Really?? Hahahaha that would be awesome. On another note, have you tried the Skyzone V02+ or what they are called. basically the most recent. Are they better than fatsharks?
I recently bought these. As a beginner in the FPV world, they seem like a good compromise with respect to price (I think the price is back around $100 again). I hadn't seen your review (but had seen other FOV-critical reviews) and now that I have seen it, I will say this: It is accurate, and I don't agree with it. Your technical facts are OK, but your negative attitude judges them too harsly. I do not think you are able to mention a single other goggle in the same price range, and that is truly what it's all about. FOV: Yes it is very small, but it works. The adjustments of the lenses helps a lot. You get FPV. Picture quality: Yes it is in a tunnel. But it can easily be adjusted to be sharp, and quality (sharpness and color) is pretty good. Power: Yes, the battery is smaller in capacity than for Fatshark, but still it lasts a pretty long time. Maybe the fatsharks require more power with their larger display modules and extra receiver for diversity? DVR: The external DVR module works and is pretty low priced, too. Yes, it isn't as sleek as onboard DVR, but again: It works, and still is less than half the price of any Fatshark goggle. Antenna diversity: It is antenna diversity. It is not fake diversity, but it is not as good as receiver diversity. I think practical use will be the true judge here. Foam thickness: Yes. Too thick. Thinner may be ordered now. USB plug: You are wrong here, I think. The USB may actually be used as an alternative power source. Need power while charging the battery? Use a power bank! Weight and size: These are pretty light and handy. Box goggles (for instance) are not. All in all: Yes, you get less than if you get Fatsharks, Aomways etc. You also pay far less. I am happy with my purchase. They work. I can practice FPV flying. The true question, that you did not answer is this: Which goggles would you buy if you had about $100 to spend on goggles. Unless you have an alternative, I think your review is unecessary harsh. For other beginners on a budget (like me): If FOV is the most important for you, I think box goggles is the only real alternative these days unless you want to pay substantially more.
thank you for this as i am looking at it as my beginner goggles....while looking at the review I was also waiting to hear what were his recommendations and he did not give any
Thanks for your reply. I'm looking to just get "my feet wet" in FPV and don't know if I'll like it or even if my reflexes are fast enough, at my age, to even fly FPV ! So, I'm looking for something, at this time , that's gonna get the job done. I DO appreciate the honesty of the review though.
I don't understand most of you in this hobby doing reviews ? I come from Hot Rods & street rods scene . we compare apples to apples . if it cost is $100 you compare it to the same type products around $100 not something 3 times more expensive . All i see is it being compared to $450 Goggle . how much unfair is that ! Not saying their are any good . Come on at least show me a better goggle in the same price range ! Or can you ?? If not the these are a good goggle for the price .
you're right - there are no real competitors in this pricerange. but if a product does dissapoint you (because too small screens for example) it doesnt matter how cheap they were - it would be just wasted money. since I have the chance to compare I had to point out why, at least for me, FOV is so important...
You're totally "correct" that we can't compared orange to apple vs price $$$ (don't disagree there). But for those that just step-in the hobby, it's fair for us to know and understand the hardware we're about to buy. We like to invest in things that we can grow with it down the path, therefore, it's nice to know what we're getting into - knowledge is the KEY!. Keep up your great reviews RCSchim.
Scott Brown you missing the point it cost these slick no good for nothing conmen sale reviewers not a dime they get the products for free we the buyers part with our hard earned cash for rubbish that's it in a nutshell we get robbed stupid by these fools that could not fly a kite in a hurricane the majority of them that i.v seen sucks. I day ban then from you tube get them banned be gone with them sewer rats is all they is
For a beginner like me this goggles are totally fine. You get what you pay for and please stop comparing a 77€ goggle with 3-500€ top end products. You are saying don't buy the EV100, yet you have an affiliate link in the description...
I dont use affilate links! the shortlinks are either just for shortening and keeping the infobox tidy, or often the companies (like here) supply links I have to use. It's then a campaing link where they see (and measure) how much sales come from my review. I get no % of sales, it only helps them judge whom to support I guess. If I was to get money off such sales - this would influence me for sure. Nobody could stay unbiased. I still dont think beginners should make their first flights with such tiny goggles (and here they are smaller then pretended. they are 24 instead of 28°...
So say what google beginner like me should buy. If i can't spend more than 200USD with shipping and customs on FPV googles? You just it is bad but i didn't see in any comment what you suggest.
aliasx666 what you say is mostly true.....BUT I was new not long ago and got my first set of FPV goggles maybe three...four years ago....the Eachine EV007's I believe they were and worked fine for learning and were way less money than these here then graduated to the Eachine Goggles Two for $149 and they are WAY better than these in this video even tho these are the small two monitor "type" like Fats and others.....Now I guess a year or two farther did feel I could afford to fork over $300 for the Aomway commander V1's and LOVE THEM for I love 16:9 all the way anyway reason I upgraded to Goggles Two...And this is my next upgrade so for bout a year have had these and STILL will NOT fork over $500 for a measly set of the goggles ONLY then $200 for the diversity RX and antenna's and all you DO NOT get with sharks no not until I may strap a set to MY OWN head and see if they are worth any more than I paid for the commnders....stupidity is not funny....And I have NO hobby store within a 200 mile range maybe more that have ANY OF THIS STUFF!! So I HAVE to go on what I think and what I watch and this guy is TOTALLY right about some reviewers that I too believe are "way TOO INTO" these places sending them free stuff to give an honest review when something does NOT even COMPARE!! It is selling out and BS!! If you are going to go to the trouble to do a review on something and have ANY experience what so ever TELL THE DAMNED TRUTH THAT IS ALL FOR SOME OF US WATCH THIS CRAP FOR A REASON!!!!! And honestly yes they are box style and unless you are TOTALLY AGAINST THAT ALL TOGETHER PERIOD THE Eachine oh VR D2 Pro with DVR I would TOTALLY imagine beat these things up one handed!!!
I'm glad you gave one alternative, but everyone immersed in the hobby says to get Fatsharks. People interested in getting involved in flying aren't going to get Fatsharks. Honestly they SHOULDN'T get Fatsharks. Trying to coax someone into spending over $500 for one component isn't helping them any. Let them get the cheaper alternative, let them get the feel of flying and see if they want to get more involved with more expensive higher quality parts. Telling people that they need to take out a second mortgage for a hobby that they might not even want to continue is turning a lot of people off before they even start.
Totally agree too. Far too much sobbery and boasting/showing off going on in this hobby. Then there's the people who think and act like you shouldn't be allowed to even think of buying an rc unless you buy the most expensive gear. I buy what I can afford and take my time to aquire everything I need. This way I can buy tougher better built stuff that lasts, regardless of the brand. I don't equate quality with a brand name. I look at the product, read reviews (much more than 1) and usually focus on the lower rated reviews since they'll alert you to any common issues or might be relatable to how I plan to use them. Price is a bit indicative of quality but not entirely. I hate guys who go to an rc meet and rhyme off all their parts and gear and their worth. Give me specs snd honest experience, not a recital of all your receipts. Rc snobs and braggers need to gtfoh. Also judgemental old folk that think your foam, hand made, electric plane shouldn't be allowed at the field or whatever. Then theres the "ONLY my way is the right way" guys. I cant think of a type I hate more than those guys.
I am 62 years old, I own 4 sets of FatSharks, I love my EV100's. I can bring them into perfect focus, something I can't do with my FatSharks even with $60 optic add-on's. I purchased 21 pair of them for a Boy Scout High Adventure here in Michigan that took place 2 weeks ago, every pair worked flawlessly. There was no way more expensive goggles could have been purchased as there were 16 scouts and 4 leaders. To say we should not buy these is a dis-service to those not receiving free goggles to review and those without the extra expendable income you have. Don't listen to this guy, if they are what fits your budget then by all means purchase a pair. When I first spun the dials on the bottom to focus them I never expected what happened, not only could I read every word of the OSD, I could see the dots after each word. I have never been able to read the OSD on my FatSharks let alone even know their are periods after the letters.
Hey! Good to see honest unhyped reviews, I really appreciate That!. I own a set of the ev100 goggles and when they first arrived I had that same wtf feeling you had when you first try them. I was sooo disappointed, fortunately for me, I had a technical issue with my goggles and was able to get a refund from banggood. I was later able to repair the issue, but after tossing them aside for a while, a buddy of mine came to fly tiny whoops in my garage and his box goggles died, so I told him I'd let him use mine and I'd suffer through the ev100 tunnel vision. It was awful at first, but believe it or Not, I've actually really grown to like them, and It seems that my eyes have adjusted to them quite well. They somehow 'feel' as if the screens are bigger. Even as I write this, I remember that righteous hate I had on for these goggles, but if they died on me, I'd actually probably get another pair. Maybe I'm crazy, but my opinion of these goggles has improved a great deal since I first tried them.
FPV Under250 thanks for sharing this. This shows how good tge brain can adapt to non - perfect conditions. I could force myself to fly many flights with them and see iff it happens to me as well. But in the other side i just wanna enjoy flying :)
RCSchim I'll be the first to admit, it did take quite some time to get used to them, but for anyone who already purchased a pair of these goggles and can't afford to get something different, it should be comforting to know that it's just a matter of getting used to them. With that being said, I think i have a preference for a less immersive fov. I think these are definitely suited to those who find extremely immersive goggles disorienting.
SO in order to fly FPV you need to spend $350.00 on goggles. Geez thanks for your honest review. I liked the part where you spent over 800.00 on Fatsharks. Stew gave that review because he wanted those of us that dont have thousands of dollars to spend on goggles an option. Secondly, why dont you just come out and say you are jealous of not only Stews views but also his Patreon account. Lastly, this may come as a shock but not everyone flys a $1500.00 drone outside. Some of us dont have wide open fields around us to go flying in, so we fly mostly indoors. If you want more subs give me options, instead of just telling me these suck. SO what other 150.00 option would you propose? Oh the $350.00 Topsky? Thanks bro.
No, to fly FPV you can get away with as little as 40$ I guess (cheapest box goggles). I still dont understand why so many users dont like them... Main difference between box and "normal" goggles: box makes you look to a very near object, almost crosseyed, normal goggles let you look "straight". Box are much easier and can achieve large screen so easy, normal goggles need complicated and high quality optics inside (that's the most expensive part at least in Fatsharks I read) Where's the part where I spent 800$ for FS? Maybe combined... the domHDs are 400-500$ I guess (didnt research this) I still believe that spending 100$ (or now rather 160+$) for the EV100 is throwing money out of the window. If you're on a budget at least try the box goggles... I think I somewhere already wrote as a joke "maybe I'm just jealous about him being the first to review and have so many views". sure true :) It's always a race for the reviewers out there. Some (like Bruce in NZ) have a unfair disadvantage of very long delivery time :) I'm a bit fed up with the fact tho that: if you put out a fast review you get many views, whereas if you take your time, test them extensivly... you have a lot of work but also low viewcount - since others were faster... (compare my Mavic review with the first Mavic reviews for example). Please check the videos linked at the end of this review - I already did some goggles comparisons, reviews. ATM: quite some movement.... Options? Cyclops2 (still like em the most of the cheap ones), maybe the Fatshark Transformers (but I didnt try them), TopSky FX7 - can only say they look good, would love to test them, dont think I will get em :) hope this justifies pressing that sub button now :) (and go ahead and also hit the bell :)
#31: Good review Mario, but keep in mind, if you ask a Lexus driver to give his opinion on a fiat 500, you probably get the same result. but thousands just love that car as there first car. Just giving my thoughts here.
I would love to race with a Fiat 500 thru the hills of Toscany rather than with a Lexus :) Yes, I see your point. From my view I thought nobody could want that small of a picture. But seems like there are some pilots that are ok with it. The "cheap goggles" point here is an illusion. they add up to 175$ now if you buy the DVR, and you still get a product that I think will not make you happy...
Agree on both, the price getting out of hand and it is not a cheap goggles anymore, better to get your hands on one to try before you buy is the best way to be sure its the one for you.
You assume a lot. I do mostly indoor FPV at the moment. With a spotter, finding your drone without a DVR is not that difficult if you also have a pretty clear overview of the area where you are flying. I'd love a bigger picture, but the resolution, sharpness and colors are OK on my EV100s. With leds and buzzer on your drone, that DVR is not that big a deal (I spent a weekend with a couple of FPV racing drone pilots earlier this summer on a farm with a field with pretty tall grass, and we always found the drone, but some of us worked as spotters, which helped. They had Fatsharks, but none of them used the DVR feature).
News just in, cheap entry level goggles aren't as good as high level goggles that are 3x the price... These goggles are fine for someone's first pair of goggles. Box goggles probably are better to start out with but they're big things to kart around. The FOV might not be the claimed 28degs but removing that thick foam massively improves on the 'stock' FOV
For 100 bucks its a good goggel . In practice the smaller view is no big probleem. And the picture is sharp. I say , why compare just test for wats it's worth. Thats my opinion.
