deleted... problem was solved.

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

Release 2 has all the video quality improvements from Release 1, with the ability to have the time on, time off with 20 S/S/C, or time off with continuous recording. It's just better all around.

Do we know since when a new firmware (Release 2 or even Release 1 but with differences that were not published) was installed on the cameras as stock?

I mean I have one #11 with stock firmware and seems it has the exposure fix improvement, while the firmware is stock (Date ON).

Also one camera differs to the other to the low light, just before sunset. One has a blue tint while the other does not.
So there must be a firmware difference, except if there is a hardware difference.

I could had knew if the second`s camera stock firmware is a "new" version if I had installed the exposure fix firmware, to see if there is any difference, but for some reason I do not want to.

And is there any chance that a Release 1 Date ON will be available with the exposure fix improvement?
I would love to have this version.

Thanks Tom, your work is very well documented!

But now my feedback. I upgraded my camera with V2 firmware (continuous date off), did a comparison of same shots before and after upgrade. Sorry, but even when playing both next to each other slow motion, I don't see any difference. Sometimes the V2 looks a bit more saturized in shades. But in the next shot V1 is a bit more saturized (so I am looking at natural variance in the saturation control). Also moving the camera from dark to light and reverse, the change in exposure (incremental steps) are the same.

Will do a more close inspection later.

Still the huge change in white balance is the most apparent "feature" of this camera. Would be perfect if there is a way to fix this white balance to "sunny" or "cloudy".

Video this morning using the continuous recording & remove time - release 2 firmware.

I find things are a bit darker than they really appear, bit too dark I feel. Weather was foggy and overcast however so that may have been part of the issue.
Also seems that the max I can get from a fully charged battery is aroung 25 mins. This is on a new cam with probably only 3-4 charges on.

No post recording processing, clips put together in iMovie with raw video as recorded.

UMorning (7 min 18 sec)

[QUOTE=schooner2000;18295051]Video this morning using the continuous recording & remove time - release 2 firmware.

I find things are a bit darker than they really appear, bit too dark I feel. Weather was foggy and overcast however so that may have been part of the issue.
Also seems that the max I can get from a fully charged battery is aroung 25 mins. This is on a new cam with probably only 3-4 charges on.

No post recording processing, clips put together in iMovie with raw video as recorded.

/QUOTE]

I agree yours does look a little on the dark side.. And sounds just like mine when the battery is low.. Also noticed a bull's eye effect not sure if camera or the fog..

I'll try to get some video with mine later today.. The little testing I did inside last night seemed OK at the time... But I was so happy to get the #11 working again anything would of looked good..

Ya I'm thinking the fog might be part of the issue in my video. but when all we get is wind, rain, and fog, I have to take what I can get :P

Hopefully one day I cna get some video in sunny blue sky conditions.

Originally Posted by air_crash

Do we know since when a new firmware (Release 2 or even Release 1 but with differences that were not published) was installed on the cameras as stock?

I mean I have one #11 with stock firmware and seems it has the exposure fix improvement, while the firmware is stock (Date ON).

Also one camera differs to the other to the low light, just before sunset. One has a blue tint while the other does not.
So there must be a firmware difference, except if there is a hardware difference.

I could had knew if the second`s camera stock firmware is a "new" version if I had installed the exposure fix firmware, to see if there is any difference, but for some reason I do not want to.

And is there any chance that a Release 1 Date ON will be available with the exposure fix improvement?
I would love to have this version.

The release 2 firmware was just released, but there's no way of knowing what you had on your camera when you received it. Since the new firmware is not backward compatible with the old, I doubt they would have started using it without an alert, which I just got a few days ago. I was cautioned to take down the old firmware so people would not download and try to use it on with the new firmware. There's no "Date on" Release 1 firmware with exposure control that I am aware of.

I had one of the version 1 cameras and one of the version 2, with the number stamped on the CMOS module ribbon (see post #2). My version 1 was better in low light than the version 2, but the version 2 seemed to have a tiny bit better exposure control with the "as received" firmware. But the exposure control firmware released in Release 1 firmware was MUCH better... eliminated the "hunting" problem.

Both of my cameras have a blue shift in low light, and yellow shift in bright light.

Originally Posted by mavlo77

Thanks Tom, your work is very well documented!

But now my feedback. I upgraded my camera with V2 firmware (continuous date off), did a comparison of same shots before and after upgrade. Sorry, but even when playing both next to each other slow motion, I don't see any difference. Sometimes the V2 looks a bit more saturized in shades. But in the next shot V1 is a bit more saturized (so I am looking at natural variance in the saturation control). Also moving the camera from dark to light and reverse, the change in exposure (incremental steps) are the same.

Will do a more close inspection later.

Still the huge change in white balance is the most apparent "feature" of this camera. Would be perfect if there is a way to fix this white balance to "sunny" or "cloudy".

The saturation control does not diminish the saturation in bright scenes, but it does look to me that it keeps the saturation higher in lower light scenes, so there is less of a difference when panning from bright to low light compared to the release 1 firmware, at least that's the way it appears to my eyes on my camera. The differences are not earthshaking, and the saturation is still too high in ALL scenes for my taste... colors are too vivid and not natural looking. But if the saturation is more constant throughout the video, I can tone down the saturation during editing and get better results overall.

The incremental steps in exposure changes look the same as it was before, but the exposure "locks in" much better in those light situations where it jumped back and forth "hunting" for the sweet spot in the early Release 1 firmware. That was fixed in the last "exposure control" firmware in Release 1.

I agree the white balance is still the biggest issue remaining. The good news is that the developer is aware of this and is now reportedly working on improving it! I also gave feedback to them on toning down the saturation level a bit, and seeing if one of the LEDs can be made to blink when recording. I think the majority of users in this forum would welcome a blinking LED so its clear the camera is recording. For those who are using the camera for "stealth" projects, well... a bit of electrical tape over the hole will fix that!

Originally Posted by schooner2000

Video this morning using the continuous recording & remove time - release 2 firmware.

I find things are a bit darker than they really appear, bit too dark I feel. Weather was foggy and overcast however so that may have been part of the issue.
Also seems that the max I can get from a fully charged battery is aroung 25 mins. This is on a new cam with probably only 3-4 charges on.

No post recording processing, clips put together in iMovie with raw video as recorded.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2phVjZYb7iw&hd=1

The dark overcast day will do this... I get many of them here. But it looks to me that the colors show more saturation in lighting like that, which is what the new saturation control firmware seems to do. Do the colors look more vivid to you than they really are (e.g. grass is greener, school(?) building is more red, etc.)? I think more color saturation can also make a scene like this appear darker.

Your battery may be weak. Mine did something similar at an early age.

First results!

I recorded this video two days ago with the #11 (firmware release 1) attached to a Flyzone Playmate. The first part is just low flying (sort of a fly's view), but after that I take it a bit higher. I think my "mount" needs a lot of improvement, there is a lot of "jello efffect" (even though this is "deshaked" in virtualdub).

