@speedingcheetah - Upgrade (2) A119 Mini 2 Units To A329S 3CH

speedingcheetah said:
@Chuck McCoy @CaptureYourAction or anyone else.

I am having some difficulty narrowing down sourcing the rear camera for the A329S.

The pictures posted on the various threads here, show it is model, RC420.

However, i seem to be running into conflicting info, with a RC400 model mentioned as the rear camera for A329/A329S.

See here: LINK

THIS listing does not even state the model number (this the place i ordered the telephoto cam from yesterday)
Click to expand...
This is the correct rear camera for A329S:
www.viofo.com

2K HDR Rear Camera with 6M Cable and Adhesive Sticker for VIOFO A329/A329S/A329T Series

A329/A329S/A329T Series Rear Camera with 6M Rear Cable and Adhesive Sticker
www.viofo.com www.viofo.com
 
Finnegan said:
I ordered mine as the 3CH kit so I don't know which Rear cam you should order.
If I were you I would reach out to @VIOFO-Support directly as well as seeing what
the others you linked have to say.

When I ordered mine there was only one I could use, but Viofo has released more
cams recently and now there may be more options than what I had in July.
Click to expand...
It's my understanding that the RC400 was the original part number from the original A329. I believe the only real difference between the RC400 and RC420 is the vents and a slight mold change which means you'd need to use the CPL-500 for the RC400 and the CPL-600 for the RC420.
 
CaptureYourAction said:
It's my understanding that the RC400 was the original part number from the original A329. I believe the only real difference between the RC400 and RC420 is the vents and a slight mold change which means you'd need to use the CPL-500 for the RC400 and the CPL-600 for the RC420.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Not worried about CPL for rear cam, as my rear windows tint pretty much acts as one.

As long as it is the identical camera internals and lens then, i guess it does not matter? Both will output the same picture quality?

The only way to get the RC420 is to buy the multi channel kit versions of the A329S then?

Not even VIOFO's own website for the part shows what model it is that they are selling.
 
speedingcheetah said:
Interesting. Not worried about CPL for rear cam, as my rear windows tint pretty much acts as one.

As long as it is the identical camera internals and lens then, i guess it does not matter? Both will output the same picture quality?

The only way to get the RC420 is to buy the multi channel kit versions of the A329S then?

Not even VIOFO's own website for the part shows what model it is that they are selling.
Click to expand...
I don't believe anything internal is different, but only Viofo will be able to answer that (unless someone else has this info). The listing on the Viofo website is likely the newer RC420 since they are suggesting the CPL-600 as an add-on, but again, I would verify with Viofo before ordering if you need to ensure your getting the RC400. While the photos in the Viofo listing don't show the new casing vents, it could be they are simply using the RC400 photo's.
 
Here is where i eat my past words.

I got and installed the Telephoto add on camera today.
Its Awesome! I should have just gotten the full multi-channel kit model in the first place.

Was surprised though, as the pictures and review videos that show physical tele cam, does not do the scale of it justice. It look SO much bigger in the pictures.
The thing is TINY! Way smaller than i had expected.
Looks like the rear cam is also the same physical form factor. If so, will easily fit on the trim at my back window, even just perfect its mount footprint to be at the very edge that is flat ridge.
(I will need to see about contacting USA sellers about the rear cam, as my last post mentioned, seems the newer revision has vents in its casing and uses different CPL)

Also, 16:9 is a must for the telephoto cam. 21:9 is ok if perfectly aimed, but it feels too narrow a view for such a zoomed image, and is cutting off some things at times, like traffic lights on top, and some view of lower part of vehicles when up close on the bottom.
It sucks that there will be useless dash and sky in the front cam footage, but, its a tradeoff i cam live with for better full frame tele capture.
(unless Viofo adds the ability to set independent resolutions for each channel.)

Is it due to the different sensor? That the 2K image the tele outputs has noticeable more contrast, and colors are far more saturated.
The 4K wide front cam of the A329T, is brighter, and less vivid, and in general at times, seems to be a tiny bit overexposed when it is very bright out.
I(I do think VIOFO needs to tweak/refine their HDR performance a bit, mainly daytime performance. That is one thing i noticed comparing it to the A119 Mini2. The latter's image was just a bit more pleasing to the eyes in general.

If you are on the fence about getting a 2ch front + Tele setup, do it! Just do it!
It is really awesome to capture so much sharp details of things further in front of you, not only plates, but anything else that may be curious or important later on.

Anyways, aside from possible finishing the setup with 3rd channel, adding in rear cam (want it confirmed to me firs though, is there a bitrate drop in 3ch mode?), i just need the slightly longer ssd cable, to route and mount the ssd i have in the place i want to, should have that by the end of the week.
 
