Shall I buy the viofo a119v3

you should try and get the same captures on a better day ( full tilt sunshine )
Also the car on the left is parked, and the car on the right are oncoming, so you are comparing ( On the left / your speed + target with no speed VS On the right / your speed + target speed ) so it is not quite fair, but i think on a optimal day you will see no difference.
If it is a focus issue with the lens you should try and obtain static footage of something where you have detailed things at different distances to the car.
It was reasonably good sunshine. Not dull by any measure.

I wasn't driving fast, about 50 kmh, and the oncoming car was slowing to turn.

The crux of the issue is, my old A119S took better photos on the right than this A119 V3. Why should my old A119S take better video clarity than my new A119 V3???
 
I am using 2560X1440P at 30FPS.
Unfortunately I can only see the frame grabs at 1080 resolution, so can't really judge what is happening.

From what I can see, the image quality appears to be good on both sides of the image and the problem reading the plate is due to motion blur from poor lighting. I will agree with Viofo, unless you post a brighter frame grab with full resolution where I can see a problem...

I know you said the light was good, but there are some dark clouds and some very dark trees shading that bit of road, the white car is not in good lighting, we need to see a sunny image with zero movement to properly judge the lens quality before we can consider other possibilities.

The sensor in your A119S is actually a faster sensor than the V3 sensor, in some conditions it may have less motion blur, possibly this was one of those conditions. Normally the extra resolution of the V3 more than makes up for the speed, as long as you try to read a plate while it is still distant; if you wait until it gets close enough for a A119S to read it then the A119S will win due to less motion blur.
 
What you're seeing is what I experience. It's kind of hit or miss. At this point, I'd say you just can't expect miracles.
Your plates seem the same size as ours (smaller than Euro plates, with smaller letters/numbers).

Maybe in full light the 60fps would work better, but I'm not completely sold on that, plus it apparently doesn't work as well at night.

As an experiment, if the unit is turned upside down, can the lens still see the road? The image on the screen can be switched.

I have one in the front and one in the back. They've been working well for me.
The only downside for me is that I can't save the rear file from the driver's seat, but with a large sd card it shouldn't matter.
 
When I first purchased a V3, the camera was distinctly out of focus on the right side vs the left side. The vendor replaced the camera and the new one has no such issues. So when I first read this post I thought perhaps this was the same manufacturing flaw.

Careful examination of @dteal's screen shots reveals that there is no problem with this camera. It is simply common everyday motion blur.

Notice that the brick wall which is on the same plane as the front bumper of the car is in sharp focus as are the curb and the lawn at the edge of the road. The white lines painted on the road also appear to be in sharp focus.

motion_blur.jpg
 
Its not poor lighting. I had sunglasses on, that's how bright it is. I run the exposure at -0.3ev which takes away the over exposed areas without darkening the dark areas. Gives better detail at day and particularly at night.

This is a good exposure, good light, light from behind, no over saturated areas and no underexposed areas.

Nor was it taken at speed, both cars were relatively slow.

That's why I chose this clip. Its good conditions. If it needs better conditions than this, well you will only get that on 10% of days, and that doesn't explain the difference between the left and the right views.
When I first purchased a V3, the camera was distinctly out of focus on the right side vs the left side. The vendor replaced the camera and the new one has no such issues. So when I first read this post I thought perhaps this was the same manufacturing flaw.

Careful examination of @dteal's screen shots reveals that there is no problem with this camera. It is simply common everyday motion blur.

Notice that the brick wall which is on the same plane as the front bumper of the car is in sharp focus as are the curb and the lawn at the edge of the road. The white lines painted on the road also appear to be in sharp focus.

View attachment 52732
For it to be motion blur, you would need the car travelling fast, and the blur of the car would be uniform. Correct??

Well the white car was slowing to turn right, so it wasn't fast, maybe 30 kmh.

Secondly the poor focus is not even. The front of the car is blurred, but the side of the car from the A-pillar back (windsreen pillar) is sharp. Look at the B-pillar, that's the one between the two doors. Its sharp as anything. So the blur is not uniform.

