Pros and Cons: A119S v2 VS A119 v2

[The Deacon]

After switching a single A119S v2 back and forth between my two cars for the past month, decided to spring for a second camera. When I saw "v2" in the Amazon listing, I assumed the camera would be an A119S. Received it yesterday, took it out of the box, and immediately noticed the lens looked different. Checked the box, didn't see an "S" in the name. Sure enough, I'd ordered an A119 v2.

Debating whether to keep it or return it and order an A119S, so don't want to use it but am wondering what the pros and cons of both cameras are. I know the A119 has the pivoting lens, that's what gave it away, but both my GPS mounts are close to the center of the windshield and I intend to mount a CPL on the camera, so it's of no particular value to me.

 

[CaptureYourAction]

The A119 has a higher resolution (1440p), so it should be a little better during the day. The A119S has a Sony sensor (can do 1080p @ 60), so the night video quality will be a little better.

 

[The Deacon]

The A119 has a higher resolution (1440p), so it should be a little better during the day. The A119S has a Sony sensor (can do 1080p @ 60), so the night video quality will be a little better.

Thanks, that's definitely a point in favor of keeping the A119, since I rarely ever drive at night. Think the last time was 4-5 years ago when my coffee maker decided 4am was a good time to die.

 

[castle]

Here is a good comparison:

 

[Sutton]

Here is a good comparison:

Great presentation

 

[Dont Knowler]

The Sony sensor of the "S" has a dark side: it often has hot pixels, also known as white pixels or bad pixels (which is OK for a high-sensitivity sensor), while the algorithm Viofo uses for masking those pixels "on the fly", although it improved in the recent firmware revisions, is still not perfect (which is indeed not OK for video quality, since some of those bad pixels stay visible in the dashcam video and spoil the picture).

Tried to upload a sample screenshot with bad pixels, but for some reason it did not work from my smartphone.

 

[OCD Tronic]

The Sony sensor of the "S" has a dark side: it often has hot pixels, also known as white pixels or bad pixels (which is OK for a high-sensitivity sensor), while the algorithm Viofo uses for masking those pixels "on the fly", although it improved in the recent firmware revisions, is still not perfect (which is indeed not OK for video quality, since some of those bad pixels stay visible in the dashcam video and spoil the picture).

Tried to upload a sample screenshot with bad pixels, but for some reason it did not work from my smartphone.

Hot Pixels will be fixed in a future Auto Calibration firmware. When it was enabled in the early pre-production testing days, it effected picture quality too much so was left off for now. There is a new Auto Calibration method available that is expected to calibrate (hide) the hot pixels without affecting picture quality. No ETA but the firmware engineers are making progress. I'm not aware of the new feature being compiled into the latest firmware yet so that would explain why you still see some.

 

[The Deacon]

Here is a good comparison:

Thanks, that's another point in favor of keeping the A119. Plus I'm lazy, and it's easier to keep it than to send it back. So I think I'll use it.

The Sony sensor of the "S" has a dark side: it often has hot pixels, also known as white pixels or bad pixels (which is OK for a high-sensitivity sensor), while the algorithm Viofo uses for masking those pixels "on the fly", although it improved in the recent firmware revisions, is still not perfect (which is indeed not OK for video quality, since some of those bad pixels stay visible in the dashcam video and spoil the picture).

Tried to upload a sample screenshot with bad pixels, but for some reason it did not work from my smartphone.

I've been using an "S" for a while now, and have noticed a few white pixels occasionally in strong sunlight. I respect the fact they annoy folks who expect perfect video, but they're not a big deal for me.

 

[DT MI]

...I respect the fact they annoy folks who expect perfect video, but they're not a big deal for me.

Given that the primary purpose of a dash cam is to record factual information about an event that occurred for use in either a legal action or insurance claim I'm good with a few hot pixels myself. I quite sure neither the judiciary nor an insurance adjuster will care that it's not cinema quality video being presented as evidence.

 

[Dont Knowler]

...There is a new Auto Calibration method available that is expected to calibrate (hide) the hot pixels without affecting picture quality. ... I'm not aware of the new feature being compiled into the latest firmware yet so that would explain why you still see some.

Firmware v.1.2 definitely does not have anything like that, since the number of visible hot pixels is huge. Firmware v.1.6 definitely has something like that, since it reduces the number of visible hot pixels dramatically (out of my own experience with both of my A119S cams). However the remaining number of hot pixels is still annoying.

Given that the primary purpose of a dash cam is to record factual information about an event that occurred for use in either a legal action or insurance claim I'm good with a few hot pixels myself. I quite sure neither the judiciary nor an insurance adjuster will care that it's not cinema quality video being presented as evidence.

Given that the primary purpose of your car is to transport you from point A to point B, hope you will not care if I go and scratch your new car all around... And: I have two A119S cams, and on both of them the word "few" is not the right word to describe the number of hot pixels I am experiencing. When I pay my money for a product, the only purpose of which is to produce video footage, I do care that this footage shall not have white dots all over the pic. This is my personal opinion, and you are free to keep yours, indeed.