A previous attempt looked better and I think it was because the camera was firmly attached to the plane body before, while now it is loosly attached trying to isolate it from motor vibrations.

Flying in and over Clark Park, Champaign (6 min 27 sec)

I was surprised anyway when I saw it after the flight (a 15g camera in a 30g plane!).

This is a compilation of a half dozen clips I shot with the Release 2 firmware. I was concentrating more on different lighting situations, color saturation, and exposure more than video content to see how the camera reacts. The over-saturation is obvious, but in the wooded scene, the saturation looks higher and better than a similar clip I shot a while back with Release 1 firmware. And the white balance shift in bright/subdued lighting changes is obvious as well, but I hope to see new firmware with improvements in this soon.

An interesting thing is these separate clips were all shot in a 20 min. time frame with the same bright clear sky with the same flash memory card formatted with the SDformatter. The video average bit rate was as low as 6,553 kbps in a bright sun clip and as high as 14,989 kbps in the shady woods clip.

The transcoding on the hosting site seems to have taken a toll in sharpness, but the colors are the same on all the options.

Bike Tour Around Trossachs

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

[...] The good news is that the developer is aware of this and is now reportedly working on improving it! I also gave feedback to them on toning down the saturation level a bit, and seeing if one of the LEDs can be made to blink when recording.

Really a big THANK YOU for all your efforts, Tom, and for being able to establish such a direct connections with the manufacturer of this camera, it's really cool to see how they take your (ours) comments in consideration!
Looking forward to those firmware updates...

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

The release 2 firmware was just released, but there's no way of knowing what you had on your camera when you received it. Since the new firmware is not backward compatible with the old, I doubt they would have started using it without an alert, which I just got a few days ago. I was cautioned to take down the old firmware so people would not download and try to use it on with the new firmware. There's no "Date on" Release 1 firmware with exposure control that I am aware of.

I had one of the version 1 cameras and one of the version 2, with the number stamped on the CMOS module ribbon (see post #2). My version 1 was better in low light than the version 2, but the version 2 seemed to have a tiny bit better exposure control with the "as received" firmware. But the exposure control firmware released in Release 1 firmware was MUCH better... eliminated the "hunting" problem.

Both of my cameras have a blue shift in low light, and yellow shift in bright light.

Hmm, then I will install Release 1 Continuous recording firmware and I will see if the exposure is still as good as on my other camera which has the exposure fix firmware though.
If it still has the same performance, as it already has with the stock firmware, then there must be a hardware difference between the two cameras. So I will not install the exposure fix firmware.
If not then there is a stock firmware difference, aka they must had installed a Date on firmware with exposure fix improvement.

My cameras differ to the low light (but in the moment they differ to the firmware also, as one has the stock). One is better than the other, with no blue tint. They were bought with a 10 day difference on mid to late of April.

BTW, I read the other thoughts about future improvements and the already done. So I think some time I`ll just install a Rel. 2 firmware.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

This is a compilation of a half dozen clips I shot with the Release 2 firmware. I was concentrating more on different lighting situations, color saturation, and exposure more than video content to see how the camera reacts.

I just saw the video. A nice one!
I like the vivid colors.

Too tell the truth I don`t like the under saturated scenes. It is like they are poor to chroma, just a step above greyscale.
If it just kept the same colorfulness (a bit to the vivid side) on all light conditions then it would be awesome.

Personally I like the warm tone it also has on the white balance. Just not so much as it is, a bit lower. Still I like it be on the warm side, rather than to the cold side.
But improved so it is kept constant when the shooting angle changes.

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

if one of the LEDs can be made to blink when recording. I think the majority of users in this forum would welcome a blinking LED so its clear the camera is recording.

I could be on the group of users who like a blinking LED as I will use the camera to the vacations. So the group of bikers could benefit and like it and many others.
But I`m not, as I know when it is recording -at least if I know it is charged. I just press the right button, see the reaction and never press it again till I want to stop recording.
Especially when it is recording onboard (heli/plane) then there is no use of the LED.
Only some mA wasted.
But if the mA are so low that the battery life is not affected much, say only one minute, then I do not mind at all if it blinks.


If you please take in mind the auto timestamp. Seen for the first 10 secs of a clip then vanish.

I ordered 2 #11 from hxelepro360 on the 15th, email said shipped on the 17th. I will update to let people know order conformity and time to ship.

P

I ordered one from eletoponline 365 on 5/17 received a E mail that it nwould not ship till 5/20 on 5/18 ebay sent notice that it was shipped..

I'll be looking for the date that is on the camera when I get it as if it's 2012 I'll think it's the V2. As when I installed V2 on my older one it came up as 2012..

Originally Posted by livonia bob

I'll be looking for the date that is on the camera when I get it as if it's 2012 I'll think it's the V2. As when I installed V2 on my older one it came up as 2012..

Now I got confused.
I know, I mean I read about, that installing the Release 2 firmware (any) will set the date to 2012 (to the file properties if it is not visible as a timestamp), while it was previously set to 2011 (user input) or not (2009 the default setting). For the latter I`m not so sure though.

But do you mean that there is no way to set it to 2011 after a timeset change?
That`s a very huge drawback.

Originally Posted by livonia bob

I ordered one from eletoponline 365 on 5/17 received a E mail that it nwould not ship till 5/20 on 5/18 ebay sent notice that it was shipped..

At the ebay listings it is mentioned that the seller is away till 21/5.

Now that I typed the date I realised there could be another localised improvement.
To the date format.
With no much effort I think they could also have a DDMMYYYY (Day Month Year) format for the date.
Maybe selectable through an extra register to the timeset.txt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_format_by_country
You can see that a lot of people use this format.

Originally Posted by air_crash

Now I got confused.
I know, I mean I read about, that installing the Release 2 firmware (any) will set the date to 2012 (to the file properties if it is not visible as a timestamp), while it was previously set to 2011 (user input) or not (default setting). For the latter I`m not so sure though.

But do you mean that there is no way to set it to 2011 after a timeset change?
That`s a very huge drawback.



At the ebay listings it is mentioned that the seller is away till 21/5.

Now that I typed the date I realised there could be another improvement.
To the date format.
With no much effort I think they could have a DDMMYYYY (Day Month Year) format for the date.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_format_by_country

No you can reset it... But my camera when new in January I think came with a 2009 date.. I set the correct date and then removed the date.. with V1 install the date carried over correctly no problem,,, with the V2 update the file date was 2012-05-18.. I had to run the time set to change it to the correct date time.. being a fool with computers I first did it using a word processor format and not a plain text as instructed this of course didn't change anything. So I then ran the file to add the date display. This bricked the camera. Had to do a reset and then install V2 again and got the camera back then used notepad to change the date and this worked..

