Mobius Telephoto Dashcam

Back to lenses, as Dashmallow brought up the subject of now I'm acknowledging the Nylquist limit, I'm even humble enough to make an admission, I was out of date thinking that resolving power was the be all and end all of quality when with sensors instead of film, the Nylquist limit is just as important as the lens resolving power. However, very few lenses ever state the required facts for matching. In fact most websites continue to rate lenses in MP based on resolving power not Nylquist parameters, which makes selection on Nylquist impossible. Therefore stated Resolving power is pretty much all we have to go on and a sensor can only record what detail it's fed minus any lost to Nylquist mismatching. However, MTF plays an even bigger part when it comes to sharpness. The same issue of lack of specs applies to MTF though as the contrast percentage is rarely stated in relation to the Nylquist (mainly because no one states the Nylquist!).

So far as do I believe there are gains to be made from better lenses, the answer is yes. One of the most moaned about factors on here is how the lens lacks sharpness to the edges. Shutter speed and rate of change relative to the previous frame can play a part in this and these I believe are related to sensor performance under the lighting conditions. However, so can edge distortion. I also believe that increasing the sharpness and detail of the image generally, is helpful in detail retrieval and if nothing else, more aesthetically pleasing.
 
This might be of interest concerning MTF, it is from a lens manufacturer.:cool:

Lens performance
While a MTF chart can be used to compare two similar lens from the same manufacturer it can be difficult to compare across different manufacturers due to testing and display differences. Further, a MTF chart measures theoretical optical performance of a lens only. Many factors (camera imaging sensor, camera software settings, filters, subject matter, subject/camera motion, etc.) can greatly affect the final image quality so MTF charts should only be used as a starting point when comparing and purchasing a lens.
 
Last edited:
Dashmallow you're paranoid. I'm posting in threads I'm already involved in / interested in. The whole idea I'm searching you out for special attention or replies is quite frankly ridiculous and paranoid in the extreme....

Every argument you have ever had with me has been started by you. So who's trolling who? The latest argument was started by YOU in post 637 when again you started becoming personal. Even then, I have remained civil and non personal throughout. Both before and after that post.

You say you didn't libel me but then admit you called me a scammer in relation to obtaining cameras from a manufacturer (something admin has been shown the facts about and decided your post was potentially libel, not belaying the fact that you just repeated it here). I've also had conversations with the manufacturer concerned about your post and they also agree they haven't been scammed. Admin has also seen the same conversation. You haven't seen my PM's and what information was exchanged with them. Again looking above, you're very latest post has again been moderated. I'll let others decided based on Admin's actions.....

I'm not going to even engage the rest of the reply above. There's nothing worth replying to and nothing on topic...
 
Tried fixing the spare 12mm to the Maxi, refuses to screw in further than a couple of turns, too tight. Tried the spare 8mm, same result. The stock lens screws back in without resistance.

Brute force didn't help either, resulted in accidentally unscrewing the top ring that holds everything in place and the elements fell out. Here's what they look like.

12.png

Will order another 12mm and check if I can get a couple of spare mounts from etoponline.
 
I wonder if I can fit that 12mm lens on a GitUp F1?
 
Congratulations, c4rc4m, this is now day seven of this nonsense with you. It is a virtual replay of the last time you did this where you posted a gratuitous, provocative and off topic challenge to something I said and then no matter what I said to reasonably answer your post you kept repeating your false assertion over and over like a petulant child having a tantrum until you had a fight on your hands.

Dashmallow you're paranoid. I'm posting in threads I'm already involved in / interested in. The whole idea I'm searching you out for special attention or replies is quite frankly ridiculous and paranoid in the extreme....

Every argument you have ever had with me has been started by you. So who's trolling who? The latest argument was started by YOU in post 637 when again you started becoming personal. Even then, I have remained civil and non personal throughout. Both before and after that post.

As usual, you're full of crap here, as you are attempting to create a false narrative. This "argument" didn't begin in post 637, and it began when you quoted me with a false and incorrect assertion in post 622 that wasn't even related to anything I said in the post you quoted. And then you went on to pound the table with the same idiotic and sciolistic assertions day after day until again you had another fight on your hands regardless of my explanations.

