|
Non Typical Cuddeback Camera Review Page |
|
|
|
Non Typical Cuddeback Camera Review Page |
|
|
|
NonTypical Digital Deer http://www.cuddebackdigital.com/ (This camera is no longer in production but is still available from some outlets.)
|
This has been a very good camera and is easy to use. The flash is very good and It has a trigger time of about 1 second. Battery life has been about three weeks. The down side of this Camera is that the support (factory repair ) is extremely slow thirty to forty days. We know that this camera works and is pretty reliable so we use it as a side by side unit to test suspected poor performing cameras. A big negative on our part is the lack of a up front battery condition indicator. You must go into the advanced mode to access battery condition. The condition is reported as a series of numbers unlike other models which report voltages. One negative on this camera is that the minimum delay time is 1 minute. we would prefer 30 seconds. The instructions in this camera's manual take a little getting use to. There is a five button arrangement that is labeled M---down---up---S---C. The M is for mode, The up-down buttons are for changing the LCD display settings, S button is for setting the display to view the next parameter, and the C button is the clear button. Being very careful most folks can get through the programming using this manual and knowing the function of each of these buttons. Like the Moultrie this company needs to put a laminated instruction sheet inside the front cover to aid operators when in the field.
|
|||||||||
|
NonTypical Digital Deer http://www.cuddebackdigital.com/
|
19 Aug 05: We have had this camera for a week and have been doing some in shop testing. The trigger time is about three times faster that the older 1.3 MP version. Their web site shows less that a second trigger time. My tests were about the same showing 1 second to just over 1 second. This is extremely good trigger time. Not up to Buckeye’s 1/10th of a second time but a full 2 seconds better than most. With its $400.00 advertised price it is very much in competition with most of the mid range standard flash cameras.
If this camera performs in the field as it did
in the shop we will be putting it on top of all the standard flash cams. The
programming is the same as its predecessor and it still needs some type of
battery condition indicator on its front. Having to go into the advanced
mode to get battery information is a hassle. Their advertising states much
better battery life with this unit so we will be taking a close look at
this. Their web site states that the camera will display the amount of
pictures taken through the window, even though the cover is closed and
locked. This feature was eliminated for the new 3.0 version. Our camera has a very tight
memory
card slot and once the card was installed the ejector did not want to work.
More use should correct this as things wear into better alignment. Once we
got the card out and the pictures downloaded to the computer they proved to
be very sharp and clear. One negative on this camera is that the minimum
delay time is 1 minute. we would prefer 30 seconds. August 30, 2005 update: This camera is now in a hot area and we did some preliminary walk tests in the field and the results are impressive. Just with this small amount of use we feel that the standard flash competition will have to get off their duffs and do some upgrades to match the performance of this camera. September 09,2005 update: This afternoon I had a phone conversation with the folks at Non Typical discussing some of our upgrade suggestions. I was told that the instructions inside the front cover would probably be adapted. We also discussed the delay time to 30 seconds possibly would be considered. Probably will not get the battery condition indicator. We also discussed the possibility of putting an off/on switch on the outside of the camera. The big news is the IR flash model that is in development. (look out Recon) This new camera will be daytime color and black and white night. We will have to get on the list to test this unit. 12-03-05 Update: So far using Duracell's, we are on 5 weeks plus, and because of the surrounding area dove season shooting the picture rate is down to 5 to 10 pictures a week. With the cool weather coming in, the sensor is getting things at 50 to 60 feet. We are very happy with this cam.
1-05-06 Update:
Engineers Choice
|
|||||||||
|
Expert 3.0 MP http://www.cuddebackdigital.com/ Chasingame Engineer Bill creates a custom mounting bracket for this cam. Photos & write up below:
Notes on the design:
Click on the pic below for a close up of battery plate installation. Make sure that the plate is behind the plastic flanges in all areas indicated by orange arrows.
