Review: Foxeer Monster Pro Mini FPV Camera

Spoiler alert: the new Foxeer Monster Pro FPV camera has really good looking image! It’s a mini size CMOS 1200TVL camera and I’ve heard they making a micro version too.

You can buy the Foxeer Monster Pro Mini FPV Camera from Banggood | GetFPV | Amazon

Further Reading: How to choose FPV Cameras?

Spec of the Monster Pro Mini

  • 16:9 Only
  • NTSC/PAL switchable
  • 1.8mm & 2.5mm lens available
  • Supports 5V – 40V
  • 1200TVL
  • 8.7g
  • $36

Image Quality

I tested the new Monster Pro Mini FPV camera while I was testing various onboard DVR solutions, and I was truly amazed by how awesome the image quality is!

Without even changing any settings, the default worked great! The colour looks vibrant and natural, the image detail and sharpness are excellent, and there is no digital artifacts and shimmering at all.

The picture is just so lovely!

Although WDR and low light performance doesn’t seem to be as good as the Eagle 2 as far as I can tell from my first flight, it’s still a great option if all you want is beautiful image.

In my next flight I will try to play around with the settings and see if there is anything I can improve, but so far I like it a lot.

See the result for yourself, sorry there are some oscillations with my quad, she has a dying motor unfortunately :(

I have never tried the Monster V2, but from the footage I’ve seen online, the Monster Pro has fixed a lot of things that I didn’t like, including the narrow FOV and cold blue-ish color.

Latency

Average latency of the Monster Pro Mini is only at 14ms, which is on par with the Runcam Sparrow 2 and Foxeer Predator. (see full latency results)

Some people are concerned about the latency of this camera because of the high TV Lines – 1200TVL. From my testing, higher TVL claimed by manufacturers doesn’t seem to necessarily increase the latency of the camera, at least that’s the case with the Monster Pro Mini.

Package Unboxing

The Monster Pro Mini includes the following accessories:

  • Mounting Bracket
  • “Mini to Standard” Adapter
  • Various screws and spacers
  • Cable
  • Camera settings joystick

Close Look at the Foxeer Monster Pro Mini

The Monster Pro Mini camera comes in a shiny, sturdy black plastic housing, which is the same case used on the Predator Mini.

If you look closer, you will notice the Monster Pro has a larger, 1.8mm lens versus the common 2.1mm lens used on many other Foxeer cameras. As far as I can tell this is the first time they are using such a big lens on their cameras, which I think really makes a difference to the image quality.

However the Monster Pro only supports 16:9, in addition to the huge FOV, it makes image look a bit distorted in 4:3 FPV Goggles, so you might want to reconsider if you are using 4:3 display equipment.

Left: Monster Pro Mini; Right: Predator Mini

The Monster Pro camera supports the “VSEN” feature – you can connect your LiPo battery to this pin and it will read the voltage and displays it on your screen.

But after complaining about it so many times, still, there is no OSD ground pin… and it doesn’t come with the right cables… Errr! It just makes changing camera settings more difficult unless you go and make a custom cable yourself.

Mounting holes are metal inserts. Overall the build quality of this camera is great.

I will continue to play with this camera, and I will try to find settings that I like and share with you guys in future updates.

13 thoughts on “Review: Foxeer Monster Pro Mini FPV Camera

  1. Dave

    Hi, what vtx did you use with this camera? Is there a vtx that is simply plug and play with the cable that comes with the monster pro?

    Reply
  2. james

    I’m looking to get an FPV camera for my bugs 3, would I also need a transmitter if I went with this one?

    Reply
  3. Scott

    Yeah! :) Finally another 16:9 camera…and a camera manufacturer that isn’t catering to all of the existing Fatshark goggle owners….and their old fashioned 4:3 aspect ratio. We all know, or should know, that the future of FPV is 16:9, just like everything else has gone to 16:9. 4:3 is used for what other items, besides FPV? NONE!
    So, when HD FPV actually gets here, and we know that the only thing holding them back is the latency, everything will be 16:9. They’ll solve that soon enough…

    I am so sick of Fatshark sitting on their butts, doing absolutely NOTHING to progress the industry. They’re obviously the leaders in the goggle market and do nothing to progress the FPV tech! They’re happy as clams because until now, with the Falcon goggles, only Aomway and maybe a little bit from Skyzone, has been a competitor. Fatshark came out with those red goggles, V4’s?, I don’t pay any attention anymore because they did nothing to innovate at all.

    Here Runcam seemingly comes out with tech advancing the industry on a monthly basis…maybe more often than that?!! lol And Fatshark has done absolutely NOTHING in the last year and a half! Sad! I think it is being done on purpose because they still must outsell all the other makers combined, by double or triple. So, if they keep everything the same, until their competitors actually come out with something revolutionary that gets the entire populous of FPV’ers to want to change, they can sit back and reap the benefits of almost no competition! I wish they had a large competitor like Runcam does with Foxeer and now Caddx, so they would come out with NEW TECH to advance the hobby.

    It’s sad we are looking at 480 lines of resolution as the standard for FPV. When I first came into this hobby, I thought “Holy Crap”, this hobby is in the stone age as far as resolution and technology. And, we are, but companies like Fatshark not innovating and pushing the technology does nothing to help us move into the 21st century. Here TV’s are common place with 4K resolution, for cheap prices under $400 now with 50″+ screens, and we are stuck at 480 horizontal lines! Thank god we have Runcam, Foxeer, and Caddx (who’s first line of cameras are quite impressive…can’t wait for the next wave!)

    Truly sad! :(

    Reply
    1. Jonno Scott

      4:3 is closest aspect to the human eye unless you have squinty eyes. As for the tv lines, you get what you pay for unless you wish to build your own fab facility. It’s a hobby with millions going towards developing it off the backs af voluteers and not funded by men with Aftershave names. Your welcome to buy your very own FPV jet, many countries are upgrading and happy to sell to the screened and loaded. Just be happy with whats available and stop squinting please.

      Reply
  4. Banner

    So now tvl is going to become like C rating where they put whatever they want. So a good test would be to get onboard dvr footage of cams and compare them to each other to see which ones are really giving the right tvl as i dont believe the monster pro has the same tvl as the monster v2. That onboard dvr of the pro is definitely not 1200tvl. Quick look at 1200tvl security cams will give you that much. True higher tvl has more latency as more lines have to be processed so unless if they found a much faster processor than the monster v2, this pro monster is not 1200tvl.

    Reply
  5. Banner

    So you didnt say anything about the sensor. I see the latency is considerably low, leaves me wondering if this actually has a 1200tvl sensor as they can lie about that. From my experiences online and in the field i have notices 1200tvl cameras have much more latency than lower tvl cams which is why i doubt theres a 1200tvl sensor in that cam. As always thanks for your testing.

    Reply
    1. Scott

      We don’t see the 1200tvl because we are using DVR’s and goggles that have 480 horizontal lines, and simply can’t see it! Please see my post above for more on the none innovating…I and others don’t even consider the Fatsharks to have a DVR anymore because the quality it puts out is soooo pooor that it’s not worth using, so it might as well be considered not having one at all.

      If we had something to actually view the 1200tvl on, I think we’d all be very impressed at the progression towards HD the camera manufactures are attempting to do. When we have 480tvl goggles and use 600tvl, 800tvl, 1200tvl cams, we still see 480tvl in our goggles so it looks like the makers are lying to us. Someday, hopefully sooner than later, a maker is going to come out with a pair of great goggles with all the other features done right… let’s say with 900tvl, that we’ll be actually able to see how great FPV can be.
      I don’t think HD goggles and cameras is that far off…

      Reply
      1. Banner

        Hello, oh i know that arlund 600tvl is the max the 5.8ghz bandwidth can send to your goggles. That not the point i was making though. Latency is the point im making, foxeer is trying to make it look like higher tvl cams dont increase latency by branding a none 1200tvl cam as 1200tvl with low latency. As far as you video recording i believe you didnt notice hes using an onboard dvr(on the drone) so it should give you the actual tvl unless if its a crappy dvr which i doubt oscar would use. That dvr recording doesnt look like 1200tvl as ive seen actual 1200tvl

  6. John Hendry

    Wow… looks like an upgraded Predator…. better to wait for Predator V2 or maybe the 4.5 g Micro Sparrow 2. Finally some progress in FPV cams after 600tvl CCD was all there was with low latency.

    Reply
    1. PDS

      Ordered a Predator Micro for my first build days ago.
      Today, i read about an inminent v2.
      Murphy’s law is cruel. :P

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Are you Robot? *

For prompt technical support, please use our forum IntoFPV.com. I check blog comments weekly.