VIOFO A139 Pro - Testing / Review Info

[Nigel]

I just updated that statement to be: "In my opinion, powering the A139 Pro 3-channel configuration with the HK3-C hardwire kit using fuse taps to source power from your vehicle's fuse box would not be recommended if you're intending on getting a decent amount of parking mode recording time."

There will be no problems if you use the parking mode timer to limit the battery use to maybe 3 hours, and for many people this is perfectly acceptable. Maybe another update to your recommendation is justified?

What happened to the Geofencing feature for parking mode?

For people who want 24/7 recording then yes, their car battery will struggle to achieve that when using 3 channels, and their dashcam battery will too!

Interestingly, it is not particularly thirsty on power when used as a 1 channel dashcam. Maybe it is worth having a parking mode setting for 2 channel only, although I suspect a lot of people buying the 3 channel version will want the interior to record thieves inside the car?

 

[Julian23]

There will be no problems if you use the parking mode timer to limit the battery use to maybe 3 hours, and for many people this is perfectly acceptable. Maybe another update to your recommendation is justified?

I personally need 8-9h parking mode when the car is not parked at home. There have been hit and runs, vandalism and more where my car is parked. Luckily my car is equipped with a 90Ah battery that handles this without any issues currently.

I suspect a lot of people buying the 3 channel version will want the interior to record thieves inside the car?

The interior camera also covers door dings and other stuff that happens directly next to your car that can't be captured by the front or rear.

 

[rcg530]

There will be no problems if you use the parking mode timer to limit the battery use to maybe 3 hours, and for many people this is perfectly acceptable. Maybe another update to your recommendation is justified?

I think my current statement about using the vehicle's battery as the power source using fuse taps for the HK3-C to power parking mode operations for the 3-channel camera is accurate.

I understand that some users will use the parking mode timer to turn off their dash camera after a short period of time and that matches up well with their driving patterns. My concern is for what I consider the more typical user that drives their car to/from work or a commuting parking lot where their vehicle will be parked for 8 to 12 hours. Setting the parking mode timer to turn off the dash camera after only a few hours doesn't really make sense to me in that situation. Knowing my luck, the thing I would need to capture on camera while being parked would happen just after the parking mode timer turns off the dash camera.

What happened to the Geofencing feature for parking mode?

I just checked my A139 Pro v1.0_1105 firmware and I don't see that feature.

For people who want 24/7 recording then yes, their car battery will struggle to achieve that when using 3 channels, and their dashcam battery will too!

I agree. That's why I wanted to get estimated dash camera battery pack runtimes to show that a 3-channel A139 Pro will need 1 or 2 battery packs to get through a 8 to 12 hour parking session.

Interestingly, it is not particularly thirsty on power when used as a 1 channel dashcam. Maybe it is worth having a parking mode setting for 2 channel only, although I suspect a lot of people buying the 3 channel version will want the interior to record thieves inside the car?

It would be interesting to see an option to turn off the interior camera in parking mode. It would also be nice to disable the GPS module in parking mode to save power.

 

[Nigel]

I agree. That's why I wanted to get estimated dash camera battery pack runtimes to show that a 3-channel A139 Pro will need 1 or 2 battery packs to get through a 8 to 12 hour parking session.

I'm not sure these extension batteries help much for a lot of people because the charge times are so long when using the extensions. They are OK if you only sometimes use the extension pack power, such as over a weekend, but the A139 3-channel (both standard and Pro) probably want to use most of the extension pack every night. So just saying that it needs 2 battery packs is maybe not helpful?

 

[Deleted member 64174]

...

 

[rcg530]

I'm not sure these extension batteries help much for a lot of people because the charge times are so long when using the extensions. They are OK if you only sometimes use the extension pack power, such as over a weekend, but the A139 3-channel (both standard and Pro) probably want to use most of the extension pack every night. So just saying that it needs 2 battery packs is maybe not helpful?

The vehicle owner‘s driving habits play into whether any of the potential power sources for a dash camera that is run in parking mode will be sufficient to their parking mode runtime needs.

If the vehicle is driven on short 5 to 10 minute trips, then no power source, vehicle battery included, will be sufficient to power any dash camera in parking mode over the long haul. Short trips don’t fully charge the vehicle’s battery, nor a single dash camera battery and especially it won’t fully dash camera battery pack installation with multiple battery packs.

The drive cycle / charge time requirements to charge the power source (vehicle battery or dash camera battery pack(s)) is something that needs to be examined for every dash camera installation requiring parking mode support.

An installation that requires multiple dash camera battery packs to achieve the amount of parking mode recording time will need to meet the charge time requirements for the number of battery packs in use which usually means 1 to 2 hours of drive time to achieve a full charge level. A single battery pack often can take 50 minutes to 90 minutes of drive time to get a full charge (low amp vs high amp charge circuit).

