Interesting test, thanks for all that your KZread videos do for the hobby. Love to watch yours and Quin's interaction. She is quite a trooper.

Great video Daniel, thanks for sharing you're findings!

Thanks for comparing these Daniel.

I missed the "Thanks for watching, bye". Thanks for posting, bye!

Well done and thanks for the effort to try and show people Too many people want to wingh !! I thank you for your effort to help people Cheers Steve

This is so weird, I was just thinking you hadn't made a video in a while and also I have been watching videos on different frequencies, then you made this.thanks

That makes a huge difference! Thanks for sharing! :)

Great comparison! Great video!

Thank you for this test !

Very useful to see, thanks for this :)

hi. im in Italy and im just getting into fpv stuff and trying to learn long fpv too. ur vids are fantastic. keep posting videos and also updates on all ur flying sessions. good luck and God Bless.

Kool stuff What was with the weird colors on the 1300 at the end?

great video!! congrat i want to know , if can i use a short piece of your video , to show at my subs the deference betwen 1300 mhz and 5.8 ghz ?

I saw bigfoot in the trees, but only after it got fuzzy :) Nice little test.

@timadams3628

9 жыл бұрын

Hahaha I was thinking the same thing.

Exact components used would be helpful for some of us to interpret your results. Thanks for doing this test.

what sort of distance in meters did you manage to get with your 1.3 from your house?

Thanks mate! thats the easiest way to explain the difference. I thought your 5.8 did real well around the houses... for 5.8 ;)

What 1300 channel was it? 1258? Great testing, patch may help with the 5.8

Hey Bruce. What was the 5.8 TX power? I run a 600mw on my mini but was wondering if I could save some weight.

WHAT IS THE DISTANCE VC come TRASMISSOR AND RECEIVER?

rctestflight what part is this in video i'm up near ogden area.

What type of antennas did you use?

Nice test. Thank you. I'm working on a FPV rover to send into the woods behind my house. (Wife says I need a hobby) How far (distance) did you get before the 1300 cut out? Why could I see your shadow on the 5.8 but not the 1300? Thank you,

@Marek-is8ii

2 жыл бұрын

its a different day

what are the power (mw) of the transmitters? Thanks

@rctestflight

9 жыл бұрын

Both transmitters are 400mW

Off the topic of the video, what bike is that?

I'm kind of confused by the high frequency thing. Is 5.8GHz used because the high frequency allows a higher data rate (video quality) but range and penetrating power are greatly reduced? Would it be possible to divide a video signal into multiple separate streams then transmit them at a much lower frequency on separate channels to be recombined at the receiver, thereby giving the same data rate but with much greater range/penetrating power?

@Hotshot_Bagger

4 жыл бұрын

5.8 is used for its smaller antenna size and it's good enough to get by for most people. When it comes to video you want your video to cut out before your control link.

wow, I just bought an 1.2Ghz VTX analogue system now, had 5.8ghz. In your video this is not bad penetration and I think clearly 1.3ghz penetrates more. my 2.4Ghz transmitter (control) is affected by the vTX very much, I've got 170meters range instead of 1km for the 2.4gh, when adding best linear polar antenna and notch filter I can reach max 400meters... with my transmitter not too much...

Reminds me my old TV.

why is the 5.8ghz changing color xD? i never experienced that on my fpv!

Since Daniels early Narrated video's I fly 5.8 with a Patch on my bese station, I get clear signal as far as I want to go. All good:-)

Hi i would appreciate if u can suggest me 1.3ghz fpv set with audio enable, so. I can listen to sound as well, Thanks

I wonder how the 2.4Ghz system would perform against the 5.8Ghz?

Interesting !

What was the mW-rating for these different transmitters?

@rctestflight

9 жыл бұрын

Both transmitters are 400mW

@prime-eight

8 жыл бұрын

+rctestflight reciever power also 400mw? what antennas were used ?

and if you think 1.2-1.3ghz can penetrate, you should crank down to 1010-1060mhz. its night and day different even compared to 1258/1280mhz. the 900/1200 vtx's are all different designs too. some output more power at higher frequency others lower. what you really get into with 900/1200 is how good the vrx is. many are not very sensitive. it's gotten better over the years, but 900mhz most of the time needs an LNA to compete with the better sensitivities 2.4/5.8ghz come with stock (especially 5.8ghz). but yes, lower frequency = more range, penetration & coverage behind objects all other things being equal (vtx output, vrx sensitivity & equal antennas)

Do they make video receivers for 1.3.