If you notice on most of the videos posted so far of V2 the date is 2012.. So if my first video with the new camera has a date of 2012 I'm going to think it came with V2 pre-installed..If it's 2011 I'm going to think it's V1 pre-installed... Not that anything I think is correct...

I waited till 7pm to make sure that the world wasn't ending and then gave up and cut the lawn.... Guess I'll have to pay off the credit cards after all also...

Originally Posted by livonia bob

...
I waited till 7pm to make sure that the world wasn't ending and then gave up and cut the lawn.... Guess I'll have to pay off the credit cards after all also...

Maybe not, it's still only 6:36 PM here.

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

Maybe not, it's still only 6:36 PM here.

As it was to be 6pm "your local time" it should of been going around the world in 24 hours..


As long as you are still here.... The #11 wouldn't be the same with out all the time and effort you put into helping us all..... Thank you very much...

Originally Posted by air_crash

Now that I typed the date I realised there could be another localised improvement.
To the date format.
With no much effort I think they could also have a DDMMYYYY (Day Month Year) format for the date.

That would definitely NOT be an improvement! The only acceptable date format is the international standard YYYYMMDD. The other two are horribly ambiguous about which is day and which month.

Tom Frank,
In regards to your post 4111 and the video. I'm not very knowledgeable about the terms being used to describe aspects of the videos. I took these two screen shots from your video. They are adjacent frames, so 1/30 of a second apart. I'm surprised at the difference in that short of time w/o any real lighting changes. Anyway, could you explain some of terms used to describe the differences such as white balance, saturation, chroma or any other aspects of these two screen shots.

Also, I downloaded the file and put it in avidemux. It said it saw h264 encoding and suggested an option. I tried both options and both had stuttering. That is the only file I've ever had problems with. Did you d/l it and process with avidemux by any chance? Have any problems? Any ideas why I might have issues with it?

Robbie

Originally Posted by zrobbie

Tom Frank,
In regards to your post 4111 and the video. I'm not very knowledgeable about the terms being used to describe aspects of the videos. I took these two screen shots from your video. They are adjacent frames, so 1/30 of a second apart. I'm surprised at the difference in that short of time w/o any real lighting changes. Anyway, could you explain some of terms used to describe the differences such as white balance, saturation, chroma or any other aspects of these two screen shots.

Also, I downloaded the file and put it in avidemux. It said it saw h264 encoding and suggested an option. I tried both options and both had stuttering. That is the only file I've ever had problems with. Did you d/l it and process with avidemux by any chance? Have any problems? Any ideas why I might have issues with it?

Robbie

You picked an area in the video where the camera was panning from a brighter area to one that was less bright, and these two frames show the camera at its worst, making a rapid shift in it's white balance and saturation. The image on the left has two problems. First, the saturation is way over emphasized, making the colors look almost "cartoonish" to me with the over-stated, vivid hues. And it also has poor white balance, adding a yellow tint to the entire image. The frame on the right, however, has adjusted down the saturation to a more natural-looking color intensity. But it also has shifted the white balance from the yellow tint to a very slight blue tint. You can see the blue a bit in the lower corners where there is grass and the image is slightly darker due to the len vingetting. But the blue tint is not so obvious with the other colors in the brighter portion of the frame, which looks pretty close to the way it looks naturally. I'd love to see the entire video that true to color, but I don't think this camera's CMOS module has enough horsepower to do it, with smoother, smaller step changes and less saturation in bright light, so it looks like more of a fade transition than a series of larger step changes. Other portions of the video where I have a lot of darker shade in the scene, the blue shift is much more obvious, especially where there is a lot of green color in a shaded area, like when I entered the woods. You can see the grass take on a slight blue green color during the transition, then stabilize the white balance right afterwards, until I point the camera up to get more of the brighter sky in the image, then the white balance shift to yellow tint kicks in again. It goes back and forth with the light level, which is why exposure control is so important, too. Everything interacts.

AviDemux is an editor, not meant to be a player really, and it has a difficult time decoding and playing an H.264 encoded video at full speed without stuttering for some reason, even on my PC which has plenty of horsepower to play videos smoothly in every other editor I use. It's a programming issue within AviDemux. If you edit the video in AviDemux and then output the file with the H.264 video codec, it plays fine in a dedicated player assuming it has the codec to decode it. WMP that comes with W7 works fine as does the VLC player.

Thanks for the explanation on the color issue. I initially tried to edit the clip in avidemux, clipping, but it wouldn't work. I clipped the beginning up to the stills I took, that worked fine every time, but after that, no matter what I tried, I couldn't clip off the end. I ended up taking the snap shots in WMM Xp.

Originally Posted by Daedalus66

That would definitely NOT be an improvement! The only acceptable date format is the international standard YYYYMMDD. The other two are horribly ambiguous about which is day and which month.

Microsoft lets you choose the format.
ebay.com shows the date in the American way, only that uses three letter for the month. So Europeans cannot get confused.
ebay.uk shows the date in the European way, only that uses three letter for the month. So Americans cannot get confused.
Amazon.com/uk differ also. On many little things (like uploading date of a photo) amazon.com uses the mm/dd/yy format, so confuses a lot of people.
Other shops also. Even if they have only one for international use.
Forums show the date as they like.
Etc

It seems noone uses the international standard, even at critical operations...
Not even paypal...

I can`t see why a video is more critical than the personal taste.
For sure I prefer to see the date, in my videos, the way as I do in my regular life, as you (may) do also.
It is not that critical or formal to have the strange ISO8601 format...

Of course I don`t mind that much if it remains at the international format.
But if it is a very simple addon, like an extra register to the timeset.txt, then it would be more convenient.

Originally Posted by Dee404

Hi all,

For some reason my shutter button has stopped working

I've had the camera apart, checked the switch with a multimeter and that seems ok. The other weird thing is I tried turning the camera on without the SD card in and the yellow light doesn't flash like it normally does, it just stays on solid.

I've tried the rest button, a hard rest by disconnecting the battery, date on firmware, and gone over the board both sides under a microscope to see if there were any dodgy joints on any of the components but no luck

Is there anything else you think I can try before contacting the vendor?

Hi again,

Just an up date on the problem I'm having with my shutter button.

I've got in contact with the vendor.

My message

Hi,

I am sorry to say my camera has gone faulty.

The problem is with the shutter button. When I turn the camera on the yellow light comes on, I then press the shutter button to take a video but then the yellow light does not go out and the camera will not record. The other thing I have noticed is that when there is no memory card in the camera the yellow light stays solid and doesn't flash like it is suppose to.

I look forward to your reply.

Regards,
Dee

The reply,

Dear friend
I am sorry for it takes trouble to you .
Does it can take picture ? You press the shutter key for a few second after the yellow light turn off .you begain recording
after it you press this key again to keep the video .
The yellow light can stays solid without memony card when your turn on the camera .
It indicate the camera can work .
Hope you can try it ,
Have any questions you can email me Thank you

Now from that reply it sounds like the yellow light stays solid on some cameras even without the memory card, does anyones do that?

