A229 Pro Test & Review PP

[Karagandinez]

Looking at the screenshots three things stand out to me;
1.) The Front camera is “wider” than the Rear camera despite their specifications.

In the specifications, the manufacturer always indicates the diagonal angle.
So, with resolutions of 2560x1440 and 2560x1080, the horizontal angle will be the same, but the diagonal angle will be different.

 

[Panzer Platform]

In the specifications, the manufacturer always indicates the diagonal angle.

I can only find these specifications.

 

[Agie]

In this post I would like to compare the Horizontal FOV of the Front, Rear, and Interior camera.
The A229 Pro 3-CH has a specification of 140° + 160° + 150° + “Wide Viewing Angle”.

View attachment 68409

I updated my work bench with more wallpaper, and a ruler.
I’m hoping the additional wallpaper will help identify focus issues.
I’m hoping the ruler will make it easier taking measurements.
I adjusted the distance of my platform jig so the camera lens is 50 centimeters from the wall.
Shoutout to @Karagandinez and @gse for helping me with that.
I made a new platform jig because @Nigel complained the camera lens was not the same height as the ruler.
The jig is now 11 inches tall, the same height as the bottom of the ruler.
The center of the lens is the same hight as the center of the ruler.
I made sure the jig was “square” with a level, if the image looks "tilted" it’s possible the lens in not “aligned”.

View attachment 68410

Here are the Horizontal measurements in the center of the recorded footage;
Front: 148.5cm
Rear: 143.5cm
Interior: 180cm
Interior LED’s On: 80cm
Shoutout to @DT MI for telling me about Right Triangle Calculator, and @rcg530 for helping me understand it.
Now that we know the Horizontal measurement, and the distance from the lens to the wall we can calculate each camera’s Horizontal AOV.

Here are the “true” Horizontal AOV’s;
Front: 112°
Rear: 110°
Interior: 122°
Interior LED’s On: 77°

Looking at the screenshots three things stand out to me;
1.) The Front camera is “wider” than the Rear camera despite their specifications.
2.) It looks like the Front camera might be out of focus on the far right side.
3.) When I turn off my garage lights, and the Interior IR LED emitters illuminate the AOV is reduced, and a lot of information is lost on the sides of the image.
I wonder how the A139 Pro IR Interior camera will compare since it has 6 IR LED emitters, instead of the 4 on the A229 Pro.
I guess I will test the A139 Pro 3-CH next.

View attachment 68411
View attachment 68412
View attachment 68413
View attachment 68414

Thank you for the dedication and hard work that's throwing out some interesting conclusions about the hardware there!

 

[Panzer Platform]

IR INTERIOR CAMERA COMPARISON - PROS & CONS
In this post I would like to compare the IR Interior cameras of the A229 Pro & A139 Pro, with their Pros & Cons.
A229 Pro Image Sensor: STARVIS 1 (IMX307) 1080P
A139 Pro Image Sensor: STARVIS 1 (IMX291) 1080P

A229 Pro FOV: 122°
A139 Pro FOV: 124° (2° wider)

A229 Pro IR LED Emitters: 4
A139 Pro IR LED Emitters: 6

A229 Pro Light Sensor: Yes
A139 Pro Light Sensor: No

A229 Pro IR Cut Filter: Yes
A139 Pro IR Cut Filter: No

A229 Pro Cable Connector: USB Type-C to 3.5mm 4-Pin Jack
A139 Pro Cable Connector: Coax

A229 Pro Cable Diameter: (3.4mm)
A139 Pro Cable Diameter: (2.8mm)



During good lighting conditions when both cameras are in full color mode the A229 Pro appears blurry / fuzzy across the entire image.
The A139 Pro appears tack sharp, and just overall “better”.




During poor lighting conditions when the IR LED Emitters are illuminated, and the cameras switch to Black & White mode the A139 Pro becomes blurry across the entire image.
The A229 Pro becomes tack sharp.
It’s almost as if the A229 Pro is “tuned” for poor lighting conditions, and Black & White mode operation, and has sacrificed a small portion of it’s “daytime” full color mode image quality.