Finally an honest review! Great job in describing exactly what this goggles are. Unfortunately , like you mentioned in your review, some of the other guys guys that are getting free stuff from banggood, are giving false reviews about the products they are getting. I was fool enough to buy this goggles based on the review of one of those guys... your review is 100% accurate,... this goggles are almost useless! the best feature they do have that other vendors should incorporate, is the ability to focus the image to do the exact correction for each of your eyes. Other than that this product should not be bought by beginners or experienced pilots. I agree with your review 100% and that is the reason I subscribed in your channel... we need real and honest reviews. I will be giving away my EV 100 googles for anyone in my flying club who wants them as these are the worse googles I ever tried for the reasons you describe... the FOV is so small, you can't hardly fly. I don't usually think negative about products, but my advice to anyone that want to get into FPV, don't get fooled by the initial price of $99 for this goggles, you are better of with "box goggles"
got mine today, (forUSD$100 ) blown away by the difference it makes to my noob tinywhooping. the image is so clear and bright that my skills suddenly got sharp too. I understand all the tech criticism but, really, for a hundred bucks, the better view, weight and feel compared to even the best face esky is huuuuge. also, no spectacles needed for me and many others is an extra freedom in the air.
congrats Tony - glad they "serve" you well (sorry, had to....) good to read that some of you guys actually like the goggles and can fly with the picture. you're right - since the image is small the sharpness and image quality looks really good!
I like your reviews and critical eye. Of course it's easier to be sharp when it's a small area, but that small image in the EV feels like it gives me more useful eye data, more visual cue acuity, than the much bigger screens on box sets. I'm all about the subjective, and for me, they raised my enjoyment level and my meagre abilities. I do get that I can expect a whole other level above this when I can afford several hundred bucks for a Fattie or Aomie. cheers, tony
My 50' TV which I use for flight simulators and sits about 8 feet away is a slightly smaller FOV than these goggles. So honestly the FOV isn't a issue with me. I've been flying EV800D's for several years now and getting used to these was not hard for me at all.
I think you are TOTALLY off base here. Yes, everything is true, no diversity, small fov. etc. BUT, THEY ARE ONLY $150.00 NOW. Fatsharks, Commanders, etc. totally ridiculous what they charge. You're a pro, sure, go for the $500.00 a pair, but for a newbie or a "poor" (me) person, they're great. Clear screens, good reception (oh no!, no diversity ! BFD, as long as I got a signal, I don't care how you get it to me) MUCH better looking than wearing one of the bucket sized goggles screen setups.
Compare to Aomway commander v1's....$300 AS GOOD AS FATS I think!! Yes twice what these cost but I myself would rather have a GOOD set of box than these!! Like what I had the Eachine Goggles Two and ones I have not tried but would imagine from my prior experience with ones mentioned the Eachine VR D2 Pro's are better as well at $88!!!! SNAP now what??
Nice review Mario, that's why I'm subscribed! Ahh the old days of youtube when people posted videos fueled by passion....not ad revenue. As a beginner I started out with quanum boxes and loved them! Still keep them around for spectators. Happy Flying!
In theory passion is the best fuel to be sucessful in life. But currently we are facing more and more "algorithms" that use the massive ammount of data available. These programs are created to maximize revenue. It's everywhere.
for us glasses wearers who dont want to have to swap diopter lenses every time someone wants to "see" thru the goggles. the adjustable ev100s were great for starters. there might be "better" but by the time you pay for Fatsharks to be superior in all ways, modules, antennas, lenses, etc you're nowhere close in price. But then there are people who want everyone to spend on the elite gear, then find out the vertigo is something the buyer cannot overcome, so they can swoop in and score more "used" gear for cheap lol. Relatively tiny FOV, but when you're focussed, its like those of us who got used to much tinier cell phone screens
Good honesty. To me the most important aspect is what I can see. Thats why I went for the biggest FOV I could afford. All the bells and whistles dont mean nothing if what you see is crap.
Thanks for the honest review! I agree I couldn't fly with them because the image was so small. I sold mine on eBay. Fatshark has a new release of the transformer coming out, the fsv1105 that I'm interested in but no DVR
First I bought a Skyzone V2+ 3D but was not satisfied, now looking for a cheap one or a better than skyzone if I can sell the skyzone. You could help me to make the decision! This is one candidate for the: - very low pice 99dollars today... - IPD and focus distance both can be tuned for each eye (for one of my eyes I see far and for one near... bot mostly far) - sponge is wide enough - has a fan/airflow - has battery - can be modded to add my separate DVR or receiver unit My second candidate is Aomway Commander 1, what I like: - a bit very expensicve - can accept 3D side by side, but just like a cardboard so aspect ratio is lost... (resolution is not the best thou) - better FOV - unfortunately not compatible with 2channel 3D FPV like the skyzone was so I have to sell my 3D can and VTX too....
thanks, not quite sure if you make fun of me or if you actually like the idea. Seems like not too many ppl covered this relation... (and then they blame huge FOV goggles for making them dizzy...)
Danke, werd ich (weitermachen). Leider wurde mir grad das nächste BrillenReview (AOMWay Commander V1s) abgesagt, weil diese anscheinend nicht mehr produziert werden (die waren kurz jetzt mal auf 180$ herunten). Macht auch nix, DJI HD Zeitalter ist angebrochen!
It seems that you are using the original foam that comes with the EV100 - it's strongly suggested to use a thinner foam (1.5-2.5mm) to avoid the tunnel effect and give a bigger picture.
This review overlooks some facts. The FS Dominator V3 have 30 deg FoV. The FS Attitude V4 32 deg. Aomway/Skyzone are similar. Put yourself in front of a 40" TV. How far do you need to be away to have 28,30,32 deg FoV? --> 175cm -> ca. 32deg. --> 185cm -> ca. 30deg. --> 200cm -> ca. 28deg. Try yourself in front of a TV or picture at the wall. The difference is not impressive. So all these Fatshark etc models are crab following the logics of this review. Think about it. You need to go for the Dominator HD for 42deg, which puts you at 130cm. That is really a difference. But keep in mind that you compare $600+ to $99 now. Also keep in mind that largely more than 35deg FoV are not really ergonomic. They eye has only a quite limited center of around 35deg which it can see shark. So if you go larger in FoV, you must look around & move your eyes in the goggles. Certainly this is immersive but not what you need for FPV. Now Fatshark is about to launch their newest model called "Base HD Goggles" with HDMI and 1280x720. Want to guess to FoV? --> 28 deg.
Hi Stefan, please take a look at my XLS sheet (I've done this some time ago cause I sometimes found no FOV in the specs of goggles but rather this: imagine 80" tv in 7foot distance. I wanted to calculate FOV out of these virt. screensize numbers. and it's pretty simple with some triangle and angle formulas. so please take a look, I've included your 3 examples there and get different degrees (lower). Also I learned that it's highly subjective to the person wearing the goggles. some prefer large FOV to get maximum immersion, others are happy with around 30-35° for best performance (in races). These goggles here, however, are more likely 24° not the claimed 28°. My measurements are not 100% accurate for sure (it's hard to) but they cant be that much off. Also the difference between 35° and their claimed 28° were to large for me...
Sorry but the answer misses the point. The ev100 nit full 28 deg; more like 26 in my calculations. But they compare rather well to e.g. Dom V3 with 30 deg or the brand new Fatshark base goggles with 28 deg. Yes, you can by larger FoV at 5 times the price. This is not a useful comparison. You compare to 70deg box goggles, which creates a totally wrong impression in the video. More than 40 is unphysiological (this is why all relevant goggles are close or below). So again the comparison is not useful. P. S. To your calculations : exactly those calculations are in my post. In metrics not in imperials. Compare the Deltas...
I think 28° diagonal is real as per the advertise and Stefan Thesen is right with his math. I bet you did the measurement looking from the top or the bottom plane. You should measure the angle in to a diagonal plane (ex: lower left - top right corners)and the numbers will be different. I've made a test with a CAD program using your virtual screen size data and for a 40" screen from 1.75m distance you get 32.37° per diagonal. For a 41" screen from 2.133m distance you get 27.44° per diagonal. But numbers are only numbers and I agree with you: The screen look small and you have to do something to get your eyes closer to the lens so the FOV will get bigger. I personally removed the foam it came with and created a new one from a 2mm thick foam to get a bigger image.
As I predicted after my critical review of the original Wizard X220s, Bangood didn't send *ME* any of these for review. I guess that after this review, you might also be off their "friendly reviewer" list :-) Being totally objective has a price -- but thumbs up to you Mario for not being a shill. My interest in these googles would be to see how they've set up that passive diversity -- I've never seen such a system that didn't actually create more problems than it solved.
check the link in my infobox abouth this blogpost. the guy has some very closeup pics of all the electronix in there. when seeing this I immediatly thought of you going over these... Thanks for your support Bruce. You ever since led the way with good reviews. AndyRC was quite ok with the range while testing. I still dont fully understand the cheap Antenna Diversity to be honest. Do you have a video on that matter? :) I just noticed that this Fatshark module with 2 antennas (the early one) with Antenna diversity, it was actually worse than a normal module. only the Laforge style diversities now (and the realAcc....) are good I think. Still - for diving I prefer a steady FR632 on a tripod... Speaking of which - I want something better than the FR632 - but I dont wanna invest in a clearview. Where's the middleground? A highly sensitive diversity RX?
I used the Quanum / Fatshark Genesis goggle for about 7 months, which allso hase a FS antenna diversity setup.. That worked out OK for me BUT.. I did have 2 instances where it completely lost reception (I wasn't flying far away at all.. It just didn't switch).. I wouldn't be To worried by the way.. I've done several negative reviews and they still talk to me..
LIKE the honesty! kudos to you Mario. ive even bought this in their lowest sale(89usd) and had to bail out a few hours after , when a flying buddy of mine told me FOV was crap. but hey, this would have to be the cheapest so far, electronics optics and everything compared to box goggles. have a couple of them. EV800 and the VR006(crazy design had me cross-eyed). keep it up man!
Ok yes they're not perfect but as a cheap entry level goggle they do the job, the key selling point for me was the adjustable lenses, no other goggles have that yet. Yes it's narrow but honestly, you learn to work with what you have. If I had several hundred to spend on some decent ones I would, this is allowing the hobbyists that don't have a fortune to spend on it an opportunity to get away from the clunky box on the head.
I bought the EV800 instead. Half the price and the filed of view is very nice and big. You also have the option of DVR on the EV800D which is just a bit more expensive but still cheaper than the EV100
i have these goggles. came from box goggles (ev800d ). 28 degrees feels about as immersive as sitting in front of a computer screen, its not bad in my opinion actually rather nice coming from the boxes. honestly it seems like a lot of the YT pilots have sticks up their ass when it comes to this stuff, i have to buy my FPV stuff on a budget. 300 dollars is not something i can just toss around. given the price and considering lower resolution, i would take the smaller/ relatively sharper image over the 480p movie theater that i am used to. as for lack of diversity i barely used it on my eachine Ev800d which has true diversity. so i'm not really losing anything. maybe tonnes of goggles out there do what the ev100 can do and more, but few of them are at or below its price range.
So come on... You start with the "base" model of fatshark at the"base" price, but who keeps it at that level? Add diversity modules, diopter adapters, upgrade antennas, upgrade the battery... *_and that's why fatshark are so awesome ‼_* What we really need is competition at the entry level. Color me not impressed at your review of the features in your imagination and not reviewing what the product actually is. OMG , my Toyota Camry doesn't have as much horsepower as the Ferrari, so it can't be any good ‼😱
Exactly he is comparing a ferrari / Lambo with a Ford/ Renault car NOT even that when i was 18 just bought my first car to drive arround I will bought a cheap car to get better before i go buy a expensive mercedes and trash it within first 2 years same goes for this BEGINNERS do not wanna spend 300 500 euro /dollars on goggles then to just find out ITS not the thing they wanna do, also like MANY reviews talk about its perfect to begin with those that get into the hobby wanna get better upgrade anyhow along side with the drone. You just dont buy the most expensive FPV drone either and on the first flight you trash it. thats just dumb.
THIS IS WHERE SAY THE AOMWAY'S COME INTO PLAY!!!?? I HAVE NEVER USED FAT SHARK ANYTHING, NEVER EVEN LOOKED THROUGH THEM WHERE I LIVE THEY DO NOT EXSIST SO I DON'T HAVE THE PLEASURE OR OPPORTUNITY TO EVEN "TRY" THEM AND CANNOT SEE MYSELF SHELLING OUT $500 FOR ONLY THE GOGGLES NO MORE AND FORKING OUT ANOTHER $200 FOR GOOD DIVERSITY RX AND ANTENNA AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT IS NOT INCLUDED WITH FAT SHARK SO MAY NEVER KNOW IF THEY ARE BETTER THAN AOMWAY COMMANDERS I HAVE BUT I STARTED WITH BOX GOGGLES MYSELF AND THEY WORKED GREAT AND I WOULD BET A CONIDERABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY THEY WERE WAY BETTER THAN THESE CRAPPERS HERE AND THEN DECIDED I DID WANT TO SEE IF I LIKED THE MONITOR ON EACH EYE AND THEN THE AOMWAYS CAME OUT AND IN 16:9 RATIO AND PERSONALLY I PREFER THAT TOTALLY ANYWAY FOR MY BOX GOGGLES WERE AND REASON I PURCHASE THEM AS WELL THE EACHINE "GOGGLES TWO" AND INSTALLED MY OWN DVR ON THEM WITHOUT MY GOGGLE VISION BEING EFFECTED WITH LATENCY FOR ONLY USED THE VIDEO LINE AS A INPUT TO THE DVR NOT CUT IT AND IN AND OUT BACK INTO THE GOGGLES BUT YET A "Y" JUNCTION AS TO BE TWO SEPERATE ENTITEIS.......COPY???? MY MAIN POINT IN ALL OF THIS IS REVIEWERS BE FREAKIN HONEST I DON'T GIVE A SHIT WHO SENDS YOUR ASSES WHAT!! I DO REVIEWS AND AM TRYING TO GET MY CHANNEL GOING BUT IT IS MOSTLY SELF SUPPORTED AND PROBABLY BECAUSE NO MATTER WHAT I WILL SAY WHAT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS AND GIVE HONEST UNBIASED VIEW ON ANY ITEM AT ANY PRICE!! AND NOT AT THE COST OF PEOPLE WHO DO WATCH ME AND MY CRAP AND TAKE WHAT I SAY FOR ME TELLING THE TRUTH!! WORD!!
Yep. Finding a good shot of the FOV on video was the deciding factor for me. I decided to pull the plug and stick with my VR D2s. Already spent the money on more quad stuff!
I know that this is old but you are totally lying. UAVfutures absolutely did mention the field of view several times in his video. Explained that it was much smaller then his other 2 favorite goggles and even stated the field of view in degrees. He was giving them a thumbs up for value for money. Some people can't afford 300 to 600 dollar goggles and what he did was rate them on a what you get for the price basis. Seems like your just jealous.
I have subscribed BECAUSE you told what I believe to be the truth. I am a former Banggood customer. Having been burned by Banggood's deceptive marketing practices, and also having bought a number of Eachine products, I am now of the opinion that their cheap prices comes at such a huge sacrifice of quality in materials AND workmanship that their stuff just isn't even usable and therefore WORTHLESS. I find your review of the EV100 very generous based on my experience with about 6 Eachine products and a comparison of a number of EV100 reviews. I thank you for your integrity and the courage it took to tell the REAL TRUTH ! ! !
It's always hard to wait and hold back pulling that (add to shoppingcart)-trigger. I know. But waiting a bit and reading/viewing reviews, reacitons and problems on RCGroups is a good way to safe you some troubles!
If these goggles could match up to the fatsharks , then they would cost just as much. I feel like the review was too much of a comparison to goggles costing 4x as much. Apples and oranges. If they had the larger fov , DVR, bigger batt, and true diversity, THEN THEY WOULD COST $400 . I think most who order these, like me, understand that we will swap antennas on day one, and eventually add a DVR. The DVR isn't a deal breaker for me because no one mentions that you can simply DVR from another set of cheap box goggles like vrd2's etc . Thanks for your personal opinion , but keep it fair , you are reviewing entry level goggles that most people will buy to move up from box goggles. That's the angle I wish to hear about , like Stu did. Maybe that's why he gets the most views.
I compared it to the larger FOV because that was my main point. Might be personal preference - but with many years of using goggles now I can tell that FOV is very important to enjoy flying. Still think that 100 or more $ are better invested in box goggles (deluxe at this money) and some more stuff.
That's a fair preference, but these are lighter and more handy than bulky box goggles. You fail to mention that the resolution of the panels is fair (same amount of resolution lines as Fatshark Dominator V3, which regardless of FOV gives almost the same amount of visual information).
Not a damned thing wrong with that for sure AT ALL!! For I used the Eachine Goggles Two for a VERY long time and was TOTALLY happy with them and was not comfortable or have big enough pocketbook to shell out $500 for ONLY the goggles then $200 for EVERYTHING that DOES NOT COME WITH THEM!!! I know have the Aomway's Commanders and LOVE THEM!! I can't imagine Fat's being any or much better and spent I think $325 or so and you get EVERYTHING except the batter but a balance converter as you may use ANY Lipo you wish with them!! So NO BRAINER for me and I felt I could afford that for the entire package diversity BUILT in! For I still WILL NOT shell out that kind of cash on a set of goggles unless I can stap the bastards on my own head and see what I see and where I live there is NO hobby store NONE that even have anything like any of this stuff. So again I may never know what Fat Sharks are all about but feel I am not missing much if anything!!! THX!!
An honest review thanks! I asked any times how is the fov and it was always brushed over , saying it was fairly small but not at all a problem, I avoided buying them because I suspected the fov would be too small and you have just confirmed my suspicions , I will stick with my Hyperion f640 which were £80 too...
I did the quick math: measured the diagonal lenght of each of the goggles as I filmed them. set them in relation to their claimed diagonal. found out that while the other goggles gave reasonable relations the EV100 was way off! If I correct their claimed 28° to 24° FOV - than my math is right again. (hope this makes sense). here's a pic and the xls if you wanna see what I did...: drive.google.com/open?id=0B4jolPxvBPhCRUlwMmQzNjNNUWc
I just subscribed. I have bought things in the past because I have seen good reviews of them, then they turned out to be crap, so I like it when people give honest reviews of things.
I was lucky enough to try a friends Skyzones, and only lucky in that it stopped me from buying them... instantly. I ended up with HD3's plus my own made box goggles with a HD screen, as looking at such a small screen is just crazy, and I believe it's simply a manufacturers way of hiding crap resolution displays. If it only has 240 line vertical res, but appears the size of a pocket tv from down the hall it will still seem sharp. Maybe people with tunnel vision would like them, but for most, given the choice wouldn't. It's a unique market, having a product that really needs to be trial tested to evaluate things like field of view, colour saturation, colour purity, contrast, brightness, sharpness, comfort, focus, IPD compatability, light sealing, and added features like true diversity or dvr, battery life, parts replacement etc, they are all usually just decided by youtube reviews and Chinese specifications. Unless you know someone who buys first, we all rely on reviewers like you Mario, who can thankfully be well trusted to save us from disappointment.. and from going broke. Cheers
Thankyou for your honest insight review to the goggles, very happy with your comments. Bruce from RCModelReviews sent me here. I have now subscribed too. :-)
I really like your Point. I flew a box google for over a year. Then i thought since i flew very often that i should buy a Fatshark. Of cause i chose tha HD3 for over 700 usd with all attachments... What happened ? Well , i was so dissapointed. Such a rip off... Also they had a defect pixel. I flew them 2 times and sold them ... Then i decided to buy the ev100. I got them for 85usd ( with 12 % promotioncode + 2 for other ppl ). I totaly agree with the fov, but for people who are not professionals , i think it is a decent choice. P.s. i bought from the rest of the fatshark money a oculus rift. I will never buy this expensive hyped fatshark shit again.
HERE YA GO!!! what I have wrote all over this review page!!! Good JFKKFCBK someone else who "GETS IT" $500 for ONLY a set of goggles then $200 for EVERYTHING YOU DO NOT GET!!!!!!! WORD!! THX- Turbo/
thanks for saying the thruth about products on your reviews , it prevents us to spend tons of money on products and being disapointed at the end thanks
Thanks for the honest review, I really appreciate it! For someone who has never flown FPV before and wants to get into the hobby without spending huge amounts of money, would you still not recommend these? I understand the FOV is pretty garbage but I feel like that's what you get for paying 1/3 of the price of the high-end goggles. They still do the job right?
Great vidio, love your tell it how it really is attitude, just because its free doesn't mean its quality and i have so much more time for the reviewer's who review for for their viewers rather than their, supliers. Subbed and keep it up.
Thank to you Andy rc and Kabab fpv, I have cancelled my order on BG before it got shipped.. I ordered it when it was 100$ and was pretty sure I’ll be happy after seeing other reviews. Now I think other reviewers are making the truth pinker ;) I know they don’t publish all of the of bad reviews on BG also, I’ll save my money and wait for something better.. Thank again
thanks for honest review - got to same conclusion it's way to narrow (sadly after reciving them) and now trying to replace/mod faceplate - to avoid keyhole effect and get a little closer to screens with my eyes to make FOV a little bigger. for 80$ a decent deal with a lot of moding possibility, but to be it as friendly as first reviews - have to agree - UAVfutures sold themselfs :/
Good luck on the modding at least. I found when removing the foam at all, eyes are a bit closer and image appears "a bit" larger. But the hard plasic cut the nose off your face then...
Hi I like your honesty with those glasses. I own a Phantom 3 standard. I use a RCA tablet 7.0 Its a great tablet but the brightness is terrible in sunlight. I been trying to find a cheap pair of goggles to hook to the HDMI port of my tablet to use the goggles as a monitor. But find it very hard to find a pair that isn't so expensive. I'm 60 years old and I just cant afford the top end goggles. Those white goggles look like it has such a tiny screen on them. That wont work for me to small. Its like looking through those peep holes in a door to see who is on the other side lol. If you have a cheap suggestion on a pair of goggles that have a HDMI port to hook to my tablet I'm all ears. Thank you for your honest review of them. You have a great channel.
Kim thanks, if you need hdmi look for example at the eachine goggles two. I already tested them. Cheap as hdmi comes only info the form of box goggles.
Thank's RCS been driving me nuts trying to find a goggle that will hook to my tablet. The sun beats the heck out of my tablet so hard to see. If you have time. Check out some of my flights with the Phantom just may like them. I'm a beginner with this bird but think I'm doing well enough. Thanks for the info appreciate it
New subscriber here and also new to the FPV world. I bought a set of EV800 'goggles' and used them for a grand total of maybe 5 minutes before a motor on my craft bit the dust. For the time I used them though, they seemed pretty neat (mind you nothing to compare to). Anyway, all that said, it would be quite welcome if you could maybe do a video talking about lens size and field of vision and aspect ratios with goggles and all that stuff. I hear mentions of it on reviews, but so far I havent really found much information on it beyond the advice to "match" the camera with the goggles. That much, I think, is common sense, but how does lens size relate to a changing FOV? What about wide angle lenses? What about DVRs? Things like that. Either way, badass review, glad I saw it because until your review I didnt realize how narrow of view these goggles have. You saved me from a worthless purchase! And one more thing, I really hope BG doesnt put you on some blacklist or whatever. I would lose a lot of respect for them. Everyone has dud products and thats nothing I would hold against BG, but to shut down any critical reviews? Thats just a bad sign...
Thank you Mario for your honesty! I was pretty disappointed when i saw the review from Stu telling us it was a great FPV Goggles, even my first FPV goggles had indeed 35° FOV! This is really a shamefull to sell these FPV goggles in 2017 and trap people with it! Have a great week and keep on flying!
Madmacs above has a vaild point that I didnt think of yet: racers might be ok with smaller screens. easier to fly? maybe us scenery oriented FPVers who fly not so fast - are more interested in a good FPV experience. so it's again a matter of taste and application. I tried my attitude SDs (with 35°) after a long time now- and was kinda ok with the size of the image. But switching to the DomHD was awesome again. And as well the boxgoggles. such a nice, large sharp image! but ok, not many racers use boxgoggles I guess :)
I wouldnt assume this. It's just a general trend that a) reviews are flooding youtube (cause the shops and vendors found that this is they cheapest way of marketing). and b) most of these reviewers either lack the knowledge to really test the stuff they're talking about, or they are influenced by capitalism (affilates, ad friendly,...). So we ended up with too many influenced influencers (and now in winter influenza will join the party :)
Thanks for confirming for me that I didn't want these goggles, I'm getting into fixed wing and want wide view. You brought up a lot of important points that beginners will appreciate (even if Banggood doesn't) like getting the right camera to match. All of my cameras are 2.1 - 2.8 which won't look good or be usable if it crops too much OSD on these. I'd rather spend the extra to get what I want rather than get another cheap set that I'm not happy with. Can't wait to see your review on the FX7.
Thanks for your courage to take an honest review .. I wish everyone would be like you, then these 'review videos' would actually be helpful :) Anyway, I just subscribed to your channel and look forward to seeing more !
Eachine Ev100 goggles are perfect, they are no different to my fatshark teleporter v5 goggles if not much better as Ev100 have adjustable eye and better vision, they do the job, i just recommend getting correct camra lens size
Many thanks for the objective and critical review ... I totally get your point and agree with everything you say, but please incorporate the situation of a beginner who has no clue how much he likes this hobby and may therefore want to start with a very limited budget and then possibly do improvements step by step. It is economically more wasteful if it turns out you really love this and are passionate about it, but what if not?! Just the goggles you recommend cost 3 times more than this unit, which is not necessarily so bad that it may take away from the basic experience and feel for it. If you need glasses for a precise vision, in case you are old or half blind :-), you might actually be very pleased with the fact that you can compensate that in the EV100, which seems not even possible on all the expensive ones, from what I have seen. But maybe when you reach a certain level of UA-cam popularity and don't buy your equipment anymore you don't even consider the price tag , which distorts the consumers view quite a bit.
Thanks for an honest review!! I was going to buy them for 100 until I saw the fov was advertised in the 20s. I had great expectations that they would create a goggle that was as good as their vrd2 pro's. In that a goggle with a fov that would destroy the fatsharks.
Good but honestly you could avoid yourself all these troubles, he's right in 2017 we should not have to buy such out-dated FPV goggles (no dvr, poor FOV, no diversity in 2017 really?) with the hypocrite argument of low price! Poor marketing in order to fool people and get their money! Shame on these people involved in this scam!
Thank you for a honest review I would hate FPV if I bought them and the field of view was so bad . this would be my first goggles. Can you recommend a starter one that doesn break my wallet
Well, I got to say that I started with some box goggles with huge field of view. Then I bought my Fatshark HD3 with much smaller FOV. I instantly had a better experience with them. Then I tried the Predator V2 from a friend and liked the even smaller FOV compared to the HD3 even more. I think you have to find a balance between immersion and overview. Liebe Grüße :-)
just out of curiuosity: what lens are you using? did you try different ones or by chance eversince use 2.8 or such? I had a 2.8 on the XJaguar and it felt weird. only after swapping the lens I liked the experience...
Started with 1.8 (like Skitzo) on my box goggles. Now I'm only using GoPro lenses (which should be 2.5) with my HD3. When I tried my friends Predator 2 I also used a GoPro lens. The funniest thing is that I do need some diopters with the HD3 but didn't need any correction with the Predators.
I dont know i use them for fpv in rc car and Plane. I will buy some better Ones soon but for trying the whole fpv trying to see if you like it this googles are just fine. I paid for googles and camera with integrated transmitter for 90euros.
I enjoy reviews to help me make decisions. I don't like reviews that say a $10 item is bad and should not be purchased b/c a $90 item is better. So if you can't have a Porsche, you want no car at all? Different strokes...
stu, bruce & andy rc are my go to's before I buy anything,, I take parts of all their reviews & make my own judgment based on what I think,,, I chose the skyzone 02 goggles,, & if theyre good for drew then I can live with that
i dont know if you are sponsered or not... but think you are the most objective reviewer of the onces i have seenl... Even Joshua said that he made 250 USD in one video in affiliate links....
+JOHNNY jeppesen I do get stuff for review. I don't get paid or such. I've seen Joshuas vid about afillating. I can understand his situation. He wants to make this instead of his job and still be able to support his family. Though task with yt alone.
i can understand it as well... we all want to make more money.... but if his income depents only on reviews and affiliate links i dont believe its going to be 100 % objective anymore... unless all the things he recieve is "amazing" (to quote another channel) i think you were the first as well to messure the latency on the Foxeer Arrow Micro 2... i dont think they will sell more because of your testresults on the latency introduces after the fix on the updatespeed of the voltage in the osd... I mean that is one of the reason why i like your channel... i think you look at things objective way instead of saying all the positive things about an item and then earn money on the affiliate links
Actually they are worth the money, I paid 105 american for a pair and another 17 american for a dvr and I love them, now I guess if I had already looked through a pair of 600 dollar goggles and then put these on maybe I could say they suck, the point is that whether you drive a Benz or a Camry, you still can share the same highway and maintain travel capability. I dont even see how you can compare fatshark to these, atleast these come with the damn reciever. $580 vs. $105, if you give some people a pound of gold they will complain that its to heavy to carry
+ RCShim As you can see from the comments people *really* appreciate honest & objective reviews! Also I agree with your sentiment. Some people seem willing to pay more for a turbocharged Lada than for a normal Toyota just because the Lada has a turbo. They don't appear to realise that some things are more important than that single factor. But hey, a fool and his money are easily parted.
+ RCSchim It's an (unfortunately) fairly common English phrase, a bit like that of wasting money but not by throwing it out of a window! :-) I thought that was a French saying but I guess it must have spread. I prefer the English equivalent though ("Throwing money down the drain"). As for emphasis, UA-cam automatically applies *bold* or _italics_ to words which are surrounded with either an asterisk (*) or underscore (_) respectively.
Thanks Mario, your honest opinion is appreciated. I hope this doesn't mean BG will cut you off as a reviewer but people who will tell it like it is and damn the consequences will always have a loyal following.
nice and that is good that some one point out thous bad thins on product, because even good products has some weaknesses. AND it is important to review even bad products than just not publish them.
Thank you for your honest opinion! To everyone saying these are so great, I'm sure they are but I want to feel like I'm flying got dangit and with the tiny FOV on these I'm not going to so I'm so glad this guy pointed this out!!!
Nice to get a positive feedback once in a while about this video :) As you say: the "feeling" the "immersion" which can fool your body and make you think you really fly, it's just not there if you look thru a tunnel...
Thanks for the honest review. I actually canceled my $99 preorder and will stick to my cheaper "FaceBox" Quanum Cyclops with the double fresnel mod and "IMAX-like" FOV. If you don't have an immersive feel of flying, then what's the point of FPV?
that's what I say! but seems like some are focused on racing and like smaller fov better. I also suspect that many dont take the FPV cams lens into consideration. maybe they would enjoy larger FOV goggles when using 2.1mm lenses...
Thanks man! Was about to order em after i just quickchecked stu's review.... Just goin for the aomway Commander for xmas then. My firefly 8s will arrive tomorrow ;) Gonna test it thursday or friday and will tell you if it is really as awesome as i assume. Thanks for this review anyways und grüsse aus Osnabrück/DE ;)
Thanks for the review, i am currently waiting for mine to arrive and I really hope I wont be too dissapointed with them. I think about maybe redesigning the case and 3d print it, so the screens get nearer to the eyes, (ofc i might need other lenses then) from what i have seen yet in reviews the displays are at least pretty sharp. With nearer screens and the mod to add a real diversity module to the goggles (thx drone mesh) those low end goggles could turn out decent. At least for the price paid i guess .. i even won something in this anniversary missions with my order :) So i´m not regreting anything yet, but lets see when they arrive xD
your plan sounds good. Kabab mentioned something similar. He gave away his and someone modifies them... The screens are of decent resolution (I guess - couldnt really tell - as small as the picture was). I'd wait and test the range of the standard VRX module. If you dont need ultra range - maybe they're fine. I found that still with the better div module in my DomHDs now: if I need confident range I use the external FR632 on a tripod. most stable image there...
Good review Mario. Banggood should appreciate critical comments on their products, so they will know what to improve on their new versions. I to do think this goggle is a step back from what you can get in the goggle market today. They could have done a better job for sure. True diversity, better field of view and a DVR. That's not rocket science nowadays. Thank you for you reviews, they have always seemed honest and unbiased, with loads of information. Only a few youtubers out there like you, Matthew O and Bonafidepirate that still review for the audience and not just for their patreon/affiliates. Keep up the good work!!
dont know Matthew O, but Keith (Bonafide..) is a great guy too. Love his flights since the first time I saw him building a runway dedicated to RC in his backyard. the only thing missing in his videos are epic mountains :) but I guess they're hard to find in the south there...
I like honest reviews but I cannot agree with you even if I had no opportunity to test mine yet! I am not going to read the 420 comments, but I am sure that a lot of people has written similar things. 1) these are goggles for a beginner - the price is enough low to make a first experiment. I read that some persons don't get used to goggles (got dizzy) 2) my definition of a beginner is also applicable to quadcopter stuff. I am not a racer and I think for a cruiser this device can help also without the immersive effect that the racers expect. At bright days my screen is difficult to see. I would like a better FOV but it is ok for the first time! 3) when you begin with the Best of Bread and after you are reviewing the most basic goggles it is difficult to see positives things. My way, as of many, is the opposite. I begin with cheap quads, cheap electronics, cheap 3d printers and so on, and when I am aware of the limitations and after a lot of mistakes I will upgrade! Not all people have your resources 4) as you recognize the lens focusing and adjusting is quite important for people like me, so a positive item. I know that some of the expensive goggles don't have this so my reticence about them 5) although the last item was important it was not enough to solve my "double vision" problem, so I needed a Mod. And here there is a huge difference of modifying a 80€ goggles than make mods at 500€ goggles and lose the warranty also I could continue to argument but it is enough to highlight the Big Mistake you did at your review! Your review is a Reaction ... to behaviors you criticize at other reviewers (sometimes you are right here), but as a Reaction your independence/neutrality is over. Your Title of the review is so unforgiving as other you criticize. I have seen your title ("why you shouldn't...) but never opened the video before buying the EV100. And now I see I was right! You cannot tell to a person to not buy a Fiat 500 when there are Ferraris over there! I like your reviews but if you do them as Reaction you will lose credibility! (Not English native, sorry)
Hi Luis, thanks for your feedback and that you took time for such a long one :) There's this main discussion here that comes down to: Should first goggles be as cheap as possible because budget is low? We have that saying: if you buy cheap you buy twice. So if on a tight budget, it's sometimes better to skip that first "cheap" step and get the good product right from the start. That's why a newbie needs an experienced opinion from someone who used goggles a lot. My reaction here was so extreme because I couldnt believe how small the picture was - and that none of the other reviewers found this as the big NO GO that it is for me (well, some other reviewers did - not all were so positive). You're right - titles like I used here - shouldnt be used. But the thing is: "normal" technically correct titles get far less attention - people seem to favor emotional titles more. This video got most views of my recent reviews - while it was one of the easiest to make for me. Not a lot of work (since I saw it was crappy) - so I could concentrate my channel on producing such videos - and even get rewarded with always increasing views and subbers (do you know H3H3 channel - all he does is critizise other channels). - That all being said: I listen to the critics here in the comments very well and I will try to be as objective and neutral as possible in future reviews. but sometimes it's hard to show everything without emotion. I'm really looking forward to testing the EV200 (which I was promised to get soon from Banggood). Not sure if they will be as good as advertised :) greets, Mario
Thks for your kind answer! I understand some of your arguments but not totally convinced :) All of us valuate differently the features of a product. There is not one only truth about the goggles. I saw also the EV200 but they lost the feature I valuate a lot: lens focusing and ipd adjustment. That's why I stay with the EV100 until this sight issue is well addressed. Note - I have not tight budget and I consciously know I will buy twice. It is not the same with computers and smartphones? Go on with your independent reviews because I don't like also biased reviews (we must have the discernment to filter at the Internet). greets
it really seems like some are not as critical about the screensize as we are. from my comparison shots I measured the real diagonal and set it in relation with the claimed 28°. No way they are even close to 28°. More likely 24°. that makes them competitors to the Fatshark Teleporters (which are around 200$). Them Teleporters they have "nice" specs btw.: Large virtual image ( 25 degree FOV, diagonal ). Crisp QVGA resolution display ( 320 x 240 ).
RCSchim I mean, how critical do you need to be in order to realize you can't see anything in front of you? that being said, I'm hoping someone finds a good lens mod for them. with a better FOV they're pretty good for the money.
RCSchim ... for me you're a honest and wise guy, general ! ... on the other side, people who are dependent on the source will always protect it (more or less visible) what ever it will cost , so for them it is a big must to always appear smarter then others do by placing more "smart, logical and rational" arguments, what in fact is just a pure low level ego-powered self-realization. The sad part of this sort of game is that the bill is always on an unaware (especially young) audience which is an easy target, what is of course the main point of this kind of spineless money hunting activity.
There's too many reviewers sing a company's praises because they send free stuff, Bruce Simpson got crossed off Walkera's Christmas card list some years ago for being too critical. Talking about Walkera, has anyone heard any good stuff about the Vitus yet?
I bought these and was very disappointed. The left screen is titled badly to the right and when I contacted Banggood they told me to take the goggles apart and fix it. I'm pretty sure that if I break something in the process they won't honor any kind return. When I asked to ship them back, they said they'd only pay for half the shipment. I'm done with Banggood. Most other Eachine products I've owned and used had no problems but for $100 this was very disappointing.
yay, the "knowitall" confirmed my bad impression of the tiny FOV: ua-cam.com/video/WW3Go490OyM/v-deo.html
HAHAHAHAHA. Love the comment "the knowitall". That's Joshuas name from now on.
I think he even created this name himself (and on tshirts?)
Really?? Hahahaha that would be awesome. On another note, have you tried the Skyzone V02+ or what they are called. basically the most recent. Are they better than fatsharks?
+LokiAmir nope, not tried any skyzones yet. They mostly have around 30fov which i didn't like...
Thanks Mario. So you prefer the Fatshark HD3 right? Are they good for both racing and fixed wing fpv?
I recently bought these. As a beginner in the FPV world, they seem like a good compromise with respect to price (I think the price is back around $100 again). I hadn't seen your review (but had seen other FOV-critical reviews) and now that I have seen it, I will say this:
It is accurate, and I don't agree with it. Your technical facts are OK, but your negative attitude judges them too harsly. I do not think you are able to mention a single other goggle in the same price range, and that is truly what it's all about.
FOV: Yes it is very small, but it works. The adjustments of the lenses helps a lot. You get FPV.
Picture quality: Yes it is in a tunnel. But it can easily be adjusted to be sharp, and quality (sharpness and color) is pretty good.
Power: Yes, the battery is smaller in capacity than for Fatshark, but still it lasts a pretty long time. Maybe the fatsharks require more power with their larger display modules and extra receiver for diversity?
DVR: The external DVR module works and is pretty low priced, too. Yes, it isn't as sleek as onboard DVR, but again: It works, and still is less than half the price of any Fatshark goggle.
Antenna diversity: It is antenna diversity. It is not fake diversity, but it is not as good as receiver diversity. I think practical use will be the true judge here.
Foam thickness: Yes. Too thick. Thinner may be ordered now.
USB plug: You are wrong here, I think. The USB may actually be used as an alternative power source. Need power while charging the battery? Use a power bank!
Weight and size: These are pretty light and handy. Box goggles (for instance) are not.
All in all: Yes, you get less than if you get Fatsharks, Aomways etc. You also pay far less. I am happy with my purchase. They work. I can practice FPV flying. The true question, that you did not answer is this: Which goggles would you buy if you had about $100 to spend on goggles. Unless you have an alternative, I think your review is unecessary harsh.
For other beginners on a budget (like me): If FOV is the most important for you, I think box goggles is the only real alternative these days unless you want to pay substantially more.
thank you for this as i am looking at it as my beginner goggles....while looking at the review I was also waiting to hear what were his recommendations and he did not give any
Matthew B I’ve been using mine for 2 years and still love them, no issue with the small screens as they are nice and clear
@@MiniMattTV tnk u
Thanks for your reply. I'm looking to just get "my feet wet" in FPV and don't know if I'll like it or even if my reflexes are fast enough, at my age, to even fly FPV ! So, I'm looking for something, at this time , that's gonna get the job done. I DO appreciate the honesty of the review though.
