IDS Imaging U3-3200SE-M-GL Rev.1.2 alternative from Hikrobot
Hikrobot replacement options for the IDS Imaging U3-3200SE-M-GL Rev.1.2: the closest models, what differs (resolution, frame rate, interface, sensor) and what to check before switching.
Comparison with Hikrobot models
Hikrobot MV-CH120-10UM V4.0 matches the U3-3200SE-M-GL Rev.1.2 on resolution, frame rate and interface.
Check before ordering:
Frame height: 3000 instead of 3008 px (-0.27 %).
Frame width: 4096 instead of 4112 px (-0.39 %).
Software, SDK, connectors, mount and dimensions require a separate engineering check.
With the same lens and working distance, on the full frame, the field of view changes: -0.39 % in width, -0.27 % 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 height: 3000 instead of 3008 px (-0.27 %).
Frame width: 4096 instead of 4112 px (-0.39 %).
With the same lens and working distance, on the full frame, the field of view changes: -0.39 % in width, -0.27 % 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 height: 3000 instead of 3008 px (-0.27 %).
Frame width: 4096 instead of 4112 px (-0.39 %).
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: -0.39 % in width, -0.27 % 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 height: 3000 instead of 3008 px (-0.27 %).
Frame width: 4096 instead of 4112 px (-0.39 %).
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: -0.39 % in width, -0.27 % 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 height: 3000 instead of 3008 px (-0.27 %).
Frame width: 4096 instead of 4112 px (-0.39 %).
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: -0.39 % in width, -0.27 % 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 height: 3000 instead of 3008 px (-0.27 %).
Frame width: 4096 instead of 4112 px (-0.39 %).
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: -0.39 % in width, -0.27 % 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:
Pixel size, X: 3.2 instead of 3.45 µm (-7.25 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Pixel size, Y: 3.2 instead of 3.45 µm (-7.25 %); the field of view will change with the same lens.
Frame width: 4096 instead of 4112 px (-0.39 %).
With the same lens and working distance, on the full frame, the field of view changes: -7.61 % in width, -5.27 % in height. A smaller image circle is required — part of the field the existing lens covers goes unused.
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:
Frame height: 3000 instead of 3008 px (-0.27 %).
Frame width: 4096 instead of 4112 px (-0.39 %).
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: -0.39 % in width, -0.27 % 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.