I'm more worried about houses. And 1.2 / 1.3 GHz looks very good!

Could you compare 2.4 and 5.8GHz?

Good video there. Thanks, But can you explain more about what exactly the differences are. I"m a noob and don't really understand.

great video 1.3 always has better penetrating power over 5.8. Also, it seems like higher power(MW) 5.8 VTX's dont have much more penetrating power vs the lower MW vtxs do, just greater able to go greater distance LOS. this is my experience anyways. Still, like others have said, 5.8 isn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be. The key to both systems working properly is a clean filtered power supply, separation of components and other filtering methods

@swungdash4246

9 жыл бұрын

Finally someone talking sense! So many comments here about Vtx power and cameras - all of which miss the POINT! Daniel has demonstrated PENETRATION or the ability of a signal to pass through objects. It doesn't matter what power you have or camera or any other irrelevant sh*t! The best, most successful way to pass a transmission through an object is using a longer wavelength, hence a lower FREQUENCY! Therefore 1.3G is always going to pass through objects easier than 2.4G or 5.8G!! For that matter lower frequency signals less than 1G are going to be even better at penetration. Nobody uses 5.8G because it's superior to 1.3G or 900Mhz at penetration. The higher the frequency the less passes through objects - however higher frequencies are less prone to "noise" from other electronic sources - but in the 1.3G to 5.8G range they are all about equally resilient to noise. The only reason you don't use 1.3G in my country is because it's ILLEGAL! You can't buy it here and they confiscate it at customs! So if you have the privilege of flying 1.3G or 900Mhz than DO IT! Abuse it before you loose it!!!! And have pity on us poor Nazi dominated 5.8G losers!

more drive along vids please :)

Is it possible to use a blimp to relay video feeds?

@blackterminal

3 жыл бұрын

I recon yes it would be. Brilliant idea actually

I like the concept you're trying to show here, but I can't help but think that most of the time the 5.8GHz was cutting out simply because of range. Sure the surrounding areas do have an impact on signal, but it still has a dramatically shorter range than the 1.3GHz. Ontop of that, what was shown isn't really a good 'use case' for planes/helicopters/multirotors. Most people fly somewhat higher up than houses/trees, except for the groups that like to 'race' in the trees.. in which, the trees are usually pretty spread out. This test seems to be more accurate for those who go FPV with ground based R/C things like cars/trucks. But again, appreciate the vid =D Too bad I'd end up going with the 5.8GHz anyway, since I dont feel like going out and getting an Amateur Radio License just to fly FPV for 10 years.

@MeltedBu11et

9 жыл бұрын

Hikari I think this test was to show the penetration power/difference between the two, not to represent what you'd expect under normal use. In my case, this was very useful however, as I'm looking to convert my Slash 4x4 to a kickass ground fpv vehicle.

What for antennas

Shit some of you are hard to please, I thought the test was educational. Thanks Daniel

Thanks, Daniel, for the comparison video. What are your conclusions?

0:50 this is in utah knowing area like this it's all wifi routers in neighborhoods thats probably loss video signal on 5.8 i believed they can be with amplifier with the signal.

Can anyone help me decide what FPV setup to get? Right now I have Fatshark Dominator v2 goggles with 5.8ghz 600mw setup and am wanting to upgrade to 1.3. I have recently gotten Dragonlink and am wanting to fly at the most 3 miles away (maybe 4). I was thinking of getting either a 11dbic antenna or a pepperbox 13dbic antenna with the 1.3ghz setup. What is something that is compatible with my fatshark goggles and can plug into my GoPro? I heard 800mw would be good for the stuff I want to do but I'm not so sure... Thanks to anyone that helps

@theinfoone

7 жыл бұрын

you are going to need a Ham radio licence to be able to use any of those transmitters

In Germany you're not even allowed to use 1300mHz frequency. There are just 2.4Ghz and 5.8Ghz, for all the others you would have to get a license. :(

@vegetoast1

9 жыл бұрын

I'm pretty sure thats the same in Australia

@arnehollstein3651

9 жыл бұрын

DJ Kinney Nobody here uses 1300MHz ;) The bigger problem is, that you're not allowed to use 5.8GHz transmitters with more than 25mW transmission power (10mW with 2.4GHz). You could only improve with better antennas. So there're a many people ignoring that law. (I'm not doing that because I don't need to.)

