Hello everyone,
I would like to briefly introduce a product that has been in development for more than a year now and is planned to enter production this summer. It's a low latency, long range, glass-to-glass video transmission system.
Remarkable features are a long range operating distance (7 kilometres tested at 100mW using an economic 8 dB patch antenna at the receiver), a glass-to-glass video latency of 80 milliseconds with plans of bringing it below 50 milliseconds, three supported video frequencies (900 MHz, 2.4 and 5.8GHz) and a very small transmitter size of 63x38 millimetres.
Please visit Fpv.Red for more details, send us an email or ask in the comments for any question.
Comments
I didn't understand you were looking specifically for those pictures, sorry you had to search for HDMI with a microscope, it's not there.
I took a look at the design. The trough hole mount of the HDMI connector is in between the best place there is to mount a FPC connector on the other side of the board. The TMDS signals are already accessible from the other side via vias used to route them out from a middle plane, but those vias are in the middle of second best position you would like to use for the FPC connector. Everything is also very close to the step down converter. I sincerely like your idea, but it is not easy. I've put it in my to do list and I will discuss it with the hardware designer. I hope he will come up with something.
Thank you again for your effort in bringing me away from HDMI connectors, I really appreciate it!
2500 pixel wide pictures are available on HD Fpv.Red's website, just click over the figures.
About adding the footprints, I don't think that is possible in the transmitter, in the current layout that would require routing the signals to the opposite side of the board due to a lack of space and that doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Ideally yes, allowing people to just solder a FPC connector would be great, but I'm worried about the space it will take and how it will modify impedances.
There is more space in the receiver, but would you really want to use a FPC cable instead of a (quality) HDMI one? You can hate HDMI all you want and I agree with you, but how is a household solution going to be any better?
I will make a blog post about error recovery.
About HDMI, I would agree with you, but there is no easy solution. If using a custom cable, even FPC, we would need to provide FPC to HDMI adapters and basically hope signal integrity to be verified. Cables would need to be very short, etc. There are many shortcomings. I believe the best option to be using standard HDMI connectors, and maybe offer custom flexible cables if there is demand for it.
The receiver will have mounting holes, so you can just take it out of the case and use it as you see fit. I don't see any reason to have mounting holes in the transmitter (there is one already that you can see in picture, but there really isn't space for a second one!).
Excellent product, now don't let us wait too much and give indicative price.
@The Sun I have not done any precise calculations, only rough estimations of bandwidth degradation. Im using 1W TX power to get the 50 mile range. This red system is very interesting though. The small size is wonderful unlike my setup which weights about 2 pounds
Hi Davide. Yep we can run to 25mW with FM or whatever, it's only above that value that the modulation type is mandated and there is a max spectral power density of 25mW/3khz BW to meet. I've just read a new note that there may be changes to that requirement soon though...
Sorry Martin, I'm pretty sure it won't fit in that regulation. However in Europe it's possible to use any kind of modulation up to 25 mW / 5.8GHz, if there are similar possibilities in Australia you should be fine (albeit with reduced range). Davide
Hi yes. I want to send 1080p to the ground to a large 1080p LCD, because that gives much more detail for searching for objects on it. The default source right now for me is a GoPro Hero4 with HDMI output. Currently SD via PAL over 5.8Ghz FM is fairly limited to show ground details, range is fine.
So without pushing for too much secret detail, does the RF link use 75 or more hopping channels ?
If not then it won't fit in the free licence class here in Australia and I can't use it anyway (professionally).
Martin
Hello Martin,
Sensitivity of the 5.8GHz version is untested yet. I guess sensitivity will be very similar, but the signal will fade much earlier.
No, this product doesn't use Wi-Fi and doesn't fit the strict Wi-Fi frequency hopping requirements.
1080p is a possibility if planned for today. From my experience when limited in bandwidth (say 5 Mbps) 720p and 1080p provide basically the same visual quality. If using 10 Mbps and an external quality HDMI camera 1080p might start to make sense. Is this the setup you were interested in?
Andy,
I think the comparison went quite well. The analog system had 5 times the transmission power and an antenna with higher gain (an extra 3 dBm iirc). Yet it started showing interferences while the HD system was still perfect. That's an unexpected victory in my book :)
Davide
I'm in the market for something like this for professional use.
Some questions.
Is the sensitivity of the 5.8Ghz version the same as the one demonstrated ?
Is the RF modulation digital, or frequency hopping of 75 or more channels ?
(fitting into part 57 or 60 of ACMA regulations in AU https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2015G01459)
Is 1080p transmission possible as well as the demonstrated 720p ?
Thanks,
Martin
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next