Daheng Imaging ME2S-1260-28U3M alternative from Hikrobot
Hikrobot replacement options for the Daheng Imaging ME2S-1260-28U3M: the closest models, what differs (resolution, frame rate, interface, sensor) and what to check before switching.
Comparison with Hikrobot models
Hikrobot MV-CH120-20UM V4.0 matches the ME2S-1260-28U3M on resolution, frame rate and interface.
Check before ordering:
Software, SDK, connectors, mount and dimensions require a separate engineering check.
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:
Pixel size, X: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Pixel size, Y: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Frame height: 3000 instead of 3072 px (-2.34 %).
With the same lens and working distance, on the full frame, the field of view changes: +7.81 % in width, +5.29 % in height. A larger image circle is required — check that the existing lens covers the active area.
The search threshold is met, but this is not a replacement without trade-offs.
Trade-offs to settle before you choose:
Pixel size, X: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Pixel size, Y: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Frame height: 3000 instead of 3072 px (-2.34 %).
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: +7.81 % in width, +5.29 % in height. A larger image circle is required — check that the existing lens covers the active area.
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 USB3 Micro-B — the system has to be checked.
Pixel size, X: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Pixel size, Y: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Frame height: 3000 instead of 3072 px (-2.34 %).
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: +7.81 % in width, +5.29 % in height. A larger image circle is required — check that the existing lens covers the active area.
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 USB3 Micro-B — the system has to be checked.
Pixel size, X: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Pixel size, Y: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Frame height: 3000 instead of 3072 px (-2.34 %).
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: +7.81 % in width, +5.29 % in height. A larger image circle is required — check that the existing lens covers the active area.
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 USB3 Micro-B — the system has to be checked.
Pixel size, X: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Pixel size, Y: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Frame height: 3000 instead of 3072 px (-2.34 %).
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: +7.81 % in width, +5.29 % in height. A larger image circle is required — check that the existing lens covers the active area.
The model meets the preliminary matching criteria for the specifications we could check; the differences are listed below.
Trade-offs to settle before you choose:
Pixel size, X: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Pixel size, Y: 3.45 instead of 3.2 µm (+7.81 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Frame height: 3000 instead of 3072 px (-2.34 %).
Frame rate: the stated 60.2 fps at 4096 × 3000 and 8 bit needs 5.92 Gbit/s. The 5 Gbit/s link allows at most 50.86 fps before overhead. Check the operating mode.
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: +7.81 % in width, +5.29 % in height. A larger image circle is required — check that the existing lens covers the active area.
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.