@arnehollstein3651

9 жыл бұрын

DJ Kinney I see! I like your point of view, but unfortunately the mentality in Germany is mostly quite different, there could be so much great inventions.

@maxeisenstadt1459

7 жыл бұрын

It's actually not "anachronistic and dead". There is quite a large community of hams around the world and there is quite a large chunk of infrastructure that depends on the regulation of radio frequencies. The community itself is a part of the regulation as casual users have to share the same space as emergency first responders, communications between commercial and private institutions (think of the VHF airband, ship to sea communications, data communications such as weather and atmospheric conditions etc.). And don't assume there isn't a great deal of technology invested in the hobby as well, there's a plethora of transmission modes and types of equipment that has to be properly calibrated and appropriately operated to prevent interference with frequencies outside intended parameters. It may be fun to shit on a regulatory power that absolutely gets on people's nerves but think of how pissed you would be if anybody could jam frequencies without consequences, you are fully capable of running a 5.8ghz FPV transmitter at whatever power level you want but the consequences include: being an asshole jamming adjacent channels and possibly emitting distortion induced harmonics, potentially causing damage to your own equipment by operating at a higher power level without a properly tuned antenna (SWR is quite critical to efficient transmission) and causing injury to yourself and others (RF exposure at high frequencies and high wattages can blind you etc.). The reason people get licenses, whether they're only technician (like me) or amateur extra (the highest class) is to be educated in the theory of radio and have an understanding of band plans set by the FCC and getting a license isn't hard; for technicians, you need to answer a 35 question proctored test and your license lasts for 10 years with privileges of access to all amateur bands above 30mhz which means that you can do whatever you want as long as you transmit your call sign every time you key up or at least every 10 minutes.

@ShaftProd

6 жыл бұрын

aliexpress

What about 2.4?

it seemed to hold the video for much longer than the 5.8

CARA DO BRASIL PRECISA DE UM TRANSMISSOR COMO SEU PARA QUE EU Polícia de Guarda, que eu vejo a 500 metros entre as casas seria ideal?

is not range below 5.8 illegal?

Love the concept, would help to know the gear used for both 1.3 and 5.8 including power and frequency of the channel used and brands of antenna. Depending on frequencies used the 1.3 may have been affecting the 5.8 on a harmonic. I fly through trees with my 5.8 setup but it's all in close proximity, signal is still awesome.

@swungdash4246

9 жыл бұрын

Still missing the point. Lower frequency passes through obstacles better. But that's still not the point! Of course1.3G is better! The only reason we use 5.8G in some countries is that it's LEGAL!

@BenGovett

9 жыл бұрын

Swung Dash People also use 5.8 because of smaller less fragile CP antennae when tree bashing, and when in close enough without too many obstacles you get slightly clearer video when using PAL and higher TVL count cameras. 1.3 is a much better choice if you need the penetration due to obstacles or want to fly long range. Legalities, yeah, well.... There are advantages and disadvantages to both systems, I was more curious as to the setup Daniel was using.

@yellowbluerc5047

9 жыл бұрын

Swung Dash ur missing the point, lower frequenties dont pass THROUGH obstacles better they go around it better...

@yellowbluerc5047

9 жыл бұрын

YellowBlue RC there iant any penetration signal is going around objects

@johnrobertson7583

9 жыл бұрын

YellowBlue RC You may be unaware of this, but radio waves dont travel in circles, they go straight. Do you think you have to have a door open in your house facing your favorite radio station for your music to be heard? No, the radio waves pass through the walls, barring any shielding. Your cars antenna is on the outside, so it can use the body as a ground plane to add to the signals it receives. If it were on the inside, the drive would be very quiet as you would get very little reception. Any "around objects", is called reflection, and results in ghost images where the receiver is getting multiple weak signals, versus the stronger direct ones. Most modern electronics can combine some of these ghosts if theyre close enough, and you dont even realize the slight delay as its being done. Ben Govett Exactly, 5.8 for compactness AND amount of data, 1.3 for pure power. He has probably never Rx-ed AM stations in the middle of the night. I used to get some from all over the US on a 9v transistor radio, just creeping the dial till something came in, and waiting for the call letters to log it.

