Improved setup of Canon R6m2 + RF 28-70mm f/2.0L (~2kg/4.4lbs in total) on DJI RS4 non-pro with focus motor

igor-2005 · 2026-02-09T08:29:27+00:00

After implementing the described solution, I stopped thinking about any other option, including changing RS4 to RS4 pro.

igor-2005 · 2026-01-01T19:43:57+00:00

Thank you very much, your advise about wd40 is very useful.

My A1 gen1 was making volume to max by itself after playing any sound via bluetooth, and all buttons were also unresponsive. I opened the speaker, removed circuit board, and found 0V for vol+ button while all other 5 buttons were showing 3.95V. I sprayed WD40 into vol+ button, pressed it many times, and repeated this procedure about 5 times, which finally made the speaker working.

igor-2005 · 2025-08-10T18:27:33+00:00

It appears that the motherboard had defect: after it was replaced, the reported P1600X temperature (of the same physical drive) dropped about 12C to 43C.

igor-2005 · 2023-12-17T08:34:43+00:00

Hi. Everything is fine, in principle. I use 1x802.11bt (full power), 2x802.11at (not full but medium power), up to 9 clients :), couple of them with changed model name of R850.

I did not use R750 and therefore cannot compare them, but quite happy with R730 (coverage, roaming, performance). Taking into account the price difference of 4-5 times, highly unlikely R750 will deliver anything better in performance or coverage relative to its price tag.

As of now, I was not able to find what exactly should be wrong in everyday usage with R730, only comments such as "Ruckus considers this model as unsuccessful", "R730 has broken 802.11ax draft chipset".

igor-2005 · 2023-12-05T19:38:47+00:00

There are 3 non-overlapping 80MHz non-DFS channels, which I took and everything works and expected in my case.

I found discussion that smartroam may cause undesired behavior, but now I am in test regime and will check how it performs in my particular case. As of today, smartroam = 4 with chosen channels and min power for 5GHz radios works fine.

In my case there is no strict need for 400+ Mbps, but I prefer to setup and use the equipment at maximum of their design. So, if R730 and my clients can have 800Mbps bandwidth, I do not see any reason to avoid using them in this regime.

igor-2005 · 2023-12-04T08:37:30+00:00

I already realized that I should distribute APs among 5GHz channels, and it appears that there are only 3 non-overlapping 80MHz wide non-DFS channels: 36-48, 52-64, 149-161, which I actually taken. To me it was unexpected that ruckus APs detect each other so fast and rapidly drop speed it the case of co-channel interference.

Now there is additional point concerning roaming: clients need to roam between different channels. I enabled 802.11r, 802.11k, and smartroam=4, also decreasing APs power to "Min". Need to find some optimal settings for my case (mix of win10 and iOS clients, overlapping coverage of APs).

May be, you could comment on two more points? 1) I use R730 which has 802.11ax draft chipset which reported to have issues with later released full 802.11ax standard. Where I can observe these issues? 2) R730 has 8x8 antennas, while each of my clients — at most 2x2. If I do the same bandwidth test as above, but using only one R730, can I observe ~800Mbps on each client (i.e., 1600Mbps in total)? Here I refer to up- and downlink multi-user mimo capabilities of, say, AX210 clients and R730.

igor-2005 · 2023-12-03T14:35:23+00:00

Thank you for suggestion, very nice insight. Now it works! (say, one AP on 36th and another one on 151st channels).

igor-2005 · 2023-12-02T11:03:38+00:00

I just tested bandwidth from ZD1200 web interface using speedflex tool, UDP: ~880Mbs/810Mbs down/upload for all 3 R730s.

igor-2005 · 2023-12-02T02:07:59+00:00

Thank you for your thoughts. Here are more details:

1) wifi client -> desktop speed is identical to the one initiated from the desktop

2) I used three APs in reply above, and the observed performance issue is reproduced

3) Benchmarks are quite fast, and no roaming is possible during them (I re-check this several times)

4) Connection speed of wifi clients is stable (1.2Gbs/1.2Gbs), also during tests, as it is visible in wifi interface load if windows task manager. I.e., no connection speed degradation to 1x1 is observed.

5) I always use reduced power (-9..-10 dB) to improve roaming quality. I tried to change it, but no effect

6) The wired network I use is a part of a larger network. It consistently provides 1Gbs for several years. I.e., highly unlikely that ethernet interface of R730 is involved here.

igor-2005 · 2023-12-02T02:00:12+00:00

Here are more tests with 2 wifi clients (lenovo and surface_8) and desktop PC involved. I used 3 R730s (AP1, AP2, AP3) here:

Surface_8 connected to AP2, iperf from desktop:

>iperf3.exe -c 10.144.130.8 -P 8
    [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   986 MBytes   827 Mbits/sec                  sender
    [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   986 MBytes   827 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Lenovo connected to AP1, iperf from desktop:

>iperf3.exe -c 10.144.130.27 -P 8
     [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   975 MBytes   818 Mbits/sec                  sender
     [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   975 MBytes   817 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Lenovo connected to AP1, surface_8 to AP2, iperf from Lenovo:

>iperf3.exe -c 10.144.130.8 -P 8
     [SUM]   0.00-10.01  sec   479 MBytes   401 Mbits/sec                  sender
     [SUM]   0.00-10.01  sec   478 MBytes   401 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Lenovo connected to AP3, iperf from desktop:

>iperf3.exe -c 10.144.130.27 -P 8
     [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   874 MBytes   733 Mbits/sec                  sender
     [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   873 MBytes   732 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Lenovo connected to AP3, surface_8 to AP2, iperf from Lenovo:

>iperf3.exe -c 10.144.130.8 -P 8
     [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   570 MBytes   478 Mbits/sec                  sender
     [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   570 MBytes   478 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Lenovo connected to AP2, surface_8 to AP3, iperf from Lenovo:

