Positives and Negatives 

Very early last year we knew of this camera and studied the specifications and pictures and then awaited its introduction to our markets. Ahead of its release the Scoutguard 550 hit the market and was almost an instant hit. There were some market strategies preceding its introduction which caused some riff throughout the industry. Slowly this  Scoutguard in a new case hit the market because of these market strategies. The new plastic carried the Covert name and a restyled sensor lens. Almost instantly sides were chosen and some questionable marketing strategies were adapted by some. No matter how minor of an issue that was reported from the field these folks would instantly jump up and discredit its source and deny the issue. Only by collecting a series of these reports (some by their own dealers) did they start to acknowledge the fact that there were any issues at all. We have always liked this camera because of its Scoutguard parentage. Because of these issues we have a number of folks that called dealers for us and we got a series of different answers as to how after purchase problems would be handled. Most were positive but there were some that stated that once purchased “what ever happens it is yours and do not even bother to try to send it back, just deal with the manufacture”. Of course we did not deal with these folks when purchasing the cameras that we used for internal diagnosis and function. Because this camera is just a Scoutguard in a new plastic case that is of a more standard trail cam design, we chose not to do a formal review. Most everything that is written in the Scoutguard review will apply to this camera and the differences will be written below. This little camera was seen as having such good potential that a number were acquired and dissected and tested and the results were taken by a major brand name and all potential issues corrected and will be marketed in 09 under their name. All manufacturers have taken the Scoutguard/Covert size as being a trend in the market and many were taken in by the introduction of other “mini” cams at the ATA and SHOT shows. We have totally tested this camera and will only report on those things that appear as being an issue and its unique positives. As is, this is a great little camera but the denial of a few minor issues by some is why we have had to take a very careful look at them. One of the dealers stated that “it is no big deal” well if that is the case why all the bother to discredit anyone who wants to talk about it? I apologized to one of the nationally known marketing managers of a very well known brand name camera and I said “I am sorry but we were not too kind to your product this year”. His answer was “at least you folks on chasingame told the truth” that is how the market grows and our products become better by knowing where the issues are. I can say that all pre release information coming from that company for 09 is very positive and will probably be ground breaking. We have absolutely nothing to gain by skewing any findings. Some of our data comes from the field that is sent to us directly by owners/users and other data is collected by carefully viewing information on many outdoor forums. All data along with our own findings is applied to our in house cameras and if it becomes fact then it is reported. The set up for this test required me digging out a couple lasers and some good measuring tapes, my tri pod and a couple bottles of temper pills. Here it goes with giving the positive data first.

 

All the good stuff

First off its heart is a Scoutguard and that can only mean that what most every one has discovered these past few months pretty well holds true with this camera. The fit and finish and appearance are first class. Its size is very much the same as Scoutguard so its application in security and field concealment should work very well. I see no difference compared to Scoutguard in programming except for a couple of things which will be discussed in the negative issues about this camera. Without knowing all its function most folks would be very happy only if function was being judged by first impressions. I do like the battery holder and the upgraded remote plug along with the sealed case. The addition of the two IR emitters is also a nice touch but comes with a slight increase of battery use.

 

All the negative stuff 

Security: This camera comes with absolutely no means of security. Using a locking bar like we use with Stealth cams cannot be used either. The strap loops line up with the PIR sensor lens so there is no place for the python to cross the front of the camera. Purchasing an aftermarket security box is mandatory for anyone who is going to use his camera in an area where theft is possible. This will bring up the cost up another $30 to $40 dollars per camera depending on which vendor you choose to buy from. 

