Spending christmas money...

[Balu]

Since I am a nice boy, I might get something for Christmas to spend on expensive gadgets and gear.

I like to start with better quality hardware instead of buying cheap and having to buy things twice and after learning how the ImmersionRC guys tick and work at our meetup in France I think their gear is a nice choice - even though there are cheaper options.

My Taranis operates on 2.4 GHz, which makes the choice of frequency easy.

• IRC 5.8 GHz, 25 mW Tx
  The maximum wattage allowed in Germany for analog video on 5.8... :-(
• SpiroNET Omni - 5.8 GHz CP Antennas
  I'm thinking about the "newer" LHCP antennas because most people got RHCP for now and these won't interfere.
• Fatshark DominatorHD
  The most expensive part... But also the most important one I guess. Besides the FPV, the DominatorHDs can be used to watch 3D content and even if they are not really "HD", the picture felt more crisp than on the cheaper ones when I tested them in summer. Just as with my Taranis I have to see these as "start up cost" that'll go along with my FPV career for quite some time.
  Only problem: They are not in stock anywhere. Are they even officially out yet?
• Camera?
  The only really undecided option. People seem to use Fatshark 600 TVL CMOS cameras, but there also is a 700 TVL CCD available and the PilotHD which would help not having to carry an extra GoPro / Mobius for additional recording?
  
  What are the differences between the CMOS/CCD cameras? Does anyone have experience with the PilotHD?

Any options? Did I miss something?

 

[ExperimentalRC]

For the camera, my personal favorite is the sony pz0420. For $40, it has the best bang for the buck, and ive never had one go bad. You can change the setting and get the colors looking SO good. I dont know where to find it in Germany, but its so popular that i wouldnt be surprised if a retailer there carries it.

 

[Quad]

DO you like it with or without the case?

 

[Balu]

I've found a PZ0420 on eBay, sold by "runcam.com". They have an M and an H version:

http://www.runcam.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=0&products_id=9
http://www.runcam.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=0&products_id=2

I'm not sure if they are just using the same "id" for the cameras or if it actually is the one you mentioned. You can get them with different lenses, so I guess the "widest" one (2.1mm / 110°) is good for FPV? Also interesting is that you can get an optional IR filter...

Hm. Looks like only the one with plastic casing has 110° FOV.

 

[Quad]

There seems to be some that like the widest and some the second widest. I went with the second widest...

 

[Kurt0326]

Since I am a nice boy, I might get something for Christmas to spend on expensive gadgets and gear.

I like to start with better quality hardware instead of buying cheap and having to buy things twice and after learning how the ImmersionRC guys tick and work at our meetup in France I think their gear is a nice choice - even though there are cheaper options.

My Taranis operates on 2.4 GHz, which makes the choice of frequency easy.

• IRC 5.8 GHz, 25 mW Tx
  The maximum wattage allowed in Germany for analog video on 5.8... :-(
• SpiroNET Omni - 5.8 GHz CP Antennas
  I'm thinking about the "newer" LHCP antennas because most people got RHCP for now and these won't interfere.
• Fatshark DominatorHD
  The most expensive part... But also the most important one I guess. Besides the FPV, the DominatorHDs can be used to watch 3D content and even if they are not really "HD", the picture felt more crisp than on the cheaper ones when I tested them in summer. Just as with my Taranis I have to see these as "start up cost" that'll go along with my FPV career for quite some time.
  Only problem: They are not in stock anywhere. Are they even officially out yet?
• Camera?
  The only really undecided option. People seem to use Fatshark 600 TVL CMOS cameras, but there also is a 700 TVL CCD available and the PilotHD which would help not having to carry an extra GoPro / Mobius for additional recording?
  
  What are the differences between the CMOS/CCD cameras? Does anyone have experience with the PilotHD?

Any options? Did I miss something?

Now I'm jealous... :applause: i won't get FPV till next year, or birthday if I'm a real good boy.

 

[Balu]

Now I'm jealous... :applause: i won't get FPV till next year, or birthday if I'm a real good boy.

Going into FPV was a goal when I started at the beginning of the year. So I started to save money in particular for this. But I also have to admit that I spent more than I thought for all kinds of other equipment and gadgets - guess that is the biggest problem with our hobby... .

