Review: FatShark FPV glasses/goggles

To discuss all things relating to flying models via remote video

Re: Review: FatShark FPV glasses/goggles

Postby Velociraptor73 » Thu May 26, 2011 5:53 am

Hi Bruce,

Have you or any other user from the forum tested the AIO Foxtech video googles against the Fatshark?
I heard that inspite the Fatshark having the biggest angle of view the AIO bet it up in every other aspect been far superior.
I'm very very curious to see how they compare in a proper review.
Do you have any idea when you will put your eyes into one of those?
It seems the AIO was priced at U$350 at time of launch, now it's up to U$430! Shame...
Velociraptor73
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 6:56 pm

Re: Review: FatShark FPV glasses/goggles

Postby RCModelReviews » Thu May 26, 2011 10:05 am

I've used the Foxtech and yes, they do seem to provide a sharper image -- but that's largely because the field of view is narrower so the pixels aren't so magnified as with the FatShark.

I did try to see if FoxTech would be interested in doing some kind of deal on a pair for review but they weren't that keen and I can't really afford to blow $450 or so on something that I don't really need.

Either will work but in the value stakes, FatShark are probably ahead - simply because they have a lower price.

I do notice that the extra magnification offered by the Fatsharks does cause some color fringing near the edge of the display -- that's simply because the lenses are not achromatic -- therefore bend different wavelengths of light to a different degree.

Good quality lenses have special coatings or materials that overcome this chromatic aberration -- but the lenses in most of these goggles are only made of plastic I think.
RCModelReviews.com, just the facts.
User avatar
RCModelReviews
 
Posts: 2120
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 3:40 am

Re: Review: FatShark FPV glasses/goggles

Postby Velociraptor73 » Fri May 27, 2011 1:36 am

Maybe Foxtech is not that confident in their product to submit for a honest review.
But I believe it won't take long to better and more affordable products to show up in the market.
This market is big, not only for FPV but for media entertainment in general
Even Sony is planing a virtual googles for release soon.
The guys who have the market now will have to work hard to keep up.
Good thing for us!
Thanks Bruce, see you in the (not so) weekly video! : )
And congrats for your patient and expertise in helping others with the hobby.
Your reviews are the best!
Velociraptor73
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 6:56 pm

Re: Review: FatShark FPV glasses/goggles

Postby Toumal » Wed Jun 22, 2011 1:44 pm

I'm going out on a limb here, Bruce, and say that I disagree with your review on several points.

I am comparing the current-gen FatShark with a pair of $110 goggles that I purchased 3 years ago (!)
Those glasses have a 320xsomething resolution, so not really high res. But despite that, the image looks better. The FatShark glasses have a nice field of view, while the picture in my old goggles is considerably smaller.

Then the build quality: FatShark is using a very cheap, brittle plastic, while my old goggles are made of a strong material with smooth finish.

The killed blow for me however is the incompatibility with glasses (you know, the ones for short-sighted folks like me). Now, I know that there are lenses you can purchase and put in, but I for example have a cylindrical distortion. I simply need to wear my own glasses.

Luckily my Brother, who is getting into FPV too now, is happy with them so far. I wouldn't be.
User avatar
Toumal
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 9:51 am

Re: Review: FatShark FPV glasses/goggles

Postby RCModelReviews » Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:03 pm

The very reason that the Fatsharks don't look as sharp as those other glasses is the field of view.

To get the wide field of view, the FatSharks magnify the image significantly -- which means that the individual pixels become larger and make the image appear somewhat less sharp. It's just like when you get closer to your TV set, you can see the individual dots that make up the picture but when you stand back you can't.

It's a trade-off - wider field of view or sharper image.

As for the plastic - mine have yet to crack or break so I'd say it's up to the task.

As you point out, you can get diopter lenses for the FatShark -- the alternative would be to allow you to wear prescription glasses but then you have the problem of keeping ambient light out. One good thing about the FS glasses is that they do effectively block all ambient light.

Like (I suspect) you do, I suffer from astigmatism but it's really not bad enough to be an issue with the FS glasses. I am also a little short-sighted but that's good because it means I can use the FS without the need for my prescription lenses.

The *BIG* benefit that the FS glasses have over many of the cheap alternatives is the way they handle a noisy video signal. Most cheaper systems will blue-screen (or black-screen) rather than continuing to show the snowy picture. Even when a decent signal is restored, they take a second or so to switch back to the "live video" mode and that can be the difference between flying and crashing your model.

However, I do think that all the video glasses are *way* overpriced for what they are.

Fear not though -- right now I'm putting together a low-cost alternative to these video glasses that will allow you to wear your prescription lenses, offer full 640x480 resolution, and cost about half the price of a set of FS glasses.

It's part of my FPV feature series that is coming up soon in which I'll cover everything from "bareback FPV" on a budget to the full-featured ($$) options.
RCModelReviews.com, just the facts.
User avatar
RCModelReviews
 
Posts: 2120
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 3:40 am

Previous

Return to FPV

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests