Interesting Trail Cam Comparison

[TheLBLman]

https://www.trailcampro.com/pages/trail-camera-shootout

 

[dhpro]

Interesting!!! Curious as how you guys interpreted these statistics

 

[TheLBLman]

Curious as how you guys interpreted these statistics

This was but one data set (of many) you should consider.

This did not consider many of the things maybe generally more valuable,
such as price, general reliability, image quality, battery life, and/or unique features (such as field scan modes), video & sound quality, etc.

This particular "test" mainly measured the "triggering" distance of various makes & models,
in a "real life" scenario of an animal simply walking across in front of the cam.
The test also measured how many "useable" feces each cam obtained,
with "useable" meaning at least 60% of the animal was covered.
The Bushnell Aggressor came out the clear winner by this measure.

In other words, in this test (which seemed a "fair" measuring)
the Bushnell Aggressor got a lot of pics that would have been missed by any of the Reconyx models.
THAT was a bit of a surprise.

Obviously, when used on a field or food plot, all other things being equal,
one would generally prefer a cam that triggers from a greater distance,
while when using over a salt lick or scrape, might matter very little.

I wasn't surprised that some makes/models didn't compare so well,
but was surprised at the relatively short triggering distance of the most expensive tested (Reconyx).
Based on this one factor, believe I'd find the Bushnell Aggressor (110-ft triggering range)
a better bet for use on fields and food plots, than say a Reconyx (40-70-ft triggering range).
Never mind you can buy two (maybe three) Bushnell Aggressors for the initial price point of one Reconyx.

I know this is only a single comparative test,
but it kinda makes me wonder if Reconyx isn't betting too much on past reputation more
than investing into research & development, when so many less expensive cams are providing
greater triggering ranges (and often better image quality).

Reconyx may still remain the best longterm value in terms of longterm reliability, but that wasn't what was tested here.

 

[Andy S.]

Assuming the test is legit, this test tells me that some of the cameras tested at 50 degrees can actually "out sense or out detect" the other ones, and it appears Bushnell got that part right. However, that is only one part of what the end user needs to make his/her digital pictures worth anything after retrieving and downloading them.

The first thing that comes to mind for me is what is the Bushnell picture quality like, and more importantly the flash range, ESPECIALLY at these longer distances that this review sort of promotes.

If the flash range is only good to 40-50', the fact it can sense/trigger at 70-100' means nothing at night. In short, it will sense a deer, flash, but only light up the immediate area and then trigger and you will have an image that is useless to you at those long distances (most likely very dark and very grainy), all the time consuming your batteries and memory on your SD card.

I would have to see some sample pics, both in the daylight, and at night, to see if the long detection distance has any real benefit to the consumer.

 

[TheLBLman]

. . . . only one part of what the end user needs.

Exactly, and much of what I was trying to say.

The first thing that comes to mind for me is what is the Bushnell picture quality like, and more importantly the flash range, ESPECIALLY at these longer distances that this review sort of promotes.

Agree. I've seen some, and just off the cuff, can say the nighttime images are above average of those cams tested, and the daytime images are way above. With this particular Bushnell cam, nighttime image quality is greatly effected by how one sets his cam's shutter speed. If set for the high shutter speed, nighttime image distance is reduced, although there will be almost zero blurring on moving animals. Conversely, when using the slowest shutter speed option, nighttime distance is maybe best I've seen (on a commercial cam), but image blurring is pretty bad on moving animals.

I would have to see some sample pics, both in the daylight, and at night, to see if the long detection distance has any real benefit to the consumer.

I don't have any pics I can show you, but will tell you, that longer detection distance is a real benefit for daytime pics (when set up to monitor a large food plot or field), as this cam produces better daytime pics than the cams that made Reconyx famous.

As we agree, what they tested here is but a single factor one should consider when deciding which cam for which purpose. And, imo, there seems to be no one cam that is most ideal for all applications and circumstances, including the top-of-the line Reconyx.

Keep in mind I'm considering "circumstances" to include the financial abilities of the purchaser, the risk of theft, etc. Where I believe trespasser theft or tampering is an increased risk, my "go to" cam has become the Browning Dark Ops, mainly due to it's extremely small size (not as noticeable), relatively low cost, good imagery, and good reliability. But it has no where near the triggering range of those Bushnell Aggressors.

 

[Mike Belt]

I guess it all depends on how you plan on using a camera. I don't do fields or food plots so I don't really need the distance although it would be nice to have. I primarily run scrapes and licks and the long distances aren't usually necessary.