When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The 2010 Lexus RX350 has a similar size screen (I think it's slightly bigger) and the back up camera has an almost HD like view. I would think it's the quality of the lens not screen.
It's the weakest link in the chain. Could be the lens, could be the sensor array, could be the video processing, could be the display, probably a couple other things too, like noise in the power feeding the camera, depending what the symptoms of the poor quality are. I would guess Audi only orders one camera used across all cars. If so, then it's more likely just poor image processing to stretch the image to the new display resolution. Just guessing though.
I have no experience with my A6 back up camera, since the parts are still in Japan... But I'll say that on my Super Duty and my toterhome it's important to periodically wipe the lens clean with a soft cloth. They are angled down slightly and even after a wash it seems a droplet hangs there and leaves some residue behind. Add to that the placement on the rear that is prone to dust and spray being whipped up in that area. Just a thought, like I said, I'm still patiently waiting to see the Audi's camera in action.
Agreed, the camera is terrible quality...almost like a low quality web cam. Audi went cheap on this camera. My 2007 Acura which is almost 5 years old has a better backup camera. My friend's 2009 Audi S5 has a better backup camera. Might be Audi went with a cheaper alternative when they went into short supply. Maybe the new cameras are from PRC.
I'm sorry, but I just don't see how the picture quality matters, so long as it meets some threshold where you can see any obstacles clearly enough to avoid them. My A6's camera passes that threshold by leaps and bounds, so I don't get what all the fuss is over.
Our screens are significantly larger and if the camera lens and chip remain the same, the image will not be as sharp (less resolution). That's exactly what I notice when comparing my 2007 Q7 to my A7. It looks like Audi is still using the same lens and the same camera for the rear, which makes total economical sense.
I'm sorry, but I just don't see how the picture quality matters, so long as it meets some threshold where you can see any obstacles clearly enough to avoid them. My A6's camera passes that threshold by leaps and bounds, so I don't get what all the fuss is over.
Our screens are significantly larger and if the camera lens and chip remain the same, the image will not be as sharp (less resolution). That's exactly what I notice when comparing my 2007 Q7 to my A7. It looks like Audi is still using the same lens and the same camera for the rear, which makes total economical sense.
Obviously, the backup camera is functional, but the point is that for a car at this price point, the picture quality should be at least as good as other cars in its class (especially cheaper cars). I don't know if the camera is the same as in the other models but I can't believe it's because of the larger size. My Lexus RX is just as large but has a very clear picture (almost HD quality IMO). The 2012 A6 isn't that much larger than my old 2011 S4 (I believe 7 inch vs. 8 inch but not sure) which was much better. With all the technology available on the A6, you would think Audi can do better.
I still like the A6, but sometimes it's the little details that make you happy and loyal customer (e.g. the storage bins below the A6 seats is a nice touch which was missing on my former S4).
Audi Recreates Crazy-Looking Speed Record Breaker From 1935
Slideshow: Audi has recreated one of the wildest machines of the pre-war speed-record era, reviving a streamlined V16 racer that originally exceeded 200 mph in 1935.