View Full Version : What about these camera systems?

12-26-2009, 11:08 AM
Has anyone looked at the camera systems used by the guys that remotely pilot RC aircraft? They are using head mounted LCD visors and radio rx/tx stuff like these:
.. and many others.
A variety of camera options are available as are frequencies and power. I'm particularly interested in the 1.3mhz band as there would be basically nothing on it since it requires a technician's ham licenses. Any thoughts on this?


12-26-2009, 01:28 PM
You have your Tech or better? If you show up on a licensed band without a license I'll have a pretty substantial problem with it. I'll be flying black flag myself though, up in the experimental bands.

1.2Ghz works ok most of the time. (I assume you mean 1.2Gig band, not Meg)

You really don't want that 2.4Ghz digitized analog stuff. Especially at that price. At 500mW you'd start stomping not just on the WiFi, but on the Spectrum's, which means you would be told to turn your system off, period.

Why are you contemplating spending 3-4x as much for a system with 1/4 the resolution and lower light sensitivity?

12-26-2009, 01:58 PM
You have your Tech or better? If you show up on a licensed band without a license I'll have a pretty substantial problem with it. For very good reasons too :) I don't have the license but I'd certainly get it before I even considered using a band that requires it. A few of my friends have the tech license and I've been meaning to get it for a while so this would just be a good excuse to get it earlier.

Why are you contemplating spending 3-4x as much for a system with 1/4 the resolution and lower light sensitivity?
Four reasons:
1) I've never been happy with WiFi in general when it comes to mission critical anything and after all the work I'm doing on this project the potential of being unable to compete effectively due to packet loss or interference on the wireless network makes me nervous.
2) I do a lot of RC stuff - both cars and helicopters and I'd likely have lots of fun with this type of camera system for many other projects too while I really have no interest in another webcam.
3) I'd not seen anyone mention this as a possibility before and so I wanted to see if there was a specific reason - I try to explore all options.
4) Reliability and consistancy was my thinking. Also, while the cameras on those sites are pretty medicore the systems work with many other cameras and I know better cameras are available. Many of the homemade videos on Youtube and such showing these systems look quite good.



12-26-2009, 02:24 PM
At 1200, you'll probably do ok because there's nothing else there. There are some birdies, but not too bad.

The 2.4 won't work at all, so don't even consider it as an option.

Non-spread-spectrum systems that are effectively analog aren't anywhere NEAR the reliability of the WiFi systems in noisy environments.

It's worth noting that there's a pretty big difference between a plane at a few hundred feet and an enclosed building with infinite noise and infinite reflectivity/multi-pathing.

23cm (1240 band) stretches from 1240 to 1300 exactly, btw. I haven't looked at the bandplan in the bay area, but study it carefully as there are geographical restrictions above 420Mhz, and 1200 is shared with law enforcement.

3300-3500 is another consideration for Tech. I'll be up at 10.25ish Ghz myself.

Fast scan at 70cm and 33cm would be yet more considerations. 70cm might make me a little nervous as some of the UHF rental handhelds that organizers may use might be scattered around in there.

I went way up into the experimental bands because there's going to be nothing there, and my birdies won't chirp in anyone elses ears. ;)

12-26-2009, 03:55 PM
The first 2.4GHz camera has specific warning of: "The AVS-2400-1000 is not compatible with 2.4GHz radio systems such as: Spektrum DX7, XPS, etc."

Seeing as all the battle bots guys use Spektrum, don't event think about a high-power 2.4GHz system, if it interferes in anyway with their stuff, guess who's not running? And if you're not licensed, Adrenalynn will throw you in the Bay for using 1.2Ghz (she was putting it nicely, I just wanted to make that clear).


12-26-2009, 03:59 PM
I don't intend on causing anyone problems, I was just curious to know others thoughts on camera systems like these rather than just the TrendNet stuff. I have no intention of breaking either federal laws or the competitions rules in any way.


12-26-2009, 04:03 PM
Yeah, wasn't accusing anyone of anything, just wanted it to be very clear, where these things stood (especially for people who might read through here later on).

Given the environment, and constraints on our interaction with other contests running at the same time, I think the Trendnet (and hopefully some other IP cams that may emerge over the coming years) are the clear winners. They won't adversely affect other competitors, don't require a license, and give a pretty good picture in a very harsh environment.