bpzle

You're saying that if someone uses utp and baluns they are not properly trained and doing the customer a disservice. Lol! Easy killer, quit talking out your arse. I've been in this biz over 10 years. Needless to say, my eyes are pretty critical of video. I've never had downtime, lost money, or missed out on a job due to using baluns. That's a rediculous statement. And for the 600m copper argument, that's not the same. I would never do that. I can't even begin to imagine the loss... I'd bet my paycheck anyone could tell a difference in the picture, even without a side by side comparison. Once again, I would never compromise picture quality. I'd like try an experiement... I'm going to dig up some stills from that client of mine, let's let YOU decide which is baluns.

Find me a $30 camera that has just a good a picture as a $150 plus camera and I say hell ya. Let me make it clear... I would never cut corners to sacrifice picture quality. But to me, if there is a route that can simplify and future proof an install, the picture looks just as good as alternatives, its around the same cost, then that's a no brainer. My advice is to try different baluns if you've been unhappy with the results.

Oh, and if you're using high power IR... of course you shouldn't use utp for the power. Pull 18/2.

I'm not suprised you can tell a difference with test equipment. But here's a bold statement: who cares? I have installs with both coax and UTP running to different cameras, of the same make/model. I can't tell a difference, the customer sure as hell can't. UTP is convenient, for both the installer and the customer for future use. Saves time and money. Run it once and be done with it... How much exactly are you gaining in quality? Its analog, its not like your gaining 2x the quality. Maybe just a hair better, depending on the opinion of the eyes looking. If you want to impress somebody, go IP. Now that's something ANYONE can see a difference in. As I said, I don't have expensive test equipment but to my eyeballs it looks good. What else matters?

@themerchant thanks for posing pics. very cool!

I've installed both the products you've mentioned. The 3511 is OK.... You do realize this is an indoor only camera, correct?

Disable the remote configuration in the router, or change the port it uses. Its probably the same port as the new DVR.

can you be more specific about the camera placement and lighting? what is your budget?

Trying to find a DVR lockbox or preferably a 6-10u enclosed rack that is really heavy duty. Will be in used indoors, but needs to be solid and preferably ventilated. I've used lock boxes in the past, but they're pretty flimsy and just there to keep honest people honest. Any ideas?

link no workie looks like all of pelco.com is down model #?

Pictures of the servers, network and rack? Would love to see...

Never heard back from you. What did you end up figuring out?

3.6mm is already a pretty wide lens... 2.8mm is probably the widest you'll find within a reasonable budget. Keep in mind that the more you zoom out, the less pixels you are putting on the target area. Yes you can see something is there, but very little detail can be seen on objects more than a few feet away from the lens. Pretty much worthless for evidence.... Cameras can only yield so many pixels, it's best to put as many as you can on the target. Think news anchor. If a camera pulled out to give an entire shot of the studio, you could see there were people sitting at the desk, but have no idea who it is. For a parking lot, what you need is more cameras covering the area, not a wider lens. For a front door, a 2.8mm lens would be fine but I would mount the camera approximately eye level near the entry of the door so that the camera would be within 2 feet of the target area: people's faces.

PM tomcctv He's a sharp guy who regularly contributes to this forum and he's in the UK.

Thank you very much for your review! Reading though an end-user's perspective is very beneficial to people like myself. I regularly sell and install single cameras that cost twice the price of your entire system. LOL! But seriously, the typical home owner/ end user is a huge market and something I wouldn't mind having a piece of. However, I'm pretty skeptical of such a CHEAP PRICE! Holy cow buddy! Straight from China for sure! I'd love to see sample still shots. Also, please update us in a few months after you've had more time to use the system. I'd be curious if you can get the footage you need when/if something happens. One last question... In hindsight, how much more would you be willing to pay next time if you actually had tech support? That's something that I really pride myself and company in providing for free. But obviously it's an expensive promise to make to people, especially to the average end-user who can be technically-challenged. Thanks again!

I'm a dealer for CNB, as well as many other brands... Those first model numbers are discontinued so you probably won't be able to find them unless you can find them used. I'm not a fan of GeoVision, mainly from all the headaches I read about from people who come here looking for help... The support I hear is almost non-existent, unless you have Rory's cell phone number. If you've had good luck with Geo and want to view the 2 seperate systems simultaneously via CMS software than I say you're on the right track. If not and you're just upgrading, then you may check out Avermedia. Pretty good bang for the buck...

oh... haha should have read the rest of the thread

According to Exacq, one license per MAC/device, no matter how many channels. That's incorrect. I just had the same question last week for a job coming up. More than one Exacq employee told me that encoders use 1 license per channel EXCEPT for select Axis 4ch models. I too was looking at using the Acti 16 ch encoder... but not anymore. Between the encoder and license price, I could put just put in IP cams from the start. I sure wish Exacq sold capture cards... Looks like an IP only solution at least for me. Encoders are too damn expensive.

Just to clarify, a "hybrid" can record both IP cameras and analog (BNC type). Check out the comparisons to IP megapixel vs analog: viewtopic.php?t=17732

Ya, no store links. If you need pricing feel free to PM me or use the wonders of Google.

Yes, you're sending less data through the pipe so your frame rate should increase. This of course does not affect what is being recorded locally.

It's possible but it wouldn't help your situation. It's not all or nothing with the DVR's remote viewing clients. You can choose to stream 1,4, or all 8 cameras at a time if you wish. Yikes, that sucks... upload speed is usually a tiny fraction of download speeds. Obviously, upload speeds are what you'd care most about as this is how to DVR gets out and talks to the world.

For that much cash, I would definitely have to recommend getting a name brand unit. Something where tech, driver, and software support won't disappear overnight. Hybids are a smart choice. IP cameras are dropping in price every day. Investing in a future proof technology ensures your not outdated in a couple years. Check this one out... http://www.averusa.com/surveillance/productdetail.aspx?id=137 I don't work for Avermedia... but I've tested lots of units out there both no names and big names. It's a solid unit that I have no problem putting my company's reputation behind.

Any idea what your budget is or are you just trying to figure out what the options are for now? You mentioned you needed IR cameras... Does this mean there is ZERO light at night after hours? Dynamic IP isn't a big deal... You work around this with a free DDNS service. The speed you mentioned... this is upload speed, not download, correct? That's not great, but I've seen much worse... It's do-able on 8 analog cams but don't expect a great frame rate when displaying all 8 cams at once.

Try what Rory said with the RAM. If a stick is going out, the CPU and HDDs will work overtime to compensate. I've seen many a blue screen of death from bad memory...