Poor front video quality when using front and rear camera

[Bugsy]

Reading through this post I must agree with the drop in quality of the front camera when the rear is connected and it’s not just the drop from1440 to 1080. Now it might just be me but the aspect ratio doesn’t seem right either when playing back the front files, cars look a little squashed in the distance. The rear camera doesn’t do this ratio looks correct. Such a shame it has to drop to 1080 as the quality of the files was very good before the arrival of the rear camera.

 

[SGM26]

Glad I read your post before purchasing. I still intend on buying a rear camera however I think I'll be waiting a bit longer to see what the outcome is.

Hopefully Nextbase get you (and the cameras) sorted soon.

 

[Luke9]

I would consider buying the 512gw, if the front camera still recorded at 1440p with the rear camera connected at 1080p

 

[jokiin]

I would consider buying the 512gw, if the front camera still recorded at 1440p with the rear camera connected at 1080p

hardware limitation, I think if they bump the 1080p results back up to where it is in single cam mode is probably acceptable though

 

[Jacko956]

As an update this is an image from my 512gw that I sent back. Soft and blurry, more so on the left...


... and this is the replacement 512gw. A bit better but think the numberplates could be clearer.

 

[Spuds]

I certainly would be happy with the replacement. So to conclude, this doesn't look like a firmware fixable solution, unless your replacement has a 'fixed' firmware.

 

[Techifan]

Hi guys,

I have been following this thread with interest as I have ordered a 512GW and hope to use it with the rear camera.

Regarding Jacko956 second picture, I agree this looks ok to me although as a dashcam newbie I have nothing previous to compare.
Can you please confirm, I understand that this was a replacement and the rear camera was connected, yes?
Can we conclude that there may be some 512GW’s out there that may be faulty and need to be replaced or has the firmware been updated on the replacement unit. Perhaps Jacko956 could check and confirm?
If it turns out to be a hardware fault then it would be useful to know the serial numbers of the faulty units and compare them to the replacement sent out to Jacko956.
Could there be a faulty batch out there, hopefully Nextbase support would know if this is likely to be the case.

 

[Jacko956]

I certainly would be happy with the replacement. So to conclude, this doesn't look like a firmware fixable solution, unless your replacement has a 'fixed' firmware.

Yes, some might be happy with the quality. However, I would think that the front camera should definitely be higher quality than the rear cam given the specs and cost of each. Therefore there's room for improvement with firmware.

 

[Jacko956]

Hi guys,

I have been following this thread with interest as I have ordered a 512GW and hope to use it with the rear camera.

Regarding Jacko956 second picture, I agree this looks ok to me although as a dashcam newbie I have nothing previous to compare.
Can you please confirm, I understand that this was a replacement and the rear camera was connected, yes?
Can we conclude that there may be some 512GW’s out there that may be faulty and need to be replaced or has the firmware been updated on the replacement unit. Perhaps Jacko956 could check and confirm?
If it turns out to be a hardware fault then it would be useful to know the serial numbers of the faulty units and compare them to the replacement sent out to Jacko956.
Could there be a faulty batch out there, hopefully Nextbase support would know if this is likely to be the case.

I have the rear cam connected to the front cam. There's a drop in quality from the front cam as it now records in 1080p instead of 1440p. I don't know if there's a faulty batch. Perhaps the heat has affected it but then the rear cam would be affected too. I'm not saying the results are not usable but they should be better.

 

[Techifan]

I have the rear cam connected to the front cam. There's a drop in quality from the front cam as it now records in 1080p instead of 1440p. I don't know if there's a faulty batch. Perhaps the heat has affected it but then the rear cam would be affected too. I'm not saying the results are not usable but they should be better.

OK, thanks for the clarification.
I have been looking at getting a dashcam for a while now and chose this model because I like the idea of the rear cam.
From what’s been said, apparently it appears that the hardware is capable of producing good pictures but only when the rear camera is disconnected.
Let’s hope they come up with a firmware update that will improve the situation.
Just a thought, can you remove, or if not adjust the polarizing filter to see if that sharpens up the image?
Having said that, if the image improves without the rear cam I can’t see the Polarizing filter causing the problem. Just thought it may be worth a try.
I will keep an eye on this thread with interest.

