I'm not impressed with the testing results yet. Here's why:
1)
I do not feel Mr. Steel's review was a good comparison. He is running the old SW (evident by screen jumpiness). I did like the fact he went behind a house.
2)
JB's test procedures were better, but I know the clearview would have done much better with two directional antennas. It makes a noticeable difference over an assymetric setup.

Clearview isn't known for edging out competition in relatively clean environments. I am very sure that with many racers, or at in indoor environment, the CVG would stomp the competition, as well as if the reviewers had a better understanding for antenna selection on the clearview, and what works best for some scenarios.

Most people will be flying outside so im still not convinced its worth the money imo.

i think seriously i should cancel my preorder for CV.. Really I am not impress at all after watching the video reviews.

I just cant see how its worth all that money,its all just Chinese hardware reworked at the end of the day.
One word "Greed"

Hope i get proven wrong as i crave for better clearer video ...

Originally Posted by Rfriedman

I'm not impressed with the testing results yet. Here's why:
1)
I do not feel Mr. Steel's review was a good comparison. He is running the old SW (evident by screen jumpiness). I did like the fact he went behind a house.
2)
JB's test procedures were better, but I know the clearview would have done much better with two directional antennas. It makes a noticeable difference over an assymetric setup.

Clearview isn't known for edging out competition in relatively clean environments. I am very sure that with many racers, or at in indoor environment, the CVG would stomp the competition, as well as if the reviewers had a better understanding for antenna selection on the clearview, and what works best for some scenarios.

On YT..the CV channel "theory" is explained by a
prePubecesnt male....
He clearly states, to use 100% of CV, one must use
2 identical antennas on Receiver end

If not, you are only using 75% of CV
capabilities....its not diversity (Omni & Directional)

P.S.
CV has been out for over a yr...its hard to understand
why FPV hobbiest were not informed of this....lol

were basing our disappointment on two tests that a) don't use the right antennas and b) that aren't in locations where CV would actually be better than tradditon RX's.

Originally Posted by ThongRaeGu

Not impressed by CV module by any reviews so far.

I don't think your gonna see much difference when
your flying alone...
RfriedMAN says it best, CVG performs GREATEST in times if need (of need)
Plus the gimmicks help..its a small 2 man USA company rather
then Chinese versions.

If your buying VideoRX's based on those two weirdos via YT
(balls of metal and creeperBardbad) then do so..

I wanted to order but I got put on a long long buttocks waiting list.

Its not looking good though based on 3 to 4 unhappy hobbyists..
Hehehehee

Originally Posted by rclab1

I don't think your gonna see much difference when
your flying alone...
RfriedMAN says it best, CVG performs GREATEST in times if need

" regular use" FPV signal can only be so good. i think people are mistakenly looking for some new amazing FPV experience, instead of understanding where and when the CV would do better.

i will wait to see some race footage with 7 other pilots in the air, and some dense urban flying or car parks with multiple quads flying around, and with the recommended antenna set up, before make my decision.

The whole idea of this was to give us a better quality video image in our goggles.
Im yet to see this in any of the many youtube video reviews imo

The only positive thing ive heard is its better indoors and in race conditions,thats me out then lol...

You will see a difference flying alone if you stay in the beam of both antennas. This is why for so long Iftron recommended using a symmetric setup. Being in both beams means it has two good signals to work with.

If you are only in 1 beam, than I'd expect similar levels of noise to other receivers. That's what JB proved. If JB repeated his same test with two directionals, he would have gotten ~20% less noise on the clearview. That said, the clearview lock will stop all that annoying banding, and which is why JB kept saying how he liked how predictable and stable the clearview picture was, even when he was in just the beam of the directional.

The problem with JB's test is that he assumes you have to fly assymetric because your flight pattern includes both close flying all around yourself and far flying in the same flight. This is not valid, because to get the best performance from CV, the antennas should be matched, and thus the ground station location and flight path should be chosen to stay in the beam.
This concept is not new to FPV; all the long range fixed wing pilots select their antennas depending on the flight, and thus is the inherent problem in having miniquad pilots review the module who assume the baseline is close+far flying on an assymetric setup.

deleted

Originally Posted by Rfriedman

You will see a difference flying alone if you stay in the beam of both antennas. This is why for so long Iftron recommended using a symmetric setup. Being in both beams means it has two good signals to work with.

If you are only in 1 beam, than I'd expect similar levels of noise to other receivers. That's what JB proved. If JB repeated his same test with two directionals, he would have gotten ~20% less noise on the clearview. That said, the clearview lock will stop all that annoying banding, and which is why JB kept saying how he liked how predictable and stable the clearview picture was, even when he was in just the beam of the directional.

The problem with JB's test is that he assumes you have to fly assymetric because your flight pattern includes both close flying all around yourself and far flying in the same flight. This is not valid, because to get the best performance from CV, the antennas should be matched, and thus the ground station location and flight path should be chosen to stay in the beam.
This concept is not new to FPV; all the long range fixed wing pilots select their antennas depending on the flight, and thus is the inherent problem in having miniquad pilots review the module who assume the baseline is close+far flying on an assymetric setup.

JB used two similar omni antenna and yet the result was not even better than Laforge... i guess that is a big negative selling point of CV.. And this video ...time to cancel my order.. as there is no point flying indoor in my case..

ClearView Module: DO OR DIE (8 min 19 sec)

Originally Posted by Rfriedman

You will see a difference flying alone if you stay in the beam of both antennas. This is why for so long Iftron recommended using a symmetric setup. Being in both beams means it has two good signals to work with.

If you are only in 1 beam, than I'd expect similar levels of noise to other receivers. That's what JB proved. If JB repeated his same test with two directionals, he would have gotten ~20% less noise on the clearview. That said, the clearview lock will stop all that annoying banding, and which is why JB kept saying how he liked how predictable and stable the clearview picture was, even when he was in just the beam of the directional.

The problem with JB's test is that he assumes you have to fly assymetric because your flight pattern includes both close flying all around yourself and far flying in the same flight. This is not valid, because to get the best performance from CV, the antennas should be matched, and thus the ground station location and flight path should be chosen to stay in the beam.
This concept is not new to FPV; all the long range fixed wing pilots select their antennas depending on the flight, and thus is the inherent problem in having miniquad pilots review the module who assume the baseline is close+far flying on an assymetric setup.

but still, that is really just splitting hairs and no one can really demonstrate a serious advantage to one receiver over the other in JB's tests - if so, show us your more objective real world testing results.

and as such ... I will not be replacing my sub-$100 module anytime soon

Until somebody shows a test that clearly (pun intended) shows that Clearview has an advantage, I will stick with what I've got at 1/4 the price.

Originally Posted by Volt_Ampere

Until somebody shows a test that clearly (pun intended) shows that Clearview has an advantage, I will stick with what I've got at 1/4 the price.

yes i agreed with u. I had cancelled my order... and awaiting for their refund. Come to think of it its US$285.... for a module., it is really expensive..not sure why i ordered it at the first place. but lucky these videos at least shedded some light on it's capabilities and i can still get back my money...really limited advantages over other modules in the market and CV not really worth the money at least for now.