Every second recording; GPS+GLONASS; do bear it in mind that I stopped multiple times to wait for other members of the group and stopped bothering about pausing the activity early on. All things considered- impressive!
I feel like it's software, as I see very contradictory results ie:
1) hiking track above (GREAT)
2) GREAT
Second comparison between my Fenix 5X and FR935- both watches were set to every second recording, GPS+GLONASS and worn on my left arm;
This is my usual Tuesday morning run in Greenwich park.
Fenix 5X setup- HRM-Run+Stryd, watch calibrated to an altitude of 10m at the start;
FR935 setup- optical HR only, watch calibrated to an altitude of 10m at the start;
http://www.mygpsfiles.com/app/#yt1PXMoM Note: altitude data was excellent; the optical HR sensor tracked extremely well with both Max HR and average HR having the exact same values; as a result the calories expended have the same value!
Another comparison between my F5X and the FR935- the F5X did not have a good day, compared to 935;
Fenix 5X setup- HRM-Run+Stryd, watch calibrated to an altitude of 7m at the start;
FR935 setup- optical HR only, watch calibrated to an altitude of 7m at the start;
Looks ok but things go keep in mind :
- this is a MUCH longer track than FlipStone's so the usual "wobbling" is going to be smoothed out in GC
- if you zoom in to the 50 meter scale it's still rather wobbly in straight lines and in the trees (a bit after lap 3)
- It's the F5x, not the F5, the larger bezel could help if indeed Garmin are using it as a so-called "EXO antenna".
Having said that what with the built-in maps I certainly wouldn't have a problem using the F5x for long hikes ;-)
Looks ok but things go keep in mind :
- this is a MUCH longer track than FlipStone's so the usual "wobbling" is going to be smoothed out in GC
- if you zoom in to the 50 meter scale it's still rather wobbly in straight lines and in the trees (a bit after lap 3)
- It's the F5x, not the F5, the larger bezel could help if indeed Garmin are using it as a so-called "EXO antenna".
Having said that what with the built-in maps I certainly wouldn't have a problem using the F5x for long hikes ;-)
Doh, it really doesn't look very well. It indeed reminds me of how F3 worked for me when released. Hiking is very important for me and if dedicated outdoor watch like F5 can't produce similar quality tracks like any other "generic" device, then alright - I won't bother - bye bye F5, welcome FR935. Hopefully my F5 comes before weekend, so I can test it.
Thanks.
As I will mostly use the watch (in my case I would opt for F5S) for hiking/climbing I am very much interested in seeing your results. Please let us know how (un)satisfied you are with F5. I also returned the F3 after release as it was virtually useless for hiking purposes. Thanks!
Every second recording; GPS+GLONASS; do bear it in mind that I stopped multiple times to wait for other members of the group and stopped bothering about pausing the activity early on. All things considered- impressive!
The tracking is quite good BUT there were big sections of the track ideal for a good tracking... no trees, no buildings... there were some with medium difficulty (trees on one side of the road) and some a bit more difficult (small patches of forest)... My question is : the trees had leaves?
I am sorry but from I have read so far I am not convinced that this watch is way better than the Fenix 3 HR that I am wearing for almost a year now.
Yes, it is better, but to be able to justify myself an upgrade I want it to be a LOT better than the Fenix 3 HR.
Has anyone tried comparing the accuracy between having GLONASS on vs off? I've noticed GLONASS puts a significant hit on battery life so I'm wondering how much of a difference this really makes.
I've been following the GPS accuracy threads, and will add my own 935 vs fenix 5 (2.72 beta) comparison, with GLONASS on, and 1 second recording. What I've been seeing is that although they're close, the 935 gives me smoother tracks. The fenix also appears more likely to stray.