As for your bogus accusation of paranoia, as I mentioned previously and the well documented facts show, you regularly tag me in threads or quote me with remarks engineered to be fractious and you've often mentioned my name in threads I haven't even participated in, also with provocative statements and references to my posts on other threads.

Accusing someone of being paranoid on an internet forum after spending a week needling them on a daily basis until you've finally provoked the fight your were looking for is a common trolling technique. Sorry, gumdrop, I'm not buying into it.

You say you didn't libel me but then admit you called me a scammer in relation to obtaining cameras from a manufacturer (something admin has been shown the facts about and decided your post was potentially libel, not belaying the fact that you just repeated it here). I've also had conversations with the manufacturer concerned about your post and they also agree they haven't been scammed. Admin has also seen the same conversation. You haven't seen my PM's and what information was exchanged with them. Again looking above, you're very latest post has again been moderated. I'll let others decided based on Admin's actions.....

As for "libeling" you I did nothing of the sort! What I said was true even if you don't like the word I used. When you bamboozle a manufacturer to send you a free camera for review that you know in advance you have no intention of reviewing is fraudulent and deceptive. You knew the WR1 was a wifi only camera that required a smartphone to change the settings but you knew in advance that you don't own a smartphone and therefore could never fully explore or demonstrate the camera for a proper review. But, let's be generous here and allow that soliciting this free camera from Viofo was perhaps an isolated individual event which was merely an example of some form of "Hanlon’s Razor" Sydrome. But, no! Then you went and did the same thing again with a second camera that you declined to review after you received it. So, now we have a pattern of behavior and one you cannot claim innocence about quite so easily. It suggests that you knowingly took advantage of the situation for personal gain. So, I am certainly not libeling you about your actions, I'm just pointing out the truth of your questionable and unethical conduct even if you don't like the words I used to describe it. Everyone else here who accepts free merchandise for review does a lot of hard work living up to the bargain the struck with the vendor or manufacturer who sent them the merchandise. You are just fortunate that Viofo has been so accommodating of your behavior but that doesn't absolve you of guilt. I hear through the grapevine that you have approached other manufacturers for free cameras, so there may be more to this story yet to be revealed.

I'm not going to even engage the rest of the reply above. There's nothing worth replying to and nothing on topic...

Oh really? Amusing how you don't like to respond when confronted with the facts or get called on the carpet for your falsehoods and misinterpretations. Off topic? That's never stopped you before. You even managed to derail the Mobius Maxi camera thread with your injection of posts about alternative high end lenses you know nothing about, have never had experience with but suggest that others go out and purchase.

As for your trolling business, I've suggested several times now that it's time to cut this out and move on and see if perhaps this trashed thread might be given the chance to recover but you are obviously still at it and no doubt you will keep this going for yet another day. I can keep this going as long as you can as I have no intention of putting up with more of your BS but I'm quite sure nobody here is too amused.
 
Last edited:
Tried fixing the spare 12mm to the Maxi, refuses to screw in further than a couple of turns, too tight. Tried the spare 8mm, same result. The stock lens screws back in without resistance.

Brute force didn't help either, resulted in accidentally unscrewing the top ring that holds everything in place and the elements fell out. Here's what they look like.

View attachment 42306

Will order another 12mm and check if I can get a couple of spare mounts from etoponline.

It doesn't always work but sometimes a tiny bit of lubricant on the lens threads can coax a recalcitrant lens to screw in all the way. This especially seems to be a problem with FRP mounts. I use some silicone paste lubricant as well as a product from Nyogel, a maker of some amazing high tech lubricants that are very effective.
 
Dashmallow, you have no knowledge of what the manufacturers knew before sending me any cameras. They were in full possession of the fact I broke my Smartphone before carrying out the review and in advance of sending me the camera, which makes your allegations libel. The camera did receive a full video review minus the smartphone control as they expected, and to their satisfaction. Which makes your allegations that I scammed them in obtaining it and didn't review it, untrue and doubly libellous. Admin has seen the emails confirming this.