With the A139 Pro 3-channel configuration requiring as much power that it does for all three parking modes, the buyer must review and be realistic about how long they want parking mode to work and will their driving habits support that on a repetitive basis.

 

[Lothar]

I suspect someone copied and pasted rather than doing the maths, and the rather low bitrate for the 1600 can be improved, assuming it is correctly recorded...

Possibly...
I see that there seems to be a hard-coded total limit of 55-58Mbps among all the cameras when running in 3CH regardless of whether 1600P or 2100P resolution.
There is a hard-coded total limit of 60Mbps in 2CH mode at 2100P resolution.

Given the above, I don't see any valid reason as to why there should be a hard coded total limit of only 44Mbps in 2CH mode at 1600P resolution. They should have room to increase the front camera bitrate in 2CH mode to at least 44Mbps at 1600P resolution (okay...now I see where the mistake could have come from) 44Mbps+16Mbps = 60Mbps. The Viofo firmware intern may have used 44Mbps for the "total" camera output to do their back of envelope calculations rather than a total output of 60Mbps which is likely what was supposed to be used.

If this is not an error at all and it is indeed intentional, then it does not make a lick of sense to run at 1600P in 2CH mode.
So the more interesting comparison for me in 2CH mode would be:
3840x2100 = 8,064,000 pixels
2K 1440P (2560x1440) = 3,686,400 pixels

3840x2100 = 44.86Mbps bitrate for the front camera in 2CH mode
2K 1440P (2560x1440) = 58.46Mbps bitrate!!! for the front camera in 2CH mode at this resolution while having to display only half of the total pixels which seems out of this world 😀

Much more bitrates to use while having to display less resolution (or half the number of pixels) should be a massive increase in IQ quality.
Hoping to see an original (without YouTube compression preferred) head to head (side by side) video match-up at some point of the A139 Pro (4K 2100P 44.86Mbps vs 2K 58.46Mbps) both day and night with HDR, but I know that is asking for too much as it is unlikely that any reviewer here has 2 front/rear camera units of the A139 Pro.

The image quality is surprisingly good at lower bitrates though, I'm not sure that everyone will want to run it set to maximum bitrate all the time, sometimes more recording time, or more reliability from the memory card is preferable.

Doesn't apply to me as I always run the maximum bitrate on any camera that I use all the time. If I'm spending that much money on it, why not?

If I want more recording, I would get a bigger SD card.
Reliability? I would stick with SanDisk MAX Endurance or the Viofo branded memory card and nothing else. I have some spares that I can use while I deal with the RMA of any memory card that fails.

 

[joe384]

Yes, I'd be interested to know whether the bitrate for 2ch mode @1600p can be improved (and whether it actually makes much difference) as I would probably use it in a 2ch configuration if I ever buy one.

Also as @Lothar mentioned, would be nice to see front camera modes in a head to head battle, to see what gets the best overall results, the higher bitrate or resolution?

 

[kamkar]

I remember testing bitrate firmware's for the X camera, and around 28 mbit for this 1080p camera was where you started to notice no change.
This was mainly looking at blocking as a result of going thru a extra high detail area.
As i recall these firmwares whent as far as 40 mbit, and so generating record large 3 minute long files, as i recall these was about 1 GB in size

 

[TonyM]

I see that there seems to be a hard-coded total limit of 55-58Mbps among all the cameras when running in 3CH regardless of whether 1600P or 2100P resolution.
There is a hard-coded total limit of 60Mbps in 2CH mode at 2100P resolution.

Given the above, I don't see any valid reason as to why there should be a hard coded total limit of only 44Mbps in 2CH mode at 1600P resolution. They should have room to increase the front camera bitrate in 2CH mode to at least 44Mbps at 1600P resolution (okay...now I see where the mistake could have come from) 44Mbps+16Mbps = 60Mbps. The Viofo firmware intern may have used 44Mbps for the "total" camera output to do their back of envelope calculations rather than a total output of 60Mbps which is likely what was supposed to be used.

Remember that you are looking at bitrate figures from a pre-release FW version. Viofo may not have optimised every resolution combination yet. I would not be surprised if the total bitrate in 2CH 1600P ends up in the region of 60Mbps similar to all the other channel & resolution combinations.

 

[kamkar]

Indeed the SOC will only do so much bitrate, i just hope that it will be maxed out, or at least kept at sensible levels for the individual setups.

60 mbit for a single 4K camera, at least if it is H.265 or AV1 it will be plenty if not a bit overkill maybe.
Granted my dji osmo action do 100 mbit, but i cant recall if that is in H.265 or H.264, it do seem to be enough though having tried it in the windscreen recording 4K/60 footage.
Now i dont need 4K/60 but i will take 4K/30 HDR.

