The best dam car deserves…

[9.81ms2]

the best dam car deserves a video feed rear view mirrors mirror for unobstructed view.

 

[johnse]

I really thought a video feed mirror would be great, until I test drove a car with one. I'm older and, as many my age, have presbyopia. My eyes don't accommodate focal changes well.

When looking in a mirror, your eyes stay focused on distance. With a video feed, your eyes have to focus on the plane of the mirror.

My glasses use progressive lenses. When glancing from the road to the dash, I'm viewing through different parts of the lens. So I see the road through the distance portion and the dash through a middle section.

But looking up at a rearview camera, I am looking at something dash-distance through the distant portion of the lenses. This causes eye strain.

So I am glad it's a real mirror.

 

[JoeMa]

I agree 100%, our RAM truck has a video mirror (optional if you fly it to the video feed) and I rarely use it.

 

[californiaboy935]

the best dam car deserves a video feed rear view mirrors mirror for unobstructed view.

No need for this. The pilot panel works great for top down too.

I think it’s an unnecessary addition to any car, and would cheapen the look. The quality is never as good either through the mirror.

Honestly, I hardly check the physical mirror unless on the off chance the reverse camera is not working.

 

[jbawden]

^^^OP is talking about a rear view mirror, the kind you use at speed, not a back up or parking camera. Many cars offer an optional rear view mirror that is camera based and what you look at is a small oled screen rather than an actual mirror. From the outside and inside it looks exactly like a traditional mirror, so has zero aesthetic implications.

I agree with others, rear view video is nauseating and doesn't off the field of view or resolution that a traditional mirror offers.

 

[9.81ms2]

I really thought a video feed mirror would be great, until I test drove a car with one. I'm older and, as many my age, have presbyopia. My eyes don't accommodate focal changes well.

When looking in a mirror, your eyes stay focused on distance. With a video feed, your eyes have to focus on the plane of the mirror.

My glasses use progressive lenses. When glancing from the road to the dash, I'm viewing through different parts of the lens. So I see the road through the distance portion and the dash through a middle section.

But looking up at a rearview camera, I am looking at something dash-distance through the distant portion of the lenses. This causes eye strain.

So I am glad it's a real mirror.

I had the same hesitation the first time I test drove a car with a video feed rear view mirror. Though I was won over by the enhanced visibility’s wider field of view and the unobstructed view even when our dog was watching the road from the middle rear seat. After a few times driving my eyes adjusted to using a video feed rear view mirror.

 

[segbrk]

I had the same hesitation the first time I test drove a car with a video feed rear view mirror. Though I was won over by the enhanced visibility’s wider field of view and the unobstructed view even when our dog was watching the road from the middle rear seat. After a few times driving my eyes adjusted to using a video feed rear view mirror.

But why does the video feed need to be a tiny, hard to see rectangle in the mirror rather than on the big screen in front of you (like it already is in the Air)?

 

[californiaboy935]

^^^OP is talking about a rear view mirror, the kind you use at speed, not a back up or parking camera. Many cars offer an optional rear view mirror that is camera based and what you look at is a small oled screen rather than an actual mirror. From the outside and inside it looks exactly like a traditional mirror, so has zero aesthetic implications.

I agree with others, rear view video is nauseating and doesn't off the field of view or resolution that a traditional mirror offers.

Understood, but using that at speed would really suck. I can’t imagine that being better, the field of view of the Lucid’s camera would support that though. If they did want to at some point offer it.

 

[californiaboy935]

But why does the video feed need to be a tiny, hard to see rectangle in the mirror rather than on the big screen in front of you (like it already is in the Air)?

Yes, agreed!

 

[borski]

I really thought a video feed mirror would be great, until I test drove a car with one. I'm older and, as many my age, have presbyopia. My eyes don't accommodate focal changes well.

When looking in a mirror, your eyes stay focused on distance. With a video feed, your eyes have to focus on the plane of the mirror.

My glasses use progressive lenses. When glancing from the road to the dash, I'm viewing through different parts of the lens. So I see the road through the distance portion and the dash through a middle section.

But looking up at a rearview camera, I am looking at something dash-distance through the distant portion of the lenses. This causes eye strain.

So I am glad it's a real mirror.

My dad had the same issue.

I prefer a normal mirror for this reason. I’m not the only one who ever drives my car.

Also, mirrors don’t have to boot.

 

[OCDC]

Young folks with good vision don't mind video screens because their eyes can switch focal planes quickly. When you reach your 40's, presbyopia kicks in and your natural lens doesn't have as much accommodation, so close up vision suffers. @johnse is correct here, and to paraphrase; you look AT a screen, but you look THROUGH a mirror. I'd find it nearly impossible to shave using a phone as a mirror, but I can use a mirror just fine.

One other point: the cameras for vision systems have a finite resolution (usually for cost reasons) and can be foiled with just a few drops of water. Most mirrors can give you a workable view even with dirt and rain on them, and are only limited in resolution by the driver's eyes.

 

[OCDC]

Also, mirrors don’t have to boot.

This. ^^

 

[Xminus6]

Young folks with good vision don't mind video screens because their eyes can switch focal planes quickly. When you reach your 40's, presbyopia kicks in and your natural lens doesn't have as much accommodation, so close up vision suffers. @johnse is correct here, and to paraphrase; you look AT a screen, but you look THROUGH a mirror. I'd find it nearly impossible to shave using a phone as a mirror, but I can use a mirror just fine.

One other point: the cameras for vision systems have a finite resolution (usually for cost reasons) and can be foiled with just a few drops of water. Most mirrors can give you a workable view even with dirt and rain on them, and are only limited in resolution by the driver's eyes.

Yup. I’ve always been a Nav Voice off guy but the screen on my Tesla is so hard to read for me that I had to turn voice back on so I wouldn’t have to look at the screen for an unsafe amount of time to read the exit numbers.

 

[9.81ms2]

Understood, but using that at speed would really suck. I can’t imagine that being better, the field of view of the Lucid’s camera would support that though. If they did want to at some point offer it.
View attachment 29462

That looks great while sitting in the showroom gravity, I pressed the mike icon and asked the gravity if you could have a rear view video feed on while driving. It said no.

 

[9point81]

I know I'm in the minority, but the camera would be preferable for me as we have a large crate for our dogs. It fills up the entire window of our EV9 and that camera is the only way we can see out of that angle. Not sure if it will do the same when in the Gravity, but would have been nice to have the option. Great thing about the camera in vehicles I've seen it in, is that you don't have to use it if you just want a regular view. Is what it is and wouldn't be enough to make me not want the Gravity.