 

[Techifan]

I have the rear cam connected to the front cam. There's a drop in quality from the front cam as it now records in 1080p instead of 1440p. I don't know if there's a faulty batch. Perhaps the heat has affected it but then the rear cam would be affected too. I'm not saying the results are not usable but they should be better.

Sorry just picked up another point.
I know the resolution drops down to 1080p when the rear camera is connected but is the quality good at 1080p without the rear camera connected.
I assume what’s being said is that the 1080p quality is ok without the rear camera but when the rear camera is connected the 1080p quality takes a hit.
If this is the case surly it proves the hard ware is not the problem and we can all hope for a firmware fix.

 

[Jacko956]

Sorry just picked up another point.
I know the resolution drops down to 1080p when the rear camera is connected but is the quality good at 1080p without the rear camera connected.
I assume what’s being said is that the 1080p quality is ok without the rear camera but when the rear camera is connected the 1080p quality takes a hit.
If this is the case surly it proves the hard ware is not the problem and we can all hope for a firmware fix.

To answer you first question the filter is a screw in type and can be easily removed. Second question, that would require 4 tests, set at 1080p, filter on and off and with rear cam connected. Then disconnect the rear and do the same tests. Might do that later.

 

[country_hick]

A 2 channel cam minimizes some issues. However, 2 separate cams gives more security as both are unlikely to die at the same time.

I will probably have 2 cams in place before to long. I plan on moving a g1w-s that is currently on the windshield to the back window by mounting to the third brake light and using a maxi up front.

 

[Techifan]

A 2 channel cam minimizes some issues. However, 2 separate cams gives more security as both are unlikely to die at the same time.

I will probably have 2 cams in place before to long. I plan on moving a g1w-s that is currently on the windshield to the back window by mounting to the third brake light and using a maxi up front.

I must admit I like the idea of a two channel cam but not at the expense of recording quality.

I may hold off buying the rear cam for a while to see if the problem can be sorted.

If not, although it will cost me more I may also have to consider using two separate cams.

 

[Skynet5]

Concluded that the front camera with rear connected is a blocky mess.

:-(

Moving traffic, no chase of seeing number plates.

I get the downgrade to 1080p, but the bitrate issue is bad.

 

[Techifan]

Concluded that the front camera with rear connected is a blocky mess.

:-(

Moving traffic, no chase of seeing number plates.

I get the downgrade to 1080p, but the bitrate issue is bad.

I believe others have said that when the front and back cameras are connected the quality of the rear camera is good and better than the front camera.

I assume there are two data streams one from the front and the other from the rear.

Just wondering if it’s possible with a firmware fix to reverse the data streams, so the higher bitrate stream is used for the front camera.

Probably wishful thinking on my part.

Actually, I’m beginning to wonder now if this has been the reason for the delay in releasing the rear camera, with them trying to overcome this issue.

To be honest, the only reason I went for the 512GW was because of the two camera set up but if I had known earlier about the issues I would have brought the 412GW.

 

[chair52]

Hi folks, quick update for you all -

Tiffany has sent me through a new firmware to test out, however I am currently on holiday at the moment so cannot rest until I get home.

Once I am back I will of course post updated tests, however the good news is Nextbase obviously think it is fixable through an update! Fingers crossed!

 

[Skynet5]

Good news. @tiffany care to share the beta wider?

 

[Techifan]

Hi folks, quick update for you all -

Tiffany has sent me through a new firmware to test out, however I am currently on holiday at the moment so cannot rest until I get home.

Once I am back I will of course post updated tests, however the good news is Nextbase obviously think it is fixable through an update! Fingers crossed!

Thank you for updating us all.
We look forward to your test results.

 

[Farmersden]

Hi folks, quick update for you all -

Tiffany has sent me through a new firmware to test out, however I am currently on holiday at the moment so cannot rest until I get home.

Once I am back I will of course post updated tests, however the good news is Nextbase obviously think it is fixable through an update! Fingers crossed!

What version software is this ?