Viofo A129 Plus - the third Viofo dashcam with 21:9 UltraWide aspect ratio

Mtz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
4,257
Reaction score
2,923
Location
Nice place
Country
Romania
Dash Cam
Viofo A229 Pro TeleQuad
Seems that Viofo will become a standard regarding Ultra Wide dashcams. Implementing new features requested by the users on existing models is making Viofo a trusted brand.
UltraWide 1080, WFHD, 2560 x 1080, Wikipedia.
I don't know how many Novatek dashcams are offering 21:9 aspect ratio and I consider Viofo can make a good decision to implement it on 2K dashcams because the final result is 2560x1080, so it is not under 1080p resolution to make some people worrying that 21:9 aspect ratio is not even Full HD.
I am big fan of 21:9 aspect ratio. Also I am fan of 30FPS instead of 60FPS and the 21:9 mode is only 30FPS in this firmware for testing.

Until now Viofo was offering the Ultra Wide 21:9 aspect ratio only for Viofo A129 Pro as: 3840x1600p 30FPS = 4K 21:9 (43mbps: 1min = 300MB)
In a testing firmware for Viofo A119 V3, Viofo introduced a new resolution as: 2560x1080p 30FPS = 2K 21:9 (32mbps: 1min = 220MB)
The Ultra Wide parameters for Viofo A129 Plus are: 2560x1080p 30FPS = 2K 21:9 (32mbps: 1min = 220MB)

Viofo A119 V3 vs Viofo A129 Plus 21:9 aspect ratio comparison:

Here you can see the differences between 21:9 and 16:9 modes on the same Viofo dashcam:

The advantages of 21:9 aspect ratio (which I am using always!) are:
1. same bitrate as for 16:9 is used also for 21:9 which means more Bits/(Pixel*Frame) and the result should be better image for 21.9 compared to 16:9
2. sky and dashboard and engine hood are not important and in 21:9 mode are less, no bitrate wasted to encode unnecessary parts of the image
3. nice Cinema Mode looking of the videos, nice option for vloggers or when you want to record a trip
4. for 2 channels models will be more nice to combine as stack vertical 2 videos recorded as 21:9, see another example.
5. no 60FPS mode. Please do not start forum fight against me, it is my opinion and nobody will change it with any dashcam released until 2021!

The only disadvantage can be for some people which can be afraid that the traffic lights will not appear if they are stopped into the first position. But you can put Pause on this video at 00:36 and see that common traffic lights are recorded into the video without any problems. Of course, for some „people” the black bars of a 21:9 video which appear at the top and the bottom of their 16:9 TV can be annoying.


List of ultrawide "21:9" monitor resolutions
Common nameTechnical nameAspect ratioResolution
WHDultrawide 72043∶1821½∶92.381720 × 720
WHD+ultrawide 90012∶521⅗∶92.42160 × 900
WFHDultrawide 108064∶2721⅓∶92.3702560 × 1080
WFHD+ultrawide 120012∶521⅗∶92.42880 × 1200
WQHDultrawide 144043∶1821½∶92.383440 × 1440
UW 1600ultrawide 160012∶521⅗∶92.43840 × 1600
WQHD+ultrawide 180012∶521⅗∶92.44320 × 1800
WUHDultrawide 216064∶2721⅓∶92.3705120 × 2160
UW 5Kultrawide 240012∶521⅗∶92.45760 × 2400
UW 6Kultrawide 288043∶1821½∶92.386880 × 2880
UW 10Kultrawide 432064∶2721⅓∶92.37010240 × 4320

enjoy,
Mtz
 
is this 21:9 mode simply cropped? If you’re not getting any additional detail due to sensor limitations, i can’t see why or how it would be useful, with the exception of a smaller file size.
 
