The list of shame fake 4K cameras and CMOS size

As with all products, some will perform better than others, even when they have identical specs. That has been, is now and for the foreseeable future will be as true for action cameras as for any other product. Separately there is the issue of whether or not a product is making false claims.

It's obvious that time and again Chinese action camera manufacturers have made false claims. Some do not have the hardware they claim. Some can't perform as they claim. Some make claims but with caveats tucked away somewhere in a manual or on their web page.

My point has been and continues to be only this: When one says that a camera manufacturer is making false claims, how do you KNOW that those claims are false? It can't be based just on the quality of the videos or photos. Cameras with verifiably better hardware and verifiably better specs can still have lower quality videos and photos than lesser cameras.

Is a manufacturer claiming that a camera has hardware that in fact it does not? Unless you have intimate knowledge of the industry and know that the claim is false, or you have seen a teardown of the camera, how do you KNOW?

Are they claiming it has performance that it does not? If you KNOW the hardware, and the specifications for that hardware are known to be incapable of the claimed performance, then you can say you KNOW the claimed performance is false. If the property details shown in video playback programs indicate certain parameters, then unless you know what the hardware is and know that it is incapable of such performance, how do you KNOW the property details are based on interpolation or double frame rates, i.e., are false?

I'm approaching this as somebody who doesn't have intimate industry knowledge and only a newbie's knowledge of action cameras. I read camera manufacturers' blurbs on their websites, specification sheets of component manufacturers, postings of knowledgeable people on sites like DCT, and I read and watch reviews. I want to understand, based on the questions I asked above, how a person can KNOW that a manufacturer's claims are false. If a person says that they KNOW that a camera's specs are false based on balance of probabilities, is that legitimate?
 
Last edited:
Mtz said:
When you will have poor image quality but with 3840x2160 resolution and real 30FPS you cannot accuse anymore the manufacturer for lies.
You will be lied by specs. 4K not means just a resolution and a FPS means a UltraHD quality, much better than actual FullHD, an image obtained from a bigger CMOS with very high standards.
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell, the only requirement to call a camera 4K Ultra HD according to the Consumer Technology Association is that it be capable of recording 3840 x 2160 at 24fps. By virtue of the resolution it should look better, but claiming compliance with 4K Ultra HD when you do in fact comply with 4K Ultra HD is not a lie. Just because a company makes a crappy product doesn't mean they've lied. It just means they made a crappy product.
 
Last edited:
TeriTerryTarry said:
I'm approaching this as somebody who doesn't have intimate industry knowledge and only a newbie's knowledge of action cameras. I read camera manufacturers' blurbs on their websites, specification sheets of component manufacturers, postings of knowledgeable people on sites like DCT, and I read and watch reviews. I want to understand, based on the questions I asked above, how a person can KNOW that a manufacturer's claims are false. If a person says that they KNOW that a camera's specs are false based on balance of probabilities, is that legitimate?
Click to expand...

a great deal of people don't know and that's exactly what these kinds of manufacturers rely on, consumers that take things at face value
 
jokiin said:
a great deal of people don't know and that's exactly what these kinds of manufacturers rely on, consumers that take things at face value
Click to expand...
I agree with you. My concerns are twofold. 1. Manufacturers can't be held ENTIRELY liable if customers don't even look at the box or the website to see if 4K is a name or a specification. If a camera called 4K is disclosed by the manufacturer as not being 4K, then the manufacturer can't be blamed for the consumer failing to do even the minimal amount of due diligence. In the US a Mazda 6 has a 4-cylinder engine as standard. A buyer can't say that the car should have had a 6-cylinder engine just because "6" was in the name. A buyer can't say the camera he bought should have been a GoPro instead of a Blackview just because it was called a Hero. 2. There seems to be a strong push in this discussion thread to say that cameras are fake 4K because they make lousy videos or because they simply must be. I've done it myself but I was wrong. It's possible many of the cameras are fake, I'm simply asking for the evidence. Just because a camera that claims to be 4K makes lousy videos doesn't mean it's not 4K unless you know that the sensor or the chip aren't capable of 4K, or unless the playback properties indicate it's not 4K. I'm personally prepared to believe knowledgeable people in the industry such as yourself and others on DCT even without concrete evidence. I'm disinclined to believe claims that a camera mustn't be 4K because of a price point (within reason) or because it makes lousy videos, unless the specifications are known.
 
