switching from fatshark to walksnail, is the latency actually that bad
- Replies 1
- Views 18
- Created
- Last Reply
Top Posters In This Topic
-
rotor_king 1 post
-
quad_flyer_x 1 post
Popular Days
Most Helpful Posts
-
the latency thing is real but also kind of not real if that makes sense. like yes walksnail is higher than analog technically but 22ms is still within what most people can fly fine, the bigger issue i
-
i came from DJI O3 goggles and tried walksnail and honestly the goggle hardware itself matters a lot for how the latency feels, not just the transmission numbers. the screen refresh rate and how fast
so ive been running fatshark dominators with a rapidfire module for a few years now and honestly the analog setup has been pretty solid, but im starting to feel like im the last person on the planet still running analog for freestyle. everyone at my local field has moved to digital and i keep borrowing my buddy's walksnail avatar setup just to mess around with it and yeah the picture quality is night and day, like genuinely embarrassing how much better it looks.
but here's the thing - when i fly his quad i swear i can feel some kind of lag compared to what im used to. he says im imagining it and that walksnail is like 22ms or whatever but i dunno, flying through tight gaps it just feels slightly off to me. could be placebo could be real. has anyone else felt this when switching over, and did it go away after you adjusted or is this just a thing you live with. im not racing just doing freestyle and the occasional cinematic type stuff.
also open to hearing if HDZero is worth considering instead, i know it has lower latency numbers on paper but the range thing has always made me nervous