Field mounting: This is about the most aggravating camera I have ever tried to hang on a tree. It is like trying to hang an ostrich egg on a tree. The supplied strap was too short for most places I wanted to use a bungee but none of my bungee hooks would fit in those little slots where the strap goes through. During testing I normally just wrap a bungee around the tree and the cam and shim it to the desired angle and go on with the test. Due to its small size and lack of an area on the front that is centered enough to hold the cam this method would not work either. I then got out one of my tri pods and figured that would solve the problem. Well the threads in the cam are too deep for the knob threads to reach. I have three good tri pods and all suffered the same way. I ended up taking an old broken tri pod and jerry rigged it in order to go on with the tests. All of our coverts are the same way. For those who want to mount to a good solid large tree an after market strap will be needed. 

Camera case vs. Function: It is apparent that there was probably a rush to market because there are several things about this case that was not very well thought out. I do not like the fact that the external battery plug has to go through the case and this requires the cam to be turned on and then closed up then the external power applied. This leaves no way of checking the camera while external power is used. Then when you return to the camera you must unplug the external source with the camera still in the on position. The interruption while plugging and un plugging could cause a problem even with the internal batteries in place.

Using the “Test Mode”:  With its brother camera, the Scoutguard 550 all you have to do is hang it on the tree and slide the bottom cover off and plug in the remote turn it on and you are in the test mode. You can then do your walk tests watching the red LED on the front of the camera and adjust the aim to the desired position. With this camera you take it to the woods and hang it on the tree but the case is closed so you cannot open it up to plug in the remote to enter the test mode. If you do open the case and plug in the remote to enter the test mode then the camera is looking off to one side. This sucks and prevents using the camera in the walk test mode for aiming. Some one was asleep when they made those designs features.

PIR sensor field of view in reference to cameras field of view: This is one of the most reported shortcomings that have been reported and found to be somewhat disturbing to some. Of the cameras tested all had this problem and some worse than others. Again there was probably a lack of engineering thought put in to this design. This last camera which will be the one that we will use to finish up our retort is typical of what we have seen and have had reported to us. First off I used my laser aim device to make sure that I could judge exactly where the camera was facing. This was done by placing the rear of my laser over the camera lens and bearing on the flat surface of the case just under the little rain roof. This gave me the center as to the camera case. I then placed a stake at 20 feet to indicate exact case center. This was all done with the camera locked in the open position and secured so it would not move. With the remote plugged in and the camera on I did walk tests to determine the left and right extremes to the PIR sensing zone. Each of these zone edges was staked and flagged. I then staked at one foot intervals from the out side stakes to the center stakes. At this time I shut down the camera and removed the remote and turned it back on into the live mode. I triggered the camera and made it take pictures. I then shut it back down and viewed the pictures on the card. The pictures indicated that the camera was actually looking about 5 feet to the left of case center. The PIR sensor was also looking off to the left. My first test showed an 8 foot area on the right at 20 feet that the PIR sensor was covering that the camera lens did not see. The difference was only 5 feet on the left side. This could result in a lot of empty pictures. I had performed this test several times a month or so ago but not do it with this kind of care. I did know that the PIR sensor was seeing much more than the camera but I did not measure the extent. I will take another half day and re do all these tests again tomorrow to verify that I have not made a mistake. Even if the dead zones were half the size as I found that would still be unacceptable. One thing for sure the PIR sensor lens is incorrectly installed and it also looks like the camera board is a little crooked. Without being able to effectively use the test mode to aim the camera, having the camera looking strait out forward is very important. I was up early this morning and double checked everything and waited for some fairly good light so I could re perform the tests. My first finding was that the camera does not look nearly as far left as I first thought from yesterday’s tests. It still is looking left of center but only about a foot and a half. The PIR sensor is looking is most definitely looking left by 4 feet. All the testing was done at 20 feet and the total area covered at that distance by the PIR sensor was 36 feet. The total distance that the camera lens covered was 14 feet. If everything was set to dead center this would leave a gap covered by the PIR sensor and the camera lens of 11 feet on each side of center. I about wore out the carpet between the computer and the testing area (front yard because rain made it too wet to head for the woods) to do all these tests over and over again. There is absolutely no question as to whether or not this camera has a serious issue with the way it is designed having an eleven foot area outside the cameras field of view that is covered by the PIR sensor is a serious flaw.

