VIOFO A229 Pro - Testing / Review - RCG

[rcg530]

If your Mini2 is some old version you have the old version of lens, actually the Mini2 has other lens.

My A119 Mini 2 cameras are the ones with the updated lens. If you check out my A119 Mini 2 review thread on this site, you'll see all the details of my testing and delayed review until I received the updated units with the updated lens.

Also people should consider that Mini2 image setup is for recording the front image. The rear cameras should have more brightness because there is less light. This is why comparing a rear camera with a front camera will give visible different results.

I installed one of my A119 Mini 2 dash cameras on the rear window per a request from @Panzer Platform to compare the video from A229 Pro rear and A119 Mini 2 since both have a IMX675 image sensor.

Back to your work, for cameras without display or even for all cameras, Viofo could create the HLA on the APP live image. When you have more cameras you can align all of them the same just by using that HLA.

Right now I am aligning camera by using live view from APP instead of HLA I am looking at the smartphone front camera hole to imagine that there is the middle of the image.
Then I am taking screenshots. I have one master screenshot with first camera aligned at desired and then I am taking screenshot with the next camera. Then align. Then delete old screenshot, then screenshot again, then align again and so on. I need to have patience to do this because it is very important when doing side by side comparisons.

To attempt to get a consistent alignment of all the dash cameras installed on my front windshield, I use a laser level to establish a consistent line to aim the middle of the vertical field of view for each camera, I use the HLA if the dash camera's app offers one to adjust the camera to the horizontal laser line or I use a crudely made overlay I place on my Android device to create my own HLA.

I purchased an inexpensive self leveling laser level. I attached it to a photography tripod using its 1/4-20 mount. The first time I used the laser level for the dash camera alignment task, I pointed the laser level at my car’s windshield to adjust the height of tripod to the level with the laser level’s horizontal line being in the middle of the area where the front camera lenses are located. Each time I want to align the front cameras I move the tripod to the driver’s side of my car by the front door and aim it at the wall. I place the vertical line as close as possible to the center line of the car. I know the laser level is not projecting its laser lines from the middle of my car, but the I know where the "center line" of my car is when extended to the garage wall. I aim the laser level's vertical line to that same "center" line of my car on the wall.



While in the car, I turn on each dash camera and then align the vertical line as close as possible to the center of the field of view. I then adjust the up/down movement of the lens to the horizontal line projected across the wall from the laser level. For the VIOFO dash cameras, I rotate my Tripltek 8 Pro Android tablet to get the larger live view from the camera. I then overlay one of the static stickers I’ve repurposed to note where the horizontal center of the live view image is located. I used a black marker to draw a line where the middle of the field of view is located on the static sticker. It doesn't make a very dark line, but the line is decent enough to align with the green horizontal line projected on the wall.



I adjust the up/down movement of the lens to get the laser level line and the center line of the live view in sync with each other. Depending on how much of a curvature is present in the windshield glass where the dash camera is located, the camera’s horizontal center line and the laser level’s horizontal line might not be a 100 percent match, but I make sure the center portion of the camera’s live view horizontal center line is aligned to the center of the laser level’s horizontal center line. A fixed windshield mount won’t allow for the full leveling of the camera’s horizontal line across the entire field of view.

I could use the laser level for the rear cameras as well, but instead I use a retaining wall in my neighbor's front yard. I aim the rear dash camera's live view horizontal alignment line at the base of that retaining wall.

 

[speedingcheetah]

Also people should consider that Mini2 image setup is for recording the front image. The rear cameras should have more brightness because there is less light. This is why comparing a rear camera with a front camera will give visible different results.

The Mini2 and other "front" cams are not always 100% only for use in the front. Having used a Mini 0826 model cam in my rear since 2016, it done very very well. Its mount style is even better suited for rear in my case.

The wedge shape of the A119 Mini2 and other models, it can work fine in many cases as a rear facing camera. But, it all really depends on the vehicle design to see how suitable mounting one of such design is.

Having replaced my Mini 0826 with a A119 Mini 2 in my rear, it performs just as well as the Front A119 Mini 2 i have.
My rear hatch window has 50% tint on it, not factory, but cam adjusts perfectly fine, can not even tell it is there during the day.
At night, yes, it is a tad darker, but its HDR is a HUGE improvement over the Mini 0826. There is no EV or any adjustment needed.
Some cams may need a boost in EV for a rear cam, either due to tint, or cause no headlight to illuminate the road behind you, but i do not think the A119 Mini 2 needs it.
Multi-channel systems, may indeed tweak their rear cam profile/HDR in a manor suited for lower light at night.

 

[Panzer Platform]

people should consider that Mini2 image setup is for recording the front image. The rear cameras should have more brightness because there is less light. This is why comparing a rear camera with a front camera will give visible different results.

I kind of disagree.

 

[Mtz]

My A119 Mini 2 cameras are the ones with the updated lens.

Great! Good to see you are not losing time by testing an outdated version.

