good and you advise me to my serious repair phone and I am between flir one pro type c and the TE-M1 type c thanks.
I have a TE-Q1 and it, or the software, is very fussy about the startup procedure. Additionally, the USB connection tends to be floppy, and if you have a modern phone with USB-C you're likely needing a C-micro adapter to add more floppiness...
The TE-Q1 is avaible with USB-C, too.
The 599€ offer are only for the Micro versions avaible, the USB-C type cost still 799
So thank You for your hint with the HT-A1.
Test the HT-A1:
Look at the Display/Resolution....
And look at this:
This is from our Flir Thermalcam (from the year 2006), which has lower thermal Resolution as the HT-A1...
But looks "better" ( to me).
How could this be
Lots of possibilities there. Firstly, is that image of yours a capture from the FLiR? That would usually be a better quality than what you see on the screen (cf. the TE discussion) so comparing to a video of the screen is somewhat dodgy
Next, the palettes are different. Different palettes enhance (or make worse) the view depending on what you're looking at. On my A1 I switch between cool and white palettes most often, whereas on my FLiR Infracam (same vintage as yours, possibly even the same thing) it stays on the palette you're using.
Next, what are you looking at? There is no sense of scale or distance to target, and any proper comparison would have the two tools looking at the same thing.
Having said all that, my Infracam does look better even though the resolution is worse in reality. I think part of it is the palette mapping where the colours don't seem to be right. If I switch to the white palette things look a lot better, even better than the Infracam.
Finally, these both have fixed focus lenses. When I use a zoom lens on my A1 the jump in clarity is stunning, so I think the focus just isn't as good as it could be.
This is from our Flir Thermalcam (from the year 2006)
Pardon, my mistake - it is the flir infracam (without sd).
Firstly, is that image of yours a capture from the FLiR?
Yes and it´s the same as if I would look on the build-in screen.
Once I bought the seek thermal compact xr, which have a better resolution as the flir infra cam noted in the specs - But it was very disappointing, so noisy, so slow....
Finally, these both have fixed focus lenses.
The flir infracam have manual focus.
Just a comment. You can unlock the thermacam to the SD version. There is just a sticker covering the SD card slot and you can change the config file to enable it. Will only work with SD cards up to 1GB however.
Finally, these both have fixed focus lenses.
The flir infracam have manual focus.
You're quite right - can't think what I was thinking! Of course, that does mean the Infracam
should be better at getting a sharp image.
As I said before, I´m actually a little bit disappointed
Our flir infra cam was from 2006...13 years old.
With specs which are looking really old against today´s cams and also against cheap ones these days.
To name it again, the seek thermal compact xr.
On the paper better than the infracam.
But in real huge disappointment against.
I agree that the Infracam has worn well for a 13-year-old product, particularly given the rate of change in the industry. But it cost £5K (got mine for £3K on a special deal and after haggling) whereas the A1 cost £200.
You can see the same with pretty much any big-name old kit vs ultra-cheap modern equivalent. I was going to suggest a scope as an example, but I think the disparity between CRT and digital mitigate against that and I can't think of a modern cheap CRT. Multimeters, then.
Hi,
I have InfraCam and Bcam (2007/2008) and they are internal the same.
The SD Card slot can be activated... if off it stores internal, if on it need a SD Card.
The Bcam has a lower setting for the internal noise generator and more Measurements.
The Kameras are expensive a few years ago. now they are <700$ in used condition.
To name it again, the seek thermal compact xr.
On the paper better than the infracam.
Seek just want to sell and lie about the quality. The XR has 206x156 sensor, this should result give 32136 thermal Pixels but in real each 15th pixel is a hole, because patent.
Additional... the HT-18 uses a Core with the same Sensor like Seek Compact (XR). i belive the A2 is just using a Seek Pro core. If you buy a HTI device you maybe just buy a Seek in another housing.
I connected a Seek XR and the HT-18 works with it, it looks like before, the Seek Pro works not with it.
Better stay by your Infracam... if you remove the housing there is a plastic nose, that limit the angle of the Lens rotation. after removing this, you can get closer to the PCB.
best wishes
joe-c
Hi again,
I was so close to buy the TE-M1 ( actually 100€ off, 30hz option included, manual focus) but the fact that the official european vendor anwers very slow or (actual) not (got a problem with the TE app) plus the posts in other threads about problems with compatibility to several smartphones, let me look again to the HT-A1....
Do someone know the closest distance for sharp picture ( it´s fixed focussing) ?
Can´t find it in the avaible specs….
but the fact that the official european vendor anwers very slow or (actual) not (got a problem with the TE app)
Got an answer today, he said it´s normal behaviour when the cam wasn´t connected….
Nevertheless, I have now ordered the HT-A1 via Amazon, should arrive in 2 days.
Will test it quick, if it´s crap, it returns...
Tada…
(Edit Pics removed)
First Impression: Not so bad as feared, hefty look and feel, will test it further on monday at work if this is suitable for pcb inspection.
Playing around...
It´s a little bit slow and the screen freezes short time after the "click" sound, I´m really exited to test it at work.
Screen freeze is normal on all microbolometer cameras that use a flat field correction shutter. The period between FFC events is usually quite short after initial power on as the sensor array warms up to thermal equilibrium. After the sensor die temperature stabilizes the FFC events become less frequent. On most cameras, every 120 seconds or so. The FFC event causes the freeze frame as the flag is across the sensors view so no new image is available while FFC takes place. The FFC event can impact upon thermal videos so some cameras can disable the FFC during video recording. Some pixel drift will appear over time though.
One of the greatest impediments to good PCB surveys, even on high resolution cameras, is the close focus capabilities of the lens, or lack thereof. The close focus capability can be improved with a supplemental ZnSe lens as you no doubt know.
Fraser
On the issue of closest focusing distance/capabilities... Apparently for HT-A1 that info wasn't readily available.
For the TE-Q1, the specified minimum focus distance for 13mm/1.0 lens is 0.4m (i.e. 40cm). I estimated that it was borderline usable for PCB stuff (and according to the example images somehow even quite ok), and thought I might need an extra lens, like some have done (for one or other purpose). But when testing it, I just kept screwing the lens and got it down to about 12cm focus distance, though I didn't check the flatness of the field at that distance. It might have gotten even closer but the effect on focus distance started to diminish. That extra 28cm closer gives quite nice increase in magnification, and in the end, for PCB work I definitely do not need any extra lens.
The main point of that is not to advertise TE-Q1 specifically, but to emphasize how the specs might not be the full truth, for our better or worse (usually worse, for this particular case for better).
Hi,
Pics from a pcb (amplifier):
Useless….
Three screenies from an A1 looking at a RPi warming up. One of them is of an unadorned A1 whilst the other two have third-party lenses in front. I'll let you guess which is which
whilst the other two have third-party lenses in front.
Aha....where can I get it from and how did you have it mounted ?
I´ve just ordered two lenses now, delivery time appx 34 days - Time enough to think about an fixure...
No, today they arrive:
But, to be honest, I don´t have any clue to use them "correct" - putting the lens directly to the housing or with distance, which side to the ht-lens….
Time to playing around….
The distance from the original lens determines the focusing distance to the target. As to which way around they go, I put the flat to the camera, but I couldn't actually tell the difference when I tried either way