New FPV Cam...Suggestions?

[sprzout]

I have been happily flying my Blade Conspiracy 220 for a while, but I've noticed that, after a few crashes, the camera keeps cutting in and out from color to B&W and back, even when there's not much of a change for lighting. I thought it was the video transmitter at first, but after checking wiring everywhere back and forth, I discovered that the camera's housing has become damaged from a crash and the cords aren't fitting in properly anymore, giving it haphazard connection.

Currently, I have a 650TVL B&W/600TVL Color Spektrum CCD camera w/a 2.8mm lens on it, and I'm thinking about moving up, if possible.

I've been looking at the RunCams, and trying to make a decision on which camera I might want to go with, as they look like they're a firm step up from what I've currently got.

I'm liking the Runcam Eagle 2, as it's got a higher TVL than my current camera, but I'm also considering the Owl 2, since I'm doing a lot of my flying during low light hours/in shadow at the ball fields. I'm also looking at 4:3, since I've got a pair of Fatshark Attitude V4s that use 4:3, and not 16:9 (I would rather just stick with 4:3 camera output; the widescreen just looks funny to me).

Also, if there are any other considerations besides the RunCams (maybe a Foxeer or Lumenier?) that I could use for a replacement, I'm open to suggestions!!!

 

[PsyBorg]

IMO you cant beat the runcam swift series. The runcam swift 2 micro or mini are the go too for me. The versatility that can be had with the menus not to mention a built in simple osd is perfect. I prefer using a 2.5mm lens with my Skyzone's as you don't get the "Expo" effect so much at the bottom edge of the view like with the 2.1 and 2.3 lens. I do suggest however you get some teflon tape and use it on the lens threads as well as the locking ring. I have had two lens vibrate out of the micros now even with the locking ring snugged down tight.

 

[ElectriSean]

I'm also a fan of the Runcam Swift 2 and micro Swift. If you have room, the 2.5mm gopro lens cannot be beat.

 

[sprzout]

IMO you cant beat the runcam swift series. The runcam swift 2 micro or mini are the go too for me. The versatility that can be had with the menus not to mention a built in simple osd is perfect. I prefer using a 2.5mm lens with my Skyzone's as you don't get the "Expo" effect so much at the bottom edge of the view like with the 2.1 and 2.3 lens. I do suggest however you get some teflon tape and use it on the lens threads as well as the locking ring. I have had two lens vibrate out of the micros now even with the locking ring snugged down tight.

LOL Teflon tape and I are old friends. I use it quite often for airbrush hose threads, and I've been installing new shower heads in my bathrooms, so I have a couple rolls lying around. But that makes complete sense now that you've said it!

So let me ask this about the OSD with the Swifts - does it have an attitude indicator, something to tell you if you're (relatively) level to the ground or not? If not, no biggie, but I was considering adding a MinimOSD board to my quad for that at one time...

I wonder if I could take the 2.8mm lens off my Spektrum camera and use it on the RunCam, or if the lenses are proprietary or not...food for thought.

 

[PsyBorg]

The swift minis have replacement lens in the full range from 2.1 to 2.8. I believe you can order them with which ever lens you wish. The micros however I have only seen in 2.1 and 2.3 mm so far. As far as osd its very basic. Volts, Time and call sign. But the do have full feature settings. Here is what I use for outdoor settings that transition great from full sun to dark shade. I am sure you can find a happy setting as well for darker flights but this is a good over all setting so I don't have to change it constantly.

 

[sprzout]

Dang, that looks a LOT better than the camera I've got now...Yep, looks like I'm upgrading!!! LOL

 

[Bricks]

I believe the new Foxeer Predator mini beats the pants off of the Runcam for WDR every comparison to the Runcams the Foxeer Preditor seems better some complain about a little red tint at the edge of bright sun light but they have not adjusted the hue they were comparing straight out of the box.. Do a google search comparing these cameras and then make up your mind.