 

[rcg530]

A139 Pro - 3840x2160 vs 3840x1600 Field of View Comparison

Here's a couple of screenshots showing theA139 Pro front camera's 3840x2160 vs 3840x1600 video resolutions. The video captured in the parking lot was when I switched from 2160 to 1600 and the on the road video was recorded on two different drives on the same road - within a few minutes of each other since I only have one A139 Pro.

Parking lot


On the road

 

[Mtz]

If you will want to judge the quality of the image you need to set the horizon at exactly the middle of the screen. You can use the preview APP to find the middle. You can easy find where is the middle of the smartphone screen and adjust the lens.
Your actual snapshots contain too much road.

I asked Viofo many times few years ago to implement a middle line in the middle of the screen APP or on the camera screen. That was the best way to help people adjusting correct their dashcams. Viofo firmware developers are adjusting the exposure at 50% sky and 50% road. If the user lens will be adjusted in another position then their values are not properly anymore. If you as very experienced user not adjusted the lens as it is expected by the firmware developer, what to expect from average Joe?

Viofo released just one beta firmware for A119 V3 with that middle line to help people adjusting their lens and was done very good, everything was like I proposed. Then maybe some users blamed what is that fcking line (which was on the screen only few seconds after camera is starting) and Viofo stopped allowing the Horizon Line Adjustment in all future firmwares from all their dashcams. A great idea was just killed forever. Of course it was never implemented on APP too.
The result of no HLA on the screen is people adjusting improperly the lens angle.

I know from old times when image sensors were poor that was better to put more road than the sky to make the image brighter. On Viofo dashcams this is not needed.

 

[rcg530]

If you will want to judge the quality of the image you need to set the horizon at exactly the middle of the screen. You can use the preview APP to find the middle. You can easy find where is the middle of the smartphone screen and adjust the lens.
Your actual snapshots contain too much road.

No matter where I place the horizon line someone always complains it's too high or too low. I ran into the "too much sky" aiming issue with BlackVue while chasing (still chasing) their RC110F rear camera (included in multi channel X Plus dash cameras) underexposure problem. I'm well aware of how to use the app live view to set the aim of the cameras. 🙂

 

[Dashmellow]

No matter where I place the horizon line someone always complains it's too high or too low. I ran into the "too much sky" aiming issue with BlackVue while chasing (still chasing) their RC110F rear camera (included in multi channel X Plus dash cameras). I'm well aware of how to use the app live view to set the aim of the cameras. 🙂

Personally, over many years I've found horizon adjustment for dash cams to be highly variable based on two factors, the AE tables of the particular camera and the size and color of the hood of the vehicle. I drive a very dark blue truck with a hood that projects well into the image and it often requires a particular angle of adjustment. The identical set-up with the same vehicle only white or light colored will often require a somewhat different angle of adjustment for optimal exposure. A single adjustment "rule" never seems to work in all situations.

 

[Mtz]

When you are testing 2 cameras on the same cars no matter the color of the hood. I remember somebody was making a comparison between two cameras, one was tested after a fresh snow and another on the same road but it was dry.
Also you should not care about AE tables because it is not your business as a buyer to know anything about AE table. You just buy the dashcam and mount it on the windshield. If some manufacturer have some very special AE table then he can put the HLA on the screen and user will align the lens accordingly to that line.

No matter where I place the horizon line someone always complains it's too high or too low.

You know very well that if you will point lower a dashcam when comparing to another dashcam which will have more sky in the image, that comparison will be not fair. When making comparison it is very important to be unbiased and show the general situation not some specific scene which is in advantage for one or for another. When I read car license plates on different dashcams or different firmwares it is not important to have the opposite car at exactly the same place, but is more important to show to the people the best video frame where the license can be read. Usually it is happening exactly at the same place, but if it will be different then must be chosen the best position for that camera.
I consider the best situation as a tester and YouTuber with many viewers is to align all your testing cameras with 50% sky and 50% road, on a street which is allowing this, without trees or buildings. Then everything you will do will be fair and helpful, no matter the color of the motor hood.

The trick with smartphone is not only to align the camera by looking at the screen, but to take snapshots from every camera alignment and then by swiping the snapshots to the left to compare the levels of the horizon from all cameras. This trick can be used also for what is saying Dashmellow, to compare the exposure for some fine adjustment in case your non-tests dashcam have better exposure for some other position than 50% sky - 50% road.

Here is a proof of a correct alignment, the front car is exactly at the same level.