Would you build another to sell? If so how much would you charge rctestflight

@jakeking49

9 жыл бұрын

Nevermind I meant to ask that on the cargo plane

3:26 i have old analog tv feeling

stock antenna?

@theinfoone

7 жыл бұрын

he clearly said it was a cloverleaf antenna

if flying higher above houses i think both 5.8 and 1.3 would work fine

Are we to assume they have the same output power ? If you are comparing 1W 5.8 and 200mw 1.3, It would be meaningless.

@swungdash4246

9 жыл бұрын

Output power is still missing the point. All things being equal the lower frequency will pass through obstacles better.

@rctestflight

9 жыл бұрын

Both transmitters are 400mW

@illusivec

9 жыл бұрын

Thanks for clearing that up.

I think you must try to record one first and the another later.. to avoid interference between

@burritos1000

9 жыл бұрын

He did...

@bruha6923

6 жыл бұрын

Such an idiot

Thanks Daniel but without knowing the test setup, power of the transmitters, type of receivers, sensitivity, camera, etc. It's not really useful.

@dtaylor483

9 жыл бұрын

Can you people not read? It says right there in the clip info 400mW tx . Dah! Granted some txs vary output power on different channels but for the scope of this demo it is inconsequential.And as long as the same camera was used for each run that too is irrelevant. So if you want purely scientific comparisons you had better reference Consumers Reports..

@808GT

9 жыл бұрын

Dianne Taylor ...type of receivers, sensitivity... Reading.

@JohnFHendry

9 жыл бұрын

Dianne Taylor This is why they say women make better pilots.... Did you know that people studying linguistics' discovered "huh?" is a universal word or tone that has the same meaning to all races that speak different languages? And Dah is the opposite of Huh so maybe it's a universal word too. I think it is... so there must be something in the middle separating them. But that's just a theory of mine I'm working on.... but you can have it.

And because unlicensed 1.3 GHz is forbidden in many countries, you can catch a nice fine or trial too. Happy flying!

Not really fair since the 5.8 has to deal with a 1.3 TX operating so close to it, that in a normal FPV scenario would not be there!

@Raid1983

9 жыл бұрын

If you look at the cloud pattern you will notice that both videos were not shot simultaneously. at least the tree part.

@Hoverbot1TV

9 жыл бұрын

Raid1983 The gate walk through had me thinking lag until I saw the shadow was different. LOL!

@superdau

9 жыл бұрын

So? The 1.3 has to deal with the 5.8 being there. (except for the fact that it wasn't because the video were recorded on different walk anyway)

@SPL-6

9 жыл бұрын

I didn't realize they were done separately, however 1.3 being the lower frequency will effect the 5.8 signal while the other way around will not have a meaningful effect.

@tehnoplus1

9 жыл бұрын

SPL You are right. Is about harmonics

5.8g is the governments approved and recommended frequency, so fuck that, use 900mhz if your a g