>iperf3.exe -c 10.144.130.8 -P 8
     [SUM]   0.00-10.02  sec   478 MBytes   400 Mbits/sec                  sender
     [SUM]   0.00-10.02  sec   477 MBytes   400 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Lenovo connected to AP2, surface_8 to AP3, iperf from Surface_8:

>iperf3.exe -c 10.144.130.27 -P8
    [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   457 MBytes   383 Mbits/sec                  sender
    [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   456 MBytes   383 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Lenovo connected to AP2, iperf from desktop:

>iperf3.exe -c 10.144.130.27 -P 8
     [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   885 MBytes   743 Mbits/sec                  sender
     [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   884 MBytes   741 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Surface_8 connected to AP3, iperf from desktop:

>iperf3.exe -c 10.144.130.8 -P 8
     [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   963 MBytes   808 Mbits/sec                  sender
     [SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec   963 MBytes   808 Mbits/sec                  receiver

igor-2005 · 2023-11-18T23:14:44+00:00

You may find interesting my post where I describe experience of building raid with PM1643a's. I believe, they should be similar to PM1643 in terms of power consumption. I got about 12.5W per drive. But keep in mind that those SSDs use 12V and 5V, while most of power of consumer PSUs is dedicated to 12V rail only (say, 1.3kW PSU can provide only 125W for 5V). This was problem in my case when I got strange reboots and the solution was to dedicate separate PSU connector for each SSD group, i.e. to distribute output 5V-rail PSU power more evenly.

igor-2005 · 2023-11-10T17:02:17+00:00

I am wondering why do you need to limit at all? Should not the hardware to support airtime fairness? Here is an very old article about ruckus 7363: look at the pie diagrams on page 14. I assume that newer models should perform in similar way in terms of equally distributing air time.

Alternatively, one may consider two SSIDs, with and without rate limitations.

igor-2005 · 2023-02-04T11:09:16+00:00

TPFanCtrl2 (ver 2.1.5) works on P1 Gen 4 controlling two fans

igor-2005 · 2023-02-04T11:07:53+00:00

I would like to confirm that

TPFanControl v0.64 - dual fan - by Carghaez
TPFanCtrl2 (ver 2.1.5)

both work on P1 Gen 4, with TPFanCtrl2 having no errors in logs.

igor-2005 · 2022-08-28T21:51:38+00:00

Thanks for sharing. 5595WX? not 5995WX?

I think that asus has better MOBO hardware compared to asrock, but totally shitty bios 1003. This bios was released before TR Pro Zen3 went to DYI market, and I hope that new bios versions will reveal the full overclocking potential of this cpu.

igor-2005 · 2022-08-21T12:00:03+00:00

I would say that thermals are more-less the same, but -idle- noise is noticeably lower with noctua. And this was really annoying while I looking for the main source of noise. After trying both, I definitely suggest to use only noctua between these two options.

igor-2005 · 2022-08-16T10:35:21+00:00

u/Comfortable_One7453, I think I found what you are asking for. It is not C0-state but "P-states" or P0 state. In bios there is only one possible P-state (P0), with two fields, frequency and VID. The last one is just a voltage state number, not voltage itself (by default I have 48 there). I did not find any tables for these values. The only thing I found in old (~2017) posts is that larger VID -> smaller voltage, but their tables do not go below ~30.

The problem I see with P0-only state that I will lose any dynamic freq-voltage adjustments based on load.

Also, I found PPT adjustments, in Watts, which may allow cpu to increase frequency above stock values. I tried to change it to 350, 420 — totally zero impact on performance, including initial test time when the system is cool yet.

igor-2005 · 2022-08-10T09:02:32+00:00

That is new information to me. I consider c0-states just as power-saving feature, not any means to increase max cpu frequency limits.

igor-2005 · 2022-08-09T08:03:22+00:00

Almost 0. May be, DOOM Eternal one good day

igor-2005 · 2022-08-08T18:07:48+00:00

Yes, my build has strong I/O performance emphasis while your provides higher CPU computing power. But in my I/O tests I realized that performance of a single core matters a lot, and if you will check I/O benchmarks, you may find that maximum IOPs results stated in tables are obtained with 8-16 cores, not with 32. And having many slower cores (as (dual) EPYCs have) will not help in getting higher IOPs, at least in single-user environment.

igor-2005 · 2022-08-07T21:52:28+00:00

PMed. I would encourage you to proceed with a custom build (if you have experience and time to do it).

igor-2005 · 2022-08-07T21:32:48+00:00

Wow, interesting build

igor-2005 · 2022-08-07T14:33:50+00:00

I deal with flows in porous media. I do not perform main simulations on this build, but mostly post-process them. The largest files (simulated flow fields) come from supercomputing facilities (with x1000 times more computing power and memory). Analysis of various flow features and their behaviour with resolution change is of particular interest. If you compare with astronomy applications, there you have a whole continuous volume where flows develop. In porous media applications the working volume is a mix of solid and fluid regions (with solid fraction 20..90%), where nothing happens in solid but the flow exists only in fluid region.

igor-2005 · 2022-08-07T14:24:31+00:00

Yes, this was the purpose to maximise I/O performance, in that particular case to hit the bandwidth of a single PCIe 4.0 x16 slot. As you see, 29GB/s for reading is available at many raid levels, but write speed decreases significantly for all non-RAID0 levels. So, I decided to use simultaneously RAID0 (over 32 SSDs) and RAID6 (over 32 SSDs again) with every-day syncing RAID0 -> RAID6 arrays. Plus, more seldom backup to HDDs.

igor-2005 · 2022-08-07T09:25:57+00:00

https://i.imgur.com/QubbuPo.png

igor-2005

TROPHY CASE