Aerial Photography and Video Discuss the growing field of aerial photography and aerial video right here!

Sunpoint, mini-optical-mouse

Reply

Old 12-04-2003, 09:01 PM
  #1  
Spanky1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My place, MI,
Posts: 138
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default Sunpoint, mini-optical-mouse

Good day!
Has anyone purchased from Sunpoint, mini-optical-mouse?
They are selling a PILE of the mini cams on ebay. In fact, a quick calculation of $10,000 fines to the number of people buying those, could pay off the national debt or solve world hunger :-)

The reviews seem good, but I'm REAL new to the video talk and ebay world. Thanks for any help.
The fubar video panning is fantastic, took a little over an hour to download from the dial up, but it was worth it.

I'm ready.
Spanky
Spanky1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2003, 11:07 PM
  #2  
PlaneKrazee
My Feedback: (14)
 
PlaneKrazee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Gales Ferry, CT
Posts: 4,877
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Sunpoint, mini-optical-mouse

What's the fine for? Selling the same stuff at 1/4 the price of some surveillance sites?
PlaneKrazee is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2003, 07:04 AM
  #3  
Spanky1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My place, MI,
Posts: 138
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Sunpoint, mini-optical-mouse

I was joking. one of the forums was talking about illegal activities and fines and such. Hope I didn't strike a nerve.

Tuesday I purchased a 1500mW system BEFORE I found this forum, thats why the question. A friend had a 200mW on a slow stick down in the city and complained about noise. When he would throttle back the picture would clear up. He felt maybe more mW would help.

SOOOO I found one on ebay that was 1500mW. But after reading through the forums, I'm not so sure that mW is what lets you go long distances and/or solve the problem w/noise. AND there is talk about quality from place to place. This is why the question about Sunpoint, Mini-optical-mouse.
Thanks for reading this far.

Spanky
Spanky1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2003, 04:18 PM
  #4  
john flynn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CardwellQueensland , AUSTRALIA
Posts: 227
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Sunpoint, mini-optical-mouse

Gidday Spanky, this may clear up the mw myth for you http://www.blackwidowav.com/questionofthemoment.html I was confused too, until I read this. Regards, John.
john flynn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2003, 11:35 PM
  #5  
PlaneKrazee
My Feedback: (14)
 
PlaneKrazee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Gales Ferry, CT
Posts: 4,877
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Sunpoint, mini-optical-mouse

That really doesn't sound right. They would normally rate the current draw in ma not mw.

Oh, by the way most new R/C transmitters only put out 1/2 to 3/4 watt or 500-750mw and can transmit for a good 2500 feet.

There are many companies selling equipment both on Ebay and off that are falsely stating range. Many companies don't even know what they are selling or what exact frequency they are transmitting on.

The best thing to do would be to see if they are FCC approved, if not, buyer beware. I would say that 80% of all spy equipment, home security equipment for sale on the internet is Not FCC approved, including some US venders.

I would like to know how much bandwidth all of these transmitters are using. The next local ham meeting is coming up soon, time to hook up with some people with test equipment.

If you buy inexpensive equipment look for pll or crystal controlled circuits to avoid drift. The spyderlinker receiver with tuning knob will drift over time but probably not during a flight.
PlaneKrazee is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 02:49 AM
  #6  
john flynn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CardwellQueensland , AUSTRALIA
Posts: 227
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Sunpoint, mini-optical-mouse

Well I guess I'm back to where I started again. I thought I learned something but you had to go and burst my bubble, thanks skypilot. John.
john flynn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 08:26 AM
  #7  
Spanky1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My place, MI,
Posts: 138
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default Range, Futaba

I agree with john flynn. I realize now how little I know. The proof will be in the pudding.

Skypilot_one you bring up something I'm curious about. Back when my father bought wideband Futaba radio's in late 70's, Futaba advertised 2 mile range documented. They said someone was radioing back what movements for the control surface to keep the plane flying. Does anyone remember?

My question is this: is the limited range of 2500 ft you talk about directly because the radio's now are narrowband? I've wondered this in a world that seems to try to focus on cheapening things.

Spanky
Thanks RCU
Spanky1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 11:50 AM
  #8  
PlaneKrazee
My Feedback: (14)
 
PlaneKrazee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Gales Ferry, CT
Posts: 4,877
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Range, Futaba

I have never flown past 2500 feet. It may be possible but I do not want to try it. We always say if you can see it you can control it which is true for a .60 size plane. I don't think I would want to try it with a 40% Extra though.

I would think that a design that transmits on as narrow a bandwidth as possible would theoretically transmit the farthest, less splatter. 6 mhz for video and sound.

I believe many of these less expensive systems transmit over a broad 50 mhz bandwidth or more.

Think of it as a water hose and pressure. Put a 1" nozzle on the hose and 50 lb. of pressure (mw),

Then put a 1/4" nozzle with the same 50 lb. (mw). Which one will transmit the water or signal farther?

