DutchRC FPV Camera's Tests!

Discussion in 'Electronics' started by DutchRC, Sep 22, 2017.

  1. Halloa people!

    okee so I thought it would be best to just Collect all FPV-camera tests I'll be doing in 1 topic.. And yes, if you feel your video / input adds to this topic: feel free to add it!

    I'll kick off things with 1 well-known camera: the Runcam Swift Mini

    Against a relatively new brand in this scene: the Caddx.us Turbo S1

    Definately competitors I'd say..
    in case you want to see the unedited DVR recordings.. those can be found in this playlist:
    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLWzWY7Q_iNraK-1QOk6iWb_2MpZalOnkZ

    And here is my comparison video between the two:



    Caddx Turbo S1 specs:
    sensor: 1/3" CCD
    res: 600tvl 4:3
    TV system: Pal or NTSC (non switchable)
    lens: 2.5mm 1.2F
    WDR: yes
    OSD: yes
    power in: 5-40V
    weight: 12g
    dimensions: 22 x 22x 27mm

    Runcam Swift Mini specs:
    sensor: 1/3" CCD
    res: 600tvl 4:3
    TV system: Pal or NTSC (non switchable)
    lens: 2.5mm 1.2F
    WDR: yes
    OSD: yes
    power in: 5-36V
    weight: 12g
    dimensions: 22.3 x 22x 27mm
     
    thunder and Wildthing like this.
  2. thunder

    thunder Top Gun

    Posts:
    1,412
    Likes:
    2,297
    Points:
    113
    Nice testing Dutch,i already have the FPV cameras that i needed but this vid showed a good comparison,,thanks for posting.
     
    Wildthing and DutchRC like this.
  3. Thanks a bunch thunder :)
     
    Wildthing likes this.
  4. a second comparison this time! The camera's are not in the same price-range at All in this video.. So what do you lose if you go with a low budget FPV camera??

    Link to the low budget cam: Eachine 1000tvl CCD camera

    And I'll compare it with: Runcam Swift Mini



    Specs of the Eachine cam:
    sensor: 1/3" CCD
    res: 976tvl
    TV system: PAL or NTSC switchable
    lens: 2.8mm 1.2F
    WDR: yes
    OSD: no
    power in: 5-20V
    weight: 10.4g
    dimensions: 24.5 x17.5 x 28mm

    Specs of the Runcam Swift Mini
    sensor: 1/3" CCD
    res: 600tvl 4:3
    TV system: Pal or NTSC (non switchable)
    lens: 2.5mm 1.2F
    WDR: yes
    OSD: yes
    power in: 5-36V
    weight: 12g
    dimensions: 22.3 x 22x 27mm
     
    thunder likes this.
  5. And.. as a for-your-info addition.. Here is a DVR recording of a flight I did today with the CaddX Turbo S1 camera :)

     
    thunder likes this.
  6. Small addition to this thread today :)
    To do better FPV-cam tests I went ahead and 'designed' a camera testing jig..

    So this video won't be a review of any camera but a look behind the scenes:

     
    Wildthing likes this.
  7. TomMonton

    TomMonton Administrator

    Posts:
    3,358
    Likes:
    6,253
    Points:
    133
    What was your impression of the nano talon ?

    I had always thought it was just a touch unstable and would require a stabilizer to settle her in nicely.

    I recognize that area too btw. You flew the et115 in that same park.
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2018
    DutchRC likes this.
  8. Yep I did ;)

    I did like the Nano Talon.. It's well constructed / designed but it's not the biggest of planes offcourse, and you can see that.. A stabi / gyro would help it..
     
  9. TomMonton

    TomMonton Administrator

    Posts:
    3,358
    Likes:
    6,253
    Points:
    133
    Of all the videos I've seen on the talon It just feels a little too loose for my taste. What caught my eye was the v-tail and preferred that approach knowing how I like to fly rudder on my planes.

    The rmrc goblin flys a "little" more stable but even on sale, I think their pricing is on the side of ... too high.
     
  10. Have you considered this plane:



    There was more wind then it would seem (I ran an external microphone with deadcat on it).. It's definately one of the most stable planes i've flown...
     
    TomMonton likes this.
  11. TomMonton

    TomMonton Administrator

    Posts:
    3,358
    Likes:
    6,253
    Points:
    133
    .. and the camera mount(s) is cool !!

    Sorry I sort of over shadowed the thread on a side bar discussion

    Excellent approach to a true side by side comparison platform.
     
  12. A newist brand this time in the 'FPV cam tests' arena :) Well.. the brand itself isn't new, but FXT is new to the FPV cam's scene..

    Any good??

     
  13. TomMonton

    TomMonton Administrator

    Posts:
    3,358
    Likes:
    6,253
    Points:
    133
    Excellent side by side comparison.

    The Mars cam seemed to have a brighter contrast. It picked up light a little better maybe. ?

    The runcam seems have a softer over all contrast and holds color a little more true.

    The Mars does have its merits. In some cases it shown brighter in the dimmer light. Street lights were dampened down well and didn't wash out the image. It took more of a golden color hue though... interesting.

    Sunlight doesn't seem to wash it out but I didn't see you pass through direct sunlight either.

    Very nicely done Dutch .. I like this method of comparison too. Leaves nothing to chance this way.
     
    DutchRC likes this.
  14. Thank you sir :)
    Yes.. I think that is a good breakdown of things.. Both camera's have there strenghts and weaknesses, though I should offcourse add both were in their stock settings.
    From looking at it is seems the RC cam has more 'reserve' as it did best in the hardest part (indoors)..
    And then there are personal preferences offcourse. I kinda still prefer CCD camera's and this RC Eagle (both camera's are Cmos) is more like a CCD..

    Yeah.. no transmitter / receiver mambo jambo this way.. Eventually I'll get hit by a car in that parking lot though :D
     

Share This Page

string(1) "1"