Camera ID: Not a really big thing but having a number of cameras alike and not having any type of serial number proved to be a big negative and we had to label each one with a number to ensure we were being fair and using the same camera through out the test.

 

Final conclusion:  This is still a great little camera as long as the user is aware of its limitations. It has hit a niche that that so far is also being held by the 550 Scoutguard and we are seeing more and more manufacturers moving toward the mini camera.  Please keep this in mind, This camera can sense out to 60 feet very easily cold conditions.  Our tests were performed at a target distance of 20 feet.  These dead zones outside the camera's field of view only get larger as the target gets farther away from the camera.   This can potentially result in numerous "empty" photos.  If the camera has to process a number of empty pictures it will be using up valuable battery life and filling up storage space on the SD card. This battery loss curve will increase if most of the photos are being taken with flash. In a perfect scenario all the target animals would be dead center and there would not be a problem. In the woods around here we have not managed to get them trained enough to comply anywhere close to perfect, in fact old big horns just wants to hang out on the edge of things every time.

 

The following pictures are to be an aid in understanding our tests detailed above.  click on images for a larger version.

Camera Set up: Mounted on tri-pod, case fixed in "open" position


Golf balls and flags used to mark boundaries of FOV and Sensing Cone:


The left and right flags are camera lens FOV and center flag is case center:


 

A view from the camera lens:


Below, the Scoutguard SG550 strapped to the back of the Covert while we performed the exact same tests.

---

02-05-2009 update:  Having the above data being looked at by many people in the field we have had a steady stream of feedback which has supported our findings. Along with this feedback has revealed yet another issue with this camera. This past week we still were seeing where the use of the three shot burst was a way around the dead zone problem. Two dealers (one from Arizona and one from Wisconsin) are still supporting the three burst as a way around the issue and stating that the dead zone is limited to an area that is 2.5 degrees. The 2.5 degree zone outside the FOV of the camera equates to an area of about ¾ of a foot at a distance of 20 feet. This comes up about ten feet short of the true measurement. The people that were trying to use the three burst found out that in most cases the first picture was blank and then the second picture was very dark as if only about half the flash was used. I did this test about twenty times and it confirmed that yes the second picture was very dark compared to the other two. My first thought was it may be because there was something in the second picture so I then hand triggered the camera to see what the result would be if all three were empty. The result was that the second picture with nothing in it was with about half the illumination. I waited until it got very dark and did some slow walk tests and viewed the IR array as I passed the FOV. The camera would flash one long flash followed by a very short flash and then two more long flashes. The total flashes were four. Three normal and one blip which was what the camera was using for the second picture. There is also an extra normal flash which is of no use except to use up valuable battery life. The very short second flash is not enough to adequately illuminate the FOV for a good picture. I then moved down to two burst and the results were the same with the second shot being dark. The camera flashed three times, again one extra flash for the two burst mode. The second flash is always a blip which results in a very dark picture. What it has come down to is this camera has a high rate of missed pictures in the single capture mode and if the multi capture is selected the second picture is very dark (about half the illumination) sometimes also empty but always dark. So this only leaves the video mode as a possibility for means to save this cameras function. The video mode will only work if the animal enters the cameras FOV and has a trigger to match.

02-08-2009 update: We have received word that some of the dealers have some type of a “in house” partial fix for the dead zone issue and that the factory has been notified and is working on upgrading future cameras so there is no dead zone. Two days of scouting the net to see if there was any dealer or distributor that had posted or acknowledged the issue or had any mention of a fix for this issue had been posted. We found none, which is strange because we are hearing about it on a daily basis. We would like to see just how this is being handled and posted on their web sites so that their customers can go there instead of having to look elsewhere for answers. We will still help in any way we can. I would think that if the factory finally does fix this and there is trouble free cams sent to the dealers, there would be a flood of folks that would send their dead zone cameras in for replacement under the one year warranty.

