Tndeer Logo

Page 1 of 1 1
Topic Options
#3318065 - 08/10/13 10:25 AM Cam ? BSK?
10 Point

Registered: 11/15/09
Posts: 2746
Loc: TN & Western KY

I'm ordering more this week, I'm very happen with my
Moultrie 990i's so the question is Reconyx ?

I can buy 3 new Moultrie's for $465, the cheapest Reconyx is
$450, how long can I depend on the Reconyx to last?
And I have to look at I'm trying to cover many tracts that I have for sale for pictures? BSK I know we have talked about it some, but never how long are your Reconyx lasting?

Not really worried about any other brands I know other are cheaper,
I have some Moultries that just played out, and it was just the
display screen going out, I shouldn't have left the out as long and maybe set the to dry better. But these cam's had some were around 25,000 to 30,000 pictures in 3 years.
- Will Rogers

#3318086 - 08/10/13 10:41 AM Re: Cam ? BSK? [Re: landman]
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind

Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65979
Loc: Nashville, TN

I would use 1 to 2 year as the average lifespan for the Moultries. I would calculate 5 to 6 years for the average lifespan of a Reconyx.

Although, the Moultries' will probably take clearer pictures. Reconyx is still stuck in their low image resolution mode (speeds up write speeds to the card, allowing faster follow-up pictures).
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

#3318111 - 08/10/13 11:05 AM Re: Cam ? BSK? [Re: BSK]
Wes Parrish
16 Point

Registered: 06/12/02
Posts: 19470
Loc: Knoxville-Dover-Union City, TN

 Originally Posted By: BSK
Reconyx is still stuck in their low image resolution mode (speeds up write speeds to the card, allowing faster follow-up pictures).

IMO, Reconyx has somewhat missed the boat in making pic quality advances. I've been diligently waiting for them to come up with some better pic quality. Meanwhile, many competitors seem to be closing the overall quality/value gap between them and Reconyx, which includes most competitors offering significantly better pic quality, at least on daytime pics.

I know all things aren't equal here, but all things being equal, generally speaking, why would someone want a 3.1 mp when they could have 8.0 mp or higher? I'm currently experimenting with a 12.0 mp cam for use on larger fields and food plots. Amazing what you can see on a buck 150 yards away when you can keep zooming in on those 12 mp.

To Reconyx's credit, they do have better quality image processors than those found in most competitor cams, meaning a 3.1 mp Reconyx image can be superior to a 5.0 mp image made with a "cheap" processor.

Page 1 of 1 1

Moderator:  RUGER, Unicam, CBU93, stretch, Bobby G, Kimber45, Mrs.Unicam, Crappie Luck, gtk 
Hop to:
Top Posters
Deer Assassin
Crappie Luck
Newest Members
yarddawg54, schiesser, bigdoc, Bggamehunter, willy2763
13605 Registered Users
Who's Online
0 registered and 38 anonymous users online.
Forum Stats
13605 Members
43 Forums
100243 Topics
1180151 Posts

Max Online: 788 @ 11/11/13 08:06 PM
Moon Phase
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
Forum Donations
The TnDeer.Com Deer Talk Forum is for Tennessee Deer Hunters by Tennessee Deer Hunters. If you enjoy using our Talk Forum and would like to contribute to help in it's up-keep. Just submit your contribution by clicking on the DONATE button below and paying with PayPal or a major credit card. Any amount is much appreciated. Thanks for your support!

TN Burn Safe

Generated in 0.005 seconds in which 0.001 seconds were spent on a total of 14 queries. Zlib compression enabled.