|Nov 01, 2007, 08:50 AM|
Joined Oct 2006
Dio Rules and is the Devil himself
|Dec 29, 2007, 01:38 PM|
How is the Headplay goggles doing?? Still happy with them?
I am starting to think in jumping to FPV, I already have some experience in FPV by using a friend (thanks Luís) rig.
I have a cheap TX/Rx/Cmos combo to tinker with, but now I am facing a big dilema, spend 260eur in a EVG922 (or similar) and buy better camera or instead buy HP, and keep my cheap hardware for some time, as you know money is not rubber, doesn't stretched
What to do, What to do...
|Dec 29, 2007, 04:32 PM|
Yes I knew the previous offer from Fatshark, but haven't given much attention to it lately.
Do you have a opinion about the fatshark material usage/quality (links?)
|Dec 29, 2007, 07:00 PM|
Fatshark goggle are new and very few peoples here had tried them.
I received their goggle last summer, and since then, I help them to design the best goggle we can found at a reasonable price.
I will give you my opinion, but I'm not independant, I work with Aeropix, and we will sell theses goggles.
The picture is bigger than any goggle that I've seen before, bright and colorfull. My eyes should be well align with the screen or picture will apear blurry on the edge, they have an adjustement (IPD) for the distance between the two screen to fit physionomie of differents peoples.
With an integrated receiver and battery on the headband, the goggle stay very light. The headband slip on the back of my head, I removed the headband and install the goggle with two tye-rap under a cap, they are now very confortable. I also had tried the Headplay goggle, and they are similar in confort with the mod I've done.
They have an video/audio inoput jack, meaning you can bypass the internal receiver and use a receiver mount on tripod with bigger antenna.It's also possible to plug the output of the receiver mount on tripod to the input of the 10mW tx that come in the kit and send the signal receive on the tripod on another channel to the goggle and stay wireless.
I opened them like I also opened most of the goggle i had. Quality is good, Airwaves receiver have good reputation and already use by many. The video lcd/lens and pcb look standard quality.
I don't see why pay more than twice the price to get headplay goggle and external receiver etc. If Headplay had a perfect optic, i would say ok, but they are not. So the best deal for your money is the fatshark goggle.
You can see me wearing the fatshark goggle and the mod I made on the video for the anti-drift headtracker
|Dec 29, 2007, 08:45 PM|
I second VR's opinion regarding the Fatshark set.I cannot express any opinion in regard to the Headplay since i don't own a set but i can give one on Fats vs Icuiti DV920 wich is a less known goggle but in my opinion of excellent image quality.It may be because the DV920 have diopter adjustments among others (i wear corrective lenses in everyday life) that make me say their image is crisper than that of the Fats,it may be the fact that their IPD matches mine better than that of the Fats( i own the original model without adjustable IPD)or it may be just bias on my part since they were more expensive i might think they should perform better but the Fats have a wider FOV (wich for me is one of the most important aspects in FPV, especially for headtrackerless heli flying), the image is as good as is gets without any contrast/brightness/saturation/hue/whatever adjustments, they are as versatile as they can get (video in/out or normal use) and last but not least the price.To the best of my knowledge the "Aviator" package includes everything you need to crash and trash your airplane or heli FPV style at what seems to me a very reasonable price.
Unlike VR concerning Aeropix i don't own stock in either Icuiti or Fatshark.Just my 4 cents( 2 each) on 2 products i use and abuse.
|Dec 31, 2007, 09:54 PM|
United States, AZ, Queen Creek
Joined Jan 2007
I thought Fat Shark was the way to go, but I asked them if they just sell only the goggles, since I had the camera,transmitter,etc., already. They said the frequencies their system is using is different than what BWAV is using, and they could not guarentee the goggles to work with my equipment (BWAV). Soooo, that ruled that system out for me. If your thinking on getting Fat Shark, plan on getting their entire system, because you can't swap and mix different equipent around. To bad, I liked their goggles, great idea! Has anyone else heard of that incompatiblity?
|Dec 31, 2007, 10:00 PM|
Actually, there's nothing that prevents you from feeding the video signal from
any external receiver into the FatShark goggles, and I have done this with my
It's just the built in 2.4Ghz receiver that may not be compatible with
everyone else's frequencies. If you look around, you'll find that most
2.4Ghz Tx/Rx pairs can switch between four frequencies, but different brands
of Tx/Rx don't always share the same 4 frequencies. They usually
overlap directly with at least *one* of the frequencies but no guarantees
Since others are reviewing the FS goggles here, I'll throw in my two cents.
