RC-Hangout

Im about to order a 600tvl sony fpv camera and would like some advice on lens selection, at the moment im flying a fatshark 600tvl with a 2.5mm lens.

The lens choices for the camera that im going to order are a 2.1mm or a 2.8mm. which would be better for mini quad flying?

Not 100% on this Dan , Lee will know better, but i read that the 2.8 was the one to go for:)

I went ahead and ordered anyway, ive ordered one of these http://www.surveilzone.com/DC5V-plastic ... ns-for-fpv and this http://www.surveilzone.com/mtv-mount-2. ... ens-cl1162.

I use a wide angle lens from a Gopro on my Flight cam. Similar to the 2.1 you have ordered.
The wide angle feels better to me. Don't feel so much as if I have blinkers on.

Interesting topic !

Almost the same as I use, I have the metal case version.
Amazing in low light and no discernible lag, good price too.
I have read that many 700 and 800TVL cameras introduce a bit of lag, not a good thing for proximity flying.

Stambo wrote:Almost the same as I use, I have the metal case version.
Amazing in low light and no discernible lag, good price too.
I have read that many 700 and 800TVL cameras introduce a bit of lag, not a good thing for proximity flying.

It was on your recommendation that i ordered this camera.

Ive been researching the different lenses used for fpv they seem to range from 2.1mm all the way up to 6mm.

The sweet spot seems to be around the 2.8-3.6mm for mini's where peripheral vision is important, 6mm is the same as the human eye so things appear to be in the correct position unlike <6mm, but the downside is that the field of view is narrow (around 43° with a 1/3" sensor). That being said the people who use a 6mm lens are usualy doing long range stuff where peripheral vision isnt as important as it is for proximity.
The other upside to a longer focal length is that as your angle of view decreases the amount of detail that can be seen increases. eg you will see far more detail with a 2.8mm over a 2.1mm and will be able to see smaller object such as branches.

Below is a list of lens sizes and the relative angle of view, they are based on the use of a board camera with a 1/3" sensor

2.8mm 81° 3.5mm 68° 4.0mm 61° 4.8mm 53° 6.0mm 43° (same depth of field as the human eye)

Good info:)

I thought that i would add links for the different lens's, for if you fancy giving a different lens a try. ive also quoted the angle of view for each lens from data in the specs.

I think that im going to place an order for a 3.6mm to try ive read that they dont suffer from barrel distortion (fisheye)

2.1mm (115°)

http://www.surveilzone.com/mtv-mount-2. ... ens-cl1162


2.8mm (87°)

http://www.surveilzone.com/2.8mm-with-i ... fpv-cl1185


3.6mm (67°)

http://www.surveilzone.com/mtv-mount-3. ... ens-cl1188


4.0mm (65°)

http://www.surveilzone.com/mtv-mount-4m ... ens-cl1163


6.0mm (45°)

http://www.surveilzone.com/mtv-mount-6m ... era-cl1173

Excellent info Dan:)

Do these lenses only fit on one particular cam Dan, I got the 600tvl off Graham....

The thread on the barrel of these lens are all m12.
I've just measured my fat shark 600tvl and the barrel is 12mm the fitting on the camera I have ordered is also 12mm. Hope this helps Tony.

I have looked at the wider lenses and prefer the 2.8 one as a good compromise between good field of view and very little fisheye effect.
I understood the narrower field of view gave you more detail, however I may be wrong.
I thought it was like cropping a picture, everything gets bigger.

That's it exactly Stambo. And the narrower the It's a personal preference so I thought for the price of them I might as well try them. And document some of my research as I went.

I found this a while back and that's what I based my understanding on, although the 2.8 seems more distorted than what I see.

Be interesting to hear what you think of the narrower lens.

Interesting Dan, I'll wait on your research results... Thanks mate