I don't think you can just dismiss this problem as due to a low resolution camera. Even a cheap low resolution camera should look much better than this. Something is wrong with this picture (pun intended ).

 

Mine looks like this - totally adequate to see while in reverse.

 

I agree that the backup camera is "adequate" (just barely) for everyday use, but that doesn't address the points I raised.

I don't think you can dismiss the blurriness as due to a low resolution camera. Even a cheap low resolution camera would look much better than this. There's something else amiss here other than an inexpensive, low resolution camera. The other point I raised is that the blurriness results in less confidence when backing up. More clarity would deliver a much better backing up experience.

 

"Just barely" adequate - really?? I guess if you want a 1080P view, maybe that's the case. It works for me just fine.

 

How about we just do it the old-fashioned way and just turn our heads back to look behind the vehicle... any takers? No?

 

I'm with you on that if one truly feels the camera is inadequate. I myself see fine but you're right -- not a bad idea to turn your head despite these gizmos. I do when changing lanes even if the bsm looks clear.

 

Yes, just barely. If it were any blurrier, I'd rate is as inadequate.

Funny you should mention it. That's what I do occasionally when I'm not feeling particularly confident in what's on the center display.

 

I guess I am very old-school. I still look behind me before backing up, and really only use the camera to supplement my normal backup process. I will say the backup camera is nice when the car is boxed in between taller cars such that I cannot see on-coming traffic from the sides. It is unfortunate that the view isn't better so I do understand the disappointment, but given my use of the camera, it works well enough for me. I would likely be envious if I drove a loaner with a much better image though...

 

I will never again buy a new car that doesn't have an array of safety features, including automatic collision avoidance braking, blind spot monitor, lane departure warning, and a rear view camera, but those safety features were never intended to be a substitute for "old school" safe driving practices. Instead, they should be thought of as tools to provide and extra layer of safety beyond what is provided by using one's eyes and other safe driving practices.

Over time, there are have been a number of posts on the CL boards from people who relied on the car's safety features as a substitute for traditional safe driving practice, and the result was a need for collision repair work.

 

So true and collision repair work is the BEST case scenario for one that relies solely on these gizmos. Plain old common sense.

 

Cost saving measure. Toyota is more profit driven than other car companies, so they'll skimp where they can. They probably opted to spent $1.34 per camera rather than $2.42 per unit for a substantially better one.

 

My 2019 ESh built in Japan has the same grainy out of focus camera as yours. My 2016 Genesis Sedan and my 2013 Azera before that both had better quality backup cameras. And don't forget the Lexus/Toyota braintrust who decided not to hide it under the protective lip of the license plate light holder like 95% of other vehicles in production. If its even sprinkling rain outside the camera is unusable because the lense is covered in water droplets. I keep meaning to wipe the camera down with rain-x to see if it sheds water better.

 

The water drops are annoying for sure when it's raining. But I had a 2014 Azera and the camera was really no different than this one but I honestly don't find it to be that blurry at all.