Early reviews from The Verge, MKBHD, and TechCrunch all highlighted the front camera as the sleeper hit of the iPhone 17 lineup. Detail retention in video calls, Portrait mode accuracy, and low-light selfie performance have all taken a meaningful step forward. For the first time in years, iPhone users aren’t looking enviously at Samsung or Pixel front cameras. This upgrade matters not just for image quality but for Apple’s positioning: as Zoom, Teams, and FaceTime become essential productivity tools, a bad front camera is no longer a forgivable weakness—it’s a liability in the premium segment.

This matters for cost because Apple already reclassified the front camera as a “high-end” part in 2022 when it moved iPhone 14 to LG Innotek and paid about three times more per unit than before. Korean reports at the time and follow-up coverage at MacRumors and AppleInsider all said the unit price jump was the biggest on the phone that year. With the iPhone 17’s doubling of pixel count, 6P lens, tighter mechanical tolerances for the square sensor, and the 375.9 billion-won camera-module capex LG Innotek announced in late 2024 to “respond to new models,” teardowns and supply-chain estimates now put the front module in the mid- to high-teens of dollars for the regular models and low-20s for the Pro. That represents a 25–40% jump over iPhone 16 levels, on a part that ships in tens of millions of units. (MacRumors)

Apple did this for the opposite reason to DJI. DJI standardises to spread risk; Apple upgraded to keep ASPs stable while tariffs and AI hardware costs eat into margin—and to finally silence years of valid criticism about its front camera. But the underlying logic is supply-chain control in both cases. Apple locked in LG Innotek, Cowell and Genius Electronic Optical for a higher-value selfie camera because it wanted predictable quality and a credible reason to price the iPhone 17 Pro Max at $1,299. DJI locks in 1/1.3 inch because it wants predictable availability when US regulators or Chinese export rules change at short notice. The end point is the same: pay a bit more now to avoid getting stuck with the wrong sensor later. (thelec.net)

What this says about Chinese imaging supply chains

There is also a China angle that rarely gets stated. China’s domestic CIS players, especially OmniVision, have very competitive 1/1.3-inch 50MP parts aimed at mid-high Android flagships. DJI can source there if Japan or Korea tighten exports, but the opposite is not true: it cannot easily source 1-inch or custom stacked sensors domestically at the same quality yet. Staying on 1/1.3 inch keeps the door open to both Chinese and non-Chinese upstream suppliers in a way that a 1-inch move would not. In 2025, with US agencies still debating whether DJI should be on the FCC covered list, that optionality is worth real money. (OMNIVISION)

So why does it look like DJI “loves” 1/1.3 inch?

Because the constraint is visible. Users see the same sensor spec again and again and assume product fatigue. In reality, DJI is doing classic consumer-electronics supply-chain management: pick one part that rides the smartphone volume wave, ship it everywhere until the economics break, and hide the sameness with software (D-Log M, better HDR, vertical video, 4K/120). Apple’s iPhone 17 selfie camera demonstrates the mirror image of that strategy: push the spec upward, accept the cost, and make the supplier invest in capacity so you can own the roadmap. The positive market reception has validated Apple’s decision—sometimes you do have to spend more to fix a weakness that’s become indefensible.

For now, 1/1.3 inch is the last sensor size where DJI can still buy like a phone maker, ship like a drone maker, and survive like a company that may or may not be allowed to sell in the US next year. And on the other side of the Pacific, the iPhone 17’s 24MP/6P selfie camera has proven that high-end front optics are no longer a low-priority component—they have moved into the part of the bill of materials that reviewers, users, and competitors actually talk about. After six years of 12MP front cameras, Apple finally acknowledged that “good enough” wasn’t good enough anymore.