|
07-13-06: Our 1 may 06 receiving date for the delivery of all models of the new Cudde cams somehow ended up with just one camera coming in on the 12th of July. We are still waiting on the other two. The 06 flagship of Non Typical came in a row boat bubble pack and missing was all the bells and whistle extras that we expected from this company. There was no locking cable or means to secure this cam other than a plastic loop for a small padlock. This camera is smaller in frontal size but thicker due to the two battery tubes running up the back. Our first order of business was to design a bracket so we could secure this $300+ investment which took a couple hours but the results were good (see side bar for details) and easy to duplicate. Being that many folks had already received their cameras long before we did, we had a multitude of things to look for from the data gathered off the outdoor forums. Most of the reported issues were not found to be the case on this cam as of now but we are just getting into this review so we will continue to check. The issue with the battery plate is well founded. I spent about 2 hours dealing with this. I could easily install the cells while setting down and the cam in my lap. Using the supplied screws and attaching it to a tree is another thing. No matter how hard I tried I was not able to successfully install the batteries unless I laid down on my back and looked up to view the placement of the plate. Our security bracket is designed so the user can tip up the cam for the purpose of the battery change. While putting away the metal left over from the bracket fabrication I inadvertently bumped the water bucket I use to cool the metal which caused some water to splash out and you guessed it, directly on the cam. I quickly wiped the outside off and when I pulled the front cover there was water in the battery and switch area which I quickly wiped off. There was no damage to the camera but here is a real problem, this cam is not water tight but appears to be somewhat water resistant as long as it is in an upright position. Transporting this camera in and out of the woods probably should be done in a plastic bag if the weather is bad. Putting a small roof over this cam when it is deployed is apparently mandatory. Doing the programming without using the manual is a method I have used with most cams to see if I can figure it out without reading from the book. Previously having a number of the Cudde cams I was use to the method and was able to program this cam. The manual is well written and easy to follow but the colors used showing the buttons proved to be hard to read. New unfamiliar users would have a learning curve as they did with the old 1.3 and 3.0. Trigger times ranged from 1 second to 1.5 seconds with the majority being closer to the 1 second time. Flash range tests are good to 40 feet but the advertised 60 feet is a bit of a stretch. In the flash range pictures there is a buck at 60 feet and can be picked out faintly buy using enhancement he can be seen. Hanging this camera on a tree following the instruction booklet suggests a couple different methods. Using the supplied screws I was able to just pull it off the tree with a short tug, also this method leaves no room to change angles for aiming. The next method describes a bungee or wire through the loop in the rear of the camera. This method did work but required a couple of small sticks wedged behind the cam to achieve the desired angle but was not very stable. Judging the picture quality from the flash range pictures show that they are sharp and clear and up to the normal we have always expected from this company. The next step will be to put this camera in a three cam test with the old 1.3, 3.0 to judge sensing and I just might stick a Stealth WD-2 along side to keep things honest. Previous 1.3 and 3.0 cams did not
have the on off switch and battery indicator which we complained about.
Evidently someone up there in the design department was paying attention and
granted our wishes.
In the interim we stuck it out on a feeder for 24
hours and it took a little less than 50 pictures both day and night and
it took pictures of some tree rats at the mentioned temperature of 90+
degrees during the day shift. The picture quality is very much like that
of the old 3.0 and they have that little hue of false colors but are
very sharp and clear. If we can keep it dry long enough we will get it
through the above mentioned 3 cam test with a kicker.
Check out Leak Analysis and Fix for this camera!