Also take note of the A229 Pro’s reduced FOV in Black & White mode operation due to only having 4 IR LED Emitters, compared to the A139 Pro’s 6.
A229 Pro B&W FOV: 84°
A139 Pro B&W FOV: 98° (14° wider)

In a future post I will compare the image quality, and full color to B&W transitions during a mock traffic stop.

 

[Agie]

IR INTERIOR CAMERA COMPARISON - PROS & CONS
In this post I would like to compare the IR Interior cameras of the A229 Pro & A139 Pro, with their Pros & Cons.
A229 Pro Image Sensor: STARVIS 1 (IMX307) 1080P
A139 Pro Image Sensor: STARVIS 1 (IMX291) 1080P

A229 Pro FOV: 122°
A139 Pro FOV: 124° (2° wider)

A229 Pro IR LED Emitters: 4
A229 Pro IR LED Emitters: 6

A229 Pro Light Sensor: Yes
A139 Pro Light Sensor: No

A229 Pro IR Cut Filter: Yes
A139 Pro IR Cut Filter: No

A229 Pro Cable Connector: USB Type-C to 3.5mm 4-Pin Jack
A139 Pro Cable Connector: Coax

A229 Pro Cable Diameter: (3.4mm)
A139 Pro Cable Diameter: (2.8mm)

View attachment 68473

During good lighting conditions when both cameras are in full color mode the A229 Pro appears blurry / fuzzy across the entire image.
The A139 Pro appears tack sharp, and just overall “better”.

View attachment 68474
View attachment 68475

During poor lighting conditions when the IR LED Emitters are illuminated, and the cameras switch to Black & White mode the A139 Pro becomes blurry across the entire image.
The A229 Pro becomes tack sharp.
It’s almost as if the A229 Pro is “tuned” for poor lighting conditions, and Black & White mode operation, and has sacrificed a small portion of it’s “daytime” full color mode image quality.

View attachment 68476
View attachment 68477

Also take note of the A229 Pro’s reduced FOV in Black & White mode operation due to only having 4 IR LED Emitters, compared to the A139 Pro’s 6.
A229 Pro B&W FOV: 84°
A139 Pro B&W FOV: 98° (14° wider)

In a future post I will compare the image quality, and full color to B&W transitions during a mock traffic stop.

Quick side question not trying to veer off topic, but I can't for the life of me remember what sensor the IR cabin camera in the Nexus 4 Pro is using, out of curiosity

Back to these, only confirms what you were suspecting that you can't have it both great at day and night, you have to choose one. Even with the viewing angle and focus shortcomings, I'd still take the A229 Pro tbh

 

[Panzer Platform]

Back to these, only confirms what you were suspecting that you can't have it both great at day and night, you have to choose one. Even with the viewing angle and focus shortcomings, I'd still take the A229 Pro tbh

Based on seeing the difference between the two during my mock traffic stop, I like the A229 Pro IR Interior better.
I wish it had the (IMX675), maybe next time.

 

[Agie]

Based on seeing the difference between the two during my mock traffic stop, I like the A229 Pro IR Interior better.
I wish it had the (IMX675), maybe next time.

Oh it's going to happen baby, a matter of a couple of years and we'll be doing 4k+4k+2k (or higher)

 

[Julian23]

A229 Pro IR LED Emitters: 4
A229 Pro IR LED Emitters: 6

Looks like a small error made it into there. The bottom one is the A139 Pro

Interesting comparison. The smaller FOV from the A229 Pro shouldn't matter that much in daily use if the camera is aimed correctly.

 

[Panzer Platform]

Looks like a small error made it into there. The bottom one is the A139 Pro

Thank you, fixed.

 

[Panzer Platform]

HDR Comparison with Firmware Update V1.0_231009 + V1.0_230928
@rcg530 @safedrivesolutions @Vortex Radar @viofo @VIOFO-Support
Keep in mind this comparison is not enough to judge final HDR performance, it’s just a reference.
The final test will be with cameras installed in a moving car trying to resolve other moving objects.

Cameras on the rig;
A229 Pro 3-CH (IMX678) + (IMX675) + (IMX307)
A229 Plus 3-CH (IMX675) + (IMX675) + (IMX307) V1.0_231009 + V1.0_230928
A139 Pro 1-CH (IMX678) V1.1_0629
A119 Mini 2 (IMX675) V1.0_20230912
Pay no attention to that man behind the Vantrue S1 Pro.












Here are the comparisons being performed;

Remarks:
A229 Pro Front: .....Unacceptable - Corrective Action Required
A139 Pro 1-CH: .....Acceptable - .....2nd best HDR performance I’ve ever tested.
A229 Plus Front: ....Unacceptable - Corrective Action Required
A119 Mini 2: ...........Acceptable - .....Best HDR Performance I’ve ever tested.
A229 Pro Rear: ......Unacceptable - Corrective Action Required
A229 Plus Rear: .....Unacceptable - Corrective Action Required
A229 Pro Interior: ...Acceptable
A229 Plus Interior: ..Acceptable

Conclusion:
Dear Viofo, whatever secret sauce you put on the A119 Mini 2’s HDR please put it on the;
1.) A229 Pro Front
2.) A229 Pro Rear
3.) A229 Plus Front
4.) A229 Plus Rear
I know you can do it because the HDR on the INTERIOR camera works.
Until we get an acceptable public firmware to fix basic HDR performance gathering “driving” test footage is almost a waste of gas.
I don’t think my request is unreasonable.
Please make the HDR performance as good, or better than the A119 Mini 2.
-Chuck

 

[Panzer Platform]

Q: Which camera has better “Low Light Sensitivity” A229 Pro 4K (IMX678), or A229 Plus 2K (IMX675)?
A: You make the call.
Btw, Horizontal FOV is;
A229 Pro: 112°
A229 Plus: 102°




Q: Why does the A229 Plus have better Low Light Sensitivity?
A: I’m confident @Nigel will along any minute to tell you why.

 

[Agie]

Q: Which camera has better “Low Light Sensitivity” A229 Pro 4K (IMX678), or A229 Plus 2K (IMX675)?
A: You make the call.
Btw, Horizontal FOV is;
A229 Pro: 112°
A229 Plus: 102°

View attachment 68508
View attachment 68509

Q: Why does the A229 Plus have better Low Light Sensitivity?
A: I’m confident @Nigel will along any minute to tell you why.

Wow that's a fair difference, wasn't expecting mind shattering results but still..

 

[speedingcheetah]

Q: Which camera has better “Low Light Sensitivity” A229 Pro 4K (IMX678), or A229 Plus 2K (IMX675)?
A: You make the call.
Btw, Horizontal FOV is;
A229 Pro: 112°
A229 Plus: 102°

View attachment 68508
View attachment 68509

Q: Why does the A229 Plus have better Low Light Sensitivity?
A: I’m confident @Nigel will along any minute to tell you why.

Interesting!
Though, thought i had read, or maybe it was in one of the many YT vids i have watched about dash cams... someone said that 4K cams seem to be worse with Night/ Low Light sensitivity than the 2K versions.
VIOFO clearly has some refinement to do with these higher end models.
Glad i went for the A119 Mini 2, it seem the most refined cam.

 

[Agie]

Interesting!
Though, thought i had read, or maybe it was in one of the many YT vids i have watched about dash cams... someone said that 4K cams seem to be worse with Night/ Low Light sensitivity than the 2K versions.
VIOFO clearly has some refinement to do with these higher end models.
Glad i went for the A119 Mini 2, it seem the most refined cam.

A229 Pro has only just come out so I'm sure they can eke some more performance out of the sensor. It has Imx675 at the back so that's not bad either when there's the imx678 up front. Would have been nice to have the better night sensor up front too, but with a lot of things in life you can't have it all..

 

[Nigel]

Q: Why does the A229 Plus have better Low Light Sensitivity?
A: I’m confident @Nigel will along any minute to tell you why.

I think it is just the exposure settings that Viofo have set in the firmware, the sensors are very similar, with the 4K Pro sensor probably able to manage slightly better sensitivity if Viofo turn it up a bit.

The darker image on the Pro may mean that it is using a faster shutter speed, which would mean that it is the better camera for motion blur - can you add some motion blur into your test so that we can see?

Those light levels are not important for most people, except those that use overnight parking mode, motion blur tends to be a very big issue because there is lots of it.

There does seem to be more noise in the Pro image, but that may be due to it using a higher gain level, which again may result in less motion blur, can't tell without a motion blur comparison in those conditions. So can't say which I prefer.

 

[Panzer Platform]

that's a fair difference

someone said that 4K cams seem to be worse with Night/ Low Light sensitivity than the 2K versions.

I think it is just the exposure settings

It was explained to me by Viofo (Bill) when I performed this test 2 weeks ago that comparing the low light sensitivity of a 4K dash cam to a 2K dash cam is not a “fair fight”.
The 2K dash cam will always have better low light sensitivity.
A 1080P dash cam will have better low light sensitivity than a 2K dash cam.
Based on my testing I find this to be true, (Nigel you let me down). lol
Poor 4K night time, and low light image quality has been an issue since October 2019, (A129 Pro).
It doesn’t look like a 4K dash cam will ever match, or surpass a 2K dash cam in low light sensitivity, (not with current technology).

 

[Nigel]

It doesn’t look like a 4K dash cam will ever match, or surpass a 2K dash cam in low light sensitivity, (not with current technology).

Not sure that is true, maybe some day we will get an IMX585 4K dashcam, and that should definitely beat the 2K IMX 675!

The 2K IMX 675 and 4K IMX 678 have exactly the same size pixels, so should have the same sensitivity and dynamic range, with the only difference being the number of pixels.

The A229 Pro has a small disadvantage of having an F1.8 lens while the A229 Plus has an F1.6, so the Pro should be the least sensitive, however being 4K, the extra resolution should make up for most of that in decreased overall image noise, although that is irrelevant if you are looking at individual pixels.

The difference you are seeing above is not explained by 2K vs 4K, the 4K image could easily be given a longer exposure to make it the same brightness as the 2K. I don't know why it isn't, maybe they wanted to hide the noise because a PRO model should have less noise, or maybe they decided to have less motion blur on the Pro model.

Until you do a motion blur comparison test in those same lighting conditions, we can't tell the real reason...

 

[Panzer Platform]

F1.8 lens

I just got done measuring 14 different Viofo dash cam FOV’s.
Not a single one is accurate to their listed specification.
What if they’re fudging the numbers on Aperture specs too?
How do I confirm & verify the Aperture specification?
From now on, all specifications must be confirmed & verified, and until they are I have zero faith in trusting any listed specification.

 

[TonyM]

Q: Which camera has better “Low Light Sensitivity” A229 Pro 4K (IMX678), or A229 Plus 2K (IMX675)?

As Nigel said, the difference is not just between the two sensors. The DSPs are not the same, and the FW may be tuned for different results - a trade-off between motion blur and noise.

Despite using the same sensor, there are differences between the A229 Pro (IMX678) and the A139 Pro (IMX678).




The A229 Plus (IMX675) is darker than the A139 Pro (IMX678), but the A139 Pro is more fuzzy.

 

[TonyM]

The darker image on the Pro may mean that it is using a faster shutter speed, which would mean that it is the better camera for motion blur - can you add some motion blur into your test so that we can see?

I recall trying similar indoor low-light tests recently, and couldn't think of a suitable moving object for repeatable results with just enough but not too much motion blur

Those light levels are not important for most people, except those that use overnight parking mode, motion blur tends to be a very big issue because there is lots of it.

My real-world testing also found very few parking locations without some form of street lighting. My test camera is better in very low light than any dashcam I've tested, but I struggled to find a real-world scenario where this was a practical benefit to the end user.