As for 60fps, I tried that on my A119s. The file size was about 10% bigger for 2X the number of frames, so the compression is higher. I wasn't expecting double the file size as that is not how video compression works, but 10% is very small. It actually resulted in poorer definition of number plate due to compression artifacts. Also 60fps had noticeably poorer nightime vision. This isnt surprising as 60FPS limits the exposure to than 1/60 sec (obviously), while 30FPS results in exposure of down to 1/30 sec allowing better night time vision.
 
Secondly the poor focus is not even. The front of the car is blurred, but the side of the car from the A-pillar back (windsreen pillar) is sharp. Look at the B-pillar, that's the one between the two doors. Its sharp as anything. So the blur is not uniform.
That is how motion blur works, the closer the car gets, the more motion blurred it becomes, so if you go back a few frames to where the plate was at the same distance as the B-pillar in this frame, you will find the plate is "sharp as anything"...
 
For it to be motion blur, you would need the car travelling fast, and the blur of the car would be uniform. Correct??

Well the white car was slowing to turn right, so it wasn't fast, maybe 30 kmh.

Secondly the poor focus is not even. The front of the car is blurred, but the side of the car from the A-pillar back (windsreen pillar) is sharp. Look at the B-pillar, that's the one between the two doors. Its sharp as anything. So the blur is not uniform.

As for 60fps, I tried that on my A119s. The file size was about 10% bigger for 2X the number of frames, so the compression is higher. I wasn't expecting double the file size as that is not how video compression works, but 10% is very small. It actually resulted in poorer definition of number plate due to compression artifacts. Also 60fps had noticeably poorer nightime vision. This isnt surprising as 60FPS limits the exposure to than 1/60 sec (obviously), while 30FPS results in exposure of down to 1/30 sec allowing better night time vision.

I believe you are using flawed logic to demonstrate that this is not motion blur and will probably need to do further testing to show that it is actually out of focus on the right side.

In your examples, you provide a screen shot and license plate close-up of a parked vehicle on the left, compared to a moving vehicle approaching you at speed on the right. That is not a valid test for focus vs motion blur on one side vs the other.

stationary_vehicle.jpg

static.jpg
Right-numberplate.jpg

Objectively, everything in the entire image is in decent focus with the exception of the front section of the white car, thus suggesting that this is indeed motion blur.

Right-Snapshot.jpg

I do have to say, that as someone with experience with many, many different dash cams, the A119 V3 is by far not as good with avoiding motion blur, even in decent lighting as some other cameras I've tested despite its many merits.
 
Last edited:
That is how motion blur works, the closer the car gets, the more motion blurred it becomes, so if you go back a few frames to where the plate was at the same distance as the B-pillar in this frame, you will find the plate is "sharp as anything"...
No that is not how motion blur occurs.
Motion blur occurs when an object is moving ACROSS the field of view. When an object is moving directly toward or away from the camera there is little ability for there to be motion blur.

Just think of a train coming towards you on the station, you can see the front of it clearly. Now think of that train going past you on the station. That's motion blur.
 
Just think of a train coming towards you on the station, you can see the front of it clearly. Now think of that train going past you on the station. That's motion blur.

Your eyes and brain do not process "motion blur" in the same way as a camera. Motion blur in a camera has to do with shutter speed and lighting. Human visual perception is an entirely different process.

One way or another, your camera is not out of focus on one side vs the other; you are seeing motion blur in your footage.

To repeat what I said earlier, you will really need to do some further testing to resolve your concern.
 
I believe you are using flawed logic to demonstrate that this is motion blur and will probably need to do further testing to show that it is not.

In your examples, you provide a screen shot and license plate close-up of a parked vehicle on the left, compared to a moving vehicle approaching you at speed on the right. That is not a valid test for focus vs motion blur on one side vs the other.

View attachment 52735

View attachment 52734
View attachment 52736

Objectively, everything in the entire image is in decent focus with the exception of the front section of the white car, thus suggesting that this is indeed motion blur.

View attachment 52737

I do have to say, that as someone with experience with many, many different dash cams, the A119 V3 is by far not as good with avoiding motion blur, even in decent lighting as some other cameras I've tested despite its many merits.
Yes but the front of the car is blurred and not the side of the car.
The image has an area of blur where the car on all videos taken. That region of the image has poor/soft focus presumably caused by either the lens or the image sensor.

