mike_va

Foxes don't like 850nm, I've seen them walk out around my IR. Does not bother the raccoons, cats, possum or deer though.

yep. system runs analytics so I generally save the fox clips

We have the same problem on the roads with hills, soccer mom in a Lexus SUV talking on the cell/kids in back/sipping a 'gourmet' coffee...good luck. Just remember to adjust up the amount of IR you need by shutter speed and however much you cut the AGC. Could try some test pics at a slower shutter to get the AGC dialed in tested with the CNB IR, then factor in the increase in shutter speed to see what you need.

MP CMOS (or CCD) is definitely not as sensitive as analog (partly smaller pixles, CMOS vs. CCD etc). Get some longpass material that will make your life a lot easier controlling headlights etc. If you are only doing plates stick with a tight beam, as that will really help your distance. I've played with a CCD MP (Pan 502) and it was not well suited to plate capture (at night). During the day gorgeous pic though. The 484 is also more sensitive than the 502 at night, for an equivalent shutter speed. Cutting by 2x is a good rule for 1-60s (cut by more for 1/500 - 1/1000). On the other hand we are helped somewhat by the fact that the plates are much more reflective than say people. I would start on the high side and back it down adjusting the power. I cover at 80 yards a 30 ft width with 2 P1344's and a RM100-10, but I'm not doing it at that fast of a shutter speed either (trying to make the cameras do double duty). I'm helped due to the fact that the cars are going fairly slow, so I'm not at your shutter speed. I'd count on being around 4-6x less sensitive as a rough guesstimate playing around with analog and MP. If you have a narrow spot analog really helps, since you can do a high shutter speed AND cut the AGC which will help with headlights. That is really the problem with trying to do two things with one camera - at a high shutter speed and low AGC which will give you a beautiful plate you won't see much else. Raytec has also started making units that can have coverage angle that can be modified by slipping in a diffusor, which is what my Bosch BDS does (i.e. 10deg LED's, semi clear piece of plastic to get 30deg). Be aware that with the Raytec etc 850 people/teens will see/notice and wonder WTF. If you are technical you can make your own, the Osram LED's are ~5-7 each, lens is $2 ea. They run them at ~1.5W ea so if you look at the power rating you can determine how many LED's they are using. You will need to work out the thermal management/mounting, and have a constant current source power supply (I have an HP that works well). Once again, a tight angle helps distance more than adding LED's. You can probably end up at 1/3-1/2 the cost, but definite hassle as you need to weatherproof, factor in your time etc. You also need to be able to deal with the surface mount aspect, as the LED's have a pad underneath the part to allow good thermal transfer (solder paste, heat gun or similar etc). 940 still glows red just not as much, if using the new surface mount LED's.

Here is what cheap CMOS or CCD for that matter cannot do. Indoors and outdoors correctly exposed, strong light outside. Also, this camera has black that is very black - better than Bosch etc. Also does a very good red. Picked up used 75, would I rather have that or a cheap camera no contest. The Qsee bullets we have are just for overview, and mounted in spots where I don't want a big camera sticking out. The inexpensive cameras are good at close range and certain lighting situations, which is all some people need.

Bosch 495 full afternoon sun

That KT&C looks like it would be fun to play with. I'm assuming the KPC-N501, does that have adjustable AGC?

Nice job, looks clean. Thanks for posting pics, always nice when someone does that. That model CNB is a good cam, especially for the price. Perhaps you've already though of this (hereditary free advice section): Might want to move the driveway cam a bit so that you can get someone looking in the passenger side window (the pic that has your truck sitting to the side more) Also, we recently converted our lights outside the garage to standard CFL from candelabra. Were able to get the parts to attach and readjust the height of the bulb from the local lighting store, it seems like your light is sitting kind of high in the fixture (they call them nipples of all things). Get more light out that way, with ours anyway. With the larger CFL you can run one of the CNB's in color even at night.

Looking at costco, they don't even seem to carry the cams we got with our little bundle. They all vary, cheap Qsee (although I would avoid any cheap camera with 1/4 CMOS and no IR cut filter) and cheap whatever. If you're going to try the route of inexpensive cams, just make sure they have a good return policy. MCM electronics (and others too) has a good return policy. Best bet though is increasing your budget a little (I'm assuming you are around 300 now). Qsee does not make their cameras, many of the others do not either. And as an example just to show there are always exceptions (captured a few minutes ago), here is 1/4 CMOS P1344 (not cheap) through a crap IR longpass filter (about 1/4 of the pic) about 60 yards out. You can't get that pic with any interlaced camera, cheap or otherwise.

