Which Inspection Camera Brand Wins?
We compared 12 inspection camera options head to head. DXZtoz came out on top. See the measured results, the runner-up, the budget pick, and a link to the full test video.
DXZtoz
Price shown in test: $140
Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
Teslong
Price shown in test: $130
Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
VEVOR
Price shown in test: $60
Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
The measured results
Every number below is read straight from the test. Scroll sideways to see all measurements. Products are listed in the order they finished.
| Product | Distance test | Piston reading test | Coin readability test | Nut extraction test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1DXZtoz$140 | blurry at 3in, much better focus at 2in, even better at 1in, matching Teslong's great view quality on the monitor; recorded video quality just as good as Teslong, called definitely a high quality camera | performing the best yet and the characters are easy to read; final subtest rating: came out on top with a rating of two (video recording rating 1.5, best yet) | producing the most crisp and legible image yet, scratches on the cylinder wall easy to see, called by far the best inspection camera yet; final subtest average rating: 1.3, best of all brands | really good field of view, very little light reflecting off the magnet, called definitely the best yet; final subtest rating: best possible rating of one |
| 2Teslong$130 | display called by far the best yet, very crisp at 3in and 2in with zoom, doing a great job at 1in; video recording definitely very high quality, looks great at 3in and 2in, described as offering slightly better color than Vevor in a close side by side comparison | performing better than Klein Tools but still too much light reflection; video recording looks even better with most letters and numbers readable | gave Vevor a run for the money though Vevor produced more contrast and less reflection; most words on coins readable; held interim second place behind Vevor before DX Eizor was tested | made very easy work of picking up the nut, but with noticeable light reflecting back toward the camera; narrator suggests flat black spray paint on the camera housing would fix this |
| 3VEVOR$60 | display called the best yet at that point, doing a pretty good job at 2in, definitely the best yet at 1in; video recording looking even better at 3in, pretty good at 2in, described as much better resolution and focus than Hopefox | too much light even on the lowest light setting, hard to read all letters and numbers | by far the best so far at providing a sharp image, providing just enough light without too much, even producing a very in focus image of the quarter's small text (called very impressive); finished second in the final subtest average with a rating of two, behind DX Eizor's 1.3 | continues to provide very crisp and in focus footage and made easy work of the nut |
| 4Milwaukee M Spector 360$279 | pretty out of focus at 3in and zoom did not help; a dark area in the upper left of the screen appeared to be camera damage on this unit; more in focus at 2in; at 1/2in with 4x zoom did a great job on a close up image, described as excellent with only a slight edge to Teslong at extreme close range | quite a bit of light glare and not all characters readable on the display, though the video recording did a much better job capturing letters and numbers | performing well but not as well as DX Eizor, image not as clearly defined; finished third in the final subtest average with a rating of 2.3 | blinded by its own light, finding the nut described as a bit of a guessing game (weak result) |
| 5Hopefox$40 | display looked quite a bit better than Camii's in a side by side comparison, decent with and without zoom at 3in/2in/1in; video recording called the best yet at 1in | display looked very good but still too much light to read every letter and number; video recording called the best yet with letters and numbers easy to read | called definitely the best so far with very little light interference on the dime and penny; not all words readable on the dime but the penny's words were legible, though not perfectly sharp | too big to fit through the spark plug hole, could not complete this test |
| 6Camii$27 | used the entire phone screen unlike Akaso/Acoath and BlueFire which used about half; better focus at 3in, called definitely looking the best yet at 2in, pretty good resolution at 1.5in and 1in with less frame lag; video recording called definitely the best yet among the three cheapest cameras | providing a higher quality image than Acoath and BlueFire though still some light reflection; video recording called by far the best yet at that point | called definitely the best of the three affordable phone cameras so far with pretty good image quality and much less light reflection, though still not enough resolution to clearly read every letter on the coins | narrator says he liked this one quite a bit better than the first two brands tested, very easy work retrieving the nut |
| 7BOPOPO$50 | decent at 2in and 1.5in from the drill bit case, but 1in was too close and the image blurry; quite a bit of screen flicker; video footage quality not as good as Hopefox | too much light reflection even on the lowest light setting, video recording also not very good | continued to struggle with light reflection even on the lowest setting; coins not nearly as sharp as Hopefox or even Camii; narrator states there was no point in attempting the quarter with this camera | too large to fit through the spark plug hole, could not complete this test |
