FMP 1.5 vs 1.8

[delacerda]

I have been lurking around here for the last few days. Great site! Through much reading about the various players, I have decided to go with the Full Metal Platinum from Uxcell. I do have a few questions though. Besides the difference in screen size/resolution, what are the major differences between the two? Do they share the same firmware? Are the screens the same except for the size? What about playability? I read a review here that the 1.8 has nice smooth video playback. Is this also true of the 1.5? I know the obvious thing to do is go for the 1.8 to get a bigger screen (the $ difference is not much anyway), but being the way I am, I would like to know more about each. Any information would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks!!

[michiganjfrog]

I got the impression that it goes beyond screen differences, that the 1.5 FMP is more cheaply made. THe plastic caps at the end of the player are just stickers on the 1.5 apparently. The firmware may not be the same, and you certainly wouldnt have the video resizing feature (where the 1.8 shows videos across the screen). The video playback is nice and smooth on the 1.8, dont know about the 1.5. Id spend a few bucks mroe to get a 1.8 version now than regret it later. Like you said, its not much more and when factored over the lifetime of the player, its more enjoyment.

[_Odyssey]

michiganjfrog... I have the FMP 1.5. The caps at the end are not stickers.. they are indeed plastic caps. Although somewhat flimsy.
The current version of the firmware is 9.0.48 and i can play videos that actually have a larger resolution than the screen can display 128x96. I've tried 120x160, 128x176 and they play smoother than the lower resolutions but of course they play beyond the physical limit of the screen so you're actually missing a bit of the movie. Strange.. i have never got a "Format error" from this. It can display a video sideways but you have to process the AMV file with a later version of AMV Converter and select "Deasil 90" or "Anti-clockwise 90" in the output settings. Playback really is dependant upon the quality of the original source file. I think as rule, the higher the resolution, the smoother the video becomes. The 1.5 does ok.

i like it, still working on a review for it.. but my next FMP will be the 1.8 version.
Edit: P.S. My FMP 1.5 can play .ogg.. I have ACDCs "Who Made Who" album in .ogg format on it pumping into my head right now lol

[deepakrr]

i think 1.8 inch is better. its gives a better and bigger 4:3 ratio video than 1.5inch.

but one thing is that you have to rotate your player to see the videos which you have converted after rotating which puts a lot of stress on my eyes at least and there is a kind of ghost effect also. maybe its just that my screen is not good enough

[michiganjfrog]

My final thoughts on this: I think the 1.5" FMP is good for -someone else-. ie. You're buying it for someone's kid or your grandmother. So you save a few bucks. If you're buying it for yourself, and you're an MP4-head, that is to say, you plan on watching videos, then lets face it: you're going to prefer the larger 1.8" version. But between a first gen 1.5 Chipod Nano clone and the 1.5 FMP, the FMP is the clear winner.

[delacerda]

Thanks for the replies! I Ordered 2 1.8 FMP's today.

michiganjfrog: I think the 1.5" FMP is good for -someone else-. ie. You're buying it for someone's kid or your grandmother.

--That's what I was thinking. I was assuming that the FMP was better than the 1st gen Nano clones.

Now I gotta start playing around with the encoding. Can't seem to get 160x120 at less than 4 MB per minute. I have downloaded samples that are around 3 MB per minute of video, and I can get the same resolution in the 3gp format around 1.5 MB per minute for my mobile phones. Thanks a lot chipod makers......another thing to keep me up hacking away at all hours of the night.....LOL

Thanks a bunch guys.

[gbakakos]

try these settings in your setting.ini file. In the AMVConvert directory.

I can get 160*120 without a problem. VFBS=High can be tried but VFBS=Medium seems to work for me best. Others say high has some issues.
Good luck...

[TransformSetup]
Overwrite=TRUE
Insertwave=FALSE
Insertpic=TRUE
Transplay=TRUE
Trycode=FALSE
VFBS=medium
VWH=160*120
Imagequality=0
Imagezoom=1
Skin=0
CopyFile=TRUE
BMPADJUST=4

[delacerda]

It's not that I cannot encode at 160x120, I am looking to reduce file size.