I installed one of my A119 Mini 2 dash cameras on the rear window per a request

I know, I read that post.

To attempt to get a consistent alignment of all the dash cameras installed on my front windshield, I use a laser level to establish a consistent line to aim the middle of the vertical field of view for each camera,

Because the dashcams are recording on the streets, the alignment should be done in the street. The best can be outside town on a street over a plain. In such environment you can easy setup 50% sky 50% road.
I know that most of the recordings are inside towns and there are buildings which will affect the sky percentage, but the initial alignment should be always standard.
I know you are making very good side by side comparisons, I trust them, what I wrote is not to deny your alignment strategy but I am telling how I am doing.

The Mini2 and other "front" cams are not always 100% only for use in the front.

Working with dashcams for more than 10 years, from the first days of this forum, it is expected that I know that I can put a „front” camera on the rear window. My post was only about comparing a „front” camera with a „rear” camera side by side and to be careful when making conclusions or requests.

Looking at such side-by-side comparisons people can decide if the best for them is to buy a dual channel dashcam or to buy two separate 1CH dashcams. Most of them are buying 2CH dashcams because is more easy to work with just one card.

But is not OK to make such comparison and to ask the manufacturer to implement on a rear camera the same image settings that he offered on the front cameras. Only for this reason I consider such comparisons to be useless, time lost by the testers. But are very good for the people which will think to buy 1 Dual channel camera or two one channel cameras. No matter my opinion about image settings, they will buy what they like. But such people are very small numbers.

I kind of disagree.

Yes, I see you disagree, but your video has the right part of the image darker. This means the video disagrees with you. People dont need to look at the whole video, it is enough to look at the static preview from Youtube. The rear camera is brighter.

 

[rcg530]

Because the dashcams are recording on the streets, the alignment should be done in the street. The best can be outside town on a street over a plain. In such environment you can easy setup 50% sky 50% road.
I know that most of the recordings are inside towns and there are buildings which will affect the sky percentage, but the initial alignment should be always standard.
I know you are making very good side by side comparisons, I trust them, what I wrote is not to deny your alignment strategy but I am telling how I am doing.

Around where I live, there are no easily accessible locations where I can place my vehicle to perform a camera alignment that is "level" and with a clear line of sight of the horizon. Even if there were a location somewhat nearby, driving there every time I installed a different camera would not be feasible. My camera alignment strategy results in a 50% road / 50% sky split. Here are a couple of frame grabs from the A229 Pro front camera with a white line at the 50/50 vertical split of the image.

 

[Mtz]

As I told you already, I like how you have aligned the lens, I observed this when you tested another dashcams. Nothing to complain from what you do about this.

I put that text again

I know you are making very good side by side comparisons, I trust them, what I wrote is not to deny your alignment strategy but I am telling how I am doing.

 

[speedingcheetah]

Great! Good to see you are not losing time by testing an outdated version.

I know, I read that post.

Because the dashcams are recording on the streets, the alignment should be done in the street. The best can be outside town on a street over a plain. In such environment you can easy setup 50% sky 50% road.
I know that most of the recordings are inside towns and there are buildings which will affect the sky percentage, but the initial alignment should be always standard.
I know you are making very good side by side comparisons, I trust them, what I wrote is not to deny your alignment strategy but I am telling how I am doing.

Working with dashcams for more than 10 years, from the first days of this forum, it is expected that I know that I can put a „front” camera on the rear window. My post was only about comparing a „front” camera with a „rear” camera side by side and to be careful when making conclusions or requests.

Looking at such side-by-side comparisons people can decide if the best for them is to buy a dual channel dashcam or to buy two separate 1CH dashcams. Most of them are buying 2CH dashcams because is more easy to work with just one card.

But is not OK to make such comparison and to ask the manufacturer to implement on a rear camera the same image settings that he offered on the front cameras. Only for this reason I consider such comparisons to be useless, time lost by the testers. But are very good for the people which will think to buy 1 Dual channel camera or two one channel cameras. No matter my opinion about image settings, they will buy what they like. But such people are very small numbers.

Yes, I see you disagree, but your video has the right part of the image darker. This means the video disagrees with you. People dont need to look at the whole video, it is enough to look at the static preview from Youtube. The rear camera is brighter.

View attachment 68867

Brighter isn’t better. If you actually look at the video, you’ll see that the darker image is superior HDR. The rear camera has poor HDR with the signs and headlights far more blown out

 

[Panzer Platform]

Around where I live, there are no easily accessible locations where I can place my vehicle to perform a camera alignment that is "level" and with a clear line of sight of the horizon. Even if there were a location somewhat nearby, driving there every time I installed a different camera would not be feasible. My camera alignment strategy results in a 50% road / 50% sky split. Here are a couple of frame grabs from the A229 Pro front camera with a white line at the 50/50 vertical split of the image.

