Posts: 1,590 Threads: 89 Likes Received: 1,283 in 768 posts Likes Given: 1,274 Joined: Jan 2017 Reputation: 31 One of the items for my build that I am taking extra time to decide is my camera. I've boiled it down to 3 possibilities. 2 of them are CCD and the other is the Eagle because I've seen that it's supposed to be awesome. Now for the tough part... how do I break a 3 way tie? I guess I'll do a poll on the forum! Here are my thoughts on each of the cameras and why they are tied for me as possibilities: Runcam Swift & Foxeer HS1177: Practically seem like the same camera to me. The only difference is I already own something from runcam that I am happy with so it creates a hair of bias to stick with what I've done once before... If there is actually something better about the HS1177 then I'd easily be swayed. I have noticed that folks compare the eagle to the HS1177 more though. (Maybe because Runcam says they should?) Runcam Eagle: More expensive, and possibly has latency issues (although I found a video that suggests the latency might not be as noticeable as some seem to think)... but supposedly it's way better. If it's way better and someone is flying one I'd love to hear opinions on this. carl.vegas Current Quads: Operational: Diatone GT2 200 In need of repair: Bumble Bee, tehStein, Slightly modified Vortex 250 • Posts: 2,286 Threads: 38 Likes Received: 1,527 in 995 posts Likes Given: 1,881 Joined: Apr 2016 Reputation: 72 23-Apr-2017, 01:24 PM (This post was last modified: 23-Apr-2017, 01:30 PM by unseen.) If your flight controller already has an OSD, there's no point getting a Swift as it has a basic OSD built in. If you have 16:9 FPV goggles, go for the Eagle in the 16:9 version. If you have standard 4:3 goggles, the Foxeer HS1177 is a great camera and very nicely priced these days. • Posts: 1,590 Threads: 89 Likes Received: 1,283 in 768 posts Likes Given: 1,274 Joined: Jan 2017 Reputation: 31 (23-Apr-2017, 01:24 PM)unseen Wrote: If your flight controller already has an OSD, there's no point getting a Swift as it has a basic OSD built in. If you have 16:9 FPV goggles, go for the Eagle in the 16:9 version. If you have standard 4:3 goggles, the Foxeer HS1177 is a great camera and very nicely priced these days. I am on Fatshark HD3s (overpriced in my opinion now that I have more experience... I should have went with the V3s). So 4:3 ratio all the way. If I get the eagle it'll be the 4:3 version. The 16:9 actually has a reduced field of view... FC does have OSD, but the swift built in OSD could be turned off right? carl.vegas Current Quads: Operational: Diatone GT2 200 In need of repair: Bumble Bee, tehStein, Slightly modified Vortex 250 • Posts: 2,286 Threads: 38 Likes Received: 1,527 in 995 posts Likes Given: 1,881 Joined: Apr 2016 Reputation: 72 (23-Apr-2017, 01:55 PM)Carl.Vegas Wrote: I am on Fatshark HD3s (overpriced in my opinion now that I have more experience... I should have went with the V3s). So 4:3 ratio all the way. If I get the eagle it'll be the 4:3 version. The 16:9 actually has a reduced field of view... FC does have OSD, but the swift built in OSD could be turned off right? I think it can on the latest versions. • Posts: 91 Threads: 10 Likes Received: 84 in 45 posts Likes Given: 105 Joined: Aug 2016 Reputation: 2 The original Swift is still available and cheaper than the Swift v2 with the OSD (that can be turned off if required)... Posts: 1,590 Threads: 89 Likes Received: 1,283 in 768 posts Likes Given: 1,274 Joined: Jan 2017 Reputation: 31 (23-Apr-2017, 07:40 PM)jimbo_wa Wrote: The original Swift is still available and cheaper than the Swift v2 with the OSD (that can be turned off if required)... Good point. I should clarify I'm talkingabout the old one not the swift 2. carl.vegas Current Quads: Operational: Diatone GT2 200 In need of repair: Bumble Bee, tehStein, Slightly modified Vortex 250 • Posts: 947 Threads: 66 Likes Received: 350 in 248 posts Likes Given: 164 Joined: Apr 2016 Reputation: 34 Here is my experience with the cameras: - Runcam eagle has a more detailed picture and the dynamic range is way better than the swift. - The swift handles light changes faster than the eagle. - I cant notice any difference regarding latency. - the colours are a bit pale on the eagle, but that has probably something to do with the good dynamic range. - both me and a friend have had problems with the eagle loosing the colours and getting blue lines. This goes away if I remove and reinsert the back PCB (there are two PCBs that are connected with a push connector). I would assume that it has something to do with a bad connection Posts: 2,286 Threads: 38 Likes Received: 1,527 in 995 posts Likes Given: 1,881 Joined: Apr 2016 Reputation: 72 (23-Apr-2017, 10:42 PM)oyvinla Wrote: - both me and a friend have had problems with the eagle loosing the colours and getting blue lines. This goes away if I remove and reinsert the back PCB (there are two PCBs that are connected with a push connector). I would assume that it has something to do with a bad connection Yuck. That sounds like they chose the wrong kind of connector and it can't handle the vibration in a quad. • Posts: 1,290 Threads: 67 Likes Received: 711 in 472 posts Likes Given: 1,216 Joined: Mar 2016 Reputation: 23 (23-Apr-2017, 10:42 PM)oyvinla Wrote: Here is my experience with the cameras: - Runcam eagle has a more detailed picture and the dynamic range is way better than the swift. - The swift handles light changes faster than the eagle. - I cant notice any difference regarding latency. - the colours are a bit pale on the eagle, but that has probably something to do with the good dynamic range. - both me and a friend have had problems with the eagle loosing the colours and getting blue lines. This goes away if I remove and reinsert the back PCB (there are two PCBs that are connected with a push connector). I would assume that it has something to do with a bad connection I have the Runcam Night Eagle and it has the same problem with losing the video feed or having vertical lines on the screen that obliterate the picture. I found that if I take a piece of double sided foam tape and insert it on the outer most circuit board in line with the connectors on the inner most circuit board and then put the back on, it provides enough pressure to keep the connectors connected. Basically it’s a work around for a design flaw in the camera. "Damn the torpedoes!!! Full speed ahead!!!" • Posts: 1,070 Threads: 70 Likes Received: 742 in 378 posts Likes Given: 577 Joined: Jan 2016 Reputation: 44 24-Apr-2017, 04:46 AM (This post was last modified: 24-Apr-2017, 04:47 AM by KonradS.) I ese the eagle an soometimes also have some issues with the image - will check the connections, thanks for the tips One thing that puts me down on the Eagle is the FOV - larger lenses are pretty expensive at 15$ a piece • Posts: 947 Threads: 66 Likes Received: 350 in 248 posts Likes Given: 164 Joined: Apr 2016 Reputation: 34 (24-Apr-2017, 04:46 AM)KonradS Wrote: I ese the eagle an soometimes also have some issues with the image - will check the connections, thanks for the tips One thing that puts me down on the Eagle is the FOV - larger lenses are pretty expensive at 15$ a piece You can use a standard gopro lens found on eBay for larger FOV and for even larger, grab a swift 2.1mm or foxeer 2.5mm. They are basically the same lens. Keep in mind that the Eagle sensor doesn't have a IR filter Eagle stock lens (IR Block) Eagle Gopro lens (IR Block) Eagle w/Swift 2.1mm lens (no IR block) Eagle w/Foxeer 2.5mm (IR-Block) • Posts: 947 Threads: 66 Likes Received: 350 in 248 posts Likes Given: 164 Joined: Apr 2016 Reputation: 34 (24-Apr-2017, 03:43 AM)sirdude Wrote: I have the Runcam Night Eagle and it has the same problem with losing the video feed or having vertical lines on the screen that obliterate the picture. I found that if I take a piece of double sided foam tape and insert it on the outer most circuit board in line with the connectors on the inner most circuit board and then put the back on, it provides enough pressure to keep the connectors connected. Basically it’s a work around for a design flaw in the camera. Thanks, I have had that thought in mind as well as I have fixed vibration problems with the swift and hs1177 with some foam. I just haven't bothered doing it yet, but I should probably try it eventually • Posts: 1,590 Threads: 89 Likes Received: 1,283 in 768 posts Likes Given: 1,274 Joined: Jan 2017 Reputation: 31 Still voteless... however I am starting to get the feel that I should stick with the foxeer or the swift. I am not exactly looking for a camera with quality issues... That's kind of BS if you ask me. Here it is supposed to be a better camera and they cant even make the components right? Nah... that's a problem for me. carl.vegas Current Quads: Operational: Diatone GT2 200 In need of repair: Bumble Bee, tehStein, Slightly modified Vortex 250 • Posts: 91 Threads: 10 Likes Received: 84 in 45 posts Likes Given: 105 Joined: Aug 2016 Reputation: 2 Voted! Depending on your build it may make sense to get the Swift Micro that's about to come out - much lighter, smaller and cheaper still? http://shop.runcam.com/runcam-micro-swift/ Posts: 1,590 Threads: 89 Likes Received: 1,283 in 768 posts Likes Given: 1,274 Joined: Jan 2017 Reputation: 31 I saw Oscar's post about the micro... I think I like the housing and probably would end up adding some of that weight back with weatherproofing. Plus I am not short on space for camera. I am building a 220 and the frame has space for FPV equipment. carl.vegas Current Quads: Operational: Diatone GT2 200 In need of repair: Bumble Bee, tehStein, Slightly modified Vortex 250 • |