 

[rcg530]

@Mtz my screenshots are from the same A139 Pro dash camera with the same FOV alignment just one at 3840x2160 resolution and one at 3840x1600 resolution. Since that date, I've adjusted the FOV upward to get the desired 50%/50% mixture of sky/ground. It's been raining in Northern California (a miracle) the past few days, so I've not been able to get any recent daytime or nighttime video with the adjusted FOV.

 

[Dashmellow]

When you are testing 2 cameras on the same cars no matter the color of the hood. I remember somebody was making a comparison between two cameras, one was tested after a fresh snow and another on the same road but it was dry.
Also you should not care about AE tables because it is not your business as a buyer to know anything about AE table. You just buy the dashcam and mount it on the windshield. If some manufacturer have some very special AE table then he can put the HLA on the screen and user will align the lens accordingly to that line.


You know very well that if you will point lower a dashcam when comparing to another dashcam which will have more sky in the image, that comparison will be not fair. When making comparison it is very important to be unbiased and show the general situation not some specific scene which is in advantage for one or for another. When I read car license plates on different dashcams or different firmwares it is not important to have the opposite car at exactly the same place, but is more important to show to the people the best video frame where the license can be read. Usually it is happening exactly at the same place, but if it will be different then must be chosen the best position for that camera.
I consider the best situation as a tester and YouTuber with many viewers is to align all your testing cameras with 50% sky and 50% road, on a street which is allowing this, without trees or buildings. Then everything you will do will be fair and helpful, no matter the color of the motor hood.

The trick with smartphone is not only to align the camera by looking at the screen, but to take snapshots from every camera alignment and then by swiping the snapshots to the left to compare the levels of the horizon from all cameras. This trick can be used also for what is saying Dashmellow, to compare the exposure for some fine adjustment in case your non-tests dashcam have better exposure for some other position than 50% sky - 50% road.

Here is a proof of a correct alignment, the front car is exactly at the same level.

I agree with the idea that for comparisons during camera testing/review one should use a consistent aiming methodology throughout compared to an individual user making adjustments according to their particular dash cam installation circumstances.

 

[viofo]

Possibly...
I see that there seems to be a hard-coded total limit of 55-58Mbps among all the cameras when running in 3CH regardless of whether 1600P or 2100P resolution.
There is a hard-coded total limit of 60Mbps in 2CH mode at 2100P resolution.

Given the above, I don't see any valid reason as to why there should be a hard coded total limit of only 44Mbps in 2CH mode at 1600P resolution. They should have room to increase the front camera bitrate in 2CH mode to at least 44Mbps at 1600P resolution (okay...now I see where the mistake could have come from) 44Mbps+16Mbps = 60Mbps. The Viofo firmware intern may have used 44Mbps for the "total" camera output to do their back of envelope calculations rather than a total output of 60Mbps which is likely what was supposed to be used.

If this is not an error at all and it is indeed intentional, then it does not make a lick of sense to run at 1600P in 2CH mode.
So the more interesting comparison for me in 2CH mode would be:
3840x2100 = 8,064,000 pixels
2K 1440P (2560x1440) = 3,686,400 pixels

3840x2100 = 44.86Mbps bitrate for the front camera in 2CH mode
2K 1440P (2560x1440) = 58.46Mbps bitrate!!! for the front camera in 2CH mode at this resolution while having to display only half of the total pixels which seems out of this world 😀

Much more bitrates to use while having to display less resolution (or half the number of pixels) should be a massive increase in IQ quality.
Hoping to see an original (without YouTube compression preferred) head to head (side by side) video match-up at some point of the A139 Pro (4K 2100P 44.86Mbps vs 2K 58.46Mbps) both day and night with HDR, but I know that is asking for too much as it is unlikely that any reviewer here has 2 front/rear camera units of the A139 Pro.


Doesn't apply to me as I always run the maximum bitrate on any camera that I use all the time. If I'm spending that much money on it, why not?

If I want more recording, I would get a bigger SD card.
Reliability? I would stick with SanDisk MAX Endurance or the Viofo branded memory card and nothing else. I have some spares that I can use while I deal with the RMA of any memory card that fails.

Normally we don't want to set limitations for the bitrate, but sometimes we have to. Like on A129 Pro, it can support up to 4K 60Mbps + FHD 16Mbps.

It seems VIOFO 4K dashcam video bitrate is already the highest compared to others.

According to our after-sales report, most of the recording issues are caused by the memory card, if using a very high bitrate for 2 or 3 channels recording, it will cause more recording issues.
Some people don't understand why they need a better memory card, and why they need to use the recommended memory card.
You can find many negative reviews under Amazon dashcam reviews.

 

[kamkar]

Yes.
I have been thinking if it would be a good idea to have a recommended meory card list very prominent on the box or in the manual, it is after all something that can fast ruin the experience, or at worst make the system useless.