I've made a little video of what happens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSj7p...ature=youtu.be

Dee, I had that problem as well with the shutter button. Only difference was that my light would blink if there was no card inserted. It turned out to be the card itself. I tried a class 10 card in the camera and now it works. The first card would not work no matter what I did, I reformatted it several times but no go. It worked fine in my PC but not in the camera. Try a different card and see if it works.

Originally Posted by smoothvirus

Dee, I had that problem as well with the shutter button. Only difference was that my light would blink if there was no card inserted. It turned out to be the card itself. I tried a class 10 card in the camera and now it works. The first card would not work no matter what I did, I reformatted it several times but no go. It worked fine in my PC but not in the camera. Try a different card and see if it works.

Thanks for your reply,

I have tried several cards now and when I format a card and insert it the camera will write the default folders to it. I am now thinking it might be a problem with the card slot on the camera. I will try swaping one off my old #8 and see if this fixes it.

The led should blink with no card inserted.
I doubt you can fix it by replacing the card slot.
Most probably you`ll just break the #8 also. It is a good camera for low and indoor light (the best out there for those occasions). Except of the sound problem.
Try to find a solution with the vendor.

Originally Posted by air_crash

The led should blink with no card inserted.
I doubt you can fix it by replacing the card slot.
Most probably you`ll just break the #8 also. It is a good camera for low and indoor light (the best out there for those occasions). Except of the sound problem.
Try to find a solution with the vendor.

Yes this might be true.

The reason behind swapping the card slots was because there is a switch that tells the camera if there is a card inserted or not and I was thinking that this switch might be stuck. I'll try and see if I can test this switch tomorrow.

Originally Posted by zrobbie

Thanks for the explanation on the color issue. I initially tried to edit the clip in avidemux, clipping, but it wouldn't work. I clipped the beginning up to the stills I took, that worked fine every time, but after that, no matter what I tried, I couldn't clip off the end. I ended up taking the snap shots in WMM Xp.

Hmmm... I just tried trimming before and after that section with AviDemux and was able to do so. But the "seeking" through the video is slower... maybe because the editor I used (MAGIX MEP17+) to make the upload copy uses "B" frames in the H.264 encoding, and these scan both ahead and behind for their compression, and might take more horsepower to decode. Since it was an .avi file, I also loaded it into Vdub. Trimming there was also slower, and the video would not play smoothly there in the editor either! Maybe the more complex encoding and higher bit rate takes it's toll.

Originally Posted by Dee404

Yes this might be true.

The reason behind swapping the card slots was because there is a switch that tells the camera if there is a card inserted or not and I was thinking that this switch might be stuck. I'll try and see if I can test this switch tomorrow.

The "switch" is a simple contact to the card casing (ground). You don't need to unsolder anything except maybe the battery. Use a multimeter to check for continuity between the pin opposite the latch mechanism (pin #9) and the card casing. It should be open circuit without a card inserted and closed circuit if the card is inserted. It's very basic indeed, more like a contact being "pushed" to ground with the card inserted.

Here is video in dark skys with three planes at my flying club. I used VideoPad editor to crop and zoom in on scenes. They are flying a large pattern which makes it hard to get in close so I thought I would try the crop function which allows you to zoom in like a bad digital zoom.

Three planes are:
Funcub by Multiplex
100" Cub gasser
HiLo nitro

Yes, I know the video is too long, just take a look and see what you can do if you have a dot in the sky you want to enlarge.

Another observation is this ingenious little HD camera is best used on sunny days.

Funcub 2 flight _ May 21, 2011 (7 min 3 sec)

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

The new firmware which I have dubbed Release 2 is now available for download here!

Before you start installing it, note it is a one way street... you can't go back to the prior version (called Release 1 now) by simply installing it back in over Release 2.

More details in the linked post above. Let me know if you find any problems.

Thanks. I updated my camera to Release 2 and the results are:
+better color saturation and exposure
+better FPS performance in indoor videos with artificial lights - 25-30 (no dropped frames), compared with 15-20 (wich means 10-15 dropped frames) of the firmware Release 1
-back to 7 Mbps video recording, compared to 10 Mbits of the firmware Release 1, but I don't really care about that, cuz the advantages are more /powerful/ than the disadvantages
Cheers!

Did a comparison video of the GoPro HDHero 960 vs 720P Keychain Cam flying on the GAUI 300X-S quad copter.

Had both mounted and recording at the same time so all conditions are identical. Slightly overcast morning. No post recording processing, just clipped together in iMovie.

This is with the latest version 2 firmware on the keychain cam.

HD Cam Comparision (4 min 59 sec)

The field of view is nicer on the keychain cam I think, but it has a bit more of a jellyvision effect and the exposure seems to vary a bit too much from dark to light but has a less washed out look than the GoPro.

Originally Posted by schooner2000

No post recording processing, just clipped together in iMovie.

Hmm, there must be something done to the videos. Both look blurred, more like motion blur. Like there is a huge transcoding loss of quality.
Maybe is youtube, but I don`t think so.

Anyway the quality of the final video, as we watch it on youtube at 720p, is not very good.

Originally Posted by schooner2000

The field of view is nicer on the keychain cam I think, but it has a bit more of a jellyvision effect and the exposure seems to vary a bit too much from dark to light but has a less washed out look than the GoPro.

Nice videos.

I think it's difficult to compare the jellyvision effect in your video because the field of views are too differnt. With a wide-angle view like the one seen in the GoPro footage vibrations and shaking produce shorter, and thus slower, displacement of the objects in the focal plane.

I think the quality of the keychain image is very good compared to the GoPro as seen in your video.

Originally Posted by ShinG0

Thanks. I updated my camera to Release 2 and the results are:
+better color saturation and exposure
+better FPS performance in indoor videos with artificial lights - 25-30 (no dropped frames), compared with 15-20 (wich means 10-15 dropped frames) of the firmware Release 1
-back to 7 Mbps video recording, compared to 10 Mbits of the firmware Release 1, but I don't really care about that, cuz the advantages are more /powerful/ than the disadvantages
Cheers!

Thanks for the insights. It will be interesting to see how different people view the new firmware, especially things like color saturation since "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". The most interesting thing for me has been that I prefer formatting with the SDformatter utility, and my data rates are consistently much higher than they were with the older firmware.

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

The saturation control does not diminish the saturation in bright scenes, but it does look to me that it keeps the saturation higher in lower light scenes, so there is less of a difference when panning from bright to low light compared to the release 1 firmware, at least that's the way it appears to my eyes on my camera. The differences are not earthshaking, and the saturation is still too high in ALL scenes for my taste... colors are too vivid and not natural looking. But if the saturation is more constant throughout the video, I can tone down the saturation during editing and get better results overall.

The incremental steps in exposure changes look the same as it was before, but the exposure "locks in" much better in those light situations where it jumped back and forth "hunting" for the sweet spot in the early Release 1 firmware. That was fixed in the last "exposure control" firmware in Release 1.