|
|||||||||
|
Expert 3.0 MP
http://www.cuddebackdigital.com/ Camera as recieved: |
2007
Cuddeback Expert Review
05-12-07 One of the good folks on our forum has sent us one of his cameras to review. This fellow is an authorized dealer and has always held his products up as being top shelf. The camera arrived in an unopened package, just as if we were just any other customer. The camera obviously had not been pre-tested by anyone prior to us receiving it. There are no changes in the case design from the several 06 cameras we tested. The issue with the water leaks is still there, along with the battery holder problems that we experienced on the 06 camera. This company has been working very hard to get on top of many of the issues and a good portion of the 06 difficulties was due to circuit board problems. The trigger time on this cam is the same as 06 and the sensing was weaker even though we had it on max setting and the jumper the same way. We had this camera out for 3 days and nights and got 150+ pictures. Night temps was in the 50s and day temps in the 80s. During the mornings when the deer were not present but our trusty crop of tree rats invaded the feeders, this camera seemed to just not be able to sense the squirrels. We only got a few pictures of the smaller critters, even though they were in attendance in front of the camera for hours. The picture quality of this camera is just fair. The nice sharp clear pictures, with good color was just not there. Even the stationary objects were fuzzy and the false hue (orange) in the pictures was pronounced. The settings was at 3.0 MP ( view the sample pictures) which should have resulted in very sharp and clear pictures. Programming and functionality of this cam had no problems at all. I designed and built another housing for this cam so we could keep it out off the weather during testing, so we could return this cam in new condition. (see pictures in side bar) The long range sensing tests proved that it would sense me at 45 feet as long as I was directly in front of the cam. If I was a little off to the side (6 feet) the camera would not see me. This means that this cam is very aim critical. When placing this cam in the field it would be necessary to pay close attention to how this camera is aimed and would probably be a good idea to do walk tests to insure that it is actually looking at the target area. From the evaluation of the 06 cameras to the evaluation of the 07 cameras we feel there have been some big improvements in function. The very narrow sensing, focus, case design, and false hue are still issues that keep this camera from being up to the standard of the old 1.3 and 3.0 cudde’s that we grew to love. It is highly recommended that some type of cover over the camera to keep the weather off be used to protect the internal electronics. 05-18-07 update: A brand new set of Duracell’s (reading 100%) and 92 pictures later (14 hours) the Duracell’s were completely dead. Pulled the batteries out (tested also with battery tester as depleted) and installed some 9000 mAh NIMH batteries and started the test again. Compared to the Buckeye in the side by side test for sensing, the results were pretty well parallel (in a 14 hour period). Both cameras were looking at a captive crowd of deer on a single feeder. It is just that the Buckeye had enough battery power to go ahead and stay out for another couple of weeks. We are thinking that this particular cam might have an internal problem reflected by the amount of battery use we experienced. One of the other Cudde dealers we have on the forum has left his cams out for weeks with no reported problems. 05-26-07 update: Eight days on the 9000 rechargeable batteries and 306 pictures with about 65% of them night with flash. This will not be the first time we have had an issue with the duracells which we strongly suspect as to what happened in the first test. Even though 8 days on good rechargeable batteries is not something to brag about it is fair when compared to some other cameras we have tested. Over all, this camera performed well and a lot of the old whiteout and other problems that surfaced last year did not seem to plague this years camera. The side by side with the more expensive Buckeye proved that this camera did well but nothing like the buckeye. We are wishing for a case upgrade in the near future and maybe a little wider sensing range and this camera will be a top contender as was its predecessor the 1.3 and 3.0 Cudde.
Note: Assembly on this newer camera appeared to be poorer
than the one we tested on 06. Gaps were more open and only after two
drops of water we would see water inside the cam in our test.
|
|||||||||
|
Excite 2.0 MP http://www.cuddebackdigital.com/
Click on the pic below for a close up of battery plate installation. Make sure that the plate is behind the plastic flanges in all areas indicated by orange arrows.
|
Non Typical's entry level cam marketed at $299 has reduced features found on the previously reviewed Expert 3.0. This camera does not have all the bells and whistles of the Expert, just basic features and a MP rating of 2.0. The flash is smaller and rated at a shorter distance. The case is the same non waterproof design as the Expert and has all of the security, battery holder, mounting and case design issues mentioned in the Expert review. The trigger time appears to be a solid 1 second as should be expected. We are starting to get many field reports about heat related issues due to this new case design. The jury is still out on this issue but it is being watched very closely. I like the idea of a basic feature cam with at least a 2 MP rating that is simple to operate and has great trigger time. There are several new cams out but only the Bushnell Trail Sentry 2.1 has the above mentioned features and trigger time. Looking in the 06 Cabelas catalog the Cudde Excite lists for $299.99 (camera only), the Bushnell lists for $149.99 or you can choose the $249.99 special which includes a portable field card viewer 1.8” screen and also includes a SD card. The Bushnell does have a strap but is lacking in any means of security. The battery plate on this individual cam was a little looser and even though it is a sorry design it was a bit easier to install than the plate on the previously tested Expert. I would strongly suggest that most folks should consider building a mounting security bracket like the one used on the Expert and not use the mounting screws. When using the screws and tightened it tends to flex the case causing the batteries to drop out and then the camera has to be re programmed. Also the screw mounting does not allow for much adjustment for camera aiming or tipping up for easy battery changes. I mounted this camera on a pine tree using the screw and with a short tug I was able to pull the cam off the tree. We use a small metal roof over the cam to keep excess moisture from getting on the cam and lens. This will probably have to be a mandatory item to have or the probability of water getting into the wrong places might cause eventual problems. While doing the trigger time and flash range tests I noticed that this cameras aim is way to the left. I had to skew the camera to the right in order to center things in the picture (another quality control issue) I purposely am leaving those pictures in the flash/trigger tests to show the results. Being the aim was far left I had suspicions that the sensor may have the same problem. A cool 70 degree morning (just had a rain) it was difficult to make this camera trigger past 20 feet. I tested the new Bushnell this same morning and it would pick me up at 45 feet every time. This cam is off to the field to gather some sample pictures then back to the factory for a refund. This camera takes very good clear pictures for a 2 MP camera. It was placed side by side with the Bushnell 119300 and even with its sensor issue took 58 pictures while the Bushnell took 130. It is really to bad that the design issues found on this cam have to be reported. I really like all the features of this camera and the picture quality.
