Defective GS8000L Dashcam or fake? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 02:00:37 pm
content: I just ordered one of these and want to share my experiences:I am used to buying things on eBay, usually from large-volume highly rated merchants and have never had a problem before. Recently I bought an "eBay Daily Deal" promoted email special for a GS8000L Ouko camera from this seller, as it was $25 with free shipping:http://www.ebay.ca/itm/HD-1080P-Car-DVR-Vehicle-Camera-Recorder-Dash-Cam-G-sensor-HDMI-GS8000L-/111427218497They have sold 20,000+ items, with 98%+ rating. And it was even in a daily deal promo from eBay. I know these are not vetted by eBay but I assume they were reputable due to the large volume and high satisfaction rate. Interestingly, the package arrived from AMAZON (not the usual Chinese packaging)... and it was fast. So I am thinking they are also selling them through Amazon and had them process the order through their Amazon warehouse, because I received the package FAST (like in 1 week) instead of the usual 3-4 weeks from my other Chinese packages.I turned it on and first thing I heard was this awful squealing noise from the speaker. Like a high pitch wine. It eventually settled down after a few minutes. I'm not sure whether it was a feedback issue or what, since the MIC is right next to the speaker, or just some initial power-on bug. Anyways, that problem has not returned at all.However, I noticed right from the beginning the image I was seeing on the display was very crappy and pixellated and with strange color noise artefacts. At first I thought it was just the cheap display.... I could live with that. But then I stuck in a MEMORY card and started recording videos and photos, and it was showing up in everything. So either the sensor or firmware is busted, or someone tried to knock-off and produce a counterfeit camera and the firmware is not compatible with the chip. I'm not sure what it going on.First of all, there IS NO WAY the camera has a 1080p sensor. They are probably just "scaling up" the video and images. I am noticing way too much pixellation. I have an SJCAM SJ4000 and that also has 1080p video and 12 MP camera, and when I take pictures with the 12 MP camera I can see every pixel clearly, so it definitely looks like a 12 megapixel image sensor (or at least whatever it is doing to convert up to a 4000 x 3000 is convincing).I have included images from the Dashcam "12 megapixel" camera photo mode here.... And the videos look just as CRAPPY with the weird large pixel noise and color rendering screwed up, not just the camera. It is pretty much unusable:Here is the original ALBUM on Imgur:http://imgur.com/a/5Gzpr/all(where you can download the full-size ORIGINAL images directly off the camera MEMORY card - each about 5 mb)Below are scaled down versions. Be sure to look at the original full size images and you'll see something strange going on.Notice all the strange noise and color-transition shading artefacts through areas with gradients especially. Like it is doing some kind of reduced-color GIF 16-color conversion inside the firmware but screwing up the color palette). And notice on the original images that even though it is 4000 x 3000 or so in size, there is NO FREAKING WAY that it is capturing that info.... Looks like a crude scale-up job which is just adding more salt in the wound, because it is just wasting space on the memory card.So I am now complaining to the seller and through eBay to see what they can do. I am not crying over spilled milk... $25 is not a big deal. I just want to see what happens because I have never had an issue with purchasing eBay stuff before. Even if I end up eating the camera, I can still use it and perhaps to a "teardown" video and screw around with it. But I wonder if anyone of you had any suggestions as to what is happening.Is it bad firmware? Crappy sensor? Counterfeit? Clearly this is not normal for this camera... I have seen YouTube videos other people have uploaded for the GS8000L and none have this strangeness going on. Any thoughts or opinions please do share.

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 02:21:57 pm
content: You've clearly been sold a piece of junk. But complaining to the seller about the 'quality' isn't a guaranteed way of getting any compensation (and doing so indicates that you received the item).The simplest and most reliable way to get a refund (via eBay/Paypal) when sold absolute rubbish (like in this case) is to have it never arrive (nudge nudge, wink wink, say no more).Just don't wait too long that you run out of time to claim 'item not arrived'.

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 03:27:47 pm
content: That camera is showing evidence of a fault. I do not believe it to be fake, just faulty. I have seem similar coming out of faulty CMOS CCTV cameras.Just ask for a refund via eBay and buy a different camera..... Or ask for a replacement camera.Fraser

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 03:33:52 pm
content: QuotePlease don't do this. For one, it's not going to turn the place into an oasis of trust if everyone is pulling stunts like this, and for another you stand a fair chance of screwing yourself when Ebay decide to believe it was delivered after all. There is nothing to beat being straight-up and honest.The correct solution is to report this as either faulty (it plainly is) or not as described (it plainly isn't). Same resolution, no pulling stupid stunts or becoming a scammer yourself.QuoteDoesn't have to be. Just follow the process and you'll get to the right destination. Most of these vocal idiots complaining about how it doesn't work for them have done stupid things (taking short cuts, lying through their teeth, etc), so it's not surprising they have problems.First, complain to the vendor. In all likelihood, and for that price, they will refund and tell you to keep the bust one. But we'll assume the don't give a toss - you won't know which it will be unless you give them the chance to fix it, and Ebay won't be interested unless you give them the chance to resolve it either. Just politely tell them it is faulty and ask them how they intend to resolve it.Next, if they sort it out you're done without leaving nasty marks on your record. But we're assuming they don't give a toss. Now is the time to take it to the Ebay resolution centre, and here you truthfully say that a) it is faulty, and b) you've notified the vendor and given them a chance to resolve it themselves. From there on it is Ebay's problem.