I agree the white balance is still the biggest issue remaining. The good news is that the developer is aware of this and is now reportedly working on improving it! I also gave feedback to them on toning down the saturation level a bit, and seeing if one of the LEDs can be made to blink when recording. I think the majority of users in this forum would welcome a blinking LED so its clear the camera is recording. For those who are using the camera for "stealth" projects, well... a bit of electrical tape over the hole will fix that!

Ha!, the blinking light while recording thing was what I opened the thread for today, I was going to suggest just that.
Yesterday I did a flight that should had resulted in a great aerial video, but when I landed the camera didn't record a thing. I'm not sure if it turned off by some reason or I monkeyed with the buttons the wrong way when setting up the plane. In any case it would be good to have an indication before and after the flight that the camera is actually recording.

As for the white balance, I would say that as it is now a fixed white balance would be better, something right in between the yellow WB in bright conditions and the blue WB in dark lighting. One of the problems of the shifting WB is that it makes post processing of the colours nearly impossible, unless you go frame by frame tweaking the settings; sheer madness of course.

I'll be looking forward for any updates on the WB fixing firmware.

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

Thanks for the insights. It will be interesting to see how different people view the new firmware, especially things like color saturation since "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". The most interesting thing for me has been that I prefer formatting with the SDformatter utility, and my data rates are consistently much higher than they were with the older firmware.

Tom,

On heavy overcast days the new firmware is all but useless. Take a look at the video I posted yesterday (#4134). I am beginning to conclude this is bright sunny day only camera.

Bill

Originally Posted by air_crash

Hmm, there must be something done to the videos. Both look blurred, more like motion blur. Like there is a huge transcoding loss of quality.
Maybe is youtube, but I don`t think so.

Anyway the quality of the final video, as we watch it on youtube at 720p, is not very good.

Nothing done on my end, perhaps its Youtube but I don't notice them beign "that bad" compared to others I've watched. Could be a result of the cloudy weather and vibration from the quad as well.

Originally Posted by Prof100

Tom,

On heavy overcast days the new firmware is all but useless. Take a look at the video I posted yesterday (#4134). I am beginning to conclude this is bright sunny day only camera.

Bill

I'm noticing the same as well, the video I just posted was bit overcast and the ones in foggy mornings are too dark I find.

Originally Posted by AleG

...
As for the white balance, I would say that as it is now a fixed white balance would be better, something right in between the yellow WB in bright conditions and the blue WB in dark lighting. One of the problems of the shifting WB is that it makes post processing of the colours nearly impossible, unless you go frame by frame tweaking the settings; sheer madness of course.
...

I agree, AleG. A constant white balance throughout the video is the goal, even if it is slightly tinted since that can be easily corrected in post processing if it is slightly off. But both the saturation and white balance looked to be linked to the exposure level, and as the exposure shifts and corrects in "steps", so do the other two. It will be interesting to see how much control the firmware has over the CMOS sensor controller, which should have these functions built into it.. at least the original one did according to it's spec sheet. But it looks to me there has been a change in the CMOS module from the original one as evidenced by the much different traces and connections on the current ribbon cable, with no apparent changes to the circuit board.

It will be interesting to see how much the shifting white balance can be tamed with ne firmware.

Originally Posted by Prof100

Tom,

On heavy overcast days the new firmware is all but useless. Take a look at the video I posted yesterday (#4134). I am beginning to conclude this is bright sunny day only camera.

Bill

Originally Posted by schooner2000

I'm noticing the same as well, the video I just posted was bit overcast and the ones in foggy mornings are too dark I find.

Yes, low light is not something this camera handles very well. But I don't see any significant difference with the Release 2 firmware in my current #11, though, and I've shot lots clips in various overcast days here for comparison.

My first #11 had the original CMOS module in it, and it had better low light sensitivity than the current one has with the different CMOS module. The current CMOS has to slow down the shutter speed to get proper exposure, and we get more motion blurring in the video. It's especially evident in indoors video, especially at night with normal room lighting.

Prof100, I think you got one of these early on. Can you confirm if you have the original CMOS module in yours (see circuit board ID pictures in post #2)? Maybe the early CMOS modules are reacting differently to the new firmware settings? My darker day videos don't seem overly dark, but they are more over-saturated and grainy.

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

Yes, low light is not something this camera handles very well. But I don't see any significant difference with the Release 2 firmware in my current #11, though, and I've shot lots clips in various overcast days here for comparison.

My first #11 had the original CMOS module in it, and it had better low light sensitivity than the current one has with the different CMOS module. The current CMOS has to slow down the shutter speed to get proper exposure, and we get more motion blurring in the video. It's especially evident in indoors video, especially at night with normal room lighting.

Prof100, I think you got one of these early on. Can you confirm if you have the original CMOS module in yours (see circuit board ID pictures in post #2)? Maybe the early CMOS modules are reacting differently to the new firmware settings? My darker day videos don't seem overly dark, but they are more over-saturated and grainy.

Tom,

Mine is an early version (December 2010). I cannot confirm the version right now.

Bill

Originally Posted by Isoprop

The "switch" is a simple contact to the card casing (ground). You don't need to unsolder anything except maybe the battery. Use a multimeter to check for continuity between the pin opposite the latch mechanism (pin #9) and the card casing. It should be open circuit without a card inserted and closed circuit if the card is inserted. It's very basic indeed, more like a contact being "pushed" to ground with the card inserted.

Thanks for that.

Tried testing the switch in the slot and it's working fine.

Think I'll give up now and leave it in the hands of the vendor.

Shot this today.. This is with V2 I wish it would just say right between the two on the brightness.. That is not blue sky on the left but a big thunderstorm..

mCP X May 23 2011.wmv (4 min 21 sec)

Originally Posted by livonia bob

Shot this today.. This is with V2 I wish it would just say right between the two on the brightness.. That is not blue sky on the left but a big thunderstorm..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMgzlylKvUk

I thought the brightness (exposure) was pretty good, but the shifting white balance between yellow tint ant blue tint was the biggest issue.

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

I thought the brightness (exposure) was pretty good, but the shifting white balance between yellow tint ant blue tint was the biggest issue.

Yes its the yellow blue shifting that I don't like but is it the white balance or the exposure.. What ever it is if it would just stay at one or the other or right between the two I would be happy..

Originally Posted by livonia bob

Yes its the yellow blue shifting that I don't like but is it the white balance or the exposure. What ever it is if it would just stay at one or the other or right between the two I would be happy..

The color shifting is caused by fluctuating white balance, but it follows the exposure. When there is more brighter sky in the frame, the exposure will cut back so the sky is not all washed out, and that triggers the shift in white balance to the yellow tint. The reverse happens when the overall frame is darker, such as when there is more ground than brighter sky in the frame. The exposure increases so the ground is not real dark with no detail, and that triggers the white balance shift to blue.