02-08-2009 2^nd update:  A little further investigation as to why the camera seemed to sense much further to one side than the other found that the multizone sensor lens is actually glued into the case a full 3/32^nd of an inch to one side. This is at point zero so that flaw would be magnified to a bunch at a distance of 20+ feet. View  picture below for a close up view of this problem. This was mentioned above but we just wanted to see if we could figure out why.

03-12-2009 update:  We had a fellow that was fairly close to us call and tell us about his camera and what it was doing. He did recognize that his camera was plagued with the same dead zone issue as all other Covert 11 cameras. In his case his head on sensing was almost non existent. I coached him through the sensing level settings and he did more tests. These proved that the camera just did not want to sense effectively directly in front of the camera but would sense areas that were high above out front of the camera. I got hold of this camera and found out in about five minutes what the problem was. If you hold the camera and look down through the clear plastic cover just below the IR array you can see a small portion of the area behind the PIR sensor. I could clearly see wires running across the area where the sensor is on the board. This is another Covert QC problem but in this case is easily fixed but I would not want to tell anyone to go ahead and open their camera. I slowly opened the camera by taking out the 4 screws that hold the battery holder and peaked inside and I could clearly see that the wires ran directly across the sensor. I carefully moved the wires back out of the way and reassembled the camera and made some tests. The straight forward sensing returned and all was well until I bumped the cam on the palm of my hand and the wires again moved back into the problem area. I again opened the camera and moved the wires behind the two clear plastic rods coming out of the board and re assembled the camera. This appears to fix the problem and small bumps on the palm of my hand did not seem to dislodge the wires as before. I would not advise anyone to open their camera and do what I have done but instead return it for a factory fix or replacement. Should something go wrong during this type of action would probably void the warranty.

03-21-2009 update:  Yet another minor issue has popped up with this camera. It was mentioned above in part but not elaborated on. There are some folks that would like to use the threaded insert (tri pod mount) to deploy their cameras in the field. All the cameras that we have had our hands on have had a problem with this insert. It is the way that we had chose to use to do a number of our tests and in each case the insert had came loose in its plastic holder. Now it is a total pain to try to unscrew the tri pod screw out of the insert because it will just spin inside the plastic. It was a matter of luck that we were able to accomplish this task with out further damage to the camera. One of the company representatives explained that it was not a problem and that they had just only put the wrong size insert into the camera and that it was an easy fix at home. They failed to say just how to effectively do this task. He also said that they were aware of this issue and the camera could be returned for exchange if this happened. I personally would return the camera and request that the replacement be an upgraded 09 camera and not a messed with 08 camera. They have stated that they will have their shipment of 09 cameras very shortly but our contact people at the factory have told us that they are third in line for the 09 cameras and it will be very late summer before they will start to receive shipments of any upgraded cameras. The management at HCO (dealing with the same manufacturer) will return the entire lot number shipment back to China when ever there is a proven issue found. This company should have the same option and there should be a stop to this continuous erosion of proven QC issues that are surfacing about this camera.

05-22-2009 update:  My mail came un done with the news of a new camera problem that was mentioned on the coueswhitetail forum (see picture). When I checked that forum there was a mention of this issue on May 14, 09 dealing with a potential water leak. I grabbed up a couple cams and examined the area of the inside of the case back where the strap loops were molded into the case. The result of this process left two ¾ X 1 inch holes that needed to be plugged. The manufacture chose to just stick a little glue in the hole and insert a plastic plug. When the camera was placed in an un even situation (pine bark )and the strap is tightened snug, I heard a little pop and the plug fell out inside the camera. Should this have happened after I closed the camera and I was on my way to my next camera thinking that It would be a couple of weeks before I could return, the camera could fill half way up with water. In this area we get rain a couple times a week so knowing about this problem should allow the users to be careful, or maybe just go ahead and cover that area with some silicon sealer.

Our test on our camera:


Report from forum user:

Click to read thread

 

---