Guys,

(Question that's stuck in my head after today's flying session)

I've flown with 2strokesmoke's Skyzone V2's a couple of times and always found the image quality to be remarkably better that my Dominator V3's (from the same quad and HS1177 camera). I know I've not always been good at checking contract/brightness which has been part of the "problem" but the image generally looks a lot sharper and cleaner on the Skyzone's.

I'm certainly no visual specialist so I've not fully got my head around aspest ratio's, resolution, etc but according to the specs the Skyzone's are 854x480 (FWVGA) and the Dominator's are 800x480 (WVGA), with no other specification differences.

Is it really that the extra 54 vertical lines making so much of a difference?

Maybe there's some visual experts on here that might be able to explain the difference?

Thanks!

are you running a diversity module in your fatsharks? could just be a better picture due to a better signal through the diversity on the skyzones. I own a set of both the skyzones and the fatsharks, but I've added a diversity module on my fatsharks and the picture quality is great.

Huh, sounds like another argument for the v3's to me! Still having enormous trouble coping with the specs of the HD3's, and especially the luke-warm reports everywhere. I mean, for that sort of money..
Be & do well,
successful flying!
Emanuele

The resolution is specified as x by y, so those 54 extra pixels are not extra lines, they're extra columns!

I think the optics on the Skyzones may be better than the Dominators, but the biggest difference is the field of view. The HD3s have a 42 degree field of view while the Skyzones have 30 degrees.

It's much harder to keep the image clear and sharp as you increase the field of view.

I think that Sigloss is talking about the Dominator V3 and not the Dominator HD3

(23-Mar-2017, 12:53 PM)tozes Wrote: I think that Sigloss is talking about the Dominator V3 and not the Dominator HD3

D'oh.

Then the field of view is the same and the difference in quality has to be down to the optics. I can't see that 54 extra pixels in width would make much difference.