I don't understand most of you in this hobby doing reviews ? I come from Hot Rods & street rods scene . we compare apples to apples . if it cost is $100 you compare it to the same type products around $100 not something 3 times more expensive . All i see is it being compared to $450 Goggle . how much unfair is that ! Not saying their are any good . Come on at least show me a better goggle in the same price range ! Or can you ?? If not the these are a good goggle for the price .
you're right - there are no real competitors in this pricerange. but if a product does dissapoint you (because too small screens for example) it doesnt matter how cheap they were - it would be just wasted money. since I have the chance to compare I had to point out why, at least for me, FOV is so important...
good post
You're totally "correct" that we can't compared orange to apple vs price $$$ (don't disagree there). But for those that just step-in the hobby, it's fair for us to know and understand the hardware we're about to buy. We like to invest in things that we can grow with it down the path, therefore, it's nice to know what we're getting into - knowledge is the KEY!. Keep up your great reviews RCSchim.
Scott Brown you missing the point it cost these slick no good for nothing conmen sale reviewers not a dime they get the products for free we the buyers part with our hard earned cash for rubbish that's it in a nutshell we get robbed stupid by these fools that could not fly a kite in a hurricane the majority of them that i.v seen sucks. I day ban then from you tube get them banned be gone with them sewer rats is all they is
1
For a beginner like me this goggles are totally fine. You get what you pay for and please stop comparing a 77€ goggle with 3-500€ top end products. You are saying don't buy the EV100, yet you have an affiliate link in the description...
aliasx666 I think what he's saying is you could have something better for the same money. And the link in the decription is just for you bud.
I dont use affilate links! the shortlinks are either just for shortening and keeping the infobox tidy, or often the companies (like here) supply links I have to use. It's then a campaing link where they see (and measure) how much sales come from my review. I get no % of sales, it only helps them judge whom to support I guess.
If I was to get money off such sales - this would influence me for sure. Nobody could stay unbiased.
I still dont think beginners should make their first flights with such tiny goggles (and here they are smaller then pretended. they are 24 instead of 28°...
So say what google beginner like me should buy. If i can't spend more than 200USD with shipping and customs on FPV googles? You just it is bad but i didn't see in any comment what you suggest.
aliasx666 what you say is mostly true.....BUT I was new not long ago and got my first set of FPV goggles maybe three...four years ago....the Eachine EV007's I believe they were and worked fine for learning and were way less money than these here then graduated to the Eachine Goggles Two for $149 and they are WAY better than these in this video even tho these are the small two monitor "type" like Fats and others.....Now I guess a year or two farther did feel I could afford to fork over $300 for the Aomway commander V1's and LOVE THEM for I love 16:9 all the way anyway reason I upgraded to Goggles Two...And this is my next upgrade so for bout a year have had these and STILL will NOT fork over $500 for a measly set of the goggles ONLY then $200 for the diversity RX and antenna's and all you DO NOT get with sharks no not until I may strap a set to MY OWN head and see if they are worth any more than I paid for the commnders....stupidity is not funny....And I have NO hobby store within a 200 mile range maybe more that have ANY OF THIS STUFF!! So I HAVE to go on what I think and what I watch and this guy is TOTALLY right about some reviewers that I too believe are "way TOO INTO" these places sending them free stuff to give an honest review when something does NOT even COMPARE!! It is selling out and BS!! If you are going to go to the trouble to do a review on something and have ANY experience what so ever TELL THE DAMNED TRUTH THAT IS ALL FOR SOME OF US WATCH THIS CRAP FOR A REASON!!!!! And honestly yes they are box style and unless you are TOTALLY AGAINST THAT ALL TOGETHER PERIOD THE Eachine oh VR D2 Pro with DVR I would TOTALLY imagine beat these things up one handed!!!
I'm glad you gave one alternative, but everyone immersed in the hobby says to get Fatsharks. People interested in getting involved in flying aren't going to get Fatsharks. Honestly they SHOULDN'T get Fatsharks. Trying to coax someone into spending over $500 for one component isn't helping them any. Let them get the cheaper alternative, let them get the feel of flying and see if they want to get more involved with more expensive higher quality parts. Telling people that they need to take out a second mortgage for a hobby that they might not even want to continue is turning a lot of people off before they even start.
Totally agree too. Far too much sobbery and boasting/showing off going on in this hobby. Then there's the people who think and act like you shouldn't be allowed to even think of buying an rc unless you buy the most expensive gear. I buy what I can afford and take my time to aquire everything I need. This way I can buy tougher better built stuff that lasts, regardless of the brand. I don't equate quality with a brand name. I look at the product, read reviews (much more than 1) and usually focus on the lower rated reviews since they'll alert you to any common issues or might be relatable to how I plan to use them. Price is a bit indicative of quality but not entirely. I hate guys who go to an rc meet and rhyme off all their parts and gear and their worth. Give me specs snd honest experience, not a recital of all your receipts. Rc snobs and braggers need to gtfoh. Also judgemental old folk that think your foam, hand made, electric plane shouldn't be allowed at the field or whatever. Then theres the "ONLY my way is the right way" guys. I cant think of a type I hate more than those guys.
I am 62 years old, I own 4 sets of FatSharks, I love my EV100's. I can bring them into perfect focus, something I can't do with my FatSharks even with $60 optic add-on's. I purchased 21 pair of them for a Boy Scout High Adventure here in Michigan that took place 2 weeks ago, every pair worked flawlessly. There was no way more expensive goggles could have been purchased as there were 16 scouts and 4 leaders. To say we should not buy these is a dis-service to those not receiving free goggles to review and those without the extra expendable income you have. Don't listen to this guy, if they are what fits your budget then by all means purchase a pair. When I first spun the dials on the bottom to focus them I never expected what happened, not only could I read every word of the OSD, I could see the dots after each word. I have never been able to read the OSD on my FatSharks let alone even know their are periods after the letters.
Hey! Good to see honest unhyped reviews, I really appreciate That!. I own a set of the ev100 goggles and when they first arrived I had that same wtf feeling you had when you first try them. I was sooo disappointed, fortunately for me, I had a technical issue with my goggles and was able to get a refund from banggood. I was later able to repair the issue, but after tossing them aside for a while, a buddy of mine came to fly tiny whoops in my garage and his box goggles died, so I told him I'd let him use mine and I'd suffer through the ev100 tunnel vision. It was awful at first, but believe it or Not, I've actually really grown to like them, and It seems that my eyes have adjusted to them quite well. They somehow 'feel' as if the screens are bigger. Even as I write this, I remember that righteous hate I had on for these goggles, but if they died on me, I'd actually probably get another pair. Maybe I'm crazy, but my opinion of these goggles has improved a great deal since I first tried them.
FPV Under250 thanks for sharing this. This shows how good tge brain can adapt to non - perfect conditions. I could force myself to fly many flights with them and see iff it happens to me as well. But in the other side i just wanna enjoy flying :)
RCSchim I'll be the first to admit, it did take quite some time to get used to them, but for anyone who already purchased a pair of these goggles and can't afford to get something different, it should be comforting to know that it's just a matter of getting used to them. With that being said, I think i have a preference for a less immersive fov. I think these are definitely suited to those who find extremely immersive goggles disorienting.
SO in order to fly FPV you need to spend $350.00 on goggles. Geez thanks for your honest review. I liked the part where you spent over 800.00 on Fatsharks. Stew gave that review because he wanted those of us that dont have thousands of dollars to spend on goggles an option. Secondly, why dont you just come out and say you are jealous of not only Stews views but also his Patreon account. Lastly, this may come as a shock but not everyone flys a $1500.00 drone outside. Some of us dont have wide open fields around us to go flying in, so we fly mostly indoors. If you want more subs give me options, instead of just telling me these suck. SO what other 150.00 option would you propose? Oh the $350.00 Topsky? Thanks bro.
No, to fly FPV you can get away with as little as 40$ I guess (cheapest box goggles). I still dont understand why so many users dont like them...
Main difference between box and "normal" goggles: box makes you look to a very near object, almost crosseyed, normal goggles let you look "straight".
Box are much easier and can achieve large screen so easy,
normal goggles need complicated and high quality optics inside (that's the most expensive part at least in Fatsharks I read)
Where's the part where I spent 800$ for FS? Maybe combined... the domHDs are 400-500$ I guess (didnt research this)
I still believe that spending 100$ (or now rather 160+$) for the EV100 is throwing money out of the window.
If you're on a budget at least try the box goggles...
I think I somewhere already wrote as a joke "maybe I'm just jealous about him being the first to review and have so many views". sure true :)
It's always a race for the reviewers out there. Some (like Bruce in NZ) have a unfair disadvantage of very long delivery time :)
I'm a bit fed up with the fact tho that: if you put out a fast review you get many views, whereas if you take your time, test them extensivly... you have a lot of work but also low viewcount - since others were faster...
(compare my Mavic review with the first Mavic reviews for example).
Please check the videos linked at the end of this review - I already did some goggles comparisons, reviews.
ATM: quite some movement....
Options? Cyclops2 (still like em the most of the cheap ones), maybe the Fatshark Transformers (but I didnt try them), TopSky FX7 - can only say they look good, would love to test them, dont think I will get em :)
hope this justifies pressing that sub button now :) (and go ahead and also hit the bell :)
#31: Good review Mario, but keep in mind, if you ask a Lexus driver to give his opinion on a fiat 500, you probably get the same result. but thousands just love that car as there first car. Just giving my thoughts here.
I would love to race with a Fiat 500 thru the hills of Toscany rather than with a Lexus :)
Yes, I see your point. From my view I thought nobody could want that small of a picture. But seems like there are some pilots that are ok with it. The "cheap goggles" point here is an illusion. they add up to 175$ now if you buy the DVR, and you still get a product that I think will not make you happy...
Agree on both, the price getting out of hand and it is not a cheap goggles anymore, better to get your hands on one to try before you buy is the best way to be sure its the one for you.
You assume a lot. I do mostly indoor FPV at the moment. With a spotter, finding your drone without a DVR is not that difficult if you also have a pretty clear overview of the area where you are flying. I'd love a bigger picture, but the resolution, sharpness and colors are OK on my EV100s. With leds and buzzer on your drone, that DVR is not that big a deal (I spent a weekend with a couple of FPV racing drone pilots earlier this summer on a farm with a field with pretty tall grass, and we always found the drone, but some of us worked as spotters, which helped. They had Fatsharks, but none of them used the DVR feature).
News just in, cheap entry level goggles aren't as good as high level goggles that are 3x the price...
These goggles are fine for someone's first pair of goggles. Box goggles probably are better to start out with but they're big things to kart around.
The FOV might not be the claimed 28degs but removing that thick foam massively improves on the 'stock' FOV
I've used them and they actually work well for getting into the fpv
For 100 bucks its a good goggel .
In practice the smaller view is no big probleem. And the picture is sharp.
I say , why compare just test for wats it's worth. Thats my opinion.
Finally an honest review! Great job in describing exactly what this goggles are. Unfortunately , like you mentioned in your review, some of the other guys guys that are getting free stuff from banggood, are giving false reviews about the products they are getting. I was fool enough to buy this goggles based on the review of one of those guys... your review is 100% accurate,... this goggles are almost useless! the best feature they do have that other vendors should incorporate, is the ability to focus the image to do the exact correction for each of your eyes. Other than that this product should not be bought by beginners or experienced pilots. I agree with your review 100% and that is the reason I subscribed in your channel... we need real and honest reviews. I will be giving away my EV 100 googles for anyone in my flying club who wants them as these are the worse googles I ever tried for the reasons you describe... the FOV is so small, you can't hardly fly. I don't usually think negative about products, but my advice to anyone that want to get into FPV, don't get fooled by the initial price of $99 for this goggles, you are better of with "box goggles"
got mine today, (forUSD$100 ) blown away by the difference it makes to my noob tinywhooping. the image is so clear and bright that my skills suddenly got sharp too. I understand all the tech criticism but, really, for a hundred bucks, the better view, weight and feel compared to even the best face esky is huuuuge. also, no spectacles needed for me and many others is an extra freedom in the air.
congrats Tony - glad they "serve" you well (sorry, had to....)
good to read that some of you guys actually like the goggles and can fly with the picture. you're right - since the image is small the sharpness and image quality looks really good!
I like your reviews and critical eye. Of course it's easier to be sharp when it's a small area, but that small image in the EV feels like it gives me more useful eye data, more visual cue acuity, than the much bigger screens on box sets. I'm all about the subjective, and for me, they raised my enjoyment level and my meagre abilities. I do get that I can expect a whole other level above this when I can afford several hundred bucks for a Fattie or Aomie. cheers, tony
My 50' TV which I use for flight simulators and sits about 8 feet away is a slightly smaller FOV than these goggles. So honestly the FOV isn't a issue with me. I've been flying EV800D's for several years now and getting used to these was not hard for me at all.
Please tell us if Banggood stop sending you stuff for review....
for sure I will keep you guys posted.
If they quit sending you stuff, then tell them to send it to me instead. I'll take it all!!!
I think you are TOTALLY off base here. Yes, everything is true, no diversity, small fov. etc. BUT, THEY ARE ONLY $150.00 NOW. Fatsharks, Commanders, etc. totally ridiculous what they charge. You're a pro, sure, go for the $500.00 a pair, but for a newbie or a "poor" (me) person, they're great. Clear screens, good reception (oh no!, no diversity ! BFD, as long as I got a signal, I don't care how you get it to me) MUCH better looking than wearing one of the bucket sized goggles screen setups.
Compare to Aomway commander v1's....$300 AS GOOD AS FATS I think!! Yes twice what these cost but I myself would rather have a GOOD set of box than these!! Like what I had the Eachine Goggles Two and ones I have not tried but would imagine from my prior experience with ones mentioned the Eachine VR D2 Pro's are better as well at $88!!!! SNAP now what??
$95
And not even 150us,now they coat 100$ so this video is nothing even close to real rewiew
Nice review Mario, that's why I'm subscribed!
Ahh the old days of youtube when people posted videos fueled by passion....not ad revenue.
As a beginner I started out with quanum boxes and loved them! Still keep them around for spectators.
Happy Flying!
In theory passion is the best fuel to be sucessful in life. But currently we are facing more and more "algorithms" that use the massive ammount of data available. These programs are created to maximize revenue. It's everywhere.
for us glasses wearers who dont want to have to swap diopter lenses every time someone wants to "see" thru the goggles. the adjustable ev100s were great for starters. there might be "better" but by the time you pay for Fatsharks to be superior in all ways, modules, antennas, lenses, etc you're nowhere close in price. But then there are people who want everyone to spend on the elite gear, then find out the vertigo is something the buyer cannot overcome, so they can swoop in and score more "used" gear for cheap lol. Relatively tiny FOV, but when you're focussed, its like those of us who got used to much tinier cell phone screens
Good honesty. To me the most important aspect is what I can see. Thats why I went for the biggest FOV I could afford. All the bells and whistles dont mean nothing if what you see is crap.
like I said - it's the most important interface between you and your copter/plane...
Thanks for the honest review! I agree I couldn't fly with them because the image was so small. I sold mine on eBay. Fatshark has a new release of the transformer coming out, the fsv1105 that I'm interested in but no DVR
Its nice to see a honest review. Thumbs up!
Good on you rcschim for giving honest feedback. I bought a dys elf a while back based on your vids and was not disappointed. Subscribed.
nice to hear. the elf is not bad. I fly those things way to seldom. gotta do more fun stuff!
First I bought a Skyzone V2+ 3D but was not satisfied, now looking for a cheap one or a better than skyzone if I can sell the skyzone.
You could help me to make the decision!
This is one candidate for the:
- very low pice 99dollars today...
- IPD and focus distance both can be tuned for each eye (for one of my eyes I see far and for one near... bot mostly far)
- sponge is wide enough
- has a fan/airflow
- has battery
- can be modded to add my separate DVR or receiver unit
My second candidate is Aomway Commander 1, what I like:
- a bit very expensicve
- can accept 3D side by side, but just like a cardboard so aspect ratio is lost... (resolution is not the best thou)
- better FOV
- unfortunately not compatible with 2channel 3D FPV like the skyzone was so I have to sell my 3D can and VTX too....
Your point on FOV of camera matching the goggles (~7:00) - tinkle tinkle - now the penny's dropped! That makes so much sense. Bloody genius RCSchim!
thanks, not quite sure if you make fun of me or if you actually like the idea. Seems like not too many ppl covered this relation...
(and then they blame huge FOV goggles for making them dizzy...)
No not making fun at all. Great help, thank you!
Danke für deine ehrlichen Reviews! Gibt leider nicht viele ytuber solcher Art. Mach weiter so!
Danke, werd ich (weitermachen).
Leider wurde mir grad das nächste BrillenReview (AOMWay Commander V1s) abgesagt, weil diese anscheinend nicht mehr produziert werden (die waren kurz jetzt mal auf 180$ herunten). Macht auch nix, DJI HD Zeitalter ist angebrochen!
@@Rcschim dji HD ist mir ne Nummer zu teuer, aber die Preise werden sicher fallen. Und Mal schauen was die nächsten Jahre noch kommt 🙂
It seems that you are using the original foam that comes with the EV100 - it's strongly suggested to use a thinner foam (1.5-2.5mm) to avoid the tunnel effect and give a bigger picture.
This review overlooks some facts. The FS Dominator V3 have 30 deg FoV. The FS Attitude V4 32 deg. Aomway/Skyzone are similar.
Put yourself in front of a 40" TV. How far do you need to be away to have 28,30,32 deg FoV?
--> 175cm -> ca. 32deg.
--> 185cm -> ca. 30deg.
--> 200cm -> ca. 28deg.
Try yourself in front of a TV or picture at the wall. The difference is not impressive. So all these Fatshark etc models are crab following the logics of this review. Think about it. You need to go for the Dominator HD for 42deg, which puts you at 130cm. That is really a difference. But keep in mind that you compare $600+ to $99 now.
Also keep in mind that largely more than 35deg FoV are not really ergonomic. They eye has only a quite limited center of around 35deg which it can see shark. So if you go larger in FoV, you must look around & move your eyes in the goggles. Certainly this is immersive but not what you need for FPV.
Now Fatshark is about to launch their newest model called "Base HD Goggles" with HDMI and 1280x720. Want to guess to FoV? --> 28 deg.
Hi Stefan, please take a look at my XLS sheet (I've done this some time ago cause I sometimes found no FOV in the specs of goggles but rather this: imagine 80" tv in 7foot distance.
I wanted to calculate FOV out of these virt. screensize numbers.
and it's pretty simple with some triangle and angle formulas.
so please take a look, I've included your 3 examples there and get different degrees (lower).
Also I learned that it's highly subjective to the person wearing the goggles. some prefer large FOV to get maximum immersion, others are happy with around 30-35° for best performance (in races).
These goggles here, however, are more likely 24° not the claimed 28°. My measurements are not 100% accurate for sure (it's hard to) but they cant be that much off. Also the difference between 35° and their claimed 28° were to large for me...
Sorry but the answer misses the point. The ev100 nit full 28 deg; more like 26 in my calculations. But they compare rather well to e.g. Dom V3 with 30 deg or the brand new Fatshark base goggles with 28 deg. Yes, you can by larger FoV at 5 times the price. This is not a useful comparison.
You compare to 70deg box goggles, which creates a totally wrong impression in the video. More than 40 is unphysiological (this is why all relevant goggles are close or below). So again the comparison is not useful.
P. S. To your calculations : exactly those calculations are in my post. In metrics not in imperials. Compare the Deltas...
I think 28° diagonal is real as per the advertise and Stefan Thesen is right with his math. I bet you did the measurement looking from the top or the bottom plane. You should measure the angle in to a diagonal plane (ex: lower left - top right corners)and the numbers will be different. I've made a test with a CAD program using your virtual screen size data and for a 40" screen from 1.75m distance you get 32.37° per diagonal. For a 41" screen from 2.133m distance you get 27.44° per diagonal. But numbers are only numbers and I agree with you: The screen look small and you have to do something to get your eyes closer to the lens so the FOV will get bigger. I personally removed the foam it came with and created a new one from a 2mm thick foam to get a bigger image.
WORD!!!!
As I predicted after my critical review of the original Wizard X220s, Bangood didn't send *ME* any of these for review. I guess that after this review, you might also be off their "friendly reviewer" list :-) Being totally objective has a price -- but thumbs up to you Mario for not being a shill. My interest in these googles would be to see how they've set up that passive diversity -- I've never seen such a system that didn't actually create more problems than it solved.
check the link in my infobox abouth this blogpost. the guy has some very closeup pics of all the electronix in there. when seeing this I immediatly thought of you going over these...
Thanks for your support Bruce. You ever since led the way with good reviews. AndyRC was quite ok with the range while testing.
I still dont fully understand the cheap Antenna Diversity to be honest. Do you have a video on that matter? :)
I just noticed that this Fatshark module with 2 antennas (the early one) with Antenna diversity, it was actually worse than a normal module.
only the Laforge style diversities now (and the realAcc....) are good I think.
Still - for diving I prefer a steady FR632 on a tripod...
Speaking of which - I want something better than the FR632 - but I dont wanna invest in a clearview. Where's the middleground? A highly sensitive diversity RX?
+RCSchim look into LNA's (low noise amplifier) aimed at the satellite TV market. A good one should improve the signal to noise ratio.
thanks for the tip
I used the Quanum / Fatshark Genesis goggle for about 7 months, which allso hase a FS antenna diversity setup.. That worked out OK for me BUT.. I did have 2 instances where it completely lost reception (I wasn't flying far away at all.. It just didn't switch)..
I wouldn't be To worried by the way.. I've done several negative reviews and they still talk to me..
good to know. I just mailed my sales contact the video - curious how she reacts - but normally she's cool.
LIKE the honesty! kudos to you Mario. ive even bought this in their lowest sale(89usd) and had to bail out a few hours after , when a flying buddy of mine told me FOV was crap. but hey, this would have to be the cheapest so far, electronics optics and everything compared to box goggles. have a couple of them. EV800 and the VR006(crazy design had me cross-eyed). keep it up man!
Ok yes they're not perfect but as a cheap entry level goggle they do the job, the key selling point for me was the adjustable lenses, no other goggles have that yet. Yes it's narrow but honestly, you learn to work with what you have. If I had several hundred to spend on some decent ones I would, this is allowing the hobbyists that don't have a fortune to spend on it an opportunity to get away from the clunky box on the head.
I bought the EV800 instead. Half the price and the filed of view is very nice and big. You also have the option of DVR on the EV800D which is just a bit more expensive but still cheaper than the EV100
i have these goggles. came from box goggles (ev800d ). 28 degrees feels about as immersive as sitting in front of a computer screen, its not bad in my opinion actually rather nice coming from the boxes. honestly it seems like a lot of the YT pilots have sticks up their ass when it comes to this stuff, i have to buy my FPV stuff on a budget. 300 dollars is not something i can just toss around. given the price and considering lower resolution, i would take the smaller/ relatively sharper image over the 480p movie theater that i am used to. as for lack of diversity i barely used it on my eachine Ev800d which has true diversity. so i'm not really losing anything. maybe tonnes of goggles out there do what the ev100 can do and more, but few of them are at or below its price range.
So come on... You start with the "base" model of fatshark at the"base" price, but who keeps it at that level? Add diversity modules, diopter adapters, upgrade antennas, upgrade the battery... *_and that's why fatshark are so awesome ‼_* What we really need is competition at the entry level. Color me not impressed at your review of the features in your imagination and not reviewing what the product actually is. OMG , my Toyota Camry doesn't have as much horsepower as the Ferrari, so it can't be any good ‼😱
RD Simmers fatshark = over priced tunnel vision....
Exactly he is comparing a ferrari / Lambo with a Ford/ Renault car NOT even that when i was 18 just bought my first car to drive arround I will bought a cheap car to get better before i go buy a expensive mercedes and trash it within first 2 years same goes for this BEGINNERS do not wanna spend 300 500 euro /dollars on goggles then to just find out ITS not the thing they wanna do, also like MANY reviews talk about its perfect to begin with those that get into the hobby wanna get better upgrade anyhow along side with the drone. You just dont buy the most expensive FPV drone either and on the first flight you trash it. thats just dumb.
RD Simmer
RD Simmers exactly you couldn't have explained it any better..
THIS IS WHERE SAY THE AOMWAY'S COME INTO PLAY!!!?? I HAVE NEVER USED FAT SHARK ANYTHING, NEVER EVEN LOOKED THROUGH THEM WHERE I LIVE THEY DO NOT EXSIST SO I DON'T HAVE THE PLEASURE OR OPPORTUNITY TO EVEN "TRY" THEM AND CANNOT SEE MYSELF SHELLING OUT $500 FOR ONLY THE GOGGLES NO MORE AND FORKING OUT ANOTHER $200 FOR GOOD DIVERSITY RX AND ANTENNA AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT IS NOT INCLUDED WITH FAT SHARK SO MAY NEVER KNOW IF THEY ARE BETTER THAN AOMWAY COMMANDERS I HAVE BUT I STARTED WITH BOX GOGGLES MYSELF AND THEY WORKED GREAT AND I WOULD BET A CONIDERABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY THEY WERE WAY BETTER THAN THESE CRAPPERS HERE AND THEN DECIDED I DID WANT TO SEE IF I LIKED THE MONITOR ON EACH EYE AND THEN THE AOMWAYS CAME OUT AND IN 16:9 RATIO AND PERSONALLY I PREFER THAT TOTALLY ANYWAY FOR MY BOX GOGGLES WERE AND REASON I PURCHASE THEM AS WELL THE EACHINE "GOGGLES TWO" AND INSTALLED MY OWN DVR ON THEM WITHOUT MY GOGGLE VISION BEING EFFECTED WITH LATENCY FOR ONLY USED THE VIDEO LINE AS A INPUT TO THE DVR NOT CUT IT AND IN AND OUT BACK INTO THE GOGGLES BUT YET A "Y" JUNCTION AS TO BE TWO SEPERATE ENTITEIS.......COPY???? MY MAIN POINT IN ALL OF THIS IS REVIEWERS BE FREAKIN HONEST I DON'T GIVE A SHIT WHO SENDS YOUR ASSES WHAT!! I DO REVIEWS AND AM TRYING TO GET MY CHANNEL GOING BUT IT IS MOSTLY SELF SUPPORTED AND PROBABLY BECAUSE NO MATTER WHAT I WILL SAY WHAT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS AND GIVE HONEST UNBIASED VIEW ON ANY ITEM AT ANY PRICE!! AND NOT AT THE COST OF PEOPLE WHO DO WATCH ME AND MY CRAP AND TAKE WHAT I SAY FOR ME TELLING THE TRUTH!! WORD!!
Thanks for the honest review, mate was asking me about these and now I can pass this on to them
Yep. Finding a good shot of the FOV on video was the deciding factor for me. I decided to pull the plug and stick with my VR D2s. Already spent the money on more quad stuff!