Right on Robert.
Wow, those are really accurate results with your garage laser method.
I gathered daytime test footage yesterday, and I'm going over the footage.
I'll post some screenshots so you guys can see how bad I screwed up the road / sky alignment. lol
I was able to drive a few miles from my house to find a nice spot in a no parking zone to align my 4 front cameras with a clear view of the horizon line.
Your laser method is looking more, and more appealing to adapt.

 

[Panzer Platform]

Yes, I see you disagree

The reason for my disagreement is, it sounded like you said people should not put Front / 1-CH dash cams on the rear of a vehicle.
Maybe I misunderstood your point.

 

[rcg530]

One of my YouTube channel viewers asked whether I had tested the A229 Pro with a front camera resolution of 2560x1440 30fps. They were wondering because in their testing of that resolution, the A229 Pro's video footage was of "poor" quality. Today, I gathered A229 Pro front camera 2560x1440 30fps footage. The video quality is poor when compared to the A119 Mini 2 configured with a resolution of 2560x1440 30fps.

 

[speedingcheetah]

One of my YouTube channel viewers asked whether I had tested the A229 Pro with a front camera resolution of 2560x1440 30fps. They were wondering because in their testing of that resolution, the A229 Pro's video footage was of "poor" quality. Today, I gathered A229 Pro front camera 2560x1440 30fps footage. The video quality is poor when compared to the A119 Mini 2 configured with a resolution of 2560x1440 30fps.

Wow. Thats bad. Is it outputting the high bitrate it is supposed to, or is it super low? If it is not low, then something else is very wrong.

Is 60fps also affected?

 

[rcg530]

Wow. Thats bad. Is it outputting the high bitrate it is supposed to, or is it super low? If it is not low, then something else is very wrong.

A229 Pro: Bitrate = Maximum, Resolution "1440P30+1440P30+1080P30", Video File Avg Bitrate: 31.13 Mbps
A119 Mini 2: Bitrate = High, Resolution "1440P30", Video File Avg Bitrate = 25.03 Mbps

Is 60fps also affected?

There is no 60fps option with the A229 Pro for the front camera.

 

[Deleted member 85644]

I have the same results with my A229 Pro as well. Have not said anything as I figured sooner or later VIOFO would correct it with a FW update. On the other hand, the interior IR camera works very well
and I really can't find an issue with it. Others may find issues, but I am not that discerning about the inside IR quality, though it is quite good.

 

[speedingcheetah]

A229 Pro: Bitrate = Maximum, Resolution "1440P30+1440P30+1080P30", Video File Avg Bitrate: 31.13 Mbps
A119 Mini 2: Bitrate = High, Resolution "1440P30", Video File Avg Bitrate = 25.03 Mbps


There is no 60fps option with the A229 Pro for the front camera.

View attachment 68887

I could’ve sworn someone confirmed on here. There was a 60 FPS 2K option for that model.

 

[QuozL]

A229 Pro: Bitrate = Maximum, Resolution "1440P30+1440P30+1080P30", Video File Avg Bitrate: 31.13 Mbps
A119 Mini 2: Bitrate = High, Resolution "1440P30", Video File Avg Bitrate = 25.03 Mbps


There is no 60fps option with the A229 Pro for the front camera.

View attachment 68887

So is the only way to get 4K 3840 x 2160 to run front camera only?

 

[rcg530]

So is the only way to get 4K 3840 x 2160 to run front camera only?

No. I typically run my A229 Pro in 3CH mode with a resolution of 2160P30(front)+1440P30(rear)+1080P30(interior).

Here's my feature comparison chart for the A229 Pro/A229 Plus/A229 Duo:



From the A229 Pro user manual:

 

[viofo]

Almost all Sony 4K sensor doesn't support 2K resolution natively, it can be optimized, but the performance can not be matched with IMX675.

 

[speedingcheetah]

There is no 60fps option with the A229 Pro for the front camera.

Ah. The A229 Plus does 2K 60FPS, but not the pro. (cause the Pro is 4K? but, i would think its cpu would be good enough to do 2K 60fps)

A229 Plus Test & Review PP

Out of interest, I tested my very simple Mobius 1 in the same way. I have often regarded the boot up time to be rather short. The result was 7.4 seconds, not much less than the A229 1-CH. Do you think the A229 Pro/Plus has such long times because it's checking the storage on the bigger...

dashcamtalk.com

Anyways, the poor image at 2K, perhaps, is how they are downscaling the raw sensor 4K resolution.
Does it also look bad in 1080 then?

 

[LateralNW]

In its native mode it supports 4K and FHD.
Offering the other resolutions is confusing.
Why has 2K become important?

I don't see a problem as I only intend to run it in 4K.
Perhaps when in parking mode when the ambient temp is high a lower res might be better.

 

[rcg530]

Why has 2K become important?

One of my channel viewers was asking if I had tested 2K resolution setting for the A229 Pro. They observed the 2K video quality issue noted in my recent post and video. I too use the full video resolution available for the image sensor when I purchase a dash camera, but it's worth checking out the other video resolutions supported in the firmware resolution setting.