The 2nd camera I received, received a review to their satisfaction, hence why they sent me a 3rd model to review, having been satisfied with the 2 previous reviews. The 3rd model of camera, unbeknown to me, didn't have a suction mount contrary to every previous model which had, so I declined to review it in car and instead offered to return it at my expense to the manufacturer concerned. Again Admin has seen these emails. So every allegation you have made against me is both untrue and libellous.

I would advise against you continuing to libel me.

I'll ignore the rest of your post for the sake of the thread.
 
Last edited:
Tried fixing the spare 12mm to the Maxi, refuses to screw in further than a couple of turns, too tight. Tried the spare 8mm, same result. The stock lens screws back in without resistance.

Brute force didn't help either, resulted in accidentally unscrewing the top ring that holds everything in place and the elements fell out. Here's what they look like.

View attachment 42306

Will order another 12mm and check if I can get a couple of spare mounts from etoponline.

Usually on treads when one is able to screw it in a turn (about) and it suddenly just stops it's because of a mismatch in treads, however it is hard to believe that a manufacturer could do something this stupid on a M12 lens that is supposed to meet the standards of M12, however considering it came from Mobius (camera) I would recommend your asking them if they have used a proprietary tread on their lens mount now. Have you had any other lens tried on this camera?
There is always the chance you just happened to get a lens with the tread messed up in manufacturing but one never knows these days. But you should bring it to those individuals of concern, meaning both parties. Bummer!

I read your post again and see that you tried another lens, so the mount is in question on the camera, better to ask Mobius at this point about their Maxi tread size. Let us know please.
 
Usually on treads when one is able to screw it in a turn (about) and it suddenly just stops it's because of a mismatch in treads, however it is hard to believe that a manufacturer could do something this stupid on a M12 lens that is supposed to meet the standards of M12, however considering it came from Mobius (camera) I would recommend your asking them if they have used a proprietary tread on their lens mount now. Have you had any other lens tried on this camera?
There is always the chance you just happened to get a lens with the tread messed up in manufacturing but one never knows these days. But you should bring it to those individuals of concern, meaning both parties. Bummer!

I read your post again and see that you tried another lens, so the mount is in question on the camera, better to ask Mobius at this point about their Maxi tread size. Let us know please.

Both lenses works fine with my M1s. Have asked etoponline if spare mounts are available. Looks just like the Mounts that came with C2 and A M1 lenses.
 
The Maxi uses the same M12 x 0.5 thread as the other Mobius cameras. Remember that the Maxi A lens is the same as the Mobius 1 D lens.
 
The lens thread problem is probably a double out of tolerance fault with the female threads being slightly undersized and the male threads slightly oversize. Normally even precision threads such as I'd expect lenses to have can handle one fault or the other, but not both together. No easy fix except for replacing one part or the other as few of us would have a M12 thread chasing tap or die. In this case swapping the lens base would be the smart thing to do- that way future lens swaps would be OK, and the lens you have would probably work.

There are several industry standards for thread tolerances and fit which are selected by application, but they are only loosely adhered to until you reach the "Aerospace Grade" level. The manufacturer tendency is for a looser fit as that always threads and usually holds so you get less rejected parts, but the opposite does happen when a machine isn't set up properly. Cutting male threads, you set the machine to cut the smallest permissible size so that as the cutting tool wears, the size increases but remains usable. Cutting female threads, you do the opposite as cutter wear makes the hole smaller. Only certified "Aerospace" threads all get measured before leaving the shop that made them, the rest get a random check at best.

Phil
 
Yes, there's only one. 8mm is available from Treeye and Fulekan, both look the same.
I also found this one at a more reasonable price. It's 8mm rather than 12mm, but as it's designed for 1/1.7" sensor the FOV will be smaller on 1/2.5".
Screenshot_20181007-215720.png
 
Yes, will end up slightly wider. Treeye also has it for the same price, Fulekan is selling it for $19.
 
Back
Top