I know that this is old but you are totally lying. UAVfutures absolutely did mention the field of view several times in his video. Explained that it was much smaller then his other 2 favorite goggles and even stated the field of view in degrees. He was giving them a thumbs up for value for money. Some people can't afford 300 to 600 dollar goggles and what he did was rate them on a what you get for the price basis. Seems like your just jealous.
I have subscribed BECAUSE you told what I believe to be the truth. I am a former Banggood customer. Having been burned by Banggood's deceptive marketing practices, and also having bought a number of Eachine products, I am now of the opinion that their cheap prices comes at such a huge sacrifice of quality in materials AND workmanship that their stuff just isn't even usable and therefore WORTHLESS. I find your review of the EV100 very generous based on my experience with about 6 Eachine products and a comparison of a number of EV100 reviews. I thank you for your integrity and the courage it took to tell the REAL TRUTH ! ! !
thanks for your support! I also thought eachine would do better...
Thank you ! a lot.
I almost bought them, but decided I was going to wait for the reviews...
It's always hard to wait and hold back pulling that (add to shoppingcart)-trigger. I know. But waiting a bit and reading/viewing reviews, reacitons and problems on RCGroups is a good way to safe you some troubles!
If these goggles could match up to the fatsharks , then they would cost just as much. I feel like the review was too much of a comparison to goggles costing 4x as much. Apples and oranges. If they had the larger fov , DVR, bigger batt, and true diversity, THEN THEY WOULD COST $400 . I think most who order these, like me, understand that we will swap antennas on day one, and eventually add a DVR. The DVR isn't a deal breaker for me because no one mentions that you can simply DVR from another set of cheap box goggles like vrd2's etc . Thanks for your personal opinion , but keep it fair , you are reviewing entry level goggles that most people will buy to move up from box goggles. That's the angle I wish to hear about , like Stu did. Maybe that's why he gets the most views.
I compared it to the larger FOV because that was my main point. Might be personal preference - but with many years of using goggles now I can tell that FOV is very important to enjoy flying.
Still think that 100 or more $ are better invested in box goggles (deluxe at this money) and some more stuff.
That's a fair preference, but these are lighter and more handy than bulky box goggles. You fail to mention that the resolution of the panels is fair (same amount of resolution lines as Fatshark Dominator V3, which regardless of FOV gives almost the same amount of visual information).
I'll stick with my box goggles..
Yeah I believe me too. VRD2. Yeah.
Not a damned thing wrong with that for sure AT ALL!! For I used the Eachine Goggles Two for a VERY long time and was TOTALLY happy with them and was not comfortable or have big enough pocketbook to shell out $500 for ONLY the goggles then $200 for EVERYTHING that DOES NOT COME WITH THEM!!! I know have the Aomway's Commanders and LOVE THEM!! I can't imagine Fat's being any or much better and spent I think $325 or so and you get EVERYTHING except the batter but a balance converter as you may use ANY Lipo you wish with them!! So NO BRAINER for me and I felt I could afford that for the entire package diversity BUILT in! For I still WILL NOT shell out that kind of cash on a set of goggles unless I can stap the bastards on my own head and see what I see and where I live there is NO hobby store NONE that even have anything like any of this stuff. So again I may never know what Fat Sharks are all about but feel I am not missing much if anything!!! THX!!
I totally respect that. I think box goggles are probably a good alternative if you can take the bulky size and (probably) added weight.
You look ridiculous with box goggles
@@tsjingtsjangtsjoeng9796 Honestly, all goggles look ridiculous.
An honest review thanks! I asked any times how is the fov and it was always brushed over , saying it was fairly small but not at all a problem, I avoided buying them because I suspected the fov would be too small and you have just confirmed my suspicions , I will stick with my Hyperion f640 which were £80 too...
I did the quick math:
measured the diagonal lenght of each of the goggles as I filmed them.
set them in relation to their claimed diagonal.
found out that while the other goggles gave reasonable relations the EV100 was way off!
If I correct their claimed 28° to 24° FOV - than my math is right again.
(hope this makes sense).
here's a pic and the xls if you wanna see what I did...: drive.google.com/open?id=0B4jolPxvBPhCRUlwMmQzNjNNUWc
I just subscribed. I have bought things in the past because I have seen good reviews of them, then they turned out to be crap, so I like it when people give honest reviews of things.
I was lucky enough to try a friends Skyzones, and only lucky in that it stopped me from buying them... instantly. I ended up with HD3's plus my own made box goggles with a HD screen, as looking at such a small screen is just crazy, and I believe it's simply a manufacturers way of hiding crap resolution displays. If it only has 240 line vertical res, but appears the size of a pocket tv from down the hall it will still seem sharp. Maybe people with tunnel vision would like them, but for most, given the choice wouldn't.
It's a unique market, having a product that really needs to be trial tested to evaluate things like field of view, colour saturation, colour purity, contrast, brightness, sharpness, comfort, focus, IPD compatability, light sealing, and added features like true diversity or dvr, battery life, parts replacement etc, they are all usually just decided by youtube reviews and Chinese specifications. Unless you know someone who buys first, we all rely on reviewers like you Mario, who can thankfully be well trusted to save us from disappointment.. and from going broke. Cheers
Thanks for this long and very nice comment!
Thankyou for your honest insight review to the goggles, very happy with your comments. Bruce from RCModelReviews sent me here. I have now subscribed too. :-)
Great video (Bruce) and I loved to get some nice words from him (everybody would)!
It's this kind of interaction that makes youtube so unique over TV.
I really like your Point. I flew a box google for over a year. Then i thought since i flew very often that i should buy a Fatshark. Of cause i chose tha HD3 for over 700 usd with all attachments... What happened ? Well , i was so dissapointed. Such a rip off... Also they had a defect pixel. I flew them 2 times and sold them ...
Then i decided to buy the ev100. I got them for 85usd ( with 12 % promotioncode + 2 for other ppl ). I totaly agree with the fov, but for people who are not professionals , i think it is a decent choice.
P.s. i bought from the rest of the fatshark money a oculus rift. I will never buy this expensive hyped fatshark shit again.
HERE YA GO!!! what I have wrote all over this review page!!! Good JFKKFCBK someone else who "GETS IT" $500 for ONLY a set of goggles then $200 for EVERYTHING YOU DO NOT GET!!!!!!! WORD!! THX- Turbo/
thanks for saying the thruth about products on your reviews , it prevents us to spend tons of money on products and being disapointed at the end thanks
Thanks for the honest review, I really appreciate it! For someone who has never flown FPV before and wants to get into the hobby without spending huge amounts of money, would you still not recommend these? I understand the FOV is pretty garbage but I feel like that's what you get for paying 1/3 of the price of the high-end goggles. They still do the job right?
+James Fenech i would still prefer bix goggles. Cheapest ones i know are the cyclops v2 from hobbyking. They are great. 50$?
Great vidio, love your tell it how it really is attitude, just because its free doesn't mean its quality and i have so much more time for the reviewer's who review for for their viewers rather than their, supliers. Subbed and keep it up.
thanks for the Sub man!
I love this guy. I love his honesty.
Happy subscriber.
thanks!
Thank to you Andy rc and Kabab fpv, I have cancelled my order on BG before it got shipped.. I ordered it when it was 100$ and was pretty sure I’ll be happy after seeing other reviews. Now I think other reviewers are making the truth pinker ;)
I know they don’t publish all of the of bad reviews on BG also, I’ll save my money and wait for something better.. Thank again
happy to help users like you!
thanks for honest review - got to same conclusion it's way to narrow (sadly after reciving them) and now trying to replace/mod faceplate - to avoid keyhole effect and get a little closer to screens with my eyes to make FOV a little bigger. for 80$ a decent deal with a lot of moding possibility, but to be it as friendly as first reviews - have to agree - UAVfutures sold themselfs :/
Good luck on the modding at least. I found when removing the foam at all, eyes are a bit closer and image appears "a bit" larger. But the hard plasic cut the nose off your face then...
Thanks for your honesty have subscribed because of this . You also explaned what you were telling us very well keep it up ty
Thanks for the nice comment!
Hi I like your honesty with those glasses. I own a Phantom 3 standard. I use a RCA tablet 7.0 Its a great tablet but the brightness is terrible in sunlight. I been trying to find a cheap pair of goggles to hook to the HDMI port of my tablet to use the goggles as a monitor. But find it very hard to find a pair that isn't so expensive. I'm 60 years old and I just cant afford the top end goggles. Those white goggles look like it has such a tiny screen on them. That wont work for me to small. Its like looking through those peep holes in a door to see who is on the other side lol. If you have a cheap suggestion on a pair of goggles that have a HDMI port to hook to my tablet I'm all ears. Thank you for your honest review of them. You have a great channel.
Kim thanks, if you need hdmi look for example at the eachine goggles two. I already tested them. Cheap as hdmi comes only info the form of box goggles.
Thank's RCS been driving me nuts trying to find a goggle that will hook to my tablet. The sun beats the heck out of my tablet so hard to see. If you have time. Check out some of my flights with the Phantom just may like them. I'm a beginner with this bird but think I'm doing well enough. Thanks for the info appreciate it
New subscriber here and also new to the FPV world. I bought a set of EV800 'goggles' and used them for a grand total of maybe 5 minutes before a motor on my craft bit the dust. For the time I used them though, they seemed pretty neat (mind you nothing to compare to). Anyway, all that said, it would be quite welcome if you could maybe do a video talking about lens size and field of vision and aspect ratios with goggles and all that stuff. I hear mentions of it on reviews, but so far I havent really found much information on it beyond the advice to "match" the camera with the goggles. That much, I think, is common sense, but how does lens size relate to a changing FOV? What about wide angle lenses? What about DVRs? Things like that. Either way, badass review, glad I saw it because until your review I didnt realize how narrow of view these goggles have. You saved me from a worthless purchase! And one more thing, I really hope BG doesnt put you on some blacklist or whatever. I would lose a lot of respect for them. Everyone has dud products and thats nothing I would hold against BG, but to shut down any critical reviews? Thats just a bad sign...
Thank you Mario for your honesty!
I was pretty disappointed when i saw the review from Stu telling us it was a great FPV Goggles, even my first FPV goggles had indeed 35° FOV!
This is really a shamefull to sell these FPV goggles in 2017 and trap people with it!
Have a great week and keep on flying!
Madmacs above has a vaild point that I didnt think of yet: racers might be ok with smaller screens. easier to fly? maybe us scenery oriented FPVers who fly not so fast - are more interested in a good FPV experience. so it's again a matter of taste and application. I tried my attitude SDs (with 35°) after a long time now- and was kinda ok with the size of the image. But switching to the DomHD was awesome again. And as well the boxgoggles. such a nice, large sharp image! but ok, not many racers use boxgoggles I guess :)
he is a clueless shill. Infuriating thing is he's raking in over $2k a month from over 200 deluded patreons.
you think he was paid to lie?.. its only a few months since he trashed other goggles and rtf racers.
A lot of people are paid to lie in this world, grow up!
His reviews sometimes are bad and promote irrelevant informations!
I wouldnt assume this. It's just a general trend that a) reviews are flooding youtube (cause the shops and vendors found that this is they cheapest way of marketing).
and b) most of these reviewers either lack the knowledge to really test the stuff they're talking about, or they are influenced by capitalism (affilates, ad friendly,...).
So we ended up with too many influenced influencers (and now in winter influenza will join the party :)
Thanks for confirming for me that I didn't want these goggles, I'm getting into fixed wing and want wide view. You brought up a lot of important points that beginners will appreciate (even if Banggood doesn't) like getting the right camera to match. All of my cameras are 2.1 - 2.8 which won't look good or be usable if it crops too much OSD on these. I'd rather spend the extra to get what I want rather than get another cheap set that I'm not happy with.
Can't wait to see your review on the FX7.
Thanks for your courage to take an honest review .. I wish everyone would be like you, then these 'review videos' would actually be helpful :) Anyway, I just subscribed to your channel and look forward to seeing more !
Very fair review. Thank you for the honest, unbiased review. Hopefully Banggood will send you something worthy of your praise.
Thanks for the much more honest and accurate review!!!
you're welcome. it's a shame that the video where I gave the worst review til now get's the most views :)
Eachine Ev100 goggles are perfect, they are no different to my fatshark teleporter v5 goggles if not much better as Ev100 have adjustable eye and better vision, they do the job, i just recommend getting correct camra lens size
Many thanks for the objective and critical review ... I totally get your point and agree with everything you say, but please incorporate the situation of a beginner who has no clue how much he likes this hobby and may therefore want to start with a very limited budget and then possibly do improvements step by step. It is economically more wasteful if it turns out you really love this and are passionate about it, but what if not?!
Just the goggles you recommend cost 3 times more than this unit, which is not necessarily so bad that it may take away from the basic experience and feel for it. If you need glasses for a precise vision, in case you are old or half blind :-), you might actually be very pleased with the fact that you can compensate that in the EV100, which seems not even possible on all the expensive ones, from what I have seen. But maybe when you reach a certain level of UA-cam popularity and don't buy your equipment anymore you don't even consider the price tag , which distorts the consumers view quite a bit.
Thanks a lot :-D I was thinking about to buy one. But now I`ll look for alternative Goggles
Thanks for your honesty Mario.
Thanks for an honest review!! I was going to buy them for 100 until I saw the fov was advertised in the 20s. I had great expectations that they would create a goggle that was as good as their vrd2 pro's. In that a goggle with a fov that would destroy the fatsharks.
I always appreciate your point of view. And its always fair. Thanks for saying what you did.
I came to the same conclusion although Iv done a lot of testing for my video.