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 04:01:24 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 03:33:52 pmSo being deliberately being sold a piece of crap is all fine and dandy, is it?Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 03:33:52 pmWe all know that eBay sides with buyers. And without signed for shipping, the only thing that will raise any flags is if the buyer consistently 'loses' items.THAT would be fraud.But finding the easy, quick and painless way to obtain one's right to a refund is simply common sense.Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 03:33:52 pmExcept that, in practice, it DOESN'T WORK.Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 03:33:52 pmBeen there, done that, was made by the vendor to jump through so many hoops - taking photos and videos showing the problem and still got ripped off in the end.Not just once, but several times. Sometimes for only $2 items.Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 03:33:52 pmAre you calling me a liar?Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 03:33:52 pmAnd the practical difference to claiming it didn't arrive is what?Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 03:33:52 pmAnd that's when you get to play the "let's string the buyer along until the time expires" game.Not to mention all the time and effort wasted with emails back and forth and photos/videos and what-not.And if the vendor insists on a return, then that's even more hassle sending the crap back - an hour at the post office at least etc. Not to mention if the vendor has almost run out the clock before demanding a return, by the time the return arrives (assuming it actually does), then you're still screwed.Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 03:33:52 pmWhat "nasty marks"? We're talking about eBay here.Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 03:33:52 pmAnd what happens when that clock ticks over to day 61?(this can easily happen with international shipping taking over half that time.)Answer: you're screwed - and the vendor profits.

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 04:43:31 pm
content: I can speak from experience and state that I have been honest regarding any issues that I have had with a purchase that did not meet the spec or description. Without exception, the seller has either refunded or eBay have refunded upon escalation. eBay only require that you communicate with the seller until the escalation date is met. The eBay staff are not stupid in my experience. If an item is faulty it is a VERY easy process. You return the item with proof of shipping and eBay refund upon receipt of that proof.Telling a lie in an effort to get a quick resolution is bad Karma and ruins eBay for others. There can be no excuse for a lie in such circumstances. Nobody likes a dishonest person.Also, be aware, a lost package report is not taken seriously for many weeks when an item is shipped by economy international post.Fraser

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 05:19:01 pm
content: QuoteIt's $25! I'm amazed they can afford to put an actual PCB in it, never mind have it do something. Nevertheless, you said yourself it is plainly faulty, and these things happen.QuoteThen there is no need to be dishonest. If it becomes 'known' that buyers cheat then Ebay will side with sellers, no? Further, the sellers have to allow for all the cheating buyers so the prices will go up, or they just won't bother to sell on there.QuoteDunno. Are you one of the aforementioned idiots?QuoteIt is fraud if you do it once.QuoteYou haven't scammed anyone.QuoteDon't play it. Sometimes it's a lesson you need to learn the hard way (and, yes, I've fallen into that, along with returning faulty goods and saving a few pennies by not doing it 'signed for', etc). That's not a reason to turn into a scammer, particularly since the seller you're scamming isn't the one that you fell for the game with.

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 05:45:33 pm
content: Quote from: Fraser on October 16, 2015, 04:43:31 pmSelling rubbish (false claims and poor quality - regardless of price) is also "bad karma" and "ruins eBay for others".Quote from: Fraser on October 16, 2015, 04:43:31 pmBut apparently, dishonest SELLERS get a free pass?The only fraud that counts is fraud on the part of the buyer?Quote from: Fraser on October 16, 2015, 04:43:31 pmIn my previous comment I stated that one of the big problems with eBay's stupid 60 day rule is that well over half that time can be taken with international shipping. Of course a 'lost package report' needs to be placed in a timely fashion, too soon and you just get told to wait, too late and you miss out on your rights entirely.But it sure beats jumping through hoops and greatly streamlines the process of getting a refund.Which apparently everyone here is telling me is going to happen anyway - so why does it matter how it is obtained?

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 05:57:05 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 05:19:01 pmWhat?IF I get sold a piece of crap that does not do what the seller says it should (even if it's cheap) then that seller is the one that is trying to scam ME.The only fair solution to the problem is to obtain a refund, correct?If that entails engaging in a practice that is simple, quick and guaranteed to result in a refund, so what?Perhaps you call it "scamming", I call it giving that samescammervendor some of his own medicine.Eye for an eye, etc.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 06:05:12 pm
content: Quote from: cimmo on October 16, 2015, 05:45:33 pmYou have 180 days with paypal. For example, I opened a case recently after more than 3 months since the purchase.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 06:09:34 pm
content: Quote from: cimmo on October 16, 2015, 05:57:05 pmGuaranteed to be permanently banned from buyer protection when you'll need it the most (when you lost some big money).

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 06:17:46 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 16, 2015, 06:05:12 pmMaybe that is a new policy, maybe it's unique to your country/region.Only a year or two ago I got taken for a ride by some dodgy eBay vendor. The item genuinely was not received - and I strongly suspect it wasn't even sent from the emails I got from him.But I was a tad naive and got played by thescammervendor and the 'buyer protection' (whatever it was at the time) expired. Paypal then told me to go jump.Since my Paypal account is tied to a credit card, I initiated a chargeback and got the refund I was entitled to that way.So, eBay and Paypal taught me a lesson and I play the game differently now.