The same goes for antennas. A very directional yagi antenna will positively increase range but that would not be practical. All antennas must be properly impedance matched to reduce standing waves or else you don't transmit the power it bounces back to the output and ends up as heat.

All of this could be bull, maybe we can have an expert tone in.
PlaneKrazee is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 12:09 PM
  #9  
mr.rc-cam
Senior Member
 
mr.rc-cam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: West Coast, CA
Posts: 536
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Range, Futaba

I believe many of these less expensive systems transmit over a broad 100khz to 1mhz bandwidth or more.
The bandwidth of all the 900Mhz to 2.4Ghz video Tx's is several Mhz. This is to support the FM video signal, which requires at least 4 Mhz for good results.

They would normally rate the current draw in mA not mW.
The comments from BlackWidow AV are true. Most of the low cost video equipment vendors are stating power specs based on current consumption. This inflates the results, often 10X more than comparable RF power. A couple of us have tested the popular 200mW 1.2Ghz systems -- they were putting out as low as 5mW. I got 40mW out of the one I tested. Details: http://www.rc-cam.com/hk_video.htm

... is the limited range of 2500 ft you talk about directly because the radio's now are narrowband? I've wondered this in a world that seems to try to focus on cheapening things.
Narrowbanding does not reduce range (it actually increases it). I do not think that you will find that decent quality modern 72Mhz R/C Tx's have reduced range. There is even one RPV pilot (cyber-flyer) that uses a stock Futaba transmitter to fly as high as 20K feet.
mr.rc-cam is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 01:44 PM
  #10  
Spanky1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My place, MI,
Posts: 138
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Range, Futaba

Thanks mr.rc-cam-RCU

It is at the limits of this brain for comprehension but it makes sense.
I do not think that you will find that decent quality modern 72Mhz R/C Tx's have reduced range.
I have read about the collapsed antenna and 50ft for test. Assuming this is for "as far as you can see", what if you go 100ft.........?

Is there a direct ratio (or sort of) to collapsed antenna feet = Tx distance?
THAT would be WAY too easy. Though I'd ask anyway. As you can tell I'm not in a club and no "old timers" to ask. I'll walk back 50 ft and put the Tx behind me also. On a full charge it won't matter, but after a while it will lose the signal if you put it behind your back. This tells me in this primative test there may be a way to determine how far out your plane can go.
Whad ya think?

Spanky
Spanky1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 07:52 PM
  #11  
mr.rc-cam
Senior Member
 
mr.rc-cam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: West Coast, CA
Posts: 536
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Range, Futaba

Is there a direct ratio (or sort of) to collapsed antenna feet = Tx distance?
Not really. Too many variables are involved to be able to do so.
mr.rc-cam is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2003, 11:26 PM
  #12  
PlaneKrazee
My Feedback: (14)
 
PlaneKrazee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Gales Ferry, CT
Posts: 4,877
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Range, Futaba

Looked closely at the frequencies that the cheap systems transmit on and it appears they do fall in the aero nav/ navaid system.

1080, 1120, 1160, 1200.
PlaneKrazee is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2003, 08:28 AM
  #13  
Spanky1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My place, MI,
Posts: 138
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default No insult intended

Just a thought.

With reguards to the frequencies and the concern for what is right/illegal.

Could it be that the technology that we are seeing available to us NOW is only because it is old? The technology dates back to WWII right? (some of it anyway)

Please understand I have great respect for our veterans and the like. My hat is off to EVERY veteran.
Through the years I've heard my uncle talk on ham stuff how it has become easier and easier until this last time he said anyone can get a ham license. Yes, there are rules, but, there are laws here saying you still can't spit on the sidewalk, or park your horse. I'm 100% sure that there is technology so advanced in NASA and the military that we are not aware of, yet. This is why the cheap stuff from hong kong is coming in and not being shut down. Maybe it's just not worth the taxpayers money to keep on top of it. Especially if it's not going to hurt anything. imho
Spanky
Spanky1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2003, 10:36 AM
  #14  
PlaneKrazee
My Feedback: (14)
 
PlaneKrazee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Gales Ferry, CT
Posts: 4,877
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: No insult intended

The cheap equipment is broadcasting on Aero navigation channels. I don't know who uses this segement of the rf band to navigate .

I don't know if these units will cause a problem with their relatively low output.
PlaneKrazee is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2003, 11:47 AM
  #15  
Spanky1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My place, MI,
Posts: 138
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: No insult intended

Would I want to be flying full scale and have a problem because someone is broadcasting ATV, no
Good point, actually excellent point. I believe the same comment was made in reference to using old wideband equipment. Can you use it? Yes. Get caught? No. BUT.........considering a glitch may take the plane to a place that could cause harm in any number of area's.

Point taken.
Spanky
Spanky1 is offline  
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service