AndyRC . OOOOOH I like Andy's channel
Good but honestly you could avoid yourself all these troubles, he's right in 2017 we should not have to buy such out-dated FPV goggles (no dvr, poor FOV, no diversity in 2017 really?) with the hypocrite argument of low price! Poor marketing in order to fool people and get their money! Shame on these people involved in this scam!
thanks for visiting here - just watched your lenghty (but very informative) review. Good job!
its great when you guys appear randomly on each others channels....
I love this guy :)
Thank you for a honest review I would hate FPV if I bought them and the field of view was so bad . this would be my first goggles. Can you recommend a starter one that doesn break my wallet
Well, I got to say that I started with some box goggles with huge field of view. Then I bought my Fatshark HD3 with much smaller FOV. I instantly had a better experience with them. Then I tried the Predator V2 from a friend and liked the even smaller FOV compared to the HD3 even more. I think you have to find a balance between immersion and overview.
Liebe Grüße :-)
just out of curiuosity: what lens are you using? did you try different ones or by chance eversince use 2.8 or such?
I had a 2.8 on the XJaguar and it felt weird. only after swapping the lens I liked the experience...
Liebe Grüße zurück natürlich, soviel Zeit muß sein :)
Started with 1.8 (like Skitzo) on my box goggles. Now I'm only using GoPro lenses (which should be 2.5) with my HD3. When I tried my friends Predator 2 I also used a GoPro lens. The funniest thing is that I do need some diopters with the HD3 but didn't need any correction with the Predators.
1.8 sounds extreme but suit to the huge FOV in a box. 2.5 and the smaller HD3 is inline with my theory :)
I dont know i use them for fpv in rc car and Plane. I will buy some better Ones soon but for trying the whole fpv trying to see if you like it this googles are just fine. I paid for googles and camera with integrated transmitter for 90euros.
The false positivity is getting a bit much out here. Thanks for being honest.
I enjoy reviews to help me make decisions.
I don't like reviews that say a $10 item is bad and should not be purchased b/c a $90 item is better.
So if you can't have a Porsche, you want no car at all? Different strokes...
stu, bruce & andy rc are my go to's before I buy anything,, I take parts of all their reviews & make my own judgment based on what I think,,, I chose the skyzone 02 goggles,, & if theyre good for drew then I can live with that
THANKS! For an honest review! Love your channel!
thank you too!
Awesome review. Had no idea about the 2.8mm/2.1mm lense stuff.
i dont know if you are sponsered or not... but think you are the most objective reviewer of the onces i have seenl...
Even Joshua said that he made 250 USD in one video in affiliate links....
+JOHNNY jeppesen I do get stuff for review. I don't get paid or such. I've seen Joshuas vid about afillating. I can understand his situation. He wants to make this instead of his job and still be able to support his family. Though task with yt alone.
i can understand it as well... we all want to make more money.... but if his income depents only on reviews and affiliate links i dont believe its going to be 100 % objective anymore... unless all the things he recieve is "amazing" (to quote another channel)
i think you were the first as well to messure the latency on the Foxeer Arrow Micro 2... i dont think they will sell more because of your testresults on the latency introduces after the fix on the updatespeed of the voltage in the osd...
I mean that is one of the reason why i like your channel... i think you look at things objective way instead of saying all the positive things about an item and then earn money on the affiliate links
Actually they are worth the money, I paid 105 american for a pair and another 17 american for a dvr and I love them, now I guess if I had already looked through a pair of 600 dollar goggles and then put these on maybe I could say they suck, the point is that whether you drive a Benz or a Camry, you still can share the same highway and maintain travel capability. I dont even see how you can compare fatshark to these, atleast these come with the damn reciever. $580 vs. $105, if you give some people a pound of gold they will complain that its to heavy to carry
+ RCShim
As you can see from the comments people *really* appreciate honest & objective reviews!
Also I agree with your sentiment. Some people seem willing to pay more for a turbocharged Lada than for a normal Toyota just because the Lada has a turbo. They don't appear to realise that some things are more important than that single factor. But hey, a fool and his money are easily parted.
"A fool and his money are easily parted." I love that, didnt hear that one, so true :)
how do you write comments in bold here? did I miss something?
+ RCSchim
It's an (unfortunately) fairly common English phrase, a bit like that of wasting money but not by throwing it out of a window! :-) I thought that was a French saying but I guess it must have spread. I prefer the English equivalent though ("Throwing money down the drain").
As for emphasis, UA-cam automatically applies *bold* or _italics_ to words which are surrounded with either an asterisk (*) or underscore (_) respectively.
Thanks Mario, your honest opinion is appreciated. I hope this doesn't mean BG will cut you off as a reviewer but people who will tell it like it is and damn the consequences will always have a loyal following.
The followers are always of much higher value than those free plastic things. I will see if BG can take some ctritics.
greets, Mario
Best review.... My eyes hurt from the tiny screens... Sold them after 1 day. Thanks 👌🏼
nice and that is good that some one point out thous bad thins on product, because even good products has some weaknesses. AND it is important to review even bad products than just not publish them.
only that way product manufacture will fix thous issues or even make better product
Danke für das ehrliche Review ;)
Thank you for your honest opinion! To everyone saying these are so great, I'm sure they are but I want to feel like I'm flying got dangit and with the tiny FOV on these I'm not going to so I'm so glad this guy pointed this out!!!
Nice to get a positive feedback once in a while about this video :)
As you say: the "feeling" the "immersion" which can fool your body and make you think you really fly, it's just not there if you look thru a tunnel...
Thanks for the honest review. I actually canceled my $99 preorder and will stick to my cheaper "FaceBox" Quanum Cyclops with the double fresnel mod and "IMAX-like" FOV. If you don't have an immersive feel of flying, then what's the point of FPV?
that's what I say! but seems like some are focused on racing and like smaller fov better.
I also suspect that many dont take the FPV cams lens into consideration.
maybe they would enjoy larger FOV goggles when using 2.1mm lenses...
Yeah, I guess all my quads have 2.1mm lenses.
Thanks man! Was about to order em after i just quickchecked stu's review....
Just goin for the aomway Commander for xmas then.
My firefly 8s will arrive tomorrow ;)
Gonna test it thursday or friday and will tell you if it is really as awesome as i assume.
Thanks for this review anyways
und grüsse aus Osnabrück/DE ;)
rumtata wait for TopSkys man...
KrzychOlsztyn ok....will do.....thanks;)
Thanks for your honest review I thought they might be rubbish.
Mario, thank you for your honest review!
Thanks for the review, i am currently waiting for mine to arrive and I really hope I wont be too dissapointed with them. I think about maybe redesigning the case and 3d print it, so the screens get nearer to the eyes, (ofc i might need other lenses then) from what i have seen yet in reviews the displays are at least pretty sharp. With nearer screens and the mod to add a real diversity module to the goggles (thx drone mesh) those low end goggles could turn out decent. At least for the price paid i guess .. i even won something in this anniversary missions with my order :) So i´m not regreting anything yet, but lets see when they arrive xD
your plan sounds good. Kabab mentioned something similar. He gave away his and someone modifies them...
The screens are of decent resolution (I guess - couldnt really tell - as small as the picture was).
I'd wait and test the range of the standard VRX module. If you dont need ultra range - maybe they're fine.
I found that still with the better div module in my DomHDs now: if I need confident range I use the external FR632 on a tripod. most stable image there...
Good review Mario. Banggood should appreciate critical comments on their products, so they will know what to improve on their new versions. I to do think this goggle is a step back from what you can get in the goggle market today. They could have done a better job for sure. True diversity, better field of view and a DVR. That's not rocket science nowadays.
Thank you for you reviews, they have always seemed honest and unbiased, with loads of information. Only a few youtubers out there like you, Matthew O and Bonafidepirate that still review for the audience and not just for their patreon/affiliates. Keep up the good work!!
dont know Matthew O, but Keith (Bonafide..) is a great guy too. Love his flights since the first time I saw him building a runway dedicated to RC in his backyard. the only thing missing in his videos are epic mountains :) but I guess they're hard to find in the south there...
Thanks for extremely honest review, good luck.
I like honest reviews but I cannot agree with you even if I had no opportunity to test mine yet! I am not going to read the 420 comments, but I am sure that a lot of people has written similar things.
1) these are goggles for a beginner - the price is enough low to make a first experiment. I read that some persons don't get used to goggles (got dizzy)
2) my definition of a beginner is also applicable to quadcopter stuff. I am not a racer and I think for a cruiser this device can help also without the immersive effect that the racers expect. At bright days my screen is difficult to see. I would like a better FOV but it is ok for the first time!
3) when you begin with the Best of Bread and after you are reviewing the most basic goggles it is difficult to see positives things. My way, as of many, is the opposite. I begin with cheap quads, cheap electronics, cheap 3d printers and so on, and when I am aware of the limitations and after a lot of mistakes I will upgrade! Not all people have your resources
4) as you recognize the lens focusing and adjusting is quite important for people like me, so a positive item. I know that some of the expensive goggles don't have this so my reticence about them
5) although the last item was important it was not enough to solve my "double vision" problem, so I needed a Mod. And here there is a huge difference of modifying a 80€ goggles than make mods at 500€ goggles and lose the warranty also
I could continue to argument but it is enough to highlight the Big Mistake you did at your review!
Your review is a Reaction ... to behaviors you criticize at other reviewers (sometimes you are right here), but as a Reaction your independence/neutrality is over. Your Title of the review is so unforgiving as other you criticize. I have seen your title ("why you shouldn't...) but never opened the video before buying the EV100. And now I see I was right! You cannot tell to a person to not buy a Fiat 500 when there are Ferraris over there!
I like your reviews but if you do them as Reaction you will lose credibility! (Not English native, sorry)
Hi Luis, thanks for your feedback and that you took time for such a long one :)
There's this main discussion here that comes down to:
Should first goggles be as cheap as possible because budget is low?
We have that saying: if you buy cheap you buy twice. So if on a tight budget, it's sometimes better to skip that first "cheap" step and get the good product right from the start. That's why a newbie needs an experienced opinion from someone who used goggles a lot.
My reaction here was so extreme because I couldnt believe how small the picture was - and that none of the other reviewers found this as the big NO GO that it is for me (well, some other reviewers did - not all were so positive).
You're right - titles like I used here - shouldnt be used. But the thing is: "normal" technically correct titles get far less attention - people seem to favor emotional titles more.
This video got most views of my recent reviews - while it was one of the easiest to make for me. Not a lot of work (since I saw it was crappy) - so I could concentrate my channel on producing such videos - and even get rewarded with always increasing views and subbers (do you know H3H3 channel - all he does is critizise other channels).
-
That all being said: I listen to the critics here in the comments very well and I will try to be as objective and neutral as possible in future reviews. but sometimes it's hard to show everything without emotion.
I'm really looking forward to testing the EV200 (which I was promised to get soon from Banggood). Not sure if they will be as good as advertised :)
greets, Mario
Thks for your kind answer! I understand some of your arguments but not totally convinced :) All of us valuate differently the features of a product. There is not one only truth about the goggles. I saw also the EV200 but they lost the feature I valuate a lot: lens focusing and ipd adjustment. That's why I stay with the EV100 until this sight issue is well addressed. Note - I have not tight budget and I consciously know I will buy twice. It is not the same with computers and smartphones? Go on with your independent reviews because I don't like also biased reviews (we must have the discernment to filter at the Internet). greets
Thank you for the education on the camera lenses
LOL @8:29 "initially my what the fuck moment" EXACTLY my same experience. No idea why so many reviews say they're great.
it really seems like some are not as critical about the screensize as we are.
from my comparison shots I measured the real diagonal and set it in relation with the claimed 28°.
No way they are even close to 28°. More likely 24°. that makes them competitors to the Fatshark Teleporters (which are around 200$). Them Teleporters they have "nice" specs btw.:
Large virtual image ( 25 degree FOV, diagonal ).
Crisp QVGA resolution display ( 320 x 240 ).
RCSchim I mean, how critical do you need to be in order to realize you can't see anything in front of you? that being said, I'm hoping someone finds a good lens mod for them. with a better FOV they're pretty good for the money.
money
Nailed it.. respect Andy
AndyRC But Andy... Your Q and A was nearly the opposite of Kababs review... You were getting on like the screen size wasn't a huge deal.
RCSchim ... for me you're a honest and wise guy, general ! ... on the other side, people who are dependent on the source will always protect it (more or less visible) what ever it will cost , so for them it is a big must to always appear smarter then others do by placing more "smart, logical and rational" arguments, what in fact is just a pure low level ego-powered self-realization. The sad part of this sort of game is that the bill is always on an unaware (especially young) audience which is an easy target, what is of course the main point of this kind of spineless money hunting activity.
An honest review! 2 thumbs up for that! I guess telling truth is rare these days :|
Thanks for the comparison
There's too many reviewers sing a company's praises because they send free stuff, Bruce Simpson got crossed off Walkera's Christmas card list some years ago for being too critical.
Talking about Walkera, has anyone heard any good stuff about the Vitus yet?
+Green Silver he said inn one off his vids that frsky also stopped supporting him after a bad review of the hours.
I bought these and was very disappointed. The left screen is titled badly to the right and when I contacted Banggood they told me to take the goggles apart and fix it. I'm pretty sure that if I break something in the process they won't honor any kind return. When I asked to ship them back, they said they'd only pay for half the shipment. I'm done with Banggood. Most other Eachine products I've owned and used had no problems but for $100 this was very disappointing.
Thank you for the truth!!! It is really refreshing to see someone tell it like it really is !!!! Keep up the good work !!!!