| 8Hilycen$100 | zoom helped at 3in and looked pretty good at 2in; display said to seem just as good as the video recording; in a side by side comparison, Vevor looked a little better | too much light reflection and glare, similar result to Depstech; video recording about the same as Depstech | display not as sharp as Vevor's; performed better than Depstech on light management but not as well as Vevor; text not as sharp or easy to read compared to Vevor | not tested |
| 9Depstech$63 | struggling to provide a clear image at 3in; at 2in, Vevor seemed quite a bit better by comparison; decent but not the best at 1in; live view display did not help but the recorded video was a lot better quality than the display, with less light color and better image quality | too much light, not all characters readable; video footage a little better but still not as good as some other brands | struggling with too much light reflection making text hard to read; coins not as in focus as Vevor's; too much light reflection off the quarter to read some words | provided even more field of view than Vevor, but with quite a bit of light reflecting off the magnet |
| 10Klein Tools$120 | really struggling at 3in; display not as sharp as Hilycen's at 2in even with zoom; 1in described as a sweet spot with zoom helping, though still not nearly as good as some other brands; video recording also not quite as good as Vevor or Hilycen | continues to struggle, not all numbers and letters readable; too much light also causing problems for the video recording | image less grainy than Hilycen's but quality not nearly as good as Vevor's; way too much light reflection even on the lowest setting; some words readable but the image lacks contrast | did not come with a magnet, could not perform this test |
| 11BlueFire$26 | very blurry at 4in; 3in and 2in looked about the same as Acoath; 1in a little blurry; video recording seemed a little better quality than the phone display but not very good overall | challenging to read numbers and letters even on the lowest light setting due to too much light; video footage a little better quality but still too much light reflection | did a little better than Acoath at producing a clear image of the dime, with a bit less light reflection; also performed a little better on the penny | magnet obstructed even more of the field of view than Acoath's, but still made easy work of picking up the nut |
| 12Acoath$20 | a little blurry at 2in even with zoom helping; video recording looked pretty good at 1in but 3in was pretty blurry with frame lag and buffering; narrator calls it definitely not a high quality camera | reading numbers/letters on the piston possible but required careful positioning; video footage a little better quality than the phone display | really struggling to produce a clear image of the dime, with a pretty big light reflection issue; also struggling with the penny, most words not readable | magnet obstructed quite a bit of the field of view, but still successfully retrieved the nut |
How it was tested
- distance/focus test on a drill bit case at multiple distances (phone display and recorded video)
- reading engraved numbers and letters on an engine piston (phone display and recorded video)
- readability of text on a dime, penny, and quarter under available lighting (phone display and recorded video)
- retrieving a dropped nut from inside an engine through a spark plug hole using the camera's magnet
“the DX Eizor came out on top with the best average finish of 1.7. It's an absolutely amazing inspection camera, but it is very expensive at a price of around $140”
Data notes and caveats
This video tests 12 inspection cameras/borescopes; nearly every brand appears under a different phonetic spelling than the description's official product list (examples: Akaso for Acoath, Camhi/Cam for Camii, Bobo Po/Bob Po Po for BOPOPO, Veewer/Vivar for VEVOR, Hillisen/Hillison for Hilycen, DXZT/DX Eizor for DXZtoz). All 12 were resolved by matching price and testing order against the description's 12-brand list, which lines up exactly with 12 distinct prices/products narrated in the transcript; BlueFire, Hopefox, Milwaukee, Depstech, Klein Tools, and Teslong already matched the description literally. Two pairs of amzn.to links in the description are identical (Acoath and DEPSTECH share one link; BlueFire and DXZtoz share another), which looks like a copy paste artifact in the description rather than a meaningful signal, so price/order was used instead of the links for brand resolution. The transcript's final third (from the DX Eizor coin readability recap through the closing scorecard) appears twice, near verbatim, suggesting a caption/transcript duplication artifact rather than the narrator repeating himself on camera; treated as one occurrence for extraction purposes. Only the top 3 places (DX Eizor, Teslong, VEVOR) and Milwaukee's per subtest placements are given explicit numeric rankings by the narrator; the relative order of the remaining 8 products in the products array above is inferred from qualitative descriptions only, not from an explicit final scorecard figure, since the on screen scorecard graphic covering all 12 brands is not read aloud in full. Hilycen has no nut extraction result anywhere in the transcript despite being tested in every other segment; flagged as a possible caption gap rather than assumed to be a genuine skip since no on camera skip statement was found for it (unlike Klein Tools, which explicitly lacked a magnet, and BOPOPO, which explicitly skipped the quarter).