 

[PsyBorg]

These were my last two out door runs on my Gremlin with the runcam swift 2 micro on the settings from my earlier set up video. One is during the worst time of day to fly FPV in and out of direct line of sight with the sun in your eyes in late afternoon and then transitioning into the darker shade of the buildings directly after. Its the change or lack of change in what you can see in these transitions that is important. You are not looking for movie quality settings here. You want the set up as stable as it can be in these transitions.

The second video is typical Central New York winter grey perma cloudiness on the same settings.

 

[TazRC]

Here's some of the newer cams:

 

[PsyBorg]

I do non't like CMOS cameras mainly because of the lack of adjustability. Some are coming out now with software for some settings but still pretty lame over the range. I think once they finally get on the same page as CCD cameras they can actually compete. Until then I don't see anything better now then what run cam is doing with the CCD cameras. Even the expensive Sony cameras don't have the same functionality you can get with the runcams right now.

 

[Bricks]

True Psyborg but if the firmware is done right from the start then less adjustment is necessary Oscar Lang is adding more CMOS camers as the technology is newer and being improved faster where CCD is not showing any real improvement over the years.

 

[sprzout]

True Psyborg but if the firmware is done right from the start then less adjustment is necessary Oscar Lang is adding more CMOS camers as the technology is newer and being improved faster where CCD is not showing any real improvement over the years.

That kinda goes hand in hand with what I read recently as well...And besides that, isn't the Runcam Eagle 2 a CMOS camera, and kinda supposed to be one of Runcam's flagship cameras? Sorry, not trying to argue this, trying to understand the pros and cons of the two - if Runcam is positing the Eagle as a higher end camera (and maybe I'm misunderstanding it with how it's listed on their website; that's certainly possible), what's the reason why I shouldn't consider it? Is it latency issues?

I'm still highly considering the Swift, after seeing your footage, but with the higher TVL from the Eagle vs. Swift, would it be worth a second look?

 

[Bricks]

The Foxeer Preditor Mini has the lowest latency. In my eyes the Super WDR is what makes this camera and mine is on the way from Getfpv.con. My current board camera sucks this time of year with the lower Sun in the horizon it is a constant issue the way WDR is handled Summer not as much of an issue. Just my opinion.

The bad for some that use certain FPV Goggles is it is only 4.3 aspect ratio and cannot be changed.

 

[Bricks]

The Foxeer Preditor Mini has the lowest latency. In my eyes the Super WDR is what makes this camera and mine is on the way from Getfpv.con. My current board camera sucks this time of year with the lower Sun in the horizon it is a constant issue the way WDR is handled Summer not as much of an issue. The Run Cam swift is 600 TVL the Predator is 1000TVL and it is IR blocked so late evening or dusk the Predator will handle that much better. Before you purchase search some more videos and reviews. Just my opinion all and all it is your money.. I am a tight wad when it comes to this stuff and I have never paid this much for a camera before $41.99 but after reading for the last month on cameras it is what I chose.

 

[ElectriSean]

Higher TVL doesn't do much for you as your VTx is broadcasting in NTSC (525TVL) or PAL (625TVL).

 

[sprzout]

Higher TVL doesn't do much for you as your VTx is broadcasting in NTSC (525TVL) or PAL (625TVL).

Sean,

Thanks for pointing that out - that was something I hadn't thought about.

Although, that now brings up another question in my mind - why offer a camera with 600, or 800, or 1000 TVL, if the transmitter can only broadcast 525/625TVL (PAL/NTSC)? Seems that the higher lines are a waste if the transmitter format can only broadcast so much...

Bricks,

4:3 isn't a problem. I've got a set of Quanum Cyclops v2 that has the ability to switch between 4:3 and 16:9, and I have a pair of Fatshark Attitude V4 goggles that I just won in a Christmas dinner raffle (which I am REALLY liking!)

The Quanums will be my backup pair for ride alongs; I like them, but they're a little bulkier than the Fatsharks. 640x480, aka 4:3 screen format, vs the 800x480 16:9 format? I think I'll stick with the 4:3 until such time as I'm kind of forced to make the jump (i.e., I get a new pair of goggles and there are no 4:3 camera options available anymore).