 

[OCD Tronic]

I'll ask to see if any new auto Calibration was was slipped into the 1.6 firmware. It wasn't in the release notes. This is the first I'm hearing about it.

 

[Dont Knowler]

This is the first I'm hearing about it.

Right you are: it was not in the release notes.

 

[Sutton]

Given that the primary purpose of a dash cam is to record factual information about an event that occurred for use in either a legal action or insurance claim I'm good with a few hot pixels myself. I quite sure neither the judiciary nor an insurance adjuster will care that it's not cinema quality video being presented as evidence.

That's exactly my sentiments. The major use of a DVR is to record for playback,for what ever reason you need. Auto insurance would be my choice. I like perfection but having pixels will definitely not hamper a record of video proof of an accident. We must not compare our DVR to our flat screen tv. Even if the playback is not 100% it still does the job.

 

[The Deacon]

Given that the primary purpose of a dash cam is to record factual information about an event that occurred for use in either a legal action or insurance claim I'm good with a few hot pixels myself. I quite sure neither the judiciary nor an insurance adjuster will care that it's not cinema quality video being presented as evidence.

That's my thinking too. Heck, even for the occasional cool or just plain weird car it captures, I wouldn't see them as a problem. Besides, based on the screen shot Dont Knowler posted, I'm more inclined to think what I'm seeing are a few specks of dust that get "lit up" occasionally. I'm running a 27" monitor, and the white dots in his photo are so tiny I can barely pick them out inside the yellow circles and the ones I'm seeing are much bigger. If that's what the hot pixel issue looks like, I'd probably never notice if I had it.

 

[SawMaster]

If I never drove at night I might feel differently, but for me, the superior low-light performance of the Sony sensor is worth having some minor issues along with it. Especially if the issue is probably going to be resolved soon

Phil

 

[DT MI]

...hope you will not care if I go and scratch your new car all around.......

No problem, as long as I'm allowed to reciprocate.

(Still trying to figure out how an act of vandalism is comparable to a minor performance 'deficiency'.)

 

[Sutton]

No problem, as long as I'm allowed to reciprocate.

(Still trying to figure out how an act of vandalism is comparable to a minor performance 'deficiency'.)

LOL

 

[Dont Knowler]

For the brightest guys around, let me explain my point:
a scratched car does its job (transporting the owner from point A to point B) just as good as a non-scratched. But no one wants his car scratched: everyone prefers glossy paint.
A hot-pixels-rich video works as evidence just as good as a normal-quality video. But I would prefer a normal-quality video for my money. Not all types of dash cams have this defect, so I see no reason why Viofo should be selling us a product with defects while it is quite possible to manufacture a product which would not have this defect. It IS a quality issue, no matter if someone agrees to tolerate it or not.

 

[OCD Tronic]

For the brightest guys around, let me explain my point:
a scratched car does its job (transporting the owner from point A to point B) just as good as a non-scratched. But no one wants his car scratched: everyone prefers glossy paint.
A hot-pixels-rich video works as evidence just as good as a normal-quality video. But I would prefer a normal-quality video for my money. Not all types of dash cams have this defect, so I see no reason why Viofo should be selling us a product with defects while it is quite possible to manufacture a product which would not have this defect. It IS a quality issue, no matter if someone agrees to tolerate it or not.

The challenge with the manual factory calibration is when they do them in the factory on a brand new sensor, not every bright pixel shows up in such a short time

as an FYI all sensors have this, Sony acknowledge that it is impossible to avoid based on current manufacturing technology and consider it to be normal, there are other variables as well, see below

the calibration process (calibration is probably an inaccurate description but that's how it is termed) does not actually calibrate the sensor but masks the effect by mapping which pixels show this issue and when the pixels around the affected pixel are dark or light (whichever the case may be) turn off the affected pixel, when they tried an automated process to dynamically mask the pixels as that is an available option in the SDK but they found that when they used it there was a negative impact on overall image quality, it does work fine on some other model sensors so yes should be something that can be improved. We questioned the engineer about this in the past and the answer was still to do it manually as there hadn't been any progress made on the automated method. That only changed recently. Just wait a bit longer and I'm sure it can be sorted.

Sony Doc:

 

[Dont Knowler]

Pulling a line:
It is OK for Sony sensors to have the hot pixels issue, but it is not of OK for a dash cam, based on this type of sensor, not to have a proper hot pixels masking algorithm.
And - yes, I still hope that this issue will improve in the coming firmware revisions of the A119S - otherwise I would have returned both cams to Seller long time ago.
However, if I had been aware of this issue before purchase, my decision might have been different (I might have bought the non-S-version), and perspective buyers have the right to get properly informed about product properties before they make their decision.