Check out Leak Analysis and Fix for this camera!
Make sure you read this: I just finished a short test using a small amount of water and an eye dropper. I opened the camera and placed paper towels in the area over the switches to protect them, I then installed the removable front cover and tightened it up. With the cam in the upright position I then put drops of water in the cracks of the front plate at the top of the cam. This would run down the crack and hit the top of the front cover and run across and down inside the face of the cam just above the switches. If the cam was canted to one side or the other slightly, this would increase the amount of moisture hitting the paper towels above the switches. I also noticed while doing the water test that the front panel is warped:
This has the PIR lens attached to it which forces the PIR to look somewhat right of center while the camera is mounted crooked and looking to the left. This is not a good situation. In the center above the orange arrow there is a 1/16 inch crack all the way through to the flash:
|
|||||||||
|
No Flash 1.3/3.0 MP http://www.cuddebackdigital.com/
Click on the pic below for a close up of battery plate installation. Make sure that the plate is behind the plastic flanges in all areas indicated by orange arrows.
|
Cudde’s
entrance to the IR market was anticipated for months as something to wait for.
We did not receive our camera as promised until today. The past month or so we
have been reporting on many issues with this camera. This data that we have put
out on our forum has been a result of many hours scouring the outdoor forums
looking for data on this camera. If you read through the two previous reviews on
the Expert and the Excite many of those issues like battery holder, case design,
method of field mounting, water leaks, and lack of security apply to this cam
also. Programming remains the same as the two other Cudde’s
also. The manual appears to be written in the same format also which is fairly
easy to follow. The MP rating is 1.3 for the IR operations and 3.0 for the
daytime color pictures. This cam uses the same principal as Buckeye by having
two cameras, one for each operation mounted side by side on the same board. The
IR array is fairly large 1”X 3” with a smoked cover which aids in the daytime
camouflage. The trigger time tests on this cam were done over twenty times and
the results are a solid
3
seconds. Flash range showed that the IR illumination was still
pretty good at 40 feet but very narrow. The picture quality, judging from the
flash range tests showed that typical fuzzy images. This morning was again 70
degrees and the sensing range showed to be about 30 feet which is pretty good
for that temperature. Not nearly as good as the Bushnell’s 40+feet sensing. Off
to the field this morning and we will be posting samples of the day/night
pictures. 07/29/06 Update: Our field test was conducted side by side with the new Bushnell 119300 IR. During the four day period the Bushnell took 249 pictures and this cam took 74. There were no empty pictures. The day pictures were at 3.0 resolution and they seemed to be not up to the quality that we seen while we tested the 3.0 Expert. The night IR pictures were pretty fuzzy but the narrow IR illumination had a tendency to whiteout close targets. The Bushnell was easily picking up deer at 40+ feet but this cam was missing many animals that were centered at 30 feet. I have a new laser aiming device that I use to fit over the PIR sensor lens that can tell me where the dead center of the PIR cone is, and on this camera it also had a warped front panel (not nearly as bad as the one on the Excite) and it showed the PIR aim of this camera was somewhat to the right of center at 15 feet.
Check out Leak Analysis and Fix for this camera!
|
|||||||||
|
Capture (white flash)
|
Cuddeback
Capture 3.0 MP white flash review 08-04-2008 Camera purchased from: WildViewWeb Contact: sales@wildviewweb.com From years back when the Cudde
folks had a good reputation they had this dry spell when everything went south
and folks had to back off. The residual old hard core lovers of this product
kept the out door forums buzzing with all these rumors about the latest release.