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 06:20:22 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on October 16, 2015, 06:09:34 pmAnd exactly HOW is thatEVERgoing to happen?Cheap Chinese shipping is UNTRACKED, 'unsigned for' and also somewhat unreliable.That's why it's cheap.There is ZERO risk to making a false "did not arrive" claim.Yes, if someone makes such a claim when they did get their item AND IT WORKED AS DESCRIBED, then sure, that's bad m'kay.But otherwise it is just a simple way of obtaining a fully deserved refund.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 06:27:39 pm
content: Quote from: cimmo on October 16, 2015, 06:20:22 pmSimply open disputes too often and you get banned out of protection. 180 policy is since the last year IIRC.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 06:28:02 pm
content: Hi everyone,I did purchase the item using PayPal. I emailed the seller right away because they even sent me a note as soon as I purchased the product that if there is any problem to contact them first, which is what I did. I noticed the poor quality right away, so I emailed them and uploaded the photos with the reply on eBay. It is clearly a problem with the device. And I believe Honesty is the best Policy. What comes around goes around...Karma.... you know the saying.Anyways, I contacted them for the past 3-4 days, and we are cycling emails back and forth. All of the seller's emails start off with "Dear friend, Thank for letting know problem, first, we want help you. Send photo of problem...", etc. So that's what I did. For 2 or 3 emails I kept emailing them photos and I even used some UPLOAD website they emailed me (not sure why except to record my IP although I used a site at work for it). My concern is that they will expect me to pay for return shipping. Obviously, if it costs me to send it back I'll just suck it up.... And that is what some of the Chinese vendors count on, because they know it is not worth the money to ship the defective product back. I just don't want to be stuck in that predicament. If they send me a way-bill or some shipping label that is paid, I can gladly throw everything back in the box, stick on the label and send it back on it's way.Meanwhile, I did notify eBay and opened a "case" which basically just officially sends the seller my message and photos but with a record in eBay that there is a problem (rather than just messaging privately back and forth in the eBay message system). Anyways, I haven't rated the seller yet.... This will be based on how they handle the dispute. If they give me problems obviously I'll let them have it.... But if they take back the defective camera (or send me one that works) I'll be happy to give them a 5-star rating.I have until October 22 to receive a satisfactory reply from the seller now and we'll see what happens. I don't know if they tried to deliberately cheat me or whether they have a bad supply chain with a mix of products of various qualities, or whether I just got the one-off faulty device with bad firmware or sensor. But the bottom line is that this device is clearly messed up in one way or another.... and if someone knows why it can also be a learning opportunity for electronics, because I have never seen a camera that works yet has noise and poor shading with strange color palette. I should try to see if this thing can be used as a thermal imaging camera because that's what it looks like it's doing.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 08:02:33 pm
content: Quote from: cimmo on October 16, 2015, 05:57:05 pmThe one you're (notionally) having trouble with now is NOT the one that you played the waiting game with. How could it be? But you are going to scam this new seller because some other seller played you along for 60 days. Two wrongs don't make a right, etc.QuoteWho knows? Perhaps there is some config setting that would fix this, and the info just needs to be made available. Maybe the vendor would prefer to replace it. Or, indeed, a refund may be forthcoming.Whatever, the end doesn't justify any means.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 08:17:16 pm
content: QuoteThat's the important bit. I think you need to explicitly say to the vendor that you want a refund (if you haven't already), and insist that the supplied evidence is sufficient to prove your case. Then let Ebay decide.QuoteI am not au fait with the law in your country, but here in the UK the vendor pays when the product is at fault. In fact, not so long ago I had pretty much this situation and the vendor stated that there was no way he was going to pay shipping because his auction stated 'no returns'. Ebay/Paypal refunded me in full (and presumably then clawed the money back from him).A quick check of ebay.ca turned upthis(my emphasis):QuoteSo looks like you're covered.

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 08:50:56 pm
content: OP, I think it's defective solely based on their largely positive feedback. However, it could still be a scam...Looking at their feedback, looks like someone said 'This 1080HD suck', but I'm not sure if it's this specific camera.EDIT: There are also a lot of sellers on Amazon, so maybe they ordered from a different seller and got a fake/defective one?

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 10:58:03 pm
content: The camera is clearly defective. I told the seller I want a refund. I started a case with eBay. I sent them the photos you see. I have tried every setting in the camera. There is no hope.How I ended up with it coming from Amazon? Perhaps they have an established North American warehouse within Amazon that fulfills local purchases? I'm not sure how it works but the camera is defective beyond a shadow of a doubt unless you see the world in 16-bit pixelated screwed up color palette mode.I will upload video from the camera and post it as well.EDIT:I am just working on uploading a video to YouTube. Get this.... the file is 1.7 GB for 7:00 minutes worth of footage.Yes, the 1080p video (1920 x 1080, 30 fps) clocks in at an astonishingly 36165 kbps total bitrate as follows:Video rate: 35653 kbps (1920 x 1080, 30 fps)Audio rate: 512 kbps (1 channel 32 kHz)Wait until you see the footage.... Total unbelievable CRAP! It just eats up SD Card for lunch and delivers the most horrific quality footage. Here are the stats for a smaller file (93 MB for 22 seconds) below with details:QuoteTo compare, my SJCAM SJ4000 footage (which is like a cheaper GoPro) will produce a file of 800 MB for the equivalent 7:00 minutes worth of footage, and it looks very nice and clear and definitely 1080p HD quality. In fact, I can then even compress it down further with Handbrake. Unless the "noise" and strange color is causing a problem with the way the video is being written and can't be compressed properly.So I wonder if this is a sensor issue and the firmware is actually doing what it is supposed to do (assuming this is a "real" GS8000L) then this entire line of cameras has incredibly BAD design in writing the data to a file with such bloated file sizes. If someone else with a GS8000L can confirm this is the case, otherwise this is an obvious fake with really awful firmware dumped into it.

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 02:26:19 am
content: Quote from: wraper on October 16, 2015, 06:27:39 pmSo, exactly what is the number of disputes that count? Do you have an eBay policy page on the topic?Because you wouldn't simply be assuming something and asserting it as fact, would you?If you get sent a piece of crap, then there IS going to be a dispute, either an 'item not as described' dispute or an 'item failed to arrive' dispute.One of those disputes is a guarantee of a refund, the other is a lot more time and effort expended with no guarantee of a suitable resolution (suitable to you, that is).

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 02:31:07 am
content: Quote from: edy on October 16, 2015, 06:28:02 pmYou're getting played like a chump.I hope you enjoy wasting your time with all these emails and wading though the bureaucracy that is the 'ebay resolution center'."Item not arrived" is one click and a few words. End of story.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 02:37:50 am
content: Here is the video I uploaded that was1.7 Gigabytesfor only 7 minutes worth of footage:It looks like Robocop is driving.It is 1080p resolution, so I don't know why YouTube is showing me 360p and 480p max... maybe my internet connection is slow. But I swear the file is 1080p, but I can barely play it on my computer because it won't decompress fast enough to play 30 fps.

