Allied Vision Alvium 1800 U-508m alternative from Hikrobot
Hikrobot replacement options for the Allied Vision Alvium 1800 U-508m: the closest models, what differs (resolution, frame rate, interface, sensor) and what to check before switching.
Comparison with Hikrobot models
Hikrobot MV-CH050-10UM V4.0 matches the Alvium 1800 U-508m on resolution, frame rate and interface.
Check before ordering:
Frame height: 2048 instead of 2056 px (-0.39 %).
Frame rate: 74.1 instead of 84 fps (-11.79 %).
Frame width: 2448 instead of 2464 px (-0.65 %).
Software, SDK, connectors, mount and dimensions require a separate engineering check.
The lens mount differs: check the fit and the flange distance of your current lens.
With the same lens and working distance, on the full frame, the field of view changes: -0.65 % in width, -0.39 % in height. A smaller image circle is required — part of the field the existing lens covers goes unused.
To confirm a model for your line, send: current lens, working distance, field of view, object speed, cable length and software.
The search threshold is met, but this is not a replacement without trade-offs.
Trade-offs to settle before you choose:
Frame rate: 74.1 instead of 84 fps (-11.79 %).
The lens mount differs: check the fit and the flange distance of your current lens.
Frame height: 2048 instead of 2056 px (-0.39 %).
Frame width: 2448 instead of 2464 px (-0.65 %).
With the same lens and working distance, on the full frame, the field of view changes: -0.65 % in width, -0.39 % in height. A smaller image circle is required — part of the field the existing lens covers goes unused.
The search threshold is met, but this is not a replacement without trade-offs.
Trade-offs to settle before you choose:
Frame rate: 80 instead of 84 fps (-4.76 %).
The lens mount differs: check the fit and the flange distance of your current lens.
Frame height: 2048 instead of 2056 px (-0.39 %).
Frame width: 2448 instead of 2464 px (-0.65 %).
The sensor part number is not confirmed in this comparison: we compare by resolution, pixel size, frame or line rate and interface.
With the same lens and working distance, on the full frame, the field of view changes: -0.65 % in width, -0.39 % in height. A smaller image circle is required — part of the field the existing lens covers goes unused.
The search threshold is met, but this is not a replacement without trade-offs.
Trade-offs to settle before you choose:
Connector: Type-C instead of USB Micro-B — the system has to be checked.
Frame rate: 80 instead of 84 fps (-4.76 %).
The lens mount differs: check the fit and the flange distance of your current lens.
Frame height: 2048 instead of 2056 px (-0.39 %).
Frame width: 2448 instead of 2464 px (-0.65 %).
The sensor part number is not confirmed in this comparison: we compare by resolution, pixel size, frame or line rate and interface.
With the same lens and working distance, on the full frame, the field of view changes: -0.65 % in width, -0.39 % in height. A smaller image circle is required — part of the field the existing lens covers goes unused.
The search threshold is met, but this is not a replacement without trade-offs.
Trade-offs to settle before you choose:
Connector: Type-C instead of USB Micro-B — the system has to be checked.
Frame rate: 80 instead of 84 fps (-4.76 %).
The lens mount differs: check the fit and the flange distance of your current lens.
Frame height: 2048 instead of 2056 px (-0.39 %).
Frame width: 2448 instead of 2464 px (-0.65 %).
The sensor part number is not confirmed in this comparison: we compare by resolution, pixel size, frame or line rate and interface.
With the same lens and working distance, on the full frame, the field of view changes: -0.65 % in width, -0.39 % in height. A smaller image circle is required — part of the field the existing lens covers goes unused.
The search threshold is met, but this is not a replacement without trade-offs.
Trade-offs to settle before you choose:
Connector: Type-C instead of USB Micro-B — the system has to be checked.
Frame rate: 80 instead of 84 fps (-4.76 %).
The lens mount differs: check the fit and the flange distance of your current lens.
Frame height: 2048 instead of 2056 px (-0.39 %).
Frame width: 2448 instead of 2464 px (-0.65 %).
The sensor part number is not confirmed in this comparison: we compare by resolution, pixel size, frame or line rate and interface.
With the same lens and working distance, on the full frame, the field of view changes: -0.65 % in width, -0.39 % in height. A smaller image circle is required — part of the field the existing lens covers goes unused.
The search threshold is met, but this is not a replacement without trade-offs.
Trade-offs to settle before you choose:
Frame rate: 79 instead of 84 fps (-5.95 %).
The lens mount differs: check the fit and the flange distance of your current lens.
Frame height: 2048 instead of 2056 px (-0.39 %).
Frame width: 2448 instead of 2464 px (-0.65 %).
The sensor part number is not confirmed in this comparison: we compare by resolution, pixel size, frame or line rate and interface.
With the same lens and working distance, on the full frame, the field of view changes: -0.65 % in width, -0.39 % in height. A smaller image circle is required — part of the field the existing lens covers goes unused.
Scope of the comparison. The comparison covers only the specifications listed, taken from published sources. It is not a statement of compatibility or interchangeability. Third-party names and trademarks are used solely to identify the products being compared; the rights to them belong to their respective owners. Software, SDK, connectors, mount and dimensions require a separate engineering check.