We all want white balance to stay reasonably constant, and the camera developers are reportedly working to improve this.

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

The color shifting is caused by fluctuating white balance, but it follows the exposure. When there is more brighter sky in the frame, the exposure will cut back so the sky is not all washed out, and that triggers the shift in white balance to the yellow tint. The reverse happens when the overall frame is darker, such as when there is more ground than brighter sky in the frame. The exposure increases so the ground is not real dark with no detail, and that triggers the white balance shift to blue.

We all want white balance to stay reasonably constant, and the camera developers are reportedly working to improve this.

I would rather have the sky washed out and be able to see the ground better.. I'm uploading a video that I took flying the Champ about 20 minutes before the heli video where you can better see the exposure problem much better than in the heli one which I agree seems more of a yellow/blue problem......

Here is the other video..

Champ May 23 2011.wmv (4 min 40 sec)

Wow, the 2 #11 came today! I ordered them on the 15th, way faster than I thought. I ordered 2 new cards from Tom's post on page 1 and they are not here yet?? oh well.

I tried my card from the #3 cam I hope that it is because it is almost full of video, and has not been formatted again yet, but both new #11 cams showed alot of digitized pixleation/scrambling effect.

Will try again when fresh new cards come. (card was a transcend 8gig class 6)

Originally Posted by wheelspinner20

...
... but both new #11 cams showed alot of digitized pixleation/scrambling effect.

Will try again when fresh new cards come. (card was a transcend 8gig class 6)

If you are shooting indoors at night with normal room lighting, you will not get good video (lots of video "noise", blurred motion, and dropped frames), even with a good flash card.

Originally Posted by schooner2000

..
The field of view is nicer on the keychain cam I think, but it has a bit more of a jellyvision effect and the exposure seems to vary a bit too much from dark to light but has a less washed out look than the GoPro.

Great comparison.. I like the keycam better as well.. I've often considered the GoPro.. but now i think the only real reason would be to get the under water housing. Thanks for posting it.. JimS

If you are shooting indoors at night with normal room lighting,

good, thanks Tom.

P

If you are now running W7 and don't care for WLMM, you can download the Vista WMM v6.0 (arguably the best Movie Maker to date) from this site. When coupled with the recommended Rehan Shader TFX module (a mere $15 shareware and well worth it), you can have a host of additional transitions and effects as well as chroma key and PIP ability. And the effects can be user modified if you can edit simple HTML script definition files.

WMM v6.0 has the conventional timeline and look/feel of the old XP WMM, but with much more capability.

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

If you are now running W7 and don't care for WLMM, you can download the Vista WMM v6.0 (arguably the best Movie Maker to date) from this site. When coupled with the recommended Rehan Shader TFX module (a mere $15 shareware and well worth it), you can have a host of additional transitions and effects as well as chroma key and PIP ability. And the effects can be user modified if you can edit simple HTML script definition files.

WMM v6.0 has the conventional timeline and look/feel of the old XP WMM, but with much more capability.

I'm guessing the WMM v6.0 won't run ox XP pro sp3?

Originally Posted by zrobbie

I'm guessing the WMM v6.0 won't run ox XP pro sp3?

You guessed right...time to upgrade!

I have a question, has anyone thought about contacting the manufacture of the Camera to see if they would be willing to write Firm Ware that would convert the Camera to suit our requirements. It would make things a lot easier for us guys and there is a big market for the Camera in the RC community. Just a thought

Originally Posted by Sixter

I have a question, has anyone thought about contacting the manufacture of the Camera to see if they would be willing to write Firm Ware that would convert the Camera to suit our requirements. It would make things a lot easier for us guys and there is a big market for the Camera in the RC community. Just a thought

Like what requirements? If you read this thread, you'll see the firmware for this camera has been improved 4 times now to better meet our requirements. And is in the process of a 5th revision!

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

Like what requirements? If you read this thread, you'll see the firmware for this camera has been improved 4 times now to better meet our requirements. And is in the process of a 5th revision!

Yep,, you Tom are doing a great job getting things done.. We just have to make sure they know what are needs are.. As I'm sure they are a little different that what they designed the camera to be used for.. So making changes that apply only to us as firmware upgrades we can use if we wish is great.. Even if we need two or more camera's with different ones for shooting under different conditions..

Please keep up the great work....

Hey, this is a HUGE thread, uh???

Just bought an #11 from hxelepro360 (and she's asking to be my friend!).

I got one question... would be possible to rotate the CMOS sensor by 90 degrees? I will mount the camera in my helmet and it would be great.

I swear a searched the thread (but it's too big) and I found a way to extend the lens by soldering tiny wires in the data ribbon, but I just want to rotate the image (and I'm not that good with soldering)...

Well, if I can't rotate the CMOS, that's OK, but it will be a bit uglier in my helmet...

BR!

Originally Posted by rtogami

Hey, this is a HUGE thread, uh???

Just bought an #11 from hxelepro360 (and she's asking to be my friend!).

I got one question... would be possible to rotate the CMOS sensor by 90 degrees? I will mount the camera in my helmet and it would be great.

I swear a searched the thread (but it's too big) and I found a way to extend the lens by soldering tiny wires in the data ribbon, but I just want to rotate the image (and I'm not that good with soldering)...

Well, if I can't rotate the CMOS, that's OK, but it will be a bit uglier in my helmet...

BR!

If you look at the pictures in post #2 you can see there is some slack in the CMOS ribbon cable, so it can be rotated 90 deg., but then you'd have to devise a new enclosure for the circuit board. But why bother... can't you just make a mount for the camera on top of your helmet and leave the camera as is?

Thanks Tom!
I don't have the camera yet, I thought the ribbon was too short for this. Hmm... I thought the ribbon was the problem, not the enclosure... thanks for point this.

Hmmm... sorry, my English is not that good. By rotating the CMOS I meant rotating the lens/sensor to use the #11 the same way we rotate a camera to take portrait or landscape pictures.

I'd like to rotate the image by 90 degrees because it would be nicer not in my helmet, but next to the camera that I already have in my helmet. I got a ContourHD mounted on the left side of my helmet, I'll use the #11 to record as rear camera.

The ContourHD is mounted by a rail system, available in both sides. One rail is attached to the helmet mount and I'd use the other rail to clip the #11 facing backward. If I manage to rotate the CMOS, this camera would keep low profile.

Sorry to divert from RC, I do have RC cars and one Lama V4 (still learning), I'll use the camera on the heli too!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rtogami
Hey, this is a HUGE thread, uh???

Just bought an #11 from hxelepro360 (and she's asking to be my friend!).

I got one question... would be possible to rotate the CMOS sensor by 90 degrees? I will mount the camera in my helmet and it would be great.

I swear a searched the thread (but it's too big) and I found a way to extend the lens by soldering tiny wires in the data ribbon, but I just want to rotate the image (and I'm not that good with soldering)...

