Innovv K5, 4K camera

Two 1080p cameras recording at 20 Mbit/s, 60 fps would be awesome. Likely superior low light performance also, as there's no free lunch with regard to light sensitivity.

But most folks seem to be distracted by throwing more pixels at things (4k), so that's what the dashcam makers sell.
 
The K1 was a re-branded product from a factory that’s no longer in business. The only reason it was a rebrand is they didn’t have enough money to design a product from scratch. The K2 K3 and K5 was built and designed from the ground up.

The K2 has IMX323 sensors. Sony Exmor

The K3 has IMx291 sensors. Sony Exmor R

The 291 Is a backside illuminated sensor giving it better low light performance compared to the 323
 
I don't have a grasp on all the technical matters of action/dash cam capture and editing. You all do seem to have an understand. I have been going by what my eyes can see on the output device. You are saying for example, motorcycle video capture, 1080p (that's a "resolution"?, eh, is adequate with a 60 fps, at a high bitrate? How high of a bitrate? And by the same token on exporting from a video editor, should a high bitrate, say 35, of the final cut be constant or variable? If you have more fps do you need a higher bitrate or does the bitrate apply more to the resolution? I know this stuff gets way heady and perhaps I'm totally missing the mark on the proper camera capture setting correlations. Is it too much to ask for one particular type of use, say motorcycle video capture, for a table of setting rows/columns, resolution, bitrate, whatever h.265 is, and all the other technical mumbo jumbo, so that a guy can at least have a starting point to experiment? Right now my brain is swimming in this stuff but me eyes are well pleased with the K5 at 4k 30fps front cam and 1080p 30fps rear cam, with a high bitrate set, and a h.265 whatever that is.
 
If you want to produce scenic drive videos, then you need as much resolution as you can get ( in this day and age that is 4K ) but you also want as many FPS to make it look smooth ( in this day and age thats 60FPS )
Also to make all of that go down well, you also want a high bitrate, and in this day and age that is about 100 Mbit for 4K footage, maybe less if the camera use H.265 encoding.

None of that you will get in any dash or motorcycle camera, as they are merely accident recorders, so they will have at least a lesser bitrate and also just 30 FPS as that is enough for that.
Really 30 fps is fine for most things, the stuff you watch on TV or at the cinema are probably also just 25 - 30 FPS and i trust like most people you had okay viewing experiences in those places.


H.265 is a encoding format, it compared with the old H.264 format mean that with all other things being the same ( resolution ) you have the same image quality at half the bitrate of H.264.
The problem here is to encode / decode ( playback ) you then need a bigger computing power.
In the camera it is often there today, but some people ( like my kid sister ) with a old laptop she barely use, well i tried to play H.265 footage on it 3 or so years ago, and that was a mess as it did not have compute power enough ( in CPU to do it with software decode ) or in the graphics card which can have the option to encode / decode in hardware.

Granted you do not need a super high end computer to work with / playback H.265 footage, but if your computer / laptop are a old dual core one maybe even quad core, then you are better sticking to H.264

You can sort of look at bitrate as a image quality multiplier, so you can have a 4K recording with 10 mbit bitrate, and it will not be good looking at least not if it is footage with movement in it, but change the bitrate to 100 mbit, and you will suddenly get a whole lot more of the little details in the footage.

Most footage you consume today are probably 720p or 1080p, your computer screen are probably 1080p too, and sure you can playback 4K footage on it just fine, but as the screen are just 1080p resolution you wont really see all the glory of your 4K recording.
Reverse you can also playback a 1080p resolution recording on your nice 4K TV, in that case the footage are scaled up, but that do not mean it become better looking, the quality are just 1080p.

If you are in doubt if your computer can handle some resolution / bitrate / encode format, just say so and i am sure someone in here can provide you with a piece of raw footage from their camera you can experiment with.
I can provide 4K/60 FPS footage in 100 mbit from my action camera, i can also provide 1440P and 1080p footage ( 30 FPS ) but with the H.265 encode from some of my dashcams.

Actually H.265 are outgunned now by even newer encode formats, like the one called AV1 and so on, but these have yet to gain support in dash and action cameras, but it will probably be here soon.
 
kamkar, it is beginning to galvanize in my tin head...that's a good thing. I'll need to read your reply again but I think I'm starting to get a better handle on the broader stroke of image capture and viewing. It really is amazing detail. Thank you so much for taking the time to explain this stuff! Let me consider the idea of getting some sample files to actually see how my PC handles them. One thing I am discovering with video is that things get messy fast...all the files and compilers and apps and what have you.
 