This 2 ½ inch thick by 5 ¼ wide and about 9 ½ inches
tall camera has finally been released. The good folks over at
WildviewWeb got us one and we will now try to kill all those rumors
that have been floating around. This is a very basic bare roots camera and only
does one thing, it takes single day/night color
pictures. There is no movie mode and no multi shot option. It has an internal
memory but that memory is only accessed by inserting a
FAT formatted SD card into the slot
with the camera off and no lights on. Move the switch away from the off position
to any of the other settings and wait for the green light to go out. Once the
green light goes out (may take up to 3 minutes) the images have been transferred
from internal memory to the SD card. Turn the cam off and remove the card and
you then can view the images that were collected in the internal memory on the
cam. The setting of the time date was very easy but not as cool as what we've
seen on the Timber eye camera. Move the switch to the different programming
stops and just use the buttons to set that selection. There is no up and down
buttons so everything is done serially in the up direction only. You must go all
the way around again if you mess up the first time. The case is very much like
the very early cudde cams. There is a plastic hinge
with a slide pin to lock the cam lid up while you have it on the tree. This
slide pin is held in the camera by a small silver E ring clip. With a lock
through the holes provided at the bottom of the case I was able to take a tooth
pick and remove this clip and open the case once the threaded knob was
unscrewed. The back of the case has a single screw that you must remove to
install the supplied tiny strap bracket. This camera is without any security
features that cannot be defeated in seconds. We will work on this for those who
need to protect their investment. The water tightness appears to be very good.
This is pleasing after that sieve for a case that appeared in 06. The front of
the case has the flash at the top and it appears to be very good. Just below
that is the PIR sensor and again they chose that narrow cone style that they
used before. Centered between the flash and PIR lens, the main camera lens is
set back with glass in front of it. One very important thing that folks must do
when they have this camera in the field is to
make sure they tighten the knob up on the case
when deploying this camera. The PIR sensor lens is part of the front
cover and the PIR sensor is part of the main assembly. If the front cover is not
tightened down the focus of this lens would be affected. When the focus is off
then the sensing efficiency would be diminished. OK, lets talk battery holder,
this one is alright. I did not have to lay on my back
to install the retainer and the batteries did not fall out and take out the
programming when bumped. The strap that came with the camera broke the first
time I tried to use it so I wrapped it up in a dollar bill and threw it away so
I could say that I had actually thrown something of value away. A visit to Home
Depot found a good little strap with a plastic clasp that seemed to work better.
I could have used one of my excellent Scoutguard
straps but I was afraid I might get something on it. 08-05-2008 update: I went through the flash range tests this morning which turned out to be an extreme ordeal. I could get the first trigger then the cam would lock up and appear to be dead. There would not be any thing recorded to the card. I removed the batteries which also proved to be another bothersome task. It required a tool to get the first two cells out of the compartment because of the limited amount of space. I tested the batteries and found them to be still new and good. I reinserted the batteries and had to go back through the programming. After about 5 or 6 repeats of the above sequence I was finally able to get the camera to function and write to the card. The flash range proved to be good past 40 feet. The sensing distance was 30 feet for this 72 degree morning. The sensing was by no means fast. It took some effort at thirty feet to get the camera to finally see me and if I was off center just a few feet forget it, the cam would not see me. This tells me that if you had deer just off center a few feet at 30 feet the camera would not see them. Aim is super critical with this camera and it does not have an aim device so you must use the test position on the switch and do walk tests. This seemed to work well as long as the sensor was picking me up but also proved that its sensing zone is very limited. This camera does work but with the lock up issue I experienced and not writing to the card along with limited sensing leaves me to not trust this camera. You could do a setup and leave the camera and if the first trigger locked up the cam you could come back a couple weeks later and not have a single picture. 