Depends on the aspect ratio you use, most people use 16:9, so divide the horizontal angle by 16 and then multiply by 9 will give you the vertical angle.
H265 saved 11% because it used a lower bitrate, which you could also get by reducing the bitrate setting for H264.
You can save space by turning down the bitrate setting, at a small loss in quality, which you would also get with H265.
60fps is not important for recording accident video. Makes nicer, smoother movies, but does not record better evidence, unless you drive a race car on track.
H265 has better compression file size / quality. So if h264 vs h265 has same file size (same bitrate), then the h265 file should have better quality. In theory it should be possible to get same quality of h264 while using lower bitrate with h265 and so save SD space.
Good theory, but in reality the extra compression algorithms of H265 do not manage to do anything useful when on the road, it will only do anything useful when parked, and then the camera will be using low bitrate anyway. Works well for people sitting in a TV studio, does OK on movies, but not for dashcam driving video.
Do you know which is the bitrate in low bitrate parking mode for 3 channel?
I don't know for the new A229 cameras, maybe @Panzer Platform can answer, but Low Bitrate on Viofo cameras is normally between 4Mb/s and 8Mb/s for a 4K video, depending on the amount of movement in the image, and at night on the amount of image noise, some cameras are a bit better than others on noise and that can make a significant difference to the bitrate. Most of the 4K cameras reduce to 2K for parking mode, so probably between 4 and 6Mb/s/channel.
I include the video bitrates for the various recording modes in my power consumption charts.
That it is not what he said. It's not about 30 fps it's enough. It is better.
Not many people here are using FHD front resolution cameras now, and this is a thread about a 2K dashcam, so my comment was intended more for the higher resolution cameras. A 4K camera with 4x the pixels of yours should be able to see to read plates twice as far away as yours (given the same FoV), thus giving you twice as many readable frames without needing to increase the fps, and in fact it is often far more than that because you get far less motion blur further away. In reality, the 2K A229 Plus will probably give you more than twice as many readable frames, because not only can it see further, but it also has a lot less motion blur close up due to faster exposure times. It is very hard to find situations were 60fps actually helps read a plate on 2K and 4K dashcams. For a while now, 60fps has often come with less bitrate than 30fps, not twice the bitrate so that you get the same number of bits per frame, so you also get reduced image quality from 60fps, although I am not sure that will continue with newer more capable processors.
@fabri @ozguy @Karagandinez @Panzer Platform @VIOFO-Support
Perhaps there was some movement in the frame in front of the A229 Plus, but there was no movement in the Mini 2.
Just curious, why was H.265 disabled on the A229 Plus/Pro? I'm hoping it comes back in a future iteration but at least with the A229 Plus, I can use a 512gb card which will help
Hello,
This is incorrect with Viofo dash cams.
dashcamtalk.com
The Mini 2 in those images is relatively under exposed, otherwise I don't see much difference.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Viofo A229 Plus (my brief review) | A229 Plus | 4 | |
| A | A229 Plus Crackle on bumps/acceleration to highway speed | A229 Plus | 15 | |
| A | A229 Plus w/ CPL Glare/Reflection? | A229 Plus | 16 | |
| P | Two questions for A229 plus/pro owners | A229 Plus | 4 | |
|
VIOFO A229 Plus - Testing / Review - RCG | A229 Plus | 45 |