When an object is coming fairly straight towards the camera there is minimal ability for there to be motion blur. Motion blur is most pronounced when an object is moving across the field of view.

The A119 V3 has very high sharpness and there isn't a setting to turn it down. I think its a combination, the poor/soft focus in that region of the view and exacerbated by the high sharpness value.
 
Motion blur occurs when an object is moving ACROSS the field of view.
Exactly, and the closer that plate gets, the faster it moves across the field of view. In addition, the closer it gets, the faster it grows to occupy more of the field of view. Both affects cause motion blur.

You need to get another test image when there is no motion from any of the vehicles (in a car park), and another when there is similar motion to above but in full sunshine, then you will see that it is not a focus issue, but low light level causing motion blur.
 
Exactly, and the closer that plate gets, the faster it moves across the field of view. In addition, the closer it gets, the faster it grows to occupy more of the field of view. Both affects cause motion blur.

You need to get another test image when there is no motion from any of the vehicles (in a car park), and another when there is similar motion to above but in full sunshine, then you will see that it is not a focus issue, but low light level causing motion blur.
The white car was only doing 25-30 kmh. It was stopping to turn right as I went past. Its not a speed issue. I had an A119S and it was slightly better on the right hand side than this even with motion. On the left this trumps the A119S. I've pulled a lot of video off the A119S I know what it is possible..

It's not a low light issue. I had to have my sunglasses on and briefly had the airconditioning running. It was mid afternoon on a day with about 1/3 of the sky covered with light clouds. In fact that makes it an easy photography day as there is a lot of direct light and a small amount of diffuse light to fill in the shadows a little and stop the light being harsh. Its also what I would call a "good typical day". Needing high noon on a cloudless day is not reasonable.
 
So prove it with a frame from when everyone is stopped at the lights, and also in sunshine with obvious shadows.

From only the frame you have already posted, I can understand why Viofo would say that it is not a focus problem, maybe there is a problem, but we can't diagnose it from just that one frame when it is clearly not sunny and the light from the sun's direction is clearly blocked by thick leaves, and we don't really know the speeds.
 
Yes but the front of the car is blurred and not the side of the car.
The image has an area of blur where the car on all videos taken. That region of the image has poor/soft focus presumably caused by either the lens or the image sensor.

When an object is coming fairly straight towards the camera there is minimal ability for there to be motion blur. Motion blur is most pronounced when an object is moving across the field of view.

The A119 V3 has very high sharpness and there isn't a setting to turn it down. I think its a combination, the poor/soft focus in that region of the view and exacerbated by the high sharpness value.

You seem to have your mind made up about what you are seeing, so unless you are open to the opinions and suggestions from others and are willing to further test your camera to prove your case one way or the other there is no further point in discussing this.
 
Last edited:
You seem to have your mind made up about what you are seeing, so unless you are open to the opinions and suggestions from others and are willing to further test your camera to prove your case one way or the or the other there is no further point in discussing this.
I have my mind up that it wasn't dull. I should know, I was there. Also that blur is most prominent when an object is moving across the field of view rather than towards the camera.
 
So prove it with a frame from when everyone is stopped at the lights, and also in sunshine with obvious shadows.

From only the frame you have already posted, I can understand why Viofo would say that it is not a focus problem, maybe there is a problem, but we can't diagnose it from just that one frame when it is clearly not sunny and the light from the sun's direction is clearly blocked by thick leaves, and we don't really know the speeds.
Do you see blue sky?
 
Good luck to you!
I keep telling you it wasn't dull, I even said the exposure was set at -0.3ev, but you keep saying it was dull and we haven't moved past it. You can even see blue sky for Pete's sake..
 
Nobody checks sharpness of focus on moving objects for very good reasons which have already been explained here. Not Nikon, not Canon, not any of the professional grade video cams. That is always the first step and of all testing also the easiest to do.

The easiest way for most people to do this is to park perpendicular to a large brick wall at a distance of 15m or more with the sun behind you being equal all across the wall. The high contrast between brick and mortar and the very straight lines will make any image distortion or lack of clarity very evident across the entire FOV of the cam.

If you're not willing to take the approaches being recommended to you, then nobody can help you in any way. It's not like it's hard to do but you must try- we can't do it for you.

Phil
 
Back
Top