Pros and Cons: A119S v2 VS A119 v2

[Dashmellow]

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:

The effect of cosmic rays is real but in practical terms, electronics errors from them is a fairly rare phenomenon. If that were not the case our computers would be crashing constantly and we would be seeing white pixels everywhere like on our smartphones and other electronics.

This disclaimer from SONY is a bit misleading if you don't pay attention to what it is actually saying. "For your reference", - 3,000 meters happens to be the height of the summit of Mount Everest.

 

[DT MI]

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 (much?) better analogy would be a car with a slight waviness in the windshield/windscreen which would be a valid comparison (a 'defect' versus malicious destruction) - and which my car has, and it doesn't bother me. If you had bothered to actually read my post you'd have noticed I said that "...I'm good with a few hot pixels myself...", and neither stated or implied that it would, or should, be acceptable to others.

 

[DT MI]

...
This disclaimer from SONY is a bit misleading if you don't pay attention to what it is actually saying. "For your reference", - 3,000 meters happens to be the height of the summit of Mount Everest.

In all fairness the 3,000 meters reference was used as a point of comparison to illustrate the difference in the effect versus at sea level - not as an absolute point of measurement. The statement also points out that latitude could also have an effect due to geomagnetic impact differences.

 

[Dashmellow]

In all fairness the 3,000 meters reference was used as a point of comparison to illustrate the difference in the effect versus at sea level - not as an absolute point of measurement. The statement also points out that latitude could also have an effect due to geomagnetic impact differences.

What exactly is the practical value of publishing the prevalence of white pixels one might encounter on top of Mount Everest?

This cosmic ray disclaimer for hot pixels is an exaggeration no matter how you wish to present it. The phenomenon is real but should not be splattering screens with white pixels in reasonable environments as we are being led to believe.

 

[Dont Knowler]

A (much?) better analogy would be a car with a slight waviness in the windshield/windscreen which would be a valid comparison (a 'defect' versus malicious destruction) - and which my car has, and it doesn't bother me.

Please believe me that I was not going to maliciously destroy your car to prove my point
As to your analogy with a "slight waviness in the windshield", I would better save this analogy for the unsharpness issue of the A119S. Since the image crispness dramatically declines towards the edges of the picture. Letting me guess, that the field, within which the "brilliant" lens is able to provide sufficient (true-1080p-compliant) resolution, is significantly less, than the sensor itself. Another defect, if you wish.

If you had bothered to actually read my post you'd have noticed I said that "...I'm good with a few hot pixels myself...", and neither stated or implied that it would, or should, be acceptable to others.

Hey, you sound offended. Please accept my sincere apologies for whatever made you feel so. I did take my time to properly read your post. Hope you took your time to properly read mine, where I stated, that the word "few" is unfortunately not the right word to describe the number of hot pixels I am experiencing. I guess that with "a few" I could live either :-(

 

[The Deacon]

LOL

Yep. I suspect every company has a few customers they devoutly wish would buy a competitor's products.

As for me, I decided to keep the A119, but that decision had nothing to do with the "hot pixel" issue on that A119S, as I'm perfectly happy with the one I have. Only decision left is which one gets mounted in which car.

 

[Dont Knowler]

Yep. I suspect every company has a few customers they devoutly wish would buy a competitor's products.

Just want a dash cam without hot pixels all over the picture. Since they do not look good. If you can recommend a good competitor`s product, I would be grateful. Maybe even the non-S-version of Viofo A119?

 

[OCD Tronic]

Just want a dash cam without hot pixels all over the picture. Since they do not look good. If you can recommend a good competitor`s product, I would be grateful. Maybe even the non-S-version of Viofo A119?

All Sony Sensor Novatek dashcam products may have a few hot pixels until the new auto calibration is fully fine tuned. (coming soon)

 

[MarcoM]

I have bought an A119s from OCD Tronic on eBay and I am impressed with the quality of the camera. I think it well designed, the settings menu is well thought and the video quality is really good. White pixels or not.


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk Pro

 

[Sutton]

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.

Well when you find a DVR without pixels let this forum know. I tried a few different brands and all of them had a bit of pixels You will drive yourself nuts trying to get the perfect cam. Admit it, a pixel here a pixel there really is not a deal breaker.

 

[Sutton]

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.

Viofo is not selling defective cams. The cam just needs to be calibrated.

 

[DT MI]

What exactly is the practical value of publishing the prevalence of white pixels one might encounter on top of Mount Everest?....

That exactly is what is NOT being published. What IS being published is how altitude, and geographic location, can affect the relative frequency of white pixels as a result of cosmic radiation.

Using cosmic rays as an explanation for white pixels may or may not be valid (I have no idea what the actual cause is), the fact is they are a reality and happen even in high end dSLR cameras (as anyone who does long exposure night photography knows). Likewise every LCD/LED monitor or TV I've ever purchased has contained some disclaimer to the effect that 'hot' pixels are normal and not covered under warranty. The fact that the Sony sensor which, as I understand, is optimized for low light imaging has them more than others comes as no surprise to me given it's optimization.

The 'practical value' of the relative incidence at 3,000 meters is to show that people living in, or traveling between, Breckenridge, CO (2,926m), Taos Valley, NM (2,841 m), Mammoth Lakes, CA (2,414 m), or Leadville, CO (3,109 m) could have a higher incidence of white pixels than in Miami, FL (1.8 m) or San Diego, CA (19 m). I'm sure a camera at the top of Mt. Everest would fare even worse.

