# 59.99 walmart/wildview cam pics



## Browning382 (Jul 24, 2006)

Not the best quality in the world but well worth the 59.99.  I bought 3 at walmart after I tested 1 to see how it did......here a couple of pics.


----------



## Browning382 (Jul 24, 2006)

I got about 40 pictures on the first weekend out.....(night shots) any deer further than about 15-20 yards out were in the dark but I can bring them out with a little photo edit...but its well worth  the money...(day shots) a lot better than I expected.  Seems to have a slow reaction time as well, definately needs to be used on a feeder or where the deer will be around a bit.


----------



## Jim Thompson (Jul 24, 2006)

nothing wrong with it for a budget cam.  keep em coming


----------



## Ricochet (Jul 24, 2006)

Is this 2.0 megapixel trailcam?  I have this one and it does take OK pics (it is slow), but I haven't had any luck with catching wildlife with it yet.  I think I have it setup in good place finally (near my feeder).  I hope to share some pics soon.


----------



## Browning382 (Jul 24, 2006)

another


----------



## Browning382 (Jul 24, 2006)

Ricochet said:
			
		

> Is this 2.0 megapixel trailcam?  I have this one and it does take OK pics (it is slow), but I haven't had any luck with catching wildlife with it yet.  I think I have it setup in good place finally (near my feeder).  I hope to share some pics soon.



this is the new one that just came out at Walmart in a red box...I think 2.0?  I noticed that all the pics with deer had a couple of just "woods" before the deer.  Which tells me that if something just walked by it wouldnt catch it.....very easy to use..day shots are pretty good...nights shots dont get enough flash but it gets them.


----------



## Browning382 (Jul 24, 2006)

one of the night shots after editing....this deer is about 15 yards away...I get deer about 30 yards out in the dark but all you see is glowing eyes till you edit it.


----------



## Ricochet (Jul 24, 2006)

Browning382 said:
			
		

> this is the new one that just came out at Walmart in a red box...I think 2.0?  I noticed that all the pics with deer had a couple of just "woods" before the deer.  Which tells me that if something just walked by it wouldnt catch it.....very easy to use..day shots are pretty good...nights shots dont get enough flash but it gets them.



Yeah, from the looks of the photo quality I would say it is the same as mine (2.0) and if something is moving "fast" by it...it will miss it.  I have a lot of pics of me moving slowly by.  LOL


----------



## Browning382 (Jul 24, 2006)

Ricochet said:
			
		

> Yeah, from the looks of the photo quality I would say it is the same as mine (2.0) and if something is moving "fast" by it...it will miss it.  I have a lot of pics of me moving slowly by.  LOL



the best way to set it up is to have your buddy walk out in front of the cam while in test mode......just make sure he is bent over to the height of a deer....all of mine all very low to the ground (....around 2-3 foot. The cam that these pics came from is not even waist high.


----------



## Handgunner (Jul 24, 2006)

Not bad at all, and you'd be surprised and how much those pictures will help when you go to picking stand sites...

Early morning or late evening, watch the direction from which they enter the picture and at what times... then set up down range accordingly.


----------



## Ricochet (Jul 24, 2006)

Browning382 said:
			
		

> the best way to set it up is to have your buddy walk out in front of the cam while in test mode......just make sure he is bent over to the height of a deer....all of mine all very low to the ground (....around 2-3 foot. The cam that these pics came from is not even waist high.



Yeah, good advice...the way the manual says doesn't seem to work very well.


----------



## leo (Jul 25, 2006)

*Real good deal Browning382*

very affordable scouting 

Thanks for sharing with us


----------



## quackwacker (Jul 26, 2006)

*splurge a little...............*

heres what you get for $40 more.

$99.00


----------



## Browning382 (Jul 26, 2006)

quackwacker said:
			
		

> heres what you get for $40 more.
> 
> $99.00



which cam is that?


----------



## Ricochet (Jul 27, 2006)

I finally got a photo of a something...a little doe (I think):







One of these days I will catch a turkey on it.  I switched in to video mode this evening and lowered it down the tree to about waist level (like mentioned here eariler).  I hope it catches some good stuff this time.


----------



## BIGABOW (Jul 27, 2006)

quackwacker said:
			
		

> heres what you get for $40 more.
> 
> $99.00


 $20 each ,not a bad price for those bucks


----------



## Browning382 (Jul 27, 2006)

BIGABOW said:
			
		

> $20 each ,not a bad price for those bucks


----------



## GeauxLSU (Jul 27, 2006)

quackwacker said:
			
		

> heres what you get for $40 more.
> 
> $99.00


Actually they are only $89 now.  
I think the additional $ is well spent as well, but whatever works for you.  Enjoy it!


----------



## leo (Jul 28, 2006)

*IMO it's worth $59.95*

especially the day pics

Thanks for posting the pics


----------



## SnapperG (Jul 28, 2006)

*from experience*

I got one just a week ago.  The second time i checked it i had 64 pictures.  I went to copy them to my comuter and it froze up, so i took the batteries out of the camera.  Big no no...it deleted all the pictures before i could see what was on it.  So just a hint of advise, dont take out or change the batteries until the pictures are saved on your computer.


----------



## Ricochet (Jul 28, 2006)

SnapperG said:
			
		

> I got one just a week ago. The second time i checked it i had 64 pictures. I went to copy them to my comuter and it froze up, so i took the batteries out of the camera. Big no no...it deleted all the pictures before i could see what was on it. So just a hint of advise, dont take out or change the batteries until the pictures are saved on your computer.


 
Exactly, if you are using internal memory only (design flaw IMO).  Using a SD card eliminates that problem...I know because my batteries have died a couple of times and the photos are still saved on the SD card.  Besides, a 64MB+ SD card is the best way to go because 16MB of internal memory doesn't go very far (especially with the 2.0 megapixel model).


----------



## GeauxLSU (Jul 28, 2006)

Ricochet said:
			
		

> Exactly, if you are using internal memory only (design flaw IMO).


That's an understatement.  I can't believe it really works that way but obviously if multiple guys have experienced it it's true.  VERY bizarre.


----------



## Ricochet (Jul 29, 2006)

GeauxLSU said:
			
		

> That's an understatement.  I can't believe it really works that way but obviously if multiple guys have experienced it it's true.  VERY bizarre.



Yeah, I agree...pretty stupid design to say the least.


----------



## Browning382 (Jul 29, 2006)

I use the sd cards....I also have a digital camera that use the sd card so I can view my pics in the woods....I dont have enough patience to wait till I get home


----------



## SnapperG (Jul 30, 2006)

*trouble....*

is anyone having trouble downloading pics from the internal memory to their computer???   This is the second time, its as thou the camera locks up during the dload.  Any suggestions???


----------



## Browning382 (Jul 30, 2006)

SnapperG said:
			
		

> is anyone having trouble downloading pics from the internal memory to their computer???   This is the second time, its as thou the camera locks up during the dload.  Any suggestions???



if you have a newer computer that has the "sd card slot" in it, just buy a $15 sd card from walmart and leave the camera in the woods.  If not, buy you a card reader and a couple of sd cards and have your camera going all the time.


----------