The FOV is great, and I experience none of the "tunnel" view that people
have complained of with some narrower FOV goggles.
I agree that the eye has to be well positioned or there's a little blur
near one edge. For most people this wouldn't be much of a problem
since the blurred bit they'd pick up with their other eye crisply. I only
have one good eye so I still notice it, particularly while testing
my OSD (which crams the text right at the edge of the view). Newer
firmware for the OSD will bring the text in a bit, and that should help.
Being able to adjust the IOD helps too, but I had to open mine up and
trim another 1/16" or so to get it to optimal position (I've always noticed
that I set binoculars much closer to each other than most people).
The hard plastic on the bridge of the nose was a bit distracting so
I glued on a little foam pad. I generally can get the headband to work ok,
but might try VRFlyer's trick of mounting it to a cap as well.
|Dec 31, 2007, 10:27 PM|
Joined Oct 2007
I only have my headplay goggles, so I can't offer any advice based on experience from other manufacturers, but I am very happy with them. The build quality is excellent, the sound quality is absolutely fantastic and as I writing this on a 42" plasma I would say the size of the screen is like viewing a 42" screen from 3ft away. The goggles also work well for gaming with good res (1024*768), a good refresh rate, contrast ratio and no motion blurring. I have 2 minor complaints, the first is the connector between the goggle cable and the liberator, the catch mechanism isn't very strong if the cable gets pulled from a 45 degree angle the cable will disconnect, not so good if this happens midflight, but no worries as a rubber band or cable tie will fix this. The second is I wish the headphones where built in to the goggles rather than the remote control unit.
Both are very minor grumbles, but it will hopefully give you an insight!
|Dec 31, 2007, 10:38 PM|
Effectively if you have already camera tx and rx, Fatshark goggle can be use like standard goggle with their video input. At $350 they are around the same price as others brands except Headplay.
But they have a 10mW tx and an integrated reciver, so you can mount your own receiver on tripod and plug the video/audio output in the 10mw tx. You will not need anymore to be wire to your tripod, you will received picture and sound wirelessly. I never tried it, but it should work if you use two channel far appart.
Also you have Lawnmate tx/rx, Fatshark use Airwaves tx/rx. one channel is exactly on the same frequencies between both, but only picture, no sound. So you will be able to select channel 3 on Fatshark goggle to receive the video picture from your Lawnmate tx.
|Dec 31, 2007, 11:25 PM|
Great feature for 5.8GHz
VRFlyer - The head tracker demo was fantastic! It is fun to put a face behind a name. I'm impressed with your work overall...
I brought this up before but it seems to me that the FatShark concept (integrated goggles with RX) is perfect for the 5.8GHz band. Most R/C and video equipment is on 35, 72, 900, 1200, 2400 etc. so I would use the headset as a short span wireless link to the RC and Video gear of one's preference without concern for channel overlap (i.e. big antenna to big receiver to little 5.8GHz TX to air to little 5.8GHz RX to eyes).
I like my Headplays AND my embarrassingly huge multi-band antenna array but hate the short cord to the brick!
|Feb 19, 2008, 11:58 AM|
Joined Oct 2006
Hi rvski and jmralves,
now this thread had been quiet for a couple of weeks, so I'd like to add my 2cents. I got a pair of FatShark goggles a few days ago, and I have to say: Once you tried them, you just don't want to go back to the keyhole goggles chained with a cable to the base station
I really appreciate the ability to just put them on and fly
The only thing I changed was to put a little sponge rubber around them, where the foam is. I like the softness of that rubber and it's very comfortable to wear them like this, just using the head band.
Also when you want to let your buddy watch through the goggles, you just take them off and hand it to him, and there won't be any danger to step on a cable or a controller box to fall down or cable to become loose, and so on...
The channels are standard Airwave frequencies 2414, 2432, 2450, 2468 MHz.
So you can check whether you can receive directly or prefer connecting the video receiver which you're already using to the AV-Input of the goggles.
You will find the specs here:
The lipos supplying the goggles are built into a slim little case which perfectly fits in the headband, and there's also a 2-cell lipo charger built into the battery case, so while charging the pack, you will always have a perfectly balanced 2-cell lipo ready for a happy battery life
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Discussion New Headplay goggles are out, Wooow !||zaguruinzasky||FPV Talk||37||Feb 05, 2011 02:26 AM|