Well, if I can't rotate the CMOS, that's OK, but it will be a bit uglier in my helmet...

BR!

If you look at the pictures in post #2 you can see there is some slack in the CMOS ribbon cable, so it can be rotated 90 deg., but then you'd have to devise a new enclosure for the circuit board. But why bother... can't you just make a mount for the camera on top of your helmet and leave the camera as is?

Or simply rotate the video in post processing.

Zrobbie, thanks but it won't work... by rotating 90 degrees I'd lose the widescreen format!

Originally Posted by rtogami

Thanks Tom!
I don't have the camera yet, I thought the ribbon was too short for this. Hmm... I thought the ribbon was the problem, not the enclosure... thanks for point this.

Hmmm... sorry, my English is not that good. By rotating the CMOS I meant rotating the lens/sensor to use the #11 the same way we rotate a camera to take portrait or landscape pictures.

I'd like to rotate the image by 90 degrees because it would be nicer not in my helmet, but next to the camera that I already have in my helmet. I got a ContourHD mounted on the left side of my helmet, I'll use the #11 to record as rear camera.

The ContourHD is mounted by a rail system, available in both sides. One rail is attached to the helmet mount and I'd use the other rail to clip the #11 facing backward. If I manage to rotate the CMOS, this camera would keep low profile.

Sorry to divert from RC, I do have RC cars and one Lama V4 (still learning), I'll use the camera on the heli too!

I understand what you want to do and I would like one with the CMOS rotated 90 degrees also to try different mounting on the planes.. The ribbon looks like it's a little short to pull it off.. But if you try it and get it to work I'll do one also..

Originally Posted by rtogami

Thanks Tom!
I don't have the camera yet, I thought the ribbon was too short for this. Hmm... I thought the ribbon was the problem, not the enclosure... thanks for point this.

Hmmm... sorry, my English is not that good. By rotating the CMOS I meant rotating the lens/sensor to use the #11 the same way we rotate a camera to take portrait or landscape pictures.

I'd like to rotate the image by 90 degrees because it would be nicer not in my helmet, but next to the camera that I already have in my helmet. I got a ContourHD mounted on the left side of my helmet, I'll use the #11 to record as rear camera.

The ContourHD is mounted by a rail system, available in both sides. One rail is attached to the helmet mount and I'd use the other rail to clip the #11 facing backward. If I manage to rotate the CMOS, this camera would keep low profile.

Sorry to divert from RC, I do have RC cars and one Lama V4 (still learning), I'll use the camera on the heli too!

OH.. I was think of rotating 90 deg. in a different direction. Wait until you get the camera and see how small it is. I don't think it is as wide as the Coutour HD camera, so having the camera in the normal horizontal position might not be so bad. But, you might have part of the helmet in the video depending on how you mount it.

Thanks Tom!
I always like to plan before I do... in this case, I annoyed you with my brainstorm... :-)

I'll see what I can do, prob. I'll just leave the cam the way it is and mount the way I manage, I don't have experience to deal with tiny electronic circuits.

No problem about the FOV, for the videos I saw here (and from techmoan.com), I think it would be perfect (in this price range).

Livonia, I'll try! If I manage to do it, I'll let you know!!!

BR

Hi All!
Today I have received my new #11 camera and first thing i do is v2 patch with Continuous Recording. It has removed timestamp, but 20 min recording is still there.
What have i done wrong?

Originally Posted by Danka

Hi All!
Today I have received my new #11 camera and first thing i do is v2 patch with Continuous Recording. It has removed timestamp, but 20 min recording is still there.
What have i done wrong?

I don't know. The continuous recording works for me. Is it possible you installed the "remove time" firmware by mistake? That would produce the results you are getting.

I'd do another install of the continuous recording firmware and see it that fixes it.

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

I don't know. The continuous recording works for me. Is it possible you installed the "remove time" firmware by mistake? That would produce the results you are getting.

I'd do another install of the continuous recording firmware and see it that fixes it.

No, i've checked the archive and folders name - it is "continuous recording". And i have flashed the firmware several times.

No dice. I think I got 2 bad cameras. Charged for an hour. Red light off. emptied card. formatted with sdformatter. Sunshine outdoors.

Full screen digitized pixilation pulsing every 2 seconds. with about 1.5 seconds of clean video in-between.!!

(head in hands... heavy sigh)

p

Originally Posted by wheelspinner20

No dice. I think I got 2 bad cameras. Charged for an hour. Red light off. emptied card. formatted with sdformatter. Sunshine outdoors.

Full screen digitized pixilation pulsing every 2 seconds. with about 1.5 seconds of clean video in-between.!!

(head in hands... heavy sigh)

p

That's very unlucky that you received two cameras with the same issues. Since you have done testing with different microSD cards the only option left is to contact the seller for an exchange.

Originally Posted by wheelspinner20

No dice. I think I got 2 bad cameras. Charged for an hour. Red light off. emptied card. formatted with sdformatter. Sunshine outdoors.

Full screen digitized pixilation pulsing every 2 seconds. with about 1.5 seconds of clean video in-between.!!

(head in hands... heavy sigh)

p

It would be interesting to see a sample of your video issue.

I am um... perplexed! I must report, when I saved the video via adapter direct in a slot on my laptop to my hardrive, and then opened the vid with WLMM the pixilation was gone! The video played without defect. Tom asked for a sample so I was going to clip one and post it on vimeo... and voila, it plays without pixilation and noise.!~??

wow, ok well IDK????

P.

first impression is that whatever default player I am currently using cannot process the codec or package properly? while I have not read every post on this thread I have not seen this reported before. I tried in both new cams (playback from the same card) and then w\ adapter same result. HMMMM.
(thumb and forefinger rubbing chin thinking man style)

P

Originally Posted by wheelspinner20

I am um... perplexed! I must report, when I saved the video via adapter direct in a slot on my laptop to my hardrive, and then opened the vid with WLMM the pixilation was gone! The video played without defect.

That's because the camera only transfers data at USB 1.1 speeds which is not fast enough to read the video file directly off of the camera.

first impression is that whatever default player I am currently using cannot process the codec or package properly?

Nope, you should take the card out of the camera and use a USB 2.0 speed reader or copy the video files off of the card before you attempt to read them.

Thanks, yes I am an idiot.... now, on to the date.... I've tried 6 different variation of the directions. I save a simple text file named timeset.txt... copied it to?? the only thing that opens in the removable disc is dcim.... MISC and 100Media inside DCIM I have copied the txt file to all three of these folders and it does not change the date... I tried both in the cam and in an adapter in the slot on the laptop.

What am I doing wrong??

p

Originally Posted by wheelspinner20

Thanks, yes I am an idiot.... now, on to the date.... I've tried 6 different variation of the directions. I save a simple text file named timeset.txt... copied it to?? the only thing that opens in the removable disc is dcim.... MISC and 100Media inside DCIM I have copied the txt file to all three of these folders and it does not change the date... I tried both in the cam and in an adapter in the slot on the laptop.

