buellwinkle

I tried real hard to get it to record and it never did. If someone can put a tutorial or how to guide on what's needed that would be great.

Good to know they thought it through.

Didn't think the hosts file would work, that's more of a local DNS than a way to trick the router. If you go on eBay, there's lots of people selling routers with DD-WRT pre-installed for decent prices. That's what I do since like you said, don't want to take the risk that I may brick the router when I can buy it already pre-done and working.

The following is also stated concerning warranties: Oy vey That statement is a keeper though. It says DVR, not IP camera, so not applicable. Also, what's "improper operation", very subjective. I could argue that they purposely hid the HTTP port number so that people would not make configuration changes to the camera via the web interface and that may be construed as "improper operation". Heck, I had to run port scanning software used for hacking just to find what the port number is. So to me, that's more of "improper operation" than installing a firmware release you found on the 'net. Even using the cameras outside their NVR may be construed as "improper operation". Has anyone tried to install the Q-See firmware on a Dahua IPC-HFW2100? That way you can use it with the Q-See NVR. Or update the firmware on the Q-See NVR with Dahua firmware. This argument can easily go on for years. Please, someone do it and put this argument to bed.

Try a different router. Personally, I buy routers that I can load DD-WRT firmware on. The flexibility makes it worth the while. I don't have any issues on 3 different carriers NATing the ports and accessing them via the LAN IP or through the WAN IP. Also, DD-WRT actually uses the term NATing, not port forwarding like consumer routers.

Not sure someone that buys Dahua cameras will want to spend $10K/mo for dedicated digital circuit to support a connection between a $200 NVR and a $200 camera. But that doesn't mean it's not possible, just not probable. Weird thing to point that out though but I concur that it's possible, I did it, had an Axis camera 100 miles away over a shared DSL line to a Dahua NVR and at VGA resolution, I may have gotten a frame per second, haha. That's great news that Costco will carry the 1080P cameras. If it's the 1080P dome, I would expect it to cost the same as the 720P bullet as wholesale is about the same. I'm hoping it's the 1080P bullet, it's so much better than the 720P bullet in many ways. I would expect the bullet to go for double the 720P bullet, so maybe $299 each.

The Q6035-E I reviewed is a fisher price toy, hmm, stand that up the Avigilon 2MP PTZ to the Axis, would love to see the dual, is Avigilon afraid of a side by side comparison? But if you Avigilon fits the $3K budget and Axis doesn't, then I guess Avigilon is the low price leader, but can it deliver? So does the OP take the word of 3 Avigilon dealers that Avigilon rocks, really, that's your convincing argument? We are Avigilon dealers so we know better. " title="Applause" /> " title="Applause" /> " title="Applause" /> I say prove it, show sample videos at night, in low light of the dark sea. Show me ships registration numbers with no light, maybe the captains face on the bridge a mile away at midnight on a moonless night. As Cuba Gooding once said, "show me the money!"

If you can +1 then I can -1. Why? because I can -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 <=== take that

If you went with some unknown encoder, it may not be supported by NVR software out there. But if you don't need it to, then it should work.

Yes, I blame Dahua totally, 100%. Why would I sue, Costco will take it back, but if they didn't, sure, small claims court, they would likely side with the consumer, not a retailer for not taking back something they said they would take back unconditionally.

No warnings on the product that prohibits this and no safety precautions in the product that prevents this, so the onus on them to protect their product from damage which they could easily do. You want a totally off the wall analogy, think McDonalds in the case of Liebeck vs. McDonalds where Liebeck was injured by McDonalds coffee because McDonalds made the coffee hot and she was not warned that it would be so. McDonalds could have prevented this by serving cold coffee or warning the customer, but chose to do neither. The average person would say that coffee is traditionally served hot and Liebeck should have known better, yet the court saw otherwise. So in theory, we can sue Q-See for damages caused to us by a camera bricked by Dahua firmware because they didn't make any attempts to warn me or prevent me from this damage. Hence, I contest that the least of their worries is having the product returned. Maybe Liebeck tried to return the hot cup of coffee but the cashier refused leading to an aware of $160,000 to Leibeck not to mention all the legal costs and bad publicity to McDonalds. Yes, McDonalds and Q-See are in different lines of business, I know, you don't have to post that this is different. But tort law applies to all products, not just coffee and cameras. So if Q-See refused to fix the problem, they could open themselves up for a class action lawsuit. Frankly, I would not think twice about trying this in court. Another example is Axis. DropCam provided their own firmware on an Axis camera that they sold as cloud based surveillance. A customer on another forum complained that they couldn't do what they wanted. Axis provided Axis firmware to fix the issue but then it was no longer able to work with Dropcam. Axis stood behind their product even though it was an OEM version they sold without firmware to Dropcam. Axis is a stand up company, Costco is a standup company, Dahua, not so sure, maybe.