@swungdash4246

9 жыл бұрын

+1

@Snowbrdr020

9 жыл бұрын

you're*

@MasterYota1

9 жыл бұрын

We know the facts of 5.8 it's gonna be wifi soon. If we don't respect the rules. people using those bands will have walk on issues. The hole purpose of the FCC in our community is to keep all the radio bands available for everyone to use and enjoy without interference . Now you wouldn't want a guy flying down the field with a 1 watt booster on 2.4 ghz stomping on your bands causing you to loose control of your video or your model. Rules suck and we might not always understand but we all have to follow them . I hope you have a great day. LETS MAKE IT CLEAR.... First there is 3 levels of a ham license. 35 questions is the level one and so on. Now in our community"RC" they regulate all our frequency's . From gps 10mhz , uhf 433 and up to 5.8 and above. Another words all RF wave lengths. First you are wrong anything over 1 watt in 2.4 is illegal without a licence to operate at that power. All Rc controllers by law in the USA can't be more than 200 Mh "Mili amps" Without the proper license . Also you can run roughly 30 to 40 rc links at 2.4 spectrum 200 Mw. More than that and you could stomp on someone. They are called spectrum hopping channels. if you have too many hopping channels what happens? What happens if you go out to the field with a 1 watt or more booster? You will cause issues. This is a known fact. " your statement makes no sense, right? "you wouldn't want a guy flying down the field to be stomping on your bands causing you to loose control" vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv I may have to explain in a more simple term. I took the test I am licensed. I hope you are too if your gonna make statements like that. The only reason you don't have to have a license to operate 2.4 or 5.8 among others is because of the power your transmitting. 200 Miliwatts on 2.4 tx. is the law in the USA in England its 25Mw. I know that 5.8 is not yet a hot topic issue yet in the USA , But as 5.8 ghz routers come out it will be. Try putting a 1 watt booster on your 2.4 TX and see if you have issues. There was a guy who was fined 10 grand for doing just that with 2.4. because it stomps all over wifi and anything on the 2.4 band.So without a filter you could be affecting 5.8. So 2.4 x 2.4 = 5.8 that's harmonics. Also anything below 1.3 is Ham area at any wattage Now I hope you may understand what I was saying.

@HDFoxra

9 жыл бұрын

dustin6498 you realize... your statement makes no sense, right? "you wouldn't want a guy flying down the field to be stomping on your bands causing you to loose control"... what you just stated, counteracts the whole 'keep all the radio bands available'. Ontop of that, the FCC is NOT there to do that at all. Its the Federal Communications Commission, meaning, ALL manner of communication is regulated by them. NOT just radio frequencies. And with that, its not to make it available to 'everyone', its to make sure we, the 'consumers', don't hinder a license holder's ability to operate. 2.4GHz-2.5GHz are a world wide 'accepted' open spectrum which does not require a license to operate. same for 5.725GHz-5.875GHz. 1.3Ghz on the other hand, is a frequency i'm surprised is even allowed to be used. It requires a license to operate in that spectrum usually. In the US, to operate between 929MHz and 2.3Ghz, you have to have an "Amateur Radio License to LEGALLY use. To gain the license you need to spend about 20-50 bucks to take a test, and have proof that the frequency you intend to use, is not in use by any other person within your transmitter's range. Meaning, you need to also do research to find out who is broadcasting in your area and if you may end up overlapping frequencies. So, its best to get something between in the 5.8GHz range because then there's no legal issues. That, or within the 902MHz-928MHz range. Which, stuff like that has me alittle bit intrigued, because my father used to do model aircraft back around the time i was born. His transmitters/receivers are all 72MHz based. Which, according to the charts, is a band which also requires a type of license. Makes me wonder if the spectrum bands have been revised since then. Wouldn't surprise me! lol. EDIT: did abit of digging around about my 72MHz thought. Turns out, the area around 70MHz is also seen as an "Amateur Radio" band, which then means a license is still required. This explains the one week, long ago when my dad took me and my brother out to the airfield, where the airfield was closed down with a sign "in process of license renewal". I never knew what that meant at the time, but apparently it was the owner of the land getting his license renewed for his area so everyone could fly.

@bartsshorts

9 жыл бұрын

Hikari could u write some more for us to read?

The higher the frequency the shorter is the transmission distance...

I recently saw a 2000mw (yes 2000) 5.8ghz transmitter for VTX. I would love to see a comparison against that and the 1.3

@freddylateub7669

8 жыл бұрын

I have one of those thunderbolt 2W, and i didn't get a really good range with it, even with good quality mushroom antennas

@ChristopherF_1971

6 жыл бұрын

Freddy Lateub yes I had one as well. I didn’t get anymore range out of the 2000mw/2watt 5.8 than a 600mw 5.8 vtx. I did however notice the 2watt vtx was a huge battery drainer. I honestly get well over 2 miles in open flat areas with my cheap AKK 600mw vtx and it’s way easier on my batteries

Check out all of IBcrazy's at (VAS) video arial systems have a fantastic group of vids on How to be good at FPV covering antenna's Ground Stations how to setup and tune your camera/antenna/Tx rx and everything inbetween,and this guy builds Antenna and sell's planes/multi's just for fpv work,His names Alex Greeve and he's one of the bedt (in my view the best! His Bluebeam antenna are the stuff of fpv legend...realy they're brilliant.Should find them up here on U tube

@nikimarkieren7848

8 жыл бұрын

www.stoneblueairlines.com/ try this site you'll be apples M8

Without detailed description this video is not so usefull. We are all waiting for the details. Yet I'm pretty sure that cameras are different. I like the one that was used for 5.8.

why dont drone racers use the same technique as DJI, there is no disturbance with a DJI product

i wish i could link both for good range and distance

@Hoverbot1TV

9 жыл бұрын

I tried through a diversity but then your carrying 2x vtx weight and the signal difference can be distracting when they switch.