Distance is all about lens focal length. A longer lens is what you need. And light, if it is dark.

With these inexpensive cameras there is not an answer, short of trying them. Then post some pics of what you discover/learn. Yes you can see washout on cheapo's and even good ones. The question is can you still get a good picture which has a lot to do with dynamic range. Cheap whatever is not going to deal well with backlighting or other extreme lighting examples. Can you make it work? Probably, you will need to play with your setup a bit when you get it as you learn. FWIW I've seen that CMOS camera outperform quite a few 1/3" CCD. Anyway, it's a decent camera at a bargain price. Is someone going to be installing these at airports? No way. Random thoughts you might not see advertised (confuses the consumer, as there always seems to be an exception): Colors are not as good on CMOS generally, although some of my Axis cams are 1/4" CMOS and can actually do better colors than CCD. Contrast is not as good on CMOS though. CCD sometimes blows out more on car headlights, I've seen this comparing my Pan 502 to Axis P1346. There can be other pros to even 1/4", at night extreme distance it is hard/very expensive to find say a 60mm f1.4 IR corrected lens for a 1/3". So, if one has a 40mm f1.4 and 1/4" CMOS the lens will let in more light than say a f1.8. In the same vein at distance 1/2" cams are even harder to find a good lens for. Problem seems to get even worse with MP lenses and IR corrected, not that many of them out there. I and am sure others could provide lots of other examples both pro and con.

Can wash out a bit in the afternoon sun. One with the cat is 830 in the morning. If you are getting them from Costco you can always return.

You could always put a small computer into the TV and pick up an IP camera (I imagine you know this already). Or get an Axis camera and a decoder, or similar. http://www.axis.com/products/cam_292/index.htm

---

I'm not sure how much light Rory has in those color pics. You can do well with the CNB day/night 0.05lux rated cams if you have enough light and in color. Here's a pic 23W CFL ea side of garage. The 610 will do about the same, with a better pic. I think I got mine used around $75. With color it really comes down to the sensitivity and amount of light. You can notice in this pic an RM100-10 IR on my lower leg, that is not being blocked completely by the IR filter in the camera. I actually had to turn down the AGC (TDN bullet CNB) in this case a to keep it from whiting out my face, black driveways are a pain... That cam costs a bit though. There are other cameras with good sensitivity, I think I used to have a Nuvico that did OK. Cheap cams sometimes leave out the IR filter, which I'd guess helps also but screws up the colors. Don't have much to offer in advice on cheap cams, although we have a couple of qsee bullets TDN that do OK. CNB will be better by at least 2x though.

compared to what? did you look at the rest of the settings? which mode are you in? The 495 can be beat by a few e.g. BBM-24F etc, but sacrifices will be made in other areas. If you are trying to get color try the 610, pretty amazing.

Above 2x only for detection. Not only interlaced video, but at 4x you are at 1-15s. We have some 495's and 620's that I never set above 2x. If you need more sensitivity try them with an f1.0 lens. I use one with a 13W CFL flood (I think, it's been a while) and it's plenty of light for the yard. If you just got them make sure the AGC has not been turned down also.

Is the night pic on your blog at 1/30s?

Note, be careful comparing lux specs, it looks like the vivotek is spec'g at 1/6s which is not that useful....

can't remember if I first saw this here or ipvm http://www.wyff4.com/r/30076862/detail.html

that's great!

On a mac mini, I used to hook up to the TV with an adapter to VGA. Then I bought another connector (adapter to HDMI) because I use the VGA in on the TV for something else.

oops brain slip. Used to have vcm24f, still have bbm24f which needs a lens...

These definitely have a better picture than the CNB, and have a WDR function for extreme backlighting that works well. Not as sensitive as the CNB but a higher quality camera. i still have a 484 (inside) on my basement door that looks out - into sun in the afternoon but it looks normal. The CNB will not work as well in that situation. Also has an auto back focus so it is perfect day and night (edit - oops guess that was mentioned already). CNB you will need IR corrected lenses to get that good of a picture.

Looks like it does a good job, within the limits of its range. Of course one might hope so given the price...thanks for posting the pics