Wide angle is not always better

Dashmellow

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2013
Messages
15,744
Reaction score
16,782
Location
Uncanny Valley (●_●)
Country
United States
Dash Cam
Umpteen
We've had some interesting discussions here on DCT about dual lens solutions going back a year or so. One concept was to use two Mobius cameras (A lens), each mounted on the two opposite A pillars aimed to provide a slightly overlapping view. Two "A" lens Mobius cameras could also be mounted side to side facing outwards for similar coverage, not unlike the Garmin concept. You would get wide coverage but good license plate capture. Of course, another option would be as @reverend mentions, having two cameras with both narrow and wide FOV. A year ago, I posted about an oddball looking camera I came across that does just that.

duallens.png
 

Street Guardian USA

Well-Known Member
Retailer
Joined
May 14, 2013
Messages
11,799
Reaction score
8,261
Location
Oakland Park, Florida (USA)
Country
United States
Dash Cam
StreetGuardian.CAM Amazon.com
Where was that other new dual camera (pointed same direction) product thread where one was optically zoomed in so you can read license plates further away.
 

M---

Active Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
371
Reaction score
215
Location
Vancouver
Country
Canada
Dash Cam
A118C
From my perspective, license plate numbers are a secondary concern. My primary concern is showing that I've been driving in a reasonable manner.

If I get into a crash and the other party sticks around, but claims it's my fault, then there's no need to have legible plates-- the other party is known. All I need is proof that I was following the rules of the road.

If I get into a crash and the other party drives off, hoping they won't be caught, then I have two concerns:
1) I want the DC to prove to the police and my insurance company that I was following the rules of the road. This takes away my liability for the crash, and means that my insurance rates won't rise as a result of somebody else's actions. But I have to pay the insurance deductible ($1,000, ouch).
2) I want my $1,000 deductible back, for this I need witnesses, or the police to figure out who it was, or I need the DC footage to show plate numbers. Even if plate numbers are available, there's no guarantee that the plates weren't stolen, or the other car wasn't stolen. Or the owners of the other car reported it stolen after the owner crashed into me. So my chances of recovering the deductible are somewhat limited.

In summary, I'd prefer to have a much wide angle coverage to show somebody else crashing into me.

As a side note, it's by choice that I have a high deductible ($1000). If I had a lower deductible ($300), my annual insurance fee would be about $150/year higher. I figure that if I take that $150/year, and consider it my "deductible fund," then I'm doing pretty well: my last at-fault crash was 14 years ago. $150 x 14yrs=$2,100. So I can pay the higher deductible a few times before it's worth having a cheap deductible!
 

kamkar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2013
Messages
30,391
Reaction score
17,088
Country
Denmark
Dash Cam
10 years, many dashcams
yeah here you dont have to have the LPN capured in live crash, if you just scribbel it down on a pice of paper after the incident its okay, and if its a bad wreck the cops will be there. ( though recent events here might lead one to think otherwise )
 
Top