Last edited:
Mtz said:
Will be more dangerous when a $50 chinese cheap camera will record 3840x2160 30FPS
Click to expand...
I will explain my quote:
1. Until now all reported fake 4K cameras have not all hardware components to record true 4K, like CMOS or Chipset which can record at native 4K.
- If you will see a 4K camera with CMOS like OV4689, AR0330, IMX078, IMX206 then for sure is not a true 4K camera. Some fakers know this and started to claim that their camera have IMX117 a CMOS which can do 4K, but in reality they are using the IMX078 CMOS just because is 12MP, same size as IMX117.
- If you will see a camera with NT96660 chipset then for sure is not a true 4K camera. Some of fakers will use some Allwinner chipset which is doing some internal resizing to 4K even from non-4K CMOS. This will result in next:
2. The dangerous thing from my quote is: when these fakers will offer real 4K as recorded video specifications but with poor quality image we can not accuse them anymore that are fakers. People will buy their poor products because are cheap, but at least will be not lied as specs. Just as video quality.

Unfortunately the 4K standard does not have a FPS standard which must be over 24FPS. Because of this the fakers are creating 4K videos at 10FPS-15FPS. Why not a 4K 3840x2160 at 1FPS?

For me seems that you like to have a cheap 4K camera which is recording as real 3840x2160 no matter if the video was resized by the poor Alwinner chipset from a non 4K CMOS, no matter if your video framerate just 15fps, no matter if your cheap 4K camera have worse video than a good FullHD video.
Sorry, but this thread is not for you, it will never keep you away to not buy a poor product no matter if have fake specs or not.

enjoy,
Mtz
 
Mtz said:
I will explain my quote:
1. Until now all reported fake 4K cameras have not all hardware components to record true 4K, like CMOS or Chipset which can record at native 4K.
- If you will see a 4K camera with CMOS like OV4689, AR0330, IMX078, IMX206 then for sure is not a true 4K camera. Some fakers know this and started to claim that their camera have IMX117 a CMOS which can do 4K, but in reality they are using the IMX078 CMOS just because is 12MP, same size as IMX117.
- If you will see a camera with NT96660 chipset then for sure is not a true 4K camera. Some of fakers will use some Allwinner chipset which is doing some internal resizing to 4K even from non-4K CMOS. This will result in next:
2. The dangerous thing from my quote is: when these fakers will offer real 4K as recorded video specifications but with poor quality image we can not accuse them anymore that are fakers. People will buy their poor products because are cheap, but at least will be not lied as specs. Just as video quality.

Unfortunately the 4K standard does not have a FPS standard which must be over 24FPS. Because of this the fakers are creating 4K videos at 10FPS-15FPS. Why not a 4K 3840x2160 at 1FPS?

For me seems that you like to have a cheap 4K camera which is recording as real 3840x2160 no matter if the video was resized by the poor Alwinner chipset from a non 4K CMOS, no matter if your video framerate just 15fps, no matter if your cheap 4K camera have worse video than a good FullHD video.
Sorry, but this thread is not for you, it will never keep you away to not buy a poor product no matter if have fake specs or not.

enjoy,
Mtz
Click to expand...
Let me reply point by point.

If you will see a 4K camera with CMOS like OV4689, AR0330, IMX078, IMX206 then for sure is not a true 4K camera. I agree. If a manufacturer says that their camera is 4K but discloses that it has these components then they're fakers.

Some fakers know this and started to claim that their camera have IMX117 a CMOS which can do 4K, but in reality they are using the IMX078 CMOS just because is 12MP, same size as IMX117. My question is, how can one know what's inside a camera unless: 1. one knows the industry and has this type of detailed knowledge or 2. one's seen seen a teardown of the camera or done so themselves. Otherwise how does one know who are fakers and who aren't based on internal components?