-1 for Avigilon

The Q6035 works quiet well in low light, but won't work without some light. You may have to supplement lighting with powerful illuminators. Certainly the Q6035-E can not be had for $3,000. The only company I know of that makes a 1080P PTZ with built in illuminators is Dahua, but have not been able to get one to review. http://www.dahuasecurity.com/products/sd698282a-hn-33.html

Don't think you can make it into an IP cam easily and even if you use an encoder it will likely be VGA resolution. Maybe you can use it as-is with some NVR software like BlueIris that supports analog cams and webcams as well as IP cams.

Yes, they have a photocell that turns it on at dusk and turns it off at dawn automatically. I have Malibu Lights on a about 100' of wire running my landscape lights at 12V. I would imagine if you run the landscape burial grade wire, it can go for a pretty long run with minimal loss.

Would love to brick one but just left for the week on business.

I would guess that any issues with the NVR may be related to port numbers as Q-See has set different ones, like the HTTP port being 85 instead of 80. So you may want to manually enter in all the port info when you configure the NVR. Also, remember, this is a P model, meaning it has a built in PoE router that may give you grief.

I dissagree, the manufacturer of the camera provides a firmware provided by the the author and owner of the firmware. You are right, it's not like Microsoft and HP where HP has no control over what Microsoft does yet they are liable. In this case, Dahua has full control over their hardware and software. The camera would end up going from Costco to Q-See and then back to Dahua nnyway and if they don't know how to flash the camera back to stock, then there's something wrong. If Q-See was that interested in protecting their camera from un-authorized updates, they could put in code to check to see if this is an official Q-See product and reject generic Dahua updates. They went through the trouble of making the port number 85 on purpose so people would not use them independantly for their NVR's, so if you use it with another NVR, is that in violation too of what Q-See has intended? Afterall, having access to the web interface means you can change parameters and maybe they don't even want you do that.

I don't mind the pigtail if it's removable for installation. For example, Mobotix, on the M12 provides a pigtail, but it's really just a short ethernet extension so I remove it and run the ethernet straight into the camera.

The manufacturer is Dahua, if they have a firmware upgrade, then it's legit. For example, if I buy an HP computer running MS Windows that's an OEM version installed by HP, in the same manner that Q-See installs an OEM version of Dahua software on it's cameras, and I apply a patch given to me by Microsoft and my computer no longer boots up, HP won't warranty it because I made changes to the computer that now made it not work, would one be dishonest in returning it to Costco?

I'm afraid more and more companies are following Dahua's lead. The new ACTi bullet camera has the same pigtail, but hopefully smaller. The worst is the Dahua IPC-HFW3200C, it has so many things on it's pigtail the worst of which is the reset button. Imagine trying to shove all that into a hole and now you don't even know if you reset the camera.

Has anyone flashed this camera yet with Dahua software? I wouldn't even know where to get this firmware. Someone sent me firmware and I bricked a genuine Dahua IPC-HFW2100N, so I'm certainly not going to try that file on the Q-See.

Which three words? I copied the text to MS Word and only found one word misspelled and that was mayonaise which is the correct spelling in Dutch

ExacqVision is very efficient, but has a very limited set of cameras that work with it. You can download ExacqVision for free for I believe 30 days and try it. Exacq Start is their low cost version. As for 25 MP cameras, depends on the frame rate and the software you get. ExacqVision Start is limited to 16 camera, after that you go to their higher end version and it's quite pricy, like $200/camera + annual maintenance fee.

I hear ya, but $350 vs. $60 and I can play Angry Birds on on the UG802, just saying