 

[Bricks]

I dug around and found a little more info on actual transmissions possible whit PAL/NTSC.



downsampling just isn´t the term describing it well really,as stated above all those links are analog based on a composite signal more specifically called fbas for us in german speaking countries or cvbs ( color video blank sync) in the english speakingworld .

it mostly adheres to standards mentioned like pal, ntsc, etc.....

tis signal can agian be modulated into about any rf carrier frequency, hence the many sytems 2.4, 1.3, 5.8, etc. to transport the same signal.




for a quick readup try this link:

http://www.thefullwiki.org/FBAS

your airplay at home or a digital video link will for the most part either display an image ( play music) or not, depending wether rf conditions match the error correction capabilities of soft /hardware.

with analog links the actual bandwith changes the actual resolution, think of a washed out fpv link on max range consisting of mostly static and some barley recognizable lines that still tell you where the horizon is . what is the actual resolution of that image? 48 x 36 ? still it´s a pal / ntsc 576i /480i signal when transmitted , it´s just not near it´s original resolution once demodulated in the tx.

so the goggle has no " hard " resolution to " scale" from, it has to deal with an anlog input , and results do vary ; )



actual resolution is variable and therefore rarely metioned in rf module data sheets.
it is capable of 576/480 lines and that is that.

still analog bandwith raises with frequency, thats why 5.8 is theoreticaly capable of a higher quality than 900 for example

immersion used to use airwave modules

theres data sheets for those :
http://www.dpcav.com/data_sheets/AWM667TX.pdf

ive used various links with various camera resolutions of 240- 700 t/l.
still none of these links will transmit a 700 line image , the " downsampling" happens in the tx chip ,in the signal cable actualy, as every connection degrades signal quality. thinking which goggle does have the best "scaling" resolutions is thinking digital again.

think lcd or plasma tv´s:
most of them are capable of displaying 1080p content, still how they display a signal from an anlog input(if they still have one, and you still have a source ) varies wildly
and is in large part dependent on the hard /software involed and not on the display devices resolution.

there is no "VHS tapes look better on 720p screens" rule.

as far as i am informed the same holds true for video goggles.

as a rule of thumb a better camera will give you a higher percieved resolution in your goggles,because it will feed a "better " signal in the remainder of your signal chain.

think tv again even though all old CRT tv´s could display 480i/576i only
a hollywood production would look substantialy better than a news report, even though both were adhering to the same technical standard.

when defining analog link quality its about s/n ratios frequency deviation and such...

i apologize if my explanations are a little bit " grassroots" but i think they still are correct.

happy to hear if i got something wrong here.

 

[sprzout]

Bit the bullet and bought a Runcam Swift 2 - found a weird deal on it on Amazon, $36.99.

It is WORLDS better than the Spektrum camera I had on my Blade Conspiracy. Maybe it's because the Spektrum didn't give me an OSD cable to correct settings? I dunno. I got it installed last night and the look through it is literal night and day. I actually have color that I can see, the world doesn't look muted...I might still have to play with the brightness and contrast a bit when I take it out for the first flight, but right now, the price was right for a HUGE upgrade, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[rockyboy]

Glad it's a winner for you. I'm a big fan of my Swift 2 also.

On the comment earlier about why do they produce cameras with a higher TVL than the VTX will transmit - could be useful in case you have a DVR onboard you could send it a higher quality video stream.

 

[sprzout]

Glad it's a winner for you. I'm a big fan of my Swift 2 also.

On the comment earlier about why do they produce cameras with a higher TVL than the VTX will transmit - could be useful in case you have a DVR onboard you could send it a higher quality video stream.

I will admit that I considered some of the others that were recommended (the Foxeer Predator, and the Rotor Riot Swift 2, for example), but when I was able to get the Swift 2 for $37 vs. $45 or $50 for most of the other cameras, I couldn't pass it up. I may change it out at a later date or get one of the others for a second quad I want to build, but that's down the road.