 

[Dont Knowler]

Viofo is not selling defective cams. The cam just needs to be calibrated.

As long as a cam needs to be calibrated, but does not have the means to be properly calibrated, for me it is defective. BTW both the AliExpress dispute resolution team and the vendor support agreed with me. I even got 30% of the purchase price of my both cams reimbursed, as I agreed to keep both cams which I proved defective.
As soon (if at all) a firmware comes out, which addresses the issue to a satisfactory extent, for me it will mean that the existing defect (since video bugs ARE a defect of any video cam) has been removed. The A119S cam is not hopeless in this respect. As of now, I am still waiting for a "good" firmware to come. Since vendor support assured me, that they are working on further reducing this hot pixels defect in future firmware revisions.
And - no - I am not a perfectionist freak running an endless quest of finding a perfect cam. For me, a cam is (just) a device for video footage generation. And if I pay my money for a cam, I expect, that the generated footage shall not have annoying visual defects. Do not even try to talk me out of this point - it is basics. Technically, it is not unavoidable for a dash cam to have such defects. I had dash cams before. As to me, this is not too much asked for a cam to generate optically acceptable footage. BTW Viofo developers also agree with me, as they say they are actively working on the resolution of this issue. If this would not have been an issue, they would not have bothered attempting resolving it. Sorry for my bad English.

 

[Sutton]

As long as a cam needs to be calibrated, but does not have the means to be properly calibrated, for me it is defective. BTW both the AliExpress dispute resolution team and the vendor support agreed with me. I even got 30% of the pay price of my both cams reimbursed, as I agreed to keep both cams which I proved defective.
As soon (if at all) a firmware comes out, which addresses the issue to a satisfactory extent, for me it will mean that the existing defect (since video bugs ARE a defect of any video cam) has been removed. The A119S cam is not hopeless in this respect. As of now, I am still waiting for a "good" firmware to come. Since vendor support assured me, that they are working on further reducing this hot pixels defect in future firmware revisions.
And - no - I am not a perfectionist freak running an endless quest of finding a perfect cam. For me, a cam is (just) a device for video footage generation. And if I pay my money for a cam, I expect, that the generated footage shall not have annoying visual defects. Do not even try to talk me out of this point - it is basics. Technically, it is not unavoidable for a dash cam to have such defects. I had dash cams before. As to me, this is not too much asked for a cam to generate optically acceptable footage. BTW Viofo developers also agree with me, as they say they are actively working on the resolution of this issue. If this would not have been an issue, they would not have bothered attempting resolving it. Sorry for my bad English.

We have a member here that has a vast knowledge of pixels his name is @Dashmellow Try to give him a shout for help.

 

[Dashmellow]

That exactly is what is NOT being published. What IS being published is how altitude, and geographic location, can affect the relative frequency of white pixels as a result of cosmic radiation.

Using cosmic rays as an explanation for white pixels may or may not be valid (I have no idea what the actual cause is), the fact is they are a reality and happen even in high end dSLR cameras (as anyone who does long exposure night photography knows). Likewise every LCD/LED monitor or TV I've ever purchased has contained some disclaimer to the effect that 'hot' pixels are normal and not covered under warranty. The fact that the Sony sensor which, as I understand, is optimized for low light imaging has them more than others comes as no surprise to me given it's optimization.

The 'practical value' of the relative incidence at 3,000 meters is to show that people living in, or traveling between, Breckenridge, CO (2,926m), Taos Valley, NM (2,841 m), Mammoth Lakes, CA (2,414 m), or Leadville, CO (3,109 m) could have a higher incidence of white pixels than in Miami, FL (1.8 m) or San Diego, CA (19 m). I'm sure a camera at the top of Mt. Everest would fare even worse.

No product I've ever owned has been splattered with hot pixels or needed elaborate "calibration" procedures to repair.

 

[OCD Tronic]

It's a Novatek/Sony thing. Not every one will show them either.

 

[Dont Knowler]

"It's a Novatek/Sony thing. "
Oh no. You cannot say that. It is a Viofo thing. I bought a Viofo product. Viofo received my money, and supplied something which does not work quite as expected. It was a Viofo decision to use the Novatek/Sony combination, and it is Viofo responsibility if this combination is not flawless.

 

[Dashmellow]

A few pixels is one thing and I'm glad that as a consumer it can be dealt with. The odd thing about dash cams as a product category is the number and types of problems we as consumers are asked to tolerate as "normal" from manufacturers and vendors.

 

[OCD Tronic]

The engineers are fully aware of the problem and a fix is in development. You'll just have to be patient. The problem is not being ignored.

 

[Dashmellow]

The engineers are fully aware of the problem and a fix is in development. You'll just have to be patient. The problem is not being ignored.

That's what we heard about the SG9665GC hot pixel problem which was "supposed" to have been resolved so the user would never need to re-calibrate only to later learn that it wasn't.

Personally, I think that in most circumstances the hot pixel issue is pretty minor in the scheme of things but a flaw is a flaw whether it is from Sony or anyone else. The SONY product simply seems more prone to this issue than others.