CaptureYourAction said:
I don't believe anything internal is different, but only Viofo will be able to answer that (unless someone else has this info). The listing on the Viofo website is likely the newer RC420 since they are suggesting the CPL-600 as an add-on, but again, I would verify with Viofo before ordering if you need to ensure your getting the RC400. While the photos in the Viofo listing don't show the new casing vents, it could be they are simply using the RC400 photo's.
Click to expand...
Was in the process of emailing a few places that sell this, but remembered you post on here.
Aside from Viofo directly, do you know of anyone selling, or who can source the newer RC420 camera in USA?
I prefer to get that model, rather than the "older" one. If they added vents, i can only assume there was a reason to.
 
speedingcheetah said:
Was in the process of emailing a few places that sell this, but remembered you post on here.
Aside from Viofo directly, do you know of anyone selling, or who can source the newer RC420 camera in USA?
I prefer to get that model, rather than the "older" one. If they added vents, i can only assume there was a reason to.
Click to expand...
I don't know of any seller, but I don't normally check what other sellers have for stock. I can certainly order one when I place another Viofo order, but I just received one a few weeks ago, so not sure when I will be placing another order just yet.
 
speedingcheetah said:
Also, 16:9 is a must for the telephoto cam. 21:9 is ok if perfectly aimed, but it feels too narrow a view for such a zoomed image, and is cutting off some things at times, like traffic lights on top, and some view of lower part of vehicles when up close on the bottom.
It sucks that there will be useless dash and sky in the front cam footage, but, its a tradeoff i cam live with for better full frame tele capture.
(unless Viofo adds the ability to set independent resolutions for each channel.)
Click to expand...
The Front 4K 21:9 and telephoto 16:9 will be added in next version.
 
Just reviewed some nighttime footage. Have to say, the telephoto is impressive. I really prefer watching its footage more than the main wide angle front camera.
There is much more light and details. Most certainly due to the cams focus point being dead with my headlights brightest flooded area up range.

Even if you are not concerned about plate capture, i HIGHLY recommend the telephoto camera. It really adds a level of exposure to down range night time capture that you just can not get with the wide angle main camera.
It also is useful to capture events or something interesting a ways up the road from you, or across a large interception.
A few nights ago, far side of a 4 way large intersection, seems Police had boxed in a car right at the light just before i got there. The main cam, could not really make out much of the scene at all. I was turning left and cam sweep right over the whole scene. If i had the telephoto, who have captured some nice zoomed in footage of it.
Or, to better capture other drivers gestures or moving about in their car....did they just wave a gun out the window?? Things like that.

The sample footage, and screenshots people share here, really just does not quite give it justice.
You really need to get it and see for yourself how well it works in your vehicle, and its headlight setup, and the roads you drive on.
Compare it to the main camera. You may find you wish you had this from the start.
 
Last edited:
Just for an update. I contacted EZ Dashcam, and they confirmed that the Rear Model cam they sell is the newer RC420 model and they updated their listing to mention that.
 
Got Rear cam installed.

@Chuck McCoy

Can confirm Bitrate drop going from 2CH to 3CH.
4K/2K 30FPS HDR
Maximum Bitrate set

(as reported by MediaInfo)

Front:
2CH 67.3 Mb/s
3CH 54.0 Mb/s

Tele:
2CH 27.5 Mb/s
3CH 25.2 Mb/s

Rear:
3CH 25.2 Mb/s

@VIOFO-Support
Is this on purpose? Would it be possible to restore the full higher bitrate as there is in 2CH?
Or at least increase the 3CH bitrates a bit in future firmware...
 
The drop in bitrate is a result of HDR being turned on, not the result of installing a third channel:

EricSan

Post in thread 'Reviewing and Testing the 3-ch Viofo A329T'

After playing around with different settings a bit more, it appears that the bitrate and filesizes for the MP4 files created by the Viofo A329T vary according to whether HDR is turned on or off in normal drive mode. Originally, I thought this was related to firmware versions, but I was wrong. Here is the data that I recorded:

A329 Drive Mode HDR Data Rates.webp
  • Like
 
EricSan said:
The drop in bitrate is a result of HDR being turned on, not the result of installing a third channel:

EricSan

Post in thread 'Reviewing and Testing the 3-ch Viofo A329T'

After playing around with different settings a bit more, it appears that the bitrate and filesizes for the MP4 files created by the Viofo A329T vary according to whether HDR is turned on or off in normal drive mode. Originally, I thought this was related to firmware versions, but I was wrong. Here is the data that I recorded:

A329 Drive Mode HDR Data Rates.webp
  • Like
Click to expand...
WHY?
There still is full bitrates in 2CH with HDR ON.
Is adding the load of a 2nd 2K camera too much for the cpu in the main unit to handle the HDR processing?
If i turn off HDR on just one cam, would full bitrate return?
 
Last edited:
Ah, so maybe there are two different triggers, then? I haven’t run with only 2 cameras yet. I’m guessing this is a processor limitation. There is only so much data you can shove through the processor and/or the MP4 encoder before trouble results.

The HDR setting on the front camera seems to be the trigger for higher or lower bitrate files. I still get higher bitrate with 3 cameras running and the front tele set to HDR.
 
speedingcheetah said:
16:9 is a must for the telephoto cam. 21:9 is ok if perfectly aimed, but it feels too narrow a view for such a zoomed image, and is cutting off some things at times, like traffic lights on top, and some view of lower part of vehicles when up close on the bottom.
It sucks that there will be useless dash and sky in the front cam footage, but, its a tradeoff i cam live with for better full frame tele capture.
(unless Viofo adds the ability to set independent resolutions for each channel.)
Click to expand...

Front 21:9, Rear 21:9, Telephoto 16:9 in upcoming firmware version V2.0

1759221709594.webp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top