If you will see a camera with NT96660 chipset then for sure is not a true 4K camera. Some of fakers will use some Allwinner chipset which is doing some internal resizing to 4K even from non-4K CMOS. I haven't seen the specifications for the Novatek 96660. However, other knowledgeable people on DCT have said this chipset is not capable of true 4K. I accept this. I agree that the Allwinner V3 chipset is not capable of 4K based on the specifications I've seen. If a manufacturer discloses that they use either the NT96660 or the Allwinner V3 but claim their camera is 4K then they're fakers.

But the question arises, if a manufacturer claims it's a 4K camera, and if the playback details indicate 3840 x 2160 at 24fps, but the manufacturer doesn't disclose the sensor or the chipset, how can one know that the hardware doesn't support 4K? There's no indication to the contrary. It might very well be true that the resolution is interpolated or the frame rate doubled, but you can't tell that from the information that's available. If it makes lousy 4K videos, does it belong on the fake 4K list just because of poor video quality?

The dangerous thing from my quote is: when these fakers will offer real 4K as recorded video specifications but with poor quality image we can not accuse them anymore that are fakers. People will buy their poor products because are cheap, but at least will be not lied as specs. Just as video quality. People buy cheap, lousy products all the time. As long as there is cheap, there will be lousy. This can't be blamed on manufacturers. If they make cameras that comply with the requirements of 4K Ultra HD, then they can make such a claim and it will be truthful. No less than any other product, if people fail to do even a minimal amount of research then they bear part of the responsibility for buying a lousy product.

Unfortunately the 4K standard does not have a FPS standard which must be over 24FPS. Because of this the fakers are creating 4K videos at 10FPS-15FPS. Why not a 4K 3840x2160 at 1FPS? The Consumer Technology Association says that 4K Ultra HD must be at least 24fps. If a manufacturer claims their camera is 4K then even if the video resolution is a native 3840 x 2160 but the frame rate is only 10fps-15fps, then they're fakers.

The only cameras I own are SJ4000's. 4K capabilities obviously aren't an issue. I just think it's important to understand exactly what constitutes a fake and what does not. Lacking evidence, how can one say that a camera is a fake?
 
Examples:
- The M20 camera was advertised with IMX117. Somebody disassembled and when comparing its CMOS with real IMX117 from GoPro, was different. Fake!
Also I asked some seller to show me video details and he was showing me details from QuickTime player which is showing interpolated resolution not the real. But when asking for original video even 3 seconds I saw the real resolution was 2880x2160. Fake!

- XiaoMi or XiaoYi or Yi dashcam was advertised with A12 chipset. After people feedback from their Action Cam they discovered that is a demanding for the Ambarella A12 chipset because it was used by GoPro. So they started to claim the camera is with A12 chipset, in reality being a cheaper variant of NT96660. This was easy to prove by camera sounds, font of date/time, other things. Also they advertised a fake resolution of 1296p which cannot be done by their CMOS. Fake!

- Some of us knows from the launching of NT96660 chipset which is the most used in actual cameras that it was not supporting IMX117. So when I see a camera with IMX117 I just need the proof that the CMOS is not real. When NT96660 will support IMX117 will be harder to discover the fakers.

- When NT96660 will support IMX117 will be not easy for fakers to buy it because is expensive so they cannot sell a cheap camera anymore. So they will keep the cheating way.
But if for example NT96660 is not able to record 4K, why to use an expensive 4K CMOS?

This thread is for people who care about their money and like to study before buy. Most of them are buying only by looking at descriptions, some are discovering this thread after receiving the camera and being disappointed and want to help other people to not buy a poor product.

