Soundy

Simplicity of setup only matters once: when you set it up. If you're choosing a camera that's easier to set up, over one that has better imaging, better performance, better features, better almost-anything-else, you may be making your own life easier, but you're potentially doing your customer a disservice. "Hey, this camera sucks in low light!" "Yes, but it was really easy for me to configure!" Areconts are a double-whammy because they don't have many features, AND they're a pain in the arse to install and configure As to which points are more important... that will depend on the specific use. I'll look at what the situation requires, then decide which points matter most for that purpose.

F/1.4 to f/1.2 is only half a stop, meaning about 50% more light... realistically, like mobbarley says, it probably won't make a substantial or even noticeable difference.

Backlighting, as in... a person coming into a dimly-lit store, through a door with bright sunlight outside. If a retail outlet has cameras, chances are that they probably have one facing the door with the intent of capturing facial details. Most cameras will dim their picture due to the overall bright lighting of the scene, and your subject becomes little more than a silhouette.

Bright back lighting is a common problem that real security cameras have to deal with on a daily basis, and your $50 webcam will fail miserably at.

Flush or surface mounted:

You left a line out: "It is hard to find specs for the sensor inside the cameras -- this is supposedly for the MS studio HD" Printed specs are nice, but largely meaningless on their own. Unscrupulous Chinese CCTV manufacturers have been relying on them for years, pushing cheap cameras as being more than they are... cameras that fall far short when put into actual use. Since you seem to be missing the point, I'll say it again: if USB webcams worked so well as security cameras, you'd see them used a lot more. But you don't... don't you think there's a good reason for this?

Most I've seen are CDs/DVDs that the cops bring with them that have their labels on them with blanks to fill in date, time, case number, etc.

I'm noticing more and more detachments are staffing members who are actually tech-savvy to begin with. Not all of them, of course, but it seems a lot of times when extracting video will be required on a visit, they send the officers who have a clue.

No. And why would you focus on a light anyway?

Put it through a hole in the camera mounting plate, then put a nut on it (with some threadlocker, preferably).

There are USB over UTP extenders that will get you hundreds of feet. They also cost more than most IP cameras. I'll say it again, if USB webcams worked so well as security cameras, you'd see them used a lot more. If I could sell a customer an HD camera for $50, my life would be easy. Fact is, they just aren't suitable in the vast majority of security uses, for the MANY reasons outlined above. Oh, and I would be really surprised if that camera has a 1/3" sensor. Frankly, I'd be surprised if it had a 1/4" sensor. Number of pixels is never representative of sensor size - just look at your average 8MP smartphone camera these days: my HTC does 720p video and it would take ten of its sensors to cover a 1/4" CCTV camera's sensor.

Electronics generate heat of their own anyway... I wouldn't worry about it at all. Just make sure it's sealed against weather and you should be good.

Scratch the IR; put CNB VCM-24VF domes up, and run them all into a four-channel analog-to-IP encoder. VCM-24VF with only street lights:

I don't think "security" of the wires is a big concern at that height. Looks, maybe...

What's the problem?

Correct.

Left camera appears to be out of focus. Right one doesn't look too bad other than high brightness, but that could be a setting on the DVR.

Can you try connecting it directly to a TV or something (to the yellow A/V input) and confirm that the camera is actually producing a proper color signal? Honestly, if this is for actual business purposes, I'd suggest just spending a few bucks to do it right and not worry about fiddling around trying to get an old used camera working with some cheap capture hardware. My last eye exam, they actually had a digital SLR (Canon of some kind, probably worth about $600-$700) set up to take retina photos... and that would produce probably 12-16MP images, rather than the 0.4MP images you're going to get out of your little capture device and analog camera. Just saying, with today's technology, you can do WAY WAY better for not a whole lot of money.

Hope you have a good internet plan at work...

Sure it does - you can buy from someone who will stand behind their products and treat their customers properly rather than causing all this headache. Given that this guy pushed you to the point of needing to threaten legal action, I'd say just get your money back, and deal with someone else.

Motion-activated lights can be had pretty cheap - I've seen the fixtures going for $15 or less (add your own bulbs).

Wow, that was a long ramble, and not entirely accurate. Incorrect. Ultimately, the only *functional* difference is the ability to use a wider range of lenses on a box camera. Most dome cameras use a smaller lens mount, although some do use the same C/CS-type lens mounