A229 Pro Test & Review PP

[markus]

Sorry to intrude, but does this reboot issue occur if you’re using the hardwire kit or is it only with the cigarette lighter charger connection?

 

[Panzer Platform]

HORIZONTAL FOV - CONFIRM & VERIFY
The A229 Pro & A229 Plus FRONT cameras have the same 140° “Wide Viewing Angle” specification.




Since both FRONT cameras have the same 140° specification their recorded footage should appear identical if placed in the same location.
I needed an elevated platform, and something in the background so here’s what that looks like.



Looking at the two screenshots it appears the A229 Pro has a wider FOV.




Q: Which one is 140°?
A: I don’t know.
Q: How much wider is the A229 Pro?
A: Based on Kentucky Windage my guess is 10°.
Q: Is this a big deal, does this really matter?
A: Any incorrect specification is false & misleading in the eyes of the consumer.
Q: What does this 10° guess look like outside?
A: Have a look see.




Oh yeah, I compared some other cameras that have the same 140° specification.
This is the LEFT side FOV.
M1: Original A119 Mini
M2: A119 Mini 2
229S: A229 Plus Front
129P: A129 Pro Front
WM1: WM1
139P: A139 Pro Front
229P: A229 Pro Front
229: Original A229 Front
129S: A129 Plus Front

 

[Nigel]

Looking at the two screenshots it appears the A229 Pro has a wider FOV.

It should have, it is 4K against 2K, so it could have twice the FoV and still be able to read all the plates that the Plus can... except it is not quite that simple

The specification is for the Lens, not the recorded image, the specifications are probably both correct.

 

[Panzer Platform]

It should have, it is 4K against 2K

The specification is for the Lens, not the recorded image

Incorrect.
Resolution is inconsequential.
A person that buys the dash cam is not a customer of the lens manufacturer, they are a customer of Viofo.
Viofo is responsible for providing the specification of their final assembled product.
If Viofo is unwilling, or unable to measure the FOV of their final assembled dash cam, and provide the specification, it is unacceptable in my opinion.
If I buy a Big Mac, and get food poisoning, the cattle rancher is not responsible, McDonald's is the one to take action against.
This post is about specifications that are false & misleading in the eyes of the consumer.

 

[Dex_]

Thank's for comparison. Only one note - IMO you should add left arrow to the last image paper with 4 number to avoid ambiguity. I'm understand that M1 have less FOV than 129S (I suppose it is mean "Plus") and this is 4 paper to the left side from cener but someone else might be confused. Adding arrows to the left and right papers from paper 1 may help to fix it.

 

[DT MI]

Q: Which one is 140°?
A: I don’t know.

To find the AOV measure the three sides of a triangle and from there you can calculate all the angles of that triangle. Let's use your A229 plus image as an example.



With the camera set up on your test rig:

1 - Measure the distance from the center of the lens to point 'B' - this will be 'Line A'
2 - Measure the distance from the center of the lens to point 'C' - this will be 'Line B'
3 - Measure the distance from point 'B' to point 'C' - this will be 'Line C'

Enter the 3 line lengths into this calculator and it will determine the three angles of the triangle formed by the center of the lens and the extreme left and right edges of the image.

Note: Under "Given" above the data entry box make sure to select "3 Sides"

Triangle Angle. Calculator | Formula

How to find the angle of a triangle? What's the sum of angles in a triangle? Check it out with this triangle angle calculator!

www.omnicalculator.com

This will be the actual AOV of the captured image regardless of the sensor size or the lens characteristics.

 

[Dashmellow]

It should have, it is 4K against 2K, so it could have twice the FoV and still be able to read all the plates that the Plus can... except it is not quite that simple

The specification is for the Lens, not the recorded image, the specifications are probably both correct.

Incorrect.
Resolution is inconsequential.
This post is about specifications that are false & misleading in the eyes of the consumer.

No PP, you are the one who is incorrect here. Nigel has it right.

And nobody is providing specifications that are "false & misleading". Manufacturers like Viofo are merely supplying the specifications provided to them by the lens manufacturer (which also are usually the diagonal AOV, not the horizontal AOV.)
The results will be different depending upon which camera the lens happens to be used in. There are variables with each camera. So, for example, two different cameras may have different senors which will be of different sizes and even somewhat different shapes. Even slight differences in sensor size will have a pronounced impact of the apparent AOV. Also, two different lenses of the same focal length from different suppliers may have different characteristics as @DT MI mentions above. Different optical designs will affect the size of the cone of light projected onto the sensor even if they are of the same exact focal length. For example, the original A119 V3 I purchased had a focus problem and it was replaced. The new one has a very slightly wider AOV than the original which seemed to indicate the Viofo may have used a different lens in the new production runs. (I discovered this discrepancy because I placed the new camera on the original GPS mount that was already installed and suddenly part of my rear view mirror mount was in the image whereas it wasn't with the original camera.)

The same lens used on different sized sensors will provide different AOV coverage of a scene, as well as different apparent magnification.

 

[Panzer Platform]

you should add left arrow to the last image paper with 4 number to avoid ambiguity. I'm understand that M1 have less FOV than 129S (I suppose it is mean "Plus")

Thanks for pointing that out, I will fix for future tests.
Yes, the last image “4 paper” is on the left”.
M1: Original A119 Mini
M2: A119 Mini 2
229S: A229 Plus Front
129P: A129 Pro Front
WM1: WM1
139P: A139 Pro Front
229P: A229 Pro Front
229: Original A229 Front
129S: A129 Plus Front

 

[Panzer Platform]

To find the AOV measure the three sides of a triangle and from there you can calculate all the angles of that triangle.

Well, why didn’t you say so?
Just kidding, thanks for the calculator, 4th grade math is rushing back to me 4 decades later. Lol

 

[RANSOM_FPS]

@Panzer Platform Hey! I'm new here and I'm planning to buy this webcam in 2CH F+R format.

Which memory card will be compatible with this according to your testing?

Budget < $80

Any suggestion will be really appreciated

 

[Panzer Platform]

Which memory card will be compatible

What memory card is recommended for a VIOFO dashcam?

Micro SD Cards play an important role in dashcams, but not all cards are suitable to be used in dashcams. The footage recorded by dash cams is saved on a micro SD card, which is an essential component of the dash cam setup. Here are some parame...

support.viofo.com

 

[DT MI]

Well, why didn’t you say so?
Just kidding, thanks for the calculator, 4th grade math is rushing back to me 4 decades later. Lol

Actually there's another way it can be done using (mostly) your existing setup that wouldn't involve any measuring at all after an initial setup - but - it will require you mount the camera exactly in the center of the test bench (which should be fairly easy) with the lens/sensor exactly parallel to the back panel (not so easy).

 

[Panzer Platform]

with the lens/sensor exactly parallel to the back panel (not so easy).

Diagram, or photo please.

 

[Panzer Platform]

Actually there's another way it can be done

I tried this method last night at 3AM, and almost got my thing stuck in the ceiling fan again. Lol

 

[Dashmellow]

I tried this method last night at 3AM, and almost got my thing stuck in the ceiling fan again. Lol

4th grade math is rushing back to me 4 decades later. Lol

I was probably in the 4th grade when I got my first protractor and learned how to measure angles. It was endless fun.

I'm pleased to see that you took my suggestion to get yourself a protractor but I assumed you would know how to use it, especially after posting the image below to demonstrate that your "guesstimate" that one of your cameras had an AOV of 165 degrees was WAY off as you could easily see where I was measuring from.





The photo you posted reveals that your measurements are off my a country mile. Several country miles actually. Why you would choose to measure from six or more inches away from the protractor I do not know.
You need to measure from the axis point where the angle measurements converge. That is why all protractors feature a hole at that point where you can place a stylus or pin so you can pivot the protractor on its axis to take addition measurements up to 360 degrees.

So Panzer, to use the protractor to measure your camera's Angle of View you need to place the front lens element of your cameras on the line at the axis point as shown in your photo, which I have modified.

 

[VVondervvall]

No PP, you are the one who is incorrect here. Nigel has it right.

And nobody is providing specifications that are "false & misleading". Manufacturers like Viofo are merely supplying the specifications provided to them by the lens manufacturer (which also are usually the diagonal AOV, not the horizontal AOV.)
The results will be different depending upon which camera the lens happens to be used in. There are variables with each camera. So, for example, two different cameras may have different senors which will be of different sizes and even somewhat different shapes. Even slight differences in sensor size will have a pronounced impact of the apparent AOV. Also, two different lenses of the same focal length from different suppliers may have different characteristics as @DT MI mentions above. Different optical designs will affect the size of the cone of light projected onto the sensor even if they are of the same exact focal length. For example, the original A119 V3 I purchased had a focus problem and it was replaced. The new one has a very slightly wider AOV than the original which seemed to indicate the Viofo may have used a different lens in the new production runs. (I discovered this discrepancy because I placed the new camera on the original GPS mount that was already installed and suddenly part of my rear view mirror mount was in the image whereas it wasn't with the original camera.)

The same lens used on different sized sensors will provide different AOV coverage of a scene, as well as different apparent magnification.

View attachment 68336

I disagree. It's in the image you post, the black circle is the image circle of the lens (which could be described as an angle), however the REAL angle of view (ideally must be specified horizontal or diagonal, WIDE = horizontal?) is dependant on the sensor size and is calculated using BOTH the lens AND sensor specs. As you clearly see in the posted image, the sensor size changes the part of the scene that is visible and thus changes the AOV.

Unless dashcam optics are different to photography optics, there are loads of calculators/articles explaining this in photography where everybody knows that a given lens will give different AOV/FOV depending on sensor size. E.g. common sensor sizes on interchangeable lens systems (aka. system cameras) that sometimes use the same lenses: four thirds, APS-C, 35mm (="full format"), medium format. Physically larger sensors will give larger AOV/FOV for the same lens, as is the case for the IMX678 which is larger then most other dashcam sensors.

I thus agree with the OP @Panzer Platform with my photographer background.

To add, this might be an industry issue if every dashcam manufacturer reports in the same way and just posts lens specs, in such case it could just be VIOFO giving the data in the same way as other manufacturers do for a comparable delivery, but if so the (dashcam) industry standard is misleading - if there is such a thing.


.

 

[DT MI]

Diagram, or photo please.

OK, first there are 3 way to determine the angles of a triangle:

1 - Having the length of 3 sides (we already did that one as above).
2 - Knowing 2 of the angles, summing them and subtract the result from 180 (not possible because we can't determine what any 2 of them are).
3 - Knowing 1 angle and the length of 2 sides. This is what we're going to do.

(Please excuse the ragged lines, I don't draw worth a diddly with a mouse. )







Looking at your test station if we mount the camera so the lens/sensor is exactly parallel to the back panel then imaginary line A-C will intersect the panel at 90° (Angle 'A').

When the camera is mounted on the platform the length of line A-C can be measured. If mounted consistantly (say with the front edge of the lens even with the edge of the platform) this will only have to be done once.

So now we have 1 angle and the length of 1 side, all we need is another side. This is where the green line comes into play. What that line represents is a ruler (a 48" 'yard stick' would be ideal). This will be attached to the back panel starting from the center to the edge.

Mount the camera with the center of the lens aligned with the end of the ruler (and exactly parallel to the back panel to insure a 90° angle). Do a screen capture and the edge of the frame on the ruler gives us the length of the second side (line A-B).

Enter the 2 side lengths (A-C and A-B ) and the known angle (Angle A, 90°) into the calculator and it will return the length of side B-C and angle 'B' and angle 'C' .

Angle 'C' is one half of the AOV so doubling that will result in the total AOV.

This is a bit of work but if you plan on testing a lot of cameras it will be be easier over time because no measurements will be needed after the initial set up.

 

[Panzer Platform]

This is a bit of work but if you plan on testing a lot of cameras it will be be easier over time because no measurements will be needed after the initial set up.

Yes, thank you so much.
From now on I plan on checking horizontal FOV, and focus of all future dash cams so I can compare them.
I think I like this last method best.
Right now I'm re-configuring the wall with more pieces of paper that say VIOFO to cover the top & bottom blank portions.
Thanks again.

 

[chili]

 

[Dashmellow]

I disagree. It's in the image you post, the black circle is the image circle of the lens (which could be described as an angle), however the REAL angle of view (ideally must be specified horizontal or diagonal, WIDE = horizontal?) is dependant on the sensor size and is calculated using BOTH the lens AND sensor specs. As you clearly see in the posted image, the sensor size changes the part of the scene that is visible and thus changes the AOV.

Unless dashcam optics are different to photography optics, there are loads of calculators/articles explaining this in photography where everybody knows that a given lens will give different AOV/FOV depending on sensor size. E.g. common sensor sizes on interchangeable lens systems (aka. system cameras) that sometimes use the same lenses: four thirds, APS-C, 35mm (="full format"), medium format. Physically larger sensors will give larger AOV/FOV for the same lens, as is the case for the IMX678 which is larger then most other dashcam sensors.

I thus agree with the OP @Panzer Platform with my photographer background.

To add, this might be an industry issue if every dashcam manufacturer reports in the same way and just posts lens specs, in such case it could just be VIOFO giving the data in the same way as other manufacturers do for a comparable delivery, but if so the (dashcam) industry standard is misleading - if there is such a thing.


.

The illustration I posted merely demonstrates that the same lens projected onto two different sized sensors will yield different results including apparent focal length and AOV. The particular measurement or angle is irrelevant here as the image is simple showing the concept of how that works. I haven't made any attempt to calculate anything.

I posted the image because Panzer Platform seems mystified that he is seeing different AOV results from cameras that apparently have the same lens on them but use different size and shaped sensors. In some cases, the cameras he is comparing have sensors with 16:9 aspect ratios which he is comparing to cameras that have sensors with 4:3 aspect ratios. Each will produce different results even if Viofo gives the same lens angle spec for both cameras.

So saying that the same lens projecting an image cone onto different sized sensors implies that a different focal length lens would also yield different results.

The same lens used on different sized sensors will provide different AOV coverage of a scene, as well as different apparent magnification.

the REAL angle of view (ideally must be specified horizontal or diagonal, WIDE = horizontal?) is dependant on the sensor size and is calculated using BOTH the lens AND sensor specs.

It is not clear why you are disagreeing with me since we seem to be saying basically the same thing.