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 02:39:10 am
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 08:02:33 pmGood luck with that policy. But I live in the real world.Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 16, 2015, 08:02:33 pmWhy was it sold in a state that needs a config setting adjusted?And why was it not sold with all the information needed to make it work?From a cheap Chinese vendor's point of view a replacement will cost MORE than a simple refund, because he has to pay for shipping both ways AND the cost of a working item.I do wonder why you are so adamant that a cheap eBay vendor supplying obviously dodgy goods should always be given the benefit of the doubt.It seems that you are either very naive or maybe you have some skin in this game that you're trying to protect?

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 02:43:41 am
content: Quote from: cimmo on October 17, 2015, 02:31:07 amI agree with the "wasting my time"... That's why I escalated it to eBay Resolution center right away for a refund, before the seller dragged me on too long. I'm going to give this a chance. If it doesn't work, you can say "I told you so" and I'll learn my lesson.By the way, the footage reminds me of the 2001 A Space Odyssey star gate sequence:Here is the link to view where the "terrain" fly-by occurs that has similar strange coloring:https://youtu.be/ou6JNQwPWE0?t=6m44s

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 03:00:17 am
content: What if it's both fake and defective?That still wouldn't account for the size,1.7 Gigabytes?

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 03:10:34 am
content: Quote from: crispy_tofu on October 17, 2015, 03:00:17 amI never of thought of that. FakeandDefective. Perhaps a batch of counterfeit cameras was produced and it was also loaded with bad firmware that wasn't caught in testing at the factory. They made it out in the wild. The firmware can't or won't be replaced and these guys are trying to get rid of them. They can't sell them in China because the buyer will come back to the store, so they figure the easiest way is to dump them on eBay for cheap enough to international buyers that they will not want to ship them back and many will not be able to get a refund.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 03:55:04 am
content: The image problem could just be a fault. I've seen very similar issues on a CCTV camera due to a loose cable. Every time it would pan or tilt to a certain position, the image would be discoloured much like yours.However it's a heap of junk. That codec basically has no compression (I dare say the CPU inside that thing wouldn't be capable of much). Over 35Mbps, that's more than some Blu-ray movies!I use a Blackvue camera in my car (granted it cost over AUD$200) which includes GPS (time, date and vehicle speed are pulled from the GPS and overlayed on the video itself). Never had a drama. I probably get about 2 days worth of driving on a 32GB card and I do drive a fair bit. Quality is also very good, I don't think my one is full HD but definitely 720P and works great in low light.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 07:33:22 am
content: Quote from: cimmo on October 17, 2015, 02:26:19 amEbay don't provide particular number of disputes, just state that if they see suspicious activity, they'll ban you out of protection. And that is smart, otherwise everyone would know the exact threshold how much he can exploit the system.EDIT: google a bit and see how people get banned.

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 08:03:56 am
content: Quote from: wraper on October 17, 2015, 07:33:22 amAnother simple assertion without anything beyond your say so that it is true.Don't tell me to google it (I'm not the one making a claim of fact) - you damn well google it then give me the link.

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 08:37:21 am
content: Fwoof... things are getting steamy...Quote from: Halcyon on October 17, 2015, 03:55:04 amMaybe OP should take it apaaaaaaaaaaaht!

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 11:17:45 am
content: The seller replied... should I accept this:Quote

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 11:32:25 am
content: Well you are losing USD$8...I think they're just trying to find an easy way out, but if that's the best way to avoid a lengthy dispute...

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 11:43:08 am
content: QuoteI wouldn't. You'd end up paying $7 for a pile of junk you can't use. Granted, that's better than $25 but...The thing to note here is that Ebay will resolve this after 22 Oct if you want them to, and you have until 30 Nov to ask them to do so. Despite our scamming friend's admonition that the vendor is playing you along, you can easily revert to Ebay sorting it in the next month and a bit, so time isn't a problem (unless you want this fixed by tomorrow morning or something).BTW, I have a cheap item which was not as described (fixed at SECAM whereas it implied it was PAL switchable) and I raised this with the vendor. He offered me the same thing (part refund and keep it) using exactly the same words that you got, so either it is the same vendor or many vendors are using the same template text (not unreasonable if they are no English speakers). In my case I accepted the part-refund, but I don't see that you would benefit in any way by doing so.So, in your position I would say that I want a full refund, and that you look forward to received the RMA instructions. At the same time, quote the text I posted above pointing out that the vendor is to pay the shipping, and ask how he wants to arrange that. Explicitly say that you require the costs of shipping covered prior to sending the item back, and then let him figure out how he wants to proceed. There is no need to be stroppy or forceful at this point - it is all going well, bearing in mind the language differences, and politeness (not to be confused with softness) pays off in the end.As an aside, I once had a CCTV camera off Ebay which had a fault that I demonstrated to the vendor via a video, and he said to send it back. That time, I sent it before recovering the costs (which I never got back) and after a month or so mentally kicked myself and put it down as a lesson learned the hard way. A couple of months later the repaired camera turned up! (It was actually repaired and not a replacement.) 'Surprised' would be an understatement.

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 12:40:47 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 17, 2015, 11:43:08 amYou should hop off your high horse before you get a nose-bleed.It is abundantly clear that this vendor is definitely a scammer and scamming a scammer isn't a bad thing at all.As some have put it - it's karma.Have you seen the videos of people scam-baiting those 409 scammers?Sure, the OP will probably get all his money back (fingers crossed!), but if that does happen then he sure did work for it!What is his time worth?

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 03:09:15 pm
content: Quote from: cimmo on October 17, 2015, 12:40:47 pmYou know, I've been following Zapta's solder paste dispenser effort and had quite a high regard for him. His being on your list has bumped him up several notches on my 'people to listen to' list.

author: marshallh
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 05:08:58 pm
content: I have the exact same dashcam, from Allelectronics. The actual sensor resolution is about 800x600. It works.If you are serious about using a dashcam I would suggest looking into the Street Guardian models. They cost $200 but there are a lot of ways they are much superior.Don't bother with an exchange here. Just get whatever money back you can, and buy a decent one.

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 06:08:45 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 17, 2015, 03:09:15 pmIf you find the comments of an obvious troll (with an abysmal S/N ratio) worthy of any heed, then more fool you.But since you asked so nicely, I'll happily add another name to the "people [for you] to listen to" list.And thanks for the backhanded ad hominem. Feel free to continue if it makes you happy, but you'll only be talking to yourself.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 07:38:37 pm
content: Ok everyone,Thanks again for your help and advice. All of you have valid points, and I can see where it can be a frustrating experience trying to get a refund from a bad seller who ships crap product and why it is often easier to just speed the refund up not having to return. In this case I already replied, so now I need to know what to do.Do I take the $18 back from my $26 purchase and lose $8 and gain a sh!t camera to perhaps take apart and make a YouTube teardown for everybody? Or do I reply that I want a full refund with cost of return shipping and see what happens? The seller will likely not want to pay for return shipping, knowing they will lose. They are already willing to refund $18... I could push for the full amount figuring eBay will at some point step in anyways.I really don't want the seller to profit from this, but on the other hand could they turn around and not offer me anything? Do I take an $8 hit, continue negotiating or hope eBay does the right thing and refunds the full amount? The camera isn't worth 2 cents because it takes BAD VIDEO, and to add insult to injury, uses a horrible file format that makes the resulting video files almost unplayable. You are better off recording in VGA mode, because that's what the sensor seems to capture at... it just upscales it to the 1080p and bloats the file. Why would they do that? The entire product (nevermind the seller) is a scammy piece of garbage.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 10:18:54 pm
content: QuoteNo. Well, strictly speaking they could, but it wouldn't do them any good because Ebay will refund you and then stiff them. They also have their reputation to think about - the last thing they want is a few negs to put off future punters, and $6 isn't worth the hassle.I am pretty sure you will find that if you hold out for the full refund you'll get that and they'll say it's not worth returning the faulty item. Obviously, that costs them, which is why they won't offer that at the start, and they'll try to keep their costs down by offering you the part refund. But you have a solid case and it's just a matter of them realising the game is up now.QuoteI'd like to see anyone here ship something that got even vaguely close to this for $26, never mind then shipping it anywhere in the world for nothing. It is actually a stunning piece of cost engineering - the fact that (if it wasn't a faulty one) it doesn't meet your spec is not the fault of the product. What were you expecting for $26?Having said that, there are much better ones but you'll pay the price - $200 is closer to what you really want.QuoteI can't believe you're still asking this! It is broken and it's not your fault. You are entitled to a full refund and you should go for it. The only reason you might not is so you can pass it on to Dave for a teardown

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 12:18:39 am
content: Quote from: edy on October 17, 2015, 07:38:37 pmStand your ground and DEMAND a full refund (to be paid ASAP). If the vendor demands the return of the item, then state that you will only do so with payment up front for the return shipping costs.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 01:48:51 am
content: QuoteI agree, I am not disappointed at the price.... $26 is a good value for this camera. I'm just upset that it didn't work. Otherwise I would be happy to keep it and use it.Never mind the poor file format, I could work around that. A 16 GB card can store enough as I plan to use it on continuous loop anyways. Even the low resolution I can handle... Not a deal breaker. This is what I expect for $26.I am mainly disappointed that the sensor/color/firmware created this crazy strange video. That's the only reason. I have even told the seller I would gladly exchange this camera for another one that works if they ship it to me and I return this one. I'm not having buyers remorse... I really want to keep this camera if it worked. I just don't want to buy a faulty one.QuoteOk, I did just that. I sent them an email kindly asking them to refund the full amount, since $18 refund for a useless camera that I paid $26 is not worth it. I told them I can send back the defective camera if they pay up front for the return shipping. I'll let you know what happens.

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 02:30:39 am
content: Fingers crossed, hopefully they'll agree!

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 06:36:30 pm
content: The seller has agreed to a return and supposedly is issuing me a return mail slip. It is going back to Nevada somewhere. Remember this was bought on eBay from what I assumed to be a Chinese vendor, but yet it was fulfilled by Amazon Canada and was sent to me from a place near the airport 20 minutes away. Now they want it returned back to Nevada, USA. I am going to follow the instructions and see if the post-office asks me for any extra money before I send anything back. Upon providing them a tracking number of the return, they said they would issue me a refund.EDIT:Sorry, I just received an update from eBay that seller can't send me a return shipping label. So I am disputing with them now how they are going to pay for return of the defective item. Let's see what happens. I am starting to feelcimmohas made some good points here...

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 07:13:08 pm
content: I searched for the address they want me to return the item to and look what I found:http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/light-in-the-box/reno-nevada-89502/light-in-the-box-mini-in-the-box-conventry-litc-inc-i-ordered-a-dash-cam-online-accep-1237872That website is actually what I used to upload the pictures when they asked me to submit photos. Familiar pattern hmmm....http://www.lightinthebox.com/is apparently a warehouse for Chinese products in the USA being shipped. Looks like on their website this is what they are clearing out and what they probably sent me:http://www.lightinthebox.com/gs8000l-original-glass-lens-1080p-car-dvr-2-7-inch-lcd-with-g-sensor-novatek_p908022.htmlThe eBay price is even more expensive. It is $25.01 CAD and $17.99 USD. I paid $25.99 USD. I'm not complaining about a few bucks. But the camera DOESN'T WORK, bottom line. So this eBay seller maybe set up a North America shipping warehouse and is selling their items also through thewww.lightinthebox.comsite, and Amazon, and has an eBay store as well.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 11:22:21 pm
content: Lodge a claim through eBay or PayPal if you get no where with the seller themselves. They might just be trying to delay efforts to push it outside the window where you can open a dispute, you've tried to communicate with the buyer as a first step without a satisfactory result, take it up a notch.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 12:32:58 am
content: I've already opened a case with eBay, which has become a "return" for now. So I am in the process of negotiating how to send the defective camera back. They are giving me until Oct. 22 to see what happens with the seller, and then I can contact them further to step in. However, the seller doesn't want to send me a shipping label... I've asked them to pre-pay for my shipping but I have to find out what it will cost. According to eBay policies, if a seller sends you a defective item, they need to cover the shipping back to them. But I don't know if they will pay me ahead of time.What I can do is check with Canada Post what it will cost to send it with tracking, and then explain that to the seller. If they agree to pay it, they can go ahead. The funny thing is, they were willing to give me $18 refund for a $26 item which I would keep. They would get $8 out of it, and I would get a defective camera. If I return the camera, they have to pay maybe $20 (refunding on shipping) to get back their defective camera.Certainly they won't give the refund ahead of time.... and probably not the shipping cost either, because if I was a scammer then I could just simply keep shipping funds also, plus the refund, plus the item also and screw them for all 3 things. And as a seller I understand why they would not want to pay for the shipping ahead of time, but they should have giving me a shipping label because in those cases they know for sure it will be used to mail the item to them and at least the scammer can't profit from it.So the question is, if I send the item back and pay for shipping, and the seller screws me over by not compensating me for shipping and maybe even stiffs me for the refund... how do I know eBay will honor it? I want to hear from eBay directly that if the seller doesn't refund and doesn't pay whatever it costs me to ship the item, that eBay will cover me.Until I have an answer from eBay, I'm not going to take the risk on paying even more money to ship it back and risk losing the return shipping costs as well.

author: Srbel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 07:05:01 am
content: I was thinking of buying one of those, but then I remembered that I don't own a car. Public transportation for me.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 10:47:22 am
content: QuoteYou don't, and they probably won't. Ebay is only interested in things that you arrange through Ebay, so whatever you agree with the vendor between yourselves is irrelevant (except if it resolves everything). I would strongly advise you not to pay anything further on this.I think your next step would be to tell the vendor that you need a pre-paid label, or upfront funds, to ship this back. If you don't get that (or a refund) by 22nd you will just turf it off onto Ebay and have them sort it out. The vendor really doesn't want you to do that and will probably cave, but if he doesn't it makes no different - Ebay will refund you, and if they say to pay the shipping up front that's a completely different thing.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 08:27:14 pm
content: I went and actually found the costs for sending it back with tracking. It is about $17 or $18. I sent the seller another message explaining that I want a full refund and if they want the item back they will have to pay shipping upfront, otherwise I can hang on to it for them.This is their usual "scripted" way of dealing with complaints.... It looks like most of the negative comments are related to this issue, about the seller not being responsible for defective items that they ship out, not taking them back or exchanging them, and sticking the shipping costs to the buyer. Also they will string you along for weeks and weeks on countless back-and-forth emails which accomplish nothing, and take months to issue refunds.So I am going to let the "grace period" expire on Oct. 22 and contact eBay to step in, since obviously I can't work out anything with this seller. This is the way they do business with all their customers. I'll let you know how it goes.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2015, 02:18:48 pm
content: Success!The seller issued me a full refund and doesn't want the defective item back, so I can eventually do a tear-down to see what may have gone wrong, although I doubt I'll be able to find anything. I have no idea if it is hardware or bad firmware. If it is hardware maybe I'll find a strange solder connection somewhere. Firmware is another story. I could try and track something down but not knowing what exactly is in the camera, and given that firmware is nearly impossible to find for all the different real and fake versions, I could just end up bricking the thing entirely.The seller knew they had a lost cause, and if eBay stepped in tomorrow (which was our deadline) it perhaps could have affected their rating because they cannot resolve things on their own. They had offered me $18 refund before on the first day so it was not a big deal for them to step it up to $25.99, but they still tried to wrangle me around for a week. Nevertheless, in the end they did the right thing.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2015, 03:02:43 pm
content: Glad it worked out for you. I think it is more likely to be a hardware problem than firmware, for the simple reason that none of these would sell (or, actually, remain sold) if it were firmware.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2015, 03:28:47 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 21, 2015, 03:02:43 pmGood point. Ok, so I'm going to open up the camera at some point and post photos and video. There is a white "quality control" sticker on top of one of the screws so I couldn't open it up before I was sure they didn't want a return/refund. Now I can open it up and see what chipset is used and everything else. It may be difficult to find the flaw but if it is a loose connector or solder joint maybe that is the problem. We'll see.It should be easy enough to test because I can turn on the camera and look at the display while I poke around and see if it makes a difference. Also I believe I can plug it into HDMI output and watch it on a monitor as well (not sure if it will allow display while running, or only on playback).Still should make an interesting teardown to see how they can build something like this and sell it for $25 with shipping included. I am certain the camera is actually a bare exposed CCD chip soldered directly on to the board and has the lens assembly stuck on top. I am guessing a really low mAh battery (well below what they claim) because the thing barely powers on for more than a few minutes without a power supply. In practice, it would be plugged in to the car anyways.... but it wouldn't work well during "Parking" surveillance.

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2015, 04:10:50 pm
content: Quote from: edy on October 16, 2015, 10:58:03 pmdefective AND fakereal GS8000L encodes to h264, your fake does mjpegdefect is probably between cmos sensor and pcb, bad hotbar connection/bad solder joints, looks like camera is losing few bits here and there, or maybe mismatching them due to wrong sensor/firmware

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 02:31:29 am
content: FIXED!During the teardown I fixed the problem!!!! I took a video and some photos of the teardown, I have included links to the images below. I'll post the video once I edit it. I took a lucky guess and did something that fixed the image problem.CAN YOU GUESS WHAT IT WAS?Look at the photos!Here is the album:http://imgur.com/a/KVesFIndividual images here:Feel free to post your guesses as to what fixed the nasty image problem! I will post the correct answer soon!HINT: It was obviously a physical problem... The camera still is crap but at least the image is no longer noisy with those strange color gradient screwed up palette like you saw before!

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 06:35:22 am
content: I've been searching high and low for part numbers.... By the looks of the unbranded chips, it appears to be a "fake" of a "fake" even. And it is composed of parts from various manufacturing dates. The Camera module has a date code 2014-11-17, the LCD panel connector says 2014-12-25, but the main PCB is stamped 2015-04-29. Yet the two main chips say "1511" and "1519" at the bottom, which would be 11th week of 2015 (March?), and 19th week of 2015 (May)? The "quality control sticker" over one of the screws says 6 of 2015 so likely it was assembled June 2015.

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 06:42:51 am
content: I'm guessing a flat flex cable is dodgy (or the connector) (or the connection itself).Quote from: edy on October 22, 2015, 02:31:29 amHooray! So it was both fake and defective...Quote from: edy on October 22, 2015, 06:35:22 amSo a defective fake of a fake.

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 09:11:36 am
content: Quote from: edy on October 22, 2015, 02:31:29 amYes, I even told you what it was before you posted photos)connection between sensor and pcb, you pulled ribbon out of the connector and plugged it back in.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 11:42:55 am
content: Bingo!You are both correct! It was the ribbon cable between the camera sensor and the main PCB. I pulled it out on both ends and re-seated it with more firm even pressure and clamped it back firmly. Thankfully this was easily possible due to the use of the clamp-style connector (no soldering needed).Obviously it was shipped from the factory with this defect and their quick factory test didn't show it. Without opening it (and invalidating the warranty/return/refund) I had no idea it was going to fixable. So I needed to make sure I wasn't going to be stuck with a problem.

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 12:07:20 pm
content: you are still left with shitty mjpeg high bitrate low quality camera thocan you make a well lit picture/still frame with it now? Im curious how much interpolated the 1080 is

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 12:55:07 pm
content: I will upload updated images and video soon, and also the tear down video. Yes the camera is still garbage and has an old bitrate-eating MJPG format. I would not recommend buying a GS8000L at any price, especially off the Internet which is full now of mostly fakes.I am lucky the seller refunded me in full, and I didn't need to pay for return shipping and fight for a long time to get my money back. So at least I got a chance to make some videos and tear down and show how to fix the problem. But an average person who is not used to electronic repairs would not have been as excited.If I knew the protocol that the camera module uses to send data to the main board I could figure out what pin was causing the issue. It looked like the image frame was good, but some color information was being corrupted.

author: bktemp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 01:05:39 pm
content: Quote from: edy on October 22, 2015, 12:55:07 pmIt is most likely raw data (10bit raw bayer pattern data) or 8/16bit YUV.

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 01:26:36 pm
content: Im sure someone clever could guess by just looking at the imagesall three base colors are affected = camera streams YUVmaybe ribbon was shifted and highest luma pin was shorting to U? because it appears to have biggest distortions in light parts of the picture, and they are turned into green/blue

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 02:09:50 pm
content: I found this online, not sure if it applies to this particular camera but it is a 24 pin output from a CMOS camera. I see many variations on the same theme but they are probably using some standard 24-pin protocol to be compatible with the most common chipsets available?

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 03:25:22 pm
content: QuoteNo, you're not. That was always on the cards as a last resort(!) - you are just influenced by the rubbish the impatient cheats flood the interwebs with. And, of course, they are neither lucky nor unlucky, just suffering the rod they made for their own back.I think I might have one of these, or very similar. Of course, it was a fake of whatever it was meant to be but it takes video, and I don't really care what format it is or how big it is so long as I can view it (and convert it if I want). The killer for me was the inability to overwrite previous recordings when the storage got full. That's a firmware issue and, sadly, not fixable by reflowing or replugging stuff.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 07:34:52 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on October 22, 2015, 03:25:22 pmPoint well taken. I've heard the same issue, and also that the G-sensor is too sensitive and will "lock" the files causing the cycling not to occur (maybe that's what you are talking about). Not sure if there is a setting in the firmware that disables the G-sensor or if there is some way to disable on or bypass the accelerometer/G-sensor hardware so it doesn't provide a signal at all.EDIT: (I just checked, my firmware allows disabling the G-sensor... set to OFF so it never locks videos)EDIT:QuoteI have always thought honesty is the best policy. Karma and all that... so I was upfront and explained the situation and things worked out. There was no need to panic or worry, and I have all the time in the world. Also, it's only $26 we are talking about so let's put it into perspective.If I was the average buyer, there was no way it would be fixed and it would have ended up in the garbage or returned, let's face it. And even if I wasn't the average buyer and liked to fix stuff, it could have also gone the other way and end up being more trouble than it's worth. Simply put, the quality control needed to address this back in China when they assembled the unit and never let it leave the factory without another try at inserting the ribbon cable, before they sealed it up with a quality control sticker covering the screw.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 08:20:00 pm
content: I've uploaded full "12 megapixel" images from the camera here:http://imgur.com/a/9KHyTIndividual photos:Someone wanted to see how badly it "upscales" the images. Well... PRETTY BAD!!!!!Same goes for the video. Aweful quality at "1080p". Which makes me wonder.... If I just encode at different resolutions all the way down to 640x480 VGA, and I notice the quality is the same crap but my file size gets substantially better, I may as well use the camera in the lowest possible resolution where I still notice the quality being the same as the 1080p? Right?At least I won't have it doing any upscaling, wasting processing time, unnecessarily wasting file space, making better use of my SD card, and making it easier later for copying and converting video formats. I'm going to test all the resolutions down to the lowest one and see if I can notice a difference in quality.By the way, I had a look at the video files, they are not that bad actually. I'll add them to my "teardown" repair video and compare with BEFORE images... Quite interesting.Here are the still-shots linked above that I uploaded to IMGUR.... Please click above links for raw files:

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 09:00:27 pm
content: looks like upscaled 720p

author: bktemp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 09:12:18 pm
content: Could also be 800x600.The scaler does a really bad job: In the horizontal direction it interpolates, but in vertical direction it seems to duplicate the lines without any interpolation.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 10:23:18 pm
content: I'm going to get some video samples made, because that is the most important use for the camera. Obviously the 12MP mode is a joke. What I need to know is what is the REAL raw pixel resolution on the sensor.... Since it is fake, I can't trust the "specs" given. If it is upscaling to 1080p from a smaller sensor, what resolution is it actually starting with?Here are the modes available:1080 FHD 1920 x 1080 (16:9 wide)1080P 1440 x 1080 (4:3 ratio)720P 1280 x 720 (16:9 wide)WVGA 848 x 480 (16:9 wide)VGA 640 x 480 (4:3 ratio)I'd venture to guess it is either 720P or WVGA 848x480. On the other hand, it could even be a 4:3 sensor that is being "cropped" top and bottom to produce the wide modes. I wouldn't be surprised. I would have no way to know unless I open up the lens.I've recorded 1080 FHD, 720P and WVGA (all the wide modes) for now and trying to figure out where to upload the raw files for you to download, since YouTube will mess things up. I'll use "vid.me"... hopefully this will allow download of the raw video file as well.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 11:23:06 pm
content: Here are the links to the raw video from the camera (AVI encapsulated MJPG format):1080 FHD:https://mega.nz/#!ENEkGKqR!QV7jfcGzWKq12X9D-YvpBIcakifecIeZtILqdsWbv00720P:https://mega.nz/#!9McXHLTL!hMZ-1TfVhNmqYbgpg55ytOifhtm_E22OOCQbpRQU4QgWVGA:https://mega.nz/#!MMNGXQaJ!vLB8R8xVTLGWwwfgWVIAcBwI1iFJjtyJ_Sh665FhutwI think the 1080 FHD and 720P look pretty close. I can tell WVGA looks more soft and blurry. So I am thinking maybe the sensor is 1280 x 720 and it is upscaling to 1920 x 1080 (for the 1080p). They claim a 5 MP CMOS sensor. If that is true, then the math gives us this:5,000,000 = 16x * 9x = 144x^2, solving for x = sqrt(5,000,000/144) = 186. So it would be 2981 x 1677 = 4,999,137 pixels.So for each "pixel" they are probably using 2x2 pixels (block of 4) to actually measure different colors, as there is a color mask filter array over the pixels (blue, red, green, green). So the actual number of resolution pixels would be cut down by a factor of 4, or twice in each direction.... So 2981 x 1677 cut in half in both directions gives us: 1490 x 838 TRUE RESOLUTION.Working backwards, 1490 x 838 = 1,248,620 colored pixels. Since you need a block of 4 pixels (2x2 arrangement of blue, red, green, green) to represent 1 color pixel, your sensor is actually 4x 1,248,620 = 4,994,480 pixels (or 5 MP) CMOS. Does that make sense? And I am assuming a 16:9 format CMOS sensor. I can do the same calculation assuming 4:3 ratio and see if there is some cropping happening.There is no way 1920 x 1080 is coming out of a sensor with 1490 x 838 possible pixels. I can see how 1280 x 720 can happen.On the other hand, if we assume now a sensor of 4:3 ratio:5,000,000 = 4x * 3x = 12x^2, solving for x = sqrt(5,000,000/12) = 645.5. So it would be 2582 x 1936 = 4,998,752 pixels.Once again, breaking this up into 4 to account for the color filter array, you would actually have 1291 x 968 possible TRUE color resolution capture. You can get 800 x 600 out of this no problem. Maybe even 1024 x 768, or SXGA 1280 x 960.On the other hand, what could be happening is they are taking a 4:3 CMOS and cropping the top and bottom (letterboxing) and basically grabbing a 1280 x 720 image from the middle of the sensor because they are limited in width across the CMOS.Hence, I conclude my best option is probably getting 1280 x 720 out of the camera if I want wide screen, with the firmware likely cropping the top and bottom to make it appear widescreen. Unfortunately they won't let me get SXGA out of it. The next best 4:3 option is 1440 x 1080 which for sure will be upscaled, and the VGA 640 x 480 will be down-scaled.Is this logic reasonable or complete rubbish? Please see the video files I shared above.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 11:24:27 pm
content: QuoteI don't think it's that because these things typically record in 5 minute files, so any lock would be on the current file and not the ancient one it needs to overwrite. But yours (and others like it) might be different, of course.What it might be is that enabling the G sensor only writes video when there is a shock. If you disable it you get constant recording. Or something like that.QuoteGotta say that they look better than the SD video off my £250 SmartWitness! Mind, that's a few years old now and their current model is HD. I wonder if there is a chart you can use to determine resolution - I'd be surprised if someone hasn't solved this problem before.

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 01:56:21 am
content: Quote from: edy on October 22, 2015, 11:42:55 amAnd this is exactly why I don't play that game.On several occasions I have had some cheap widget arrive not-working correctly. So it gets opened up and sometimes (as you've discovered) it's a really easy fix, end of story, everyone's happy.On other occasions, it is fractally stuffed and not repairable.So it didn't arrive. I'm then happy(ish) and the vendor doesn't waste his time trying to play games.The irony in this situation with this fake AND faulty camera is that because you actually played by the rules, the vendor lost his money, whereas if you had been less afraid of 'doing the wrong thing', both you and the vendor would have been happy(ish?).

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 05:48:56 am
content: Teardown Time!

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 10:49:49 am
content: QuoteThe vendor would have lost his money either way. Or do you think money gets created out of thin air to compensate both vendor and buyer? The only way the vendor could be worse off is if he actually paid to have the product shipped back and it's a total loss, but if it was easily repairable (as in this case) he may have been able to sell it on again. Of course, if it was 'lost' he doesn't have that choice and you've scammed him out of more dosh.