 

[Flat4]

I've found a PZ0420 on eBay, sold by "runcam.com". They have an M and an H version:

http://www.runcam.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=0&products_id=9
http://www.runcam.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=0&products_id=2

I'm not sure if they are just using the same "id" for the cameras or if it actually is the one you mentioned. You can get them with different lenses, so I guess the "widest" one (2.1mm / 110°) is good for FPV? Also interesting is that you can get an optional IR filter...

Hm. Looks like only the one with plastic casing has 110° FOV.

I love the sony pz0420, you can find them for as cheap as $25 if you look around. Another good option that gives even better picture for a bit more is the newer sony effio-v 890 cams. They are probably the best image you are going to get out of one of these things, and they aren't a ton more than the 0420.

As far as the lens is concerned, it's going to be mostly personal preference. The wider the angel the harder your depth perception is going to be, though you'll be able to see more, and vice-versa for narrower lenses. I personally prefer the 2.8mm lens, I found the 2.1 to be a bit to hard to truly judge range. This really only becomes a problem with proximity flying, which is all I do anymore.

Hope this helps.

 

[Balu]

I love the sony pz0420, you can find them for as cheap as $25 if you look around. Another good option that gives even better picture for a bit more is the newer sony effio-v 890 cams. They are probably the best image you are going to get out of one of these things, and they aren't a ton more than the 0420.

As far as the lens is concerned, it's going to be mostly personal preference. The wider the angel the harder your depth perception is going to be, though you'll be able to see more, and vice-versa for narrower lenses. I personally prefer the 2.8mm lens, I found the 2.1 to be a bit to hard to truly judge range. This really only becomes a problem with proximity flying, which is all I do anymore.

Hope this helps.

It helps a lot . I can't find the sony effio-v 890 anywhere though.

There seems to be a 960H on a merchant page with really bad German translations - and a video from our community member BMSweb

http://www.kamera2000.com/products/...-CAM-WDR-7%2d17V-Breitspannung-v.-PZ0420.html

 

[Flat4]

It helps a lot . I can't find the sony effio-v 890 anywhere though.

There seems to be a 960H on a merchant page with really bad German translations - and a video from our community member BMSweb

http://www.kamera2000.com/products/...-CAM-WDR-7%2d17V-Breitspannung-v.-PZ0420.html

Sorry I was off with the name, was just doing it from memory. This is the camera I was talking about.

http://www.surveilzone.com/sony-960h-ccd-effio-v-800tvl-ultra-wdr-camera-cc1526

Here's a video that really shows the colors this camera gives when configured right. Not done by me.

You can tweak the pz0420 to close to that, but you'll never get as vivid of colors. However being able to score them for a decent bit cheaper makes them a fantastic beginner camera.

 

[Balu]

RCModelReviews just reviewed the 800tvl in comparison to the 600tvl (old and newer version), where the 800tvl has some lag issues.

 

[Flat4]

RCModelReviews just reviewed the 800tvl in comparison to the 600tvl (old and newer version), where the 800tvl has some lag issues.

You know it's funny you mention that. Up until this point I used the effio-v camera in a pretty large flying wing, used for duration flying not really proximity, and I didn't really notice the lag. Well on Monday I busted my last pz0420 in my 4S mini quad, and had to swap in the effio-v.

Had my first flight with the mini quad and that cam today, I felt very disconnected and couldn't pinpoint why, but that has to be it. I actually was just browsing around about the latency from the cam, and decided to stick with the 0420 for now for the mini quads. Sorry for the uneducated recommendation.

 

[Balu]

Sorry for the uneducated recommendation.

Nothing to be sorry about. I might have stumbled over the camera later anyway, but after your suggestion I knew what to look for. Otherwise I might have missed the review because I wasn't paying attention to this camera .

The comments on the video are interesting. There are team pilots who fly with them and don't seem to have problems. Perhaps it's just that they are used to the lag?

 

[Flat4]

Perhaps it's just that they are used to the lag?

I'm not sure how you could get use to that delay, at least for fast proximity flying. I only flew three batteries through it, but it definitely didn't inspire confidence. Like I said before though, I did have it on a decent sized flying wing, and never even noticed the latency.

I also saw other people's comments saying they didn't have any latency at all, so I'm wondering if it has something to do with another component. I mean I do fly with DIY goggles that use an lcd screen, maybe the fatshark goggles don't experience this? I could test next time I'm out with my friend, with his fatsharks.

I'm really curious because I would love to be able to use this cam with my mini's, the increased clarity definitely helps with spotting small branches, ect.

If you find any more info on it let me know, I'll do the same.