08-06-2008 update: I went and retrieved the broken strap and parts but left the dollar out there. I spent about an hour trying to re assemble this little short piece of ____ and gave up, the dollar has its company back. The strap was only long enough to go around small trees anyway. One of my Scoutguard straps fit just fine and upgraded the capture a little. Next I spent a number of hours putting together security brackets to see how I could secure this camera but most all attempts were weak. The raised rib down the back of the camera and only one screw hole to secure the bracket made it a loosing battle. We had some folks on the forum that had some ideas but they did not figure on the hinge pin as being a weak point. The cudde bear box they had for the older cameras could probably be copied to fit this camera. The problem being that the cost of building that kind of security box would nearly equal the price of the camera. I had set up on a bird feeder yesterday in good sun to get an idea of picture quality. I pulled the card and XP said there were images on the card. A short time later they popped up and I began to survey the images. Gone is the false hue of cuddies past and now these cameras have a more natural color that is actually pretty good. Not anywhere near the Scoutguard quality but pretty good. There is a slight milky haze effect to the pictures. The colors are good and have a moderate degree of definition. If you manage to get a good one of these cameras and figure out how to secure it, you would probably enjoy it. I have turned it over to Anthony to try to fit it in on the hill. Right now we have about 8 reviews underway and space and corn are limited. Anyway in the $200 range I feel that Scoutguard has not a thing to worry about while looking down from its lofty feature rich perch. 08-08-2008 update: Well folks I got this cam out to Anthony to do the trigger time tests and get some sample pictures. He found out in short order that this task would be monumental. The cam still locks up after the first flash and the flash will not work again until you reset the camera by pulling the batteries. Just getting the batteries out enough to reset the cam is a job in its self. As of now this review is pulled as a bad idea and this cam is headed for the 100 yard target mound for this afternoons practice plinking. The Academy Ghost does not have the picture quality but this last one we received does flash when triggered without having to pull the batteries. Not to bad for a cam that cost $80 less than the capture. 08-08-2008 amended update: Now that we have had a little first hand dealings with this camera I spent some precious time trying to see if there has been any kind of history to date dealing with this cam. The short time that it has been out I have seen an increase in problems dealing with this camera on the outdoor forums. Cudde has not managed to clear this cam of all issues prior to shipping. Two areas seem to stick out and they are flash problems and not writing to the card. Several folks complained about the difficulty they are having removing the batteries. Lets hope that the factory gets on top of this because we need this camera to operate as advertised and give folks the opportunity to choose between different manufacturers. 10-02-2008 update: We were able to borrow a camera that has a proven history on function, so we can continue to finish getting all the data needed for this review. Since the last update and all the time we have spent waiting on finding a usable camera, I have been monitoring the forums for some good news but have not found any yet. It seems that these cameras are something like some Moultrie cams we seen some time back. If you get hold of a good one, keep it. The folks that have been happy are extremely happy and those who have had problems are very perplexed over customer service. Most have chosen the route of just returning it to the place of purchase rather than fighting the customer service system. Well it is again headed to the hill to get some testing done and we are pretty sure it will hold together long enough to get this done. We definitely need a good white flash camera in this price range. 10-06-2008 update: This cam only has one function and that is to take pictures with or without flash. For a short period of time we stuck this cam side by side with the Predator cam Xtinction because we were limited on space it the testing area. We noticed that this cam took a good percentage more pictures that the Predator in the same time. We can take this in two different ways. Either we have two sorry cams on our hands but one is a degree worse that the other or we can say we have two good cams on or hands and one is just better than the other. Both of these cams have yet to prove themselves in the field so we will have to put both up against a known good performer to see just where they fall as far as performance. This cam has performed well so far while being out there by its self. 10-09-2008 update: There is just not a lot of tests we can do with this cam because all it does is take pictures at one resolution. We have been waiting for a break so we could set up another side by side with several cams so we can get some idea of what it does up against a known performer. We had a serious rain last night and we pulled the card and it was dry inside so that means that it is far better that its latest predecessors which leaked like a sieve. This cam is still working which makes us think we may have one of those “good ones” that I have been hearing about on the forums. Things go right we will have the big test set up this evening. 10-18-2008 update: In our four camera side by side this cam came in third in sensing. The top scoring camera got 419 pictures and this cam got 189. Most all Cudde cams we have tested have that very narrow sensing cone and they do not do very good in the sensing department. After pushing this cam pretty hard it has still held together and not failed. This is a very basic cam and when it works it seemed to work well except for the sensing. This concludes this review.
|
|||||||||
 Take
me to the Home Page |
