Looking For A Good Helmet Cam
 

Hi all,

I have some extra money for a helmet cam. Anybody have any good options? I have a couple hundred bucks. Its more for mountain biking than commuting. Im looking for clarity and quality

http://helmetcameracentral.com/reviews

The people I know with helmet cameras recommend that website. I've been meaning to plunk down for one, but can't quite justify it at the moment. :/

I have the Oregon Scientific ATC2K:

PROS:
Cheaper ( I think I paid $90)
Small
Mounts on Bike or Helmet
Takes standard SD Memory Cards and AA Batteries
With a 2 Gig memory you get about hour and 30 minutes recording time at the best resolution
captures sound also
Easy to edit on the PC with standard video software
In good lighting you can get decent quality

CONS:
Battery life isn't the greatest, so I got rechargeable ones
Poor performance in freezing weather (camera shuts off), they suggest Lithium batteries for the cold but I haven't felt like putting that kind of money into batteries
Quality is OK for the web and PC, but not something you would want to watch on a wide screen TV
In dim light gets a little grainy looking, camera does not self adjust for lighting conditions.

I've had the Oregon Scientific - it ain't very good really. If you buy a cheap cam, you'll probably wind up being disappointed.

You want a GOOD helmet cam, go here:
http://www.vholdr.com/

$330, but you WILL like it. Or you can spend less and take your chances. Personally, I've spent more money trying to save money than if I just bought good stuff in the first place.

IJM, not to defend the Oregon but the version 2 is much improved over the original (don't know which one you had).

But for what I want it, for it does the job, and I couldn't see spending more.

The Vholdr looks great, but for me it would be overkill.

Yeah, I've seen reviews on that VHoldr before... talk about sweet... and tough...

I had the original one. But I've seen output from the V2, and it's pretty bad too, though significantly improved. If someone's reason for a helmet cam is to document bad drivers (which seems to be the case for many here), IMHO it's not a great choice. I was never able to get plate numbers off mine for cars that were passing me, I could only do that if I caught up to them (which I never do).

Grainy IS how cameras adjust for lighting conditions. If they didn't adjust for lighting conditions, you'd either have almost black pictures in even overcast conditions, or washed-out white in direct sun.

People don't realize how vast a difference there is in lighting between full sun and even shade on a sunny day or overcast. It's a huge difference. We have incredible cameras in our eyes, and we seldom think about how good they are.

Digital cameras generally open their lenses up farther to get more light - this isn't possible on cheap fixed-lens cameras like the OS, and in any case only goes so far - or they slow their shutter speed down - they can do this, but not below 1/30th second if they're shooting 30 FPS. The only other trick they have is to just boost the image in software - essentially they're just multiplying the level of each pixel by some amount to brighten the image. The problem is that also multiplies the low-level noise inherent in the camera's sensor which is normally too low to see. That's what the grain is, it's sensor noise, and the REASON you see it is that the camera *IS* adjusting for low level. The root cause is that the camera has a very tiny, cheap sensor. You eliminate noise by using better and larger sensors, but that costs money, especially since bigger sensors require bigger and better lenses, and the lens that's in most cameras costs about a nickel.

I haven't dived into the video pool yet.
I'm holding out for now with a the idea of getting a
Hi-def camcorder mounted on the handlebar.
It's just a thought for now.

I've thought about that; I have a Canon HF100 which is all solid state, but my ride is quite rough in places and it could easily wreck the image stabilization mechanism which is a floating mechanical piece.

I haven't done any homework at all to comment.
Maybe by springtime when I start looking into it
there may be newer cam versions to consider?

I have the ATC2K. If you have a fast enough connection, you can check out the videos recorded with it here:

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v2...CRAND20071117/

Don't ask me what it was set at--it was almost a year ago.

EDIT: Oh, yeah... turn your speaker volume down, first.

Boston streets destroyed the mount on the Oregon Scientific ATC2K after a few months. Anything mounted on plastic mounts winds up flying off due to mount fracture eventually. Much to the credit of this camera, it survived separation and impact without damage, but I didn't get a recording of the whole event because the camera shut off as it hit the pavement.

Matt

We bought one on Amazon for $25. It's advertised for skateboarders.

What can I say... you get what you pay for. It eats batteries like the giant battery monster and only makes 15-minute videos. Low light situations look like someone forgot to take off the lenscap. All in all, I would not recommend it. Now if I could only remember the brand....

IJM,

Thanks for the eduction, seriously, that makes sense, and I'm always willing to learn.

But I totally agree that if I want to capture faces or license plates you need a better camera. I wanted something to document my rides, show my kids what bad drivers do, and just have some cheap video fun without spending a fortune...and for that I think it was $90 well spent.

But again, any insight to the hows and whys is always appreciated!!

The OS camera is great for that. And if you want to use it as supporting evidence of the car's behavior in a case where the identity of the car/driver is known, it's OK for that too. I just wouldn't rely on it if you have to make a positive ID on a car; the resolution isn't good enough.

i know this is a couple of days old...

but...since there is sound recording too....could you read a license plate number outloud?

it'd be better than nothing.

Yeah, but I think a big part of the reason to HAVE a camera is that when you're busy avoiding death, you generally don't get the plate number. Read some close reports on this board - you'll find that in almost all cases, the cyclist says "I didn't even think about getting his plat number."

The camera is so that you can look at the plate an hour later after the adrenaline is gone.

Thanks ItsjustME for jumping to my headcam for safety thread. I am definitely hoping to take the pressure off of "busily avoiding death" and capturing some responsibility by sporting the cameras.