What am I doing wrong??

p

Don't put the timeset.txt into any folder on the card. Put it directly in the *root* of the card. For example, on a Windows PC open up "Computer", then double-click into your SD card, and put the timeset.txt file right there.

And you're not an idiot, these cameras are not easy to use at first. I don't think the slow USB 1.1 speeds of the camera have ever been mentioned by anyone in this thread for some reason.

Obviously, I cant find the root directory of that drive... using windows 7 64 bit

If you see the folders MISC and DCIM as you mentioned in your previous post then you are currently in the root of your sd card.

Thanks for your help, that is where I left the text file created in notepad. in the proper format.

Then I unplug the camera, shut it off, and turn it back on.

And i even tried in the adapter, the drag and drop, into the SD removable.... same result.

no result.

Yikes.... I'm glad I have fun flying... cuz this stuff sucks.! lol

Tomorow is another day... oh crap, it is tomorow... ok well today is another day, I gotta get some sleep.!

That is the correct location. Now it just needs to be named correctly. You can't name it anything other than "timeset.txt". So right-click on one of those and remove the [1] or the (2). Make sure it is EXACTLY timeset.txt

As it is, you have "timeset(2).txt" and "TIMESET[1].txt", which are both incorrect. Your file extensions are hidden so you don't see the ".txt" which is completely fine. Just don't add another .txt to the name.

Originally Posted by xamindar

That's because the camera only transfers data at USB 1.1 speeds which is not fast enough to read the video file directly off of the camera.

Nope, you should take the card out of the camera and use a USB 2.0 speed reader or copy the video files off of the card before you attempt to read them.

Good advice to trouble shoot a problem like this, but I have not experienced this problem, and I play video directly off my camera via a USB cable in a port on my PC monitor all the time with no issues. So it's likely a dual problem of slower USB ports and slower CPU on his computer. Or maybe a flakey USB cable.

Originally Posted by wheelspinner20

I save a simple text file named timeset.txt... copied it to??
What am I doing wrong??

Originally Posted by wheelspinner20

... using windows 7 64 bit

Well, it is a common misunderstanding/confusion.

Windows Vista/7 by default does not show the extensions of the filenames if they are common (usual).
You have to make them visible manually.

So if you have not done it then you`ll end up with a file like this:
Timeset.txt.txt

Note that you don`t have to make extensions visible though.
But in this case you have to name the file as: Timeset (no dot, no extension)

More info http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/w...ame-extensions

Woops! I just looked better to xamindar`s last message. He already tells about this.
Well, too bad to waste all that typing...

Originally Posted by tom frank

good advice to trouble shoot a problem like this, but i have not experienced this problem, and i play video directly off my camera via a usb cable in a port on my pc monitor all the time with no issues. So it's likely a dual problem of slower usb ports and slower cpu on his computer. Or maybe a flakey usb cable.

+ 1

What's the weight of this new hd key cam (#11)?

Thanks

10 to 15 grams i believe. light enuf to forget its in your poket!

Question, have anyone tested one of these? If so, what is your opinion about them.

HD 720p DV DVR Car Sports Racing Video Camera HDMI Pro

http://cgi.ebay.com/HD-720p-DV-DVR-C...item3a666444f7

thank you very muh guys....will try later.... not mahine tom new and reasonably powerful and fast. tried 3 diff. usb connetions and 3 different ports...and both new cams.

Originally Posted by wheelspinner20

10 to 15 grams i believe. light enuf to forget its in your poket!

Thanks for the quick reply.

That weight is with the case?
I'm concerned about the weight because I would like to use it in my glider..

Originally Posted by HF_ATL

What's the weight of this new hd key cam (#11)?

Thanks

I have two.
One is 16.4g and the other is 16.3g.
This is with a 0.1g precision scale.
The camera with its casing (of course) but no key chain & key ring and no microSD card (about 1g more).

Originally Posted by air_crash

I have two.
One is 16.4g and the other is 16.3g.
This is with a 0.1g precision scale.
The camera with its casing (of course) but no key chain & key ring and no microSD card (about 1g more).

Thank you very much!

Probably I'll order one soon..

Originally Posted by Tom Frank

Good advice to trouble shoot a problem like this, but I have not experienced this problem, and I play video directly off my camera via a USB cable in a port on my PC monitor all the time with no issues. So it's likely a dual problem of slower USB ports and slower CPU on his computer. Or maybe a flakey USB cable.

Just because you haven't seen the problem doesn't necessarily mean that it doesn't exist. The fact is, in some cases the 12 Mbit/s speed (not counting usb overhead on top of that) of the USB connection to the camera may not be fast enough to always play the video files directly from the camera as wheelspinner20 and I discovered. But who knows, maybe your camera is built differently in that it allows a faster connection.

Originally Posted by xamindar

Just because you haven't seen the problem doesn't necessarily mean that it doesn't exist. The fact is, in some cases the 12 Mbit/s speed (not counting usb overhead on top of that) of the USB connection to the camera may not be fast enough to always play the video files directly from the camera as wheelspinner20 and I discovered. But who knows, maybe your camera is built differently in that it allows a faster connection.

when I transfer from camera to pc I get ~8 MB/s = 82 Mbit/s so it's definitely not a USB 1.1 device and your issue it's not a throughput problem

Originally Posted by Giorg

when I transfer from camera to pc I get ~8 MB/s = 82 Mbit/s so it's definetly not a USB 1.1 device and your issue it's not a throughput problem

OK, so that confirms that some of these cameras work at a faster speed than the others. Strange, but good to know. Hopefully the replacement I get will be like yours and Toms.

Originally Posted by xamindar

Just because you haven't seen the problem doesn't necessarily mean that it doesn't exist. The fact is, in some cases the 12 Mbit/s speed (not counting usb overhead on top of that) of the USB connection to the camera may not be fast enough to always play the video files directly from the camera as wheelspinner20 and I discovered. But who knows, maybe your camera is built differently in that it allows a faster connection.

<EDIT> Looks like Giorg beat me to it <EDIT>

Hmmm... I don't see anywhere that I said the problem doesn't exist. I simply said I had not experienced it and there's more to it than the camera's USB port speed.

I'd be interested in how you determined the camera has a USB 1.1 port? The spec sheet for these cameras (see the pic in post #2) clearly states it has a USB 2.0 port, and the fact that I can play clips with over 15 Mbit/sec video data rate (not counting the added audio data rate) directly from the camera via a cabled connection to my PC confirms it's not a USB 1.1 port in the camera... at least not in my camera, and I do not believe my camera is different from anyone elses.

So there's more to it than the camera's USB port speed as I suggested in my prior post. Could be flakey cabling or pins in the port plugs... who knows? But the fact that simply reading the card directly in a card reader or copying the files from the camera to the PC solved the problem in this case is good news, and good advice as a first troubleshootinf step if anyone else has a similar problem.