Some people come into dashcams, and maybe having used higher end action cameras for recording whatever, and so can get mighty let down by what dashcams do.
Some come in and say "must be able to capture plates" and you can also do that almost 100% certain if it is a mid summer day and the sun are out and you are driving across open prairie.
Otherwise the is a range of environmental factors that play in along with what the hardware used in cameras are actually able to do, so you end up with over a year, well a great deal of the time you will only have a tiny chance of a plate capture.

Add to that the American strange system of only having 1 plate on a car, and as small as possible and with all manner of background graphics on it, all doing nothing good for plate capture.
Thats why i always recommend dual systems for Americans, cuz even if your front camera have nothing to see on the oncoming car, your rear camera will have a chance if he have a plate in the back.
Over here in EU ville cars have big plates front and rear, so our chance of a plate capture are 2 X of a American.

If you like me think " i want a camera that document what i do with my vehicle" then you will have no problem finding a camera system as most will do that day or night, and only severe fog would put a damper on that.
Then beside that your camera can also capture a lot of other things, and maybe the day when you need it the most it will too.
But that guy liking pictures of cupcakes while he rear end you, he will not get away with claiming that you was driving erratic and changing lanes all over the place, cuz your camera have you driving in your lane and then ,,,,,BAM !
If you have a rear camera, you might even be lucky and have footage of him with his phone touching his nose, though it is somewhat of a call to expect, but best lighting conditions and you probably could.
The main thing is that you do not get to pay, and most cameras should be able to prove that, so stay within the law and you should be good with a camera.

4K cameras are cool now for daytime footage, they suffer a little in low light, though still fully able to log anything you do in relation to lane markings - side of the road - color of intersections ASO.
Some 1080p cameras often bases on the Sony IMX 291 sensor are more light sensitive, and so their footage at night are more relaxing to watch, but the degree of better low light abilities do not translate to better capture of little details like a license plate.
You can get plates alright at night even in the light of your own headlight, but the total difference in speed in between your camera bike and what ever cant be more than walking pace.
This is due to the fact that in order to capture enough light to make bright footage, the camera will maximize the exposure time for each video frame, but a slow exposure time + a target that move are a bad solution.

The crystal crisp pictures you see on race cars zipping by at insane speeds, well the photographer probably used a exposure time of 1000 of a second or 10.000 of a second, so even at insane speeds when he take the picture the race car only move a fraction of a inch in the time the picture are taken.
But a dashcam at night go as low as 1:30 second which are just slow enough to still be able to take 30 frames every second, but so slow exposures things dont have to be that fast before they move several inches while the photo is taken, resulting in what is called motion blur.

A photographer rule of thumb is, if you want to photo something at speed, you must at least use a exposure time of 1:500 second.
So the faster things you want to photograph or film the more light you must have to do so or the photo / video will be dark / under exposed.
This is also why you some times see super slow motion recordings are a little dark, even if it is filmed in the middle of the day with 100 % sun out, but even the sun and all its light are not enough if you want to take 100.000 photos in a second, or as some do millions of photos in a second.
Really fast and you need huge flashes that go off at the millisecond you want to record those valuable photos
At Holloman AFB they move things so fast, first of all they have to do it inside a plastic tube with gas in it as doing so thru air mean their experiment will melt.

 
Never thought of how dumb the American license plate is but you are correct its size, placement, and designer styles makes it pert near useless. But at least we get to pay outrageous fees every year to keep em on our vehicles.

I think I'm getting it, at least the action/dash cam thing. It is super complicated. You do well explaining it.

If I'm taken out, I hope it is by a Rocket Sled :)
 
That would literally be dying in a blaze of glory, much better than slowly choking to death in a hospital bed.
 
Looking forward to some videos for comparison.

That price point is painful, but as a long-time K2 user I see welcome improvements:

--external mic. Much more useful than having it built into DVR. You can put it somewhere it will pick up useful sound.

--remote control/status lights unit. Good move. On a lot of bikes you were basically forced to stick the K2 DVR under the seat. Great for protecting the DVR, really annoying for access. Now one can put the Big Silver Button in a convenient location, and see what the system is up to without fooling with a phone or removing the seat.

--integrating DVR into front cam, much easier SD card access this way.

--It looks like they're using the existing power converter from the K2. Good, no reason to mess with that, there were too many problems with some earlier designs shutting themselves off.

Is it possible they moved the DVR guts to the front cam to help with heat management acid staining minneapolis? Presumably the camera will be mounted where it gets plenty of free air, which would help carry away heat.
Has anyone installed the new K5, 4K camera system from INNOVV? Thinking about upgrading to it from my K2. Wish they had upgraded the rear camera from 1080 to a bit higher, but they did supposedly improve it. And no, if I do the upgrade the K2 will not be for sale, going to hand it down (install) on another local Spyder riders bike that has helped me out in the past. I know that after having the K2 for over a year I don't want to ride without front and rear dash cams.
 
Back
Top