This thread is showing the power of forums when its members are adding info to help the others. And with the help from insiders from China or some manufacturers like JooVuu, jokiin, gitup which are adding value to this forum compared to other manufacturers which are coming here only to sell.

enjoy,
Mz
 
TeriTerryTarry said:
But the question arises, if a manufacturer claims it's a 4K camera, and if the playback details indicate 3840 x 2160 at 24fps, but the manufacturer doesn't disclose the sensor or the chipset, how can one know that the hardware doesn't support 4K? There's no indication to the contrary. It might very well be true that the resolution is interpolated or the frame rate doubled, but you can't tell that from the information that's available. If it makes lousy 4K videos, does it belong on the fake 4K list just because of poor video quality?
Click to expand...
I guess you can never be sure, but does it matter why it is poor quality? What matters is that it is poor quality, your 4K videos are not going to do justice to your 4K TV. If an HD resolution camera is producing better image quality than a UHD resolution camera then that is all that really matters when deciding which camera to buy, it doesn't matter if the poor quality is produced by a low resolution lens, a low resolution sensor, low resolution firmware, a low power processor or something else, it is still a poor quality image.

A separate issue to the image quality is that some manufacturers are not telling the truth in their descriptions, specifications and even names, and that is not just with the resolution, they can tell lies about other specifications too.

In most cases you can tell, if you zoom in on an image then a real 4K camera, even if it is a poor one will normally have good detail down to individual pixels at some position in the image, if the poor image is caused by a poor lens then it will normally be OK in the centre and bad at the sides, if it is caused by being out of focus then it will normally be in focus at some point if the image includes very close objects as well as very distance objects and even if it is focused beyond the horizon then the closer objects will be more out of focus than the distant ones so you can see that it is a focus issue.

A true 4K camera using the IMX117 will produce images that if you put an HD image next to a UHD image and zoom in on the centre of the image so that the pixels from each are shown on your screen at the same size then you will not be able to see the difference in quality of the pixels, the only difference will be that the image will be 4x the size. Although on the real 4K IMX117 camera I was looking at yesterday even the HD image appeared interpolated, turned out that it was, when set to 1080 120fps it couldn't manage real 1080 although it can manage real UHD 30fps! So does that mean that GoPro are not telling the truth when they claim 1080 120fps for their Hero 4? Maybe we should boycott GoPro?
 
Nigel said:
A separate issue to the image quality is that some manufacturers are not telling the truth in their descriptions, specifications and even names, and that is not just with the resolution, they can tell lies about other specifications too.
Click to expand...
He is not interested about image quality because he is expecting to read here only technical details and proofs about fakes. This thread is not with advice which camera have best image or what to buy. In some way I understand him.

He is feeling more comfortable if a manufacturer is not offering any details about chipset used or CMOS but the recorded image is real 4K 3840x2160, framerate is not important.
Most of poor chinese manufacturers are nor offering such details and if some of them which are smarter will not offer such details anymore from now just to hide their fake 4K from smart people which know to judge a camera just by reading the specs.

Regarding image quality, the only thing we can not know just by reading the specs is the quality of lens. You can have two cameras with same specs but one can have better image just because of the lens. Here we don't have brand names so evident to judge a camera quality before buying, we need some other people to post their samples and feedback. But for example Sony is using Carl Zeiss lens which can assure you in some way about good image quality.

I know also that some manufacturers like @gitup and Mobius are searching a lot to offer the best lens they can find, unfortunately for them are not a brand name lenses like Zeiss so if somebody is comparing their cameras with other with same specs they don't find a reason to buy their products with better lens than others and maybe to spend more money on their cameras.

We need some brand names also for lenses, 6G or 7G or 13G can write any faker on their sites even their lenses are plastic.

enjoy,
Mtz
 
Mtz said:
We need some brand names also for lenses, 6G or 7G or 13G can write any faker on their sites even their lenses are plastic.
Click to expand...

which lens you use is the one thing you don't want to give away too much detail about unfortunately
 
Yes, because in some way you need to protect your good image quality to not be copied easy by anybody after your hard work to find a good one. But if on your lens is wrote Carl Zeiss then is no problem.

highres-carl-zeiss-sonnar-t-18-24-tstar-6_1366281509.webp


enjoy,
Mtz
 
one issue is to protect your source, the other issue if you did share the specification no doubt someone would copy the detail and use in their advertising even without having the same lens
 
Nigel,

What you said: A separate issue to the image quality is that some manufacturers are not telling the truth in their descriptions, specifications and even names, and that is not just with the resolution, they can tell lies about other specifications too.