Not smaller file size, because bitrate is the same, ~25Mbps in H265 or ~30Mbps in H264. You'll have somehow better encoding quality, more bits for less pixels, though I didn't notice any difference. ;)
 
is this 21:9 mode simply cropped? If you’re not getting any additional detail due to sensor limitations, i can’t see why or how it would be useful, with the exception of a smaller file size.

It's not simply cropped as you might do with editing programs. It reduces the amount of sky being 'seen' and used by the cam processor so there's less chance of overexposure from a bright sky, and based on cam aim might reduce some dash reflections too. With Viofo cams being good at handling exposure already there won't be a lot of improvement but anything gained in vid quality is worthwhile :cool:

Phil
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mtz
is this 21:9 mode simply cropped? If you’re not getting any additional detail due to sensor limitations, i can’t see why or how it would be useful, with the exception of a smaller file size.
You didn't read the first post. Was too long or wasn't explained well? Which information you expect to be added there? Or you want more people to repeat the same things?
Nobody is forcing you to use a feature which you don't like. Adding the 21:9 feature is not affecting other features so if you like to have more sky and more motor hood in your videos you can use 16:9 as before and you will not lose any advantage you already have.
It is just a new option for the people which understand it's benefits. Some people will not agree with that benefits so they will not use it. Freedom of choice.

enjoy,
Mtz
 
is this 21:9 mode simply cropped?
Probably it uses only a part of the sensor (exactly 2590x1080 pixels), instead of native resolution (2592x 1944) of it and then a crop from it. So it's probably not an ordinary crop, though I have some doubt.
 
Last edited:
Not an ordinary crop- this was my initial concern as that would not produce benefits in image quality. It is implemented where it can have benefit by removing the unnecessary parts of the sensor signal which might reduce video quality due to exposure of unnecessary parts of what the cam "sees".

Choice is good- use this if you want to and don't use it if you don't want to.

Phil
 
Not smaller file size, because bitrate is the same, ~25Mbps in H265 or ~30Mbps in H264. You'll have somehow better encoding quality, more bits for less pixels, though I didn't notice any difference. ;)
Then, using the 21:9, you can also reduce the bitrate setting one step without seeing any difference, and that will give longer record times and less memory card wear.

If you are using a high bitrate then you should only see the effect of improved bits per pixel when driving fast under trees.
 
Then, using the 21:9...
Yes, both of your assertions are true, but... As far as I know and tested, the golden figure for good quality in 4k@30fps is min. 100Mbps (in H265). So, because the resolution is about a quarter, for 2k 25Mbps would be the golden figure. I always will use highest bitrate, because whenever the lossy compression is involved, more (M)bits doesn't never mean that they are wasted.
 
So, because the resolution is about a quarter, for 2k...
Actually about half, and I think the modern codecs do a bit better, and the last bit is normally only for colour accuracy and clarity, which isn't too important for dashcam evidence purposes, only for movie making.
 
I've just looked at my A119 resolution list and I can't see any 21:9.

Which one is it ?
 
Actually about half, and I think the modern codecs do a bit better... which isn't too important for dashcam evidence purposes, only for movie making.
If compared with 21:9 (2.764 Mpix), 4k UHD (8.294 Mpix) is 3 times larger... we splitted the difference between opinions. ;) In that case the optimal bitrate would be ~33 Mbps in H265.
Some people (including me) would be happy to have a so-called all-in-one or at least multi featured camera, not only for traffic. For example, I'll try to use my A129+ to capture timelapses (like these), I checked the feature and works good. I already make for it a small adapter to mount it on a tripod. :D

I've just looked at my A119 resolution list and I can't see any 21:9.

Which one is it ?

2560x1080
 
Last edited:
If compared with 21:9 (2.764 Mpix), 4k UHD (8.294 Mpix) is 3 times larger...
Not if it is 21:9 4K ;)
I already make for it a small adapter to mount it on a tripod. :D
I use a GoPro Hero 4 frame to hold my A129 Pro for 4K on a tripod, but I need a slower shutter speed for movies:


And A129 widescreen:

 
Back
Top