@guafito

9 жыл бұрын

Hoverbot1TV thanks for letting me know. If I could only implement like 3 different 900mhz,1300mhz and 2.4 ghz. In a single board solution. For different types of environment. You know. I'll start my research c: this will make a good project for aeronautics class :D its system could use each type of frequency depending on interference and range c: would be nice to have. Would also be nice as a redundant solution. I am clueless right now. I will see if its possible for a thing like this to exist in hobby size for quads :D

@Hoverbot1TV

9 жыл бұрын

guafito It would be best to channel all freq's on vrx side through a system that balances image quality fro all incoming signals in diversity box.

I never met anyone whos flying half meter above the ground 500m away like in your video

After watching this I really dont see why people give 5.8ghz such a bad reputation. For the most part it hung in there for most of the time the 1.3 did. 1.3 is superior in situations like this, I will say that but the size of the antenna would just irritate me.

@vegetoast1

9 жыл бұрын

5.8 also has superior video quality. 1.3 is all blurry compared

@Hoverbot1TV

9 жыл бұрын

vegetoast1 I'm close to getting a 32ch 5.8 vrx set since the blur gets to me on 1280 etc. :o)

@OMEGOOLIEBIRD

9 жыл бұрын

glenn ford 'But you shouldn't be pushing the limit anyway'???? Whatttt!!! Do you wear pink shoes and own a collection of ladies underwear?

@philaell

9 жыл бұрын

glenn ford I hear that. I do push the limit of my experience level but since multiple things could block signal i try to be smart about pushing the electronics.

@jahmer998

9 жыл бұрын

OMEGOOLIEBIRD lol

@MontisX2 Still missing the POINT! Details are insignificant. Lower frequency always has better penetration, as this video proves - funny this video confirms physics -funny about that! 2.4G is better than 5.8G and 1.3G is better than 2.4! Hell, why not go for 0.4G and you still get signal inside a steel bunker! Perhaps not, but I'm trying to state the bleeding obvious - 1.3G will get better signal through things - the reasons we use 5.8G is NOT for penetration!!! For one it is more legal in more places, 2 it's more compact in size,3 it has a narrower, more directional beam, 4 it doesn't interfere with 2.4G control ... a few other reasons besides, but penetration is not among them! So as far as this video proving 1.3G has better range through obstacles - of course it does - duh!

FIRST!

@techflightsims

9 жыл бұрын

To get punched in the face :D

Thanks Daniel, but this is a pretty pointless test. Of course lower frequency is going to have greater penetration. But that's beside the point. 5.8Ghz is NOT used because it has better penetration. 5.8Ghz has advantages in other areas like being LEGAL without a permit in many countries where 1.3G may not be. Also 5.8G uses a smaller, more compact antenna, a more directional beam and other advantages. To each their own. If all you want is penetration why not simply go 470Mhz or lower??? See how many truckers you can PO in your region...

Конечно 1.2Гига победит на земле в чистую за счёт лучшей пробиваемости в воздухе 1.2 победит на нескольких км особенно в туман.

BOTH is gorrble no evolution since 2007 HD digital or nothing

Both suck :(

muy malos los dos sistemas

Not a very scientific test. Don't know if the exact same camera was used because it didn't respond to light the same. Also, the tests were done at different times. (look at the clouds and shadows). Yes, there might be some interference if done side by side but the antennas could be separated by a 3' wooden bar or something. Nice try.

@rctestflight

9 жыл бұрын

The camera was the same for each test. The camera has no significance when testing range or penetrating power. The tests were done about 3 minutes apart so the time really had no effect.

@rubdulbah3201

6 жыл бұрын

At this point mostly every test on youtube is nowhere near scientific. Just take anything you see here as for entertainment purposes only. Helps me sleep at night anyway.