What I said: As with all products, some will perform better than others, even when they have identical specs. That has been, is now and for the foreseeable future will be as true for action cameras as for any other product. Separately there is the issue of whether or not a product is making false claims.

We are in agreement on this point. Indeed I agree with the entirety of your posting above.
 
Mtz,

What you said: You can have two cameras with same specs but one can have better image just because of the lens.

What I said: As with all products, some will perform better than others, even when they have identical specs.

I agree with you!
 
Mtz,

What you said: Some of us knows from the launching of NT96660 chipset which is the most used in actual cameras that it was not supporting IMX117.

What I said: I haven't seen the specifications for the Novatek 96660. However, other knowledgeable people on DCT have said this chipset is not capable of true 4K. I accept this.

We agree!

What you said: So when I see a camera with IMX117 I just need the proof that the CMOS is not real. You need proof!

What I said: My question is, how can one know what's inside a camera unless: 1. one knows the industry and has this type of detailed knowledge or 2. one's seen a teardown of the camera or done so themselves. Otherwise how does one know who are fakers and who aren't based on internal components? I need proof!

We agree!
 
Mtz,

What you said: He is feeling more comfortable if a manufacturer is not offering any details about chipset used or CMOS but the recorded image is real 4K 3840x2160, framerate is not important.

NOT TRUE!

Here's what I said: The Consumer Technology Association says that 4K Ultra HD must be at least 24fps. If a manufacturer claims their camera is 4K then even if the video resolution is a native 3840 x 2160 but the frame rate is only 10fps-15fps, then they're fakers.

I also said: It's obvious that time and again Chinese action camera manufacturers have made false claims. Some do not have the hardware they claim. Some can't perform as they claim. Some make claims but with caveats tucked away somewhere in a manual or on their web page.
- AND -
My point has been and continues to be only this: When one says that a camera manufacturer is making false claims, how do you KNOW that those claims are false? It can't be based just on the quality of the videos or photos. Cameras with verifiably better hardware and verifiably better specs can still have lower quality videos and photos than lesser cameras.

And yet you say: He is not interested about image quality because he is expecting to read here only technical details and proofs about fakes. This thread is not with advice which camera have best image or what to buy. In some way I understand him.

Consistently and repeatedly I have expressed my interest in the quality of videos and photos, the truth or dishonesty of manufacturers, and the actual facts of hardware and specifications. I regret I haven't been able to make this clear to you. I can see I'm beating a dead horse at this point so I'll probably stop posting comments along this line.
 
TeriTerryTarry said:
I can see I'm beating a dead horse at this point so I'll probably stop posting comments along this line.
Click to expand...

I don't think so, but some constructive feedback (no offence meant) if you use the reply function when you post and want to quote what people have said it would be much easier (for me at least) to follow what you're saying 🙂
 
jokiin said:
I don't think so, but some constructive feedback (no offence meant) if you use the reply function when you post and want to quote what people have said it would be much easier (for me at least) to follow what you're saying 🙂
Click to expand...
I agree with you jokiin, but my feeling is that the posts are getting longer and longer but without any progress. I was also quoting from more than one post in order to make the same point. The fact is I agree with much of what Mtz is saying but can't seem to convince him. He's also assuming that I hold certain views that in fact I do not and I've expressly said so. Since the disagreement is principally with Mtz, not with anybody else, I don't think it's appropriate to continue here.
 
TeriTerryTarry said:
When one says that a camera manufacturer is making false claims, how do you KNOW that those claims are false?
Click to expand...
And I replied to you in my previous post how some of us are discovering the fakes.

From your post my conclusion was something like you are not trusting us with proofs that cameras have fake 4K but you trust manufacturers description and we should believe them. I can not believe a manufacturer which is selling a $80 camera advertised with IMX117 and I will start thinking that is fake. Then I search for proofs for my idea. All reported cameras are based on facts, not intuition.
If some well known member from a forum or a trusted person is telling me that a camera with IMX117 should cost at least $150 I believe him without any proof because seems logical.

enjoy,
Mtz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top