Wish List Feature Improvements for A118C

[PEja]

heat certainly does. on mine, i've noticed that on hot days, the camera slides up off the mount a LOT easier (looser) than it does on cold days. it also picks up engine vibrations at particular RPMs on hot days, where on cold days, you don't get any engine/road noise at all. to fix that, i added a small piece of adhesive felt to the mount, to sort of pre-tension it, and eliminate vibrations in the videos.

Exactly! I have researched and found that camera is loose with windscreen holder. So, because of heat or something else, or plastic holder has become smaller or plastic housing of camera has become bigger 🙂

 

[shokk]

64GB will work, format in the camera before use

Hi people. I tried a 64Gb Samsung card in my B40. It just came up with card error. I formatted the card in the camera, but didn't help. Wondering if a firmware update might help. This is the firmware in the cam now.
"B40 Mini 170° 1.5 inch Novatek 96650 H.264 FHD 1080P 30 ftps" I can't remember what the firmware number if off the top of my head. The cam is the battery type. Can anybody tell me the correct firmware for this dashcam? The info would be much appreciated . Thanks.

 

[jokiin]

Jan 2015 firmware onwards support 64gb cards

 

[shokk]

Jan 2015 firmware onwards support 64gb cards

Thanks jokiin. I will just try to find the right firmware for it now. I assume it is on the firmware page.
Edit : This is the latest firmware I see . A118.20150104.zip

 

[jokiin]

That would work

 

[shokk]

That would work

Great. Thank you.

 

[shokk]

Thanks jokiin. I will just try to find the right firmware for it now. I assume it is on the firmware page.
Edit : This is the latest firmware I see . A118.20150104.zip

I ended up using this firmware. https://dashcamtalk.com/forum/attachments/fwa118_viofo_201504803-zip.13543/

I have only done a short test since the firmware upgrade. So far it is working. It even lets me put the cars number plate details in, which my original firmware had when I First bought the cam.The 64 GB card is working now, too. Happy daze. Thanks for the helpful advice.

 

[normm]

Hi peoples, I've just installed my A118C, wire has been run down the roof liner, door sills etc and at the moment is just plugged into my accessory power port but will fix that when I grab an add-a fuse etc.

The only problem I was having was sound distortion due to vibrations. I noticed a few solutions in this thread but thought I'd mention that I solved it with a couple of strips of draught tape on the holder. Makes putting the cam on a bit harder but all vibrations are now gone 🙂

 

[OldMan01]

I have a Viofo A118C which I bought from GearBest Nov-Dec, 2015. From what I have seen, I would say that it is "genuine" and working as good as the best that I have seen reported. I upgraded to Viofo's 2016-03-16 firmware. I have not been keeping track of any further upgrades.

I use 720 @ 30 fps right now because I like to maintain a few days worth of recording on a 64GB card in case something happens that I do not notice (like someone breaking into the car across from mine in a parking lot) which might be caught with "Motion Detection".

So far, after some testing, I decided to leave WDR ON and EV =+0. The result is higher contrast than I would like, and also over-sharpened.

The high contrast overall probably cannot be "fixed" without increasing exposure time, thus resulting in blurring. But the over-sharpening is "fixable". There should be a user option to reduce the sharpening. I think some people think that this high degree of sharpening is a good idea. It is not. But trying to explain it to people is hard, so I will only briefly say that it does not necessarily result in "better" data. In fact, the processing and file size increase can be the result of "bad/fake" data which takes up processing/file space that could be used for "good/real" data. For example, if you see someone with a face in a bit of shadow try enlarging it. No eyes? No mouth? No nose? Is it even human? The detail is gone because the processing did not get that far. Maybe if the processing was not wasted on giving some clouds or tree leaves over-sharpened edges, there would have been more processing to show the "face" actually had a mouth.

True, this is hard to prove, but, if you give me a choice to reduce the "sharpening", I will probably do so until I see that further reduction is detrimental.

 

[jokiin]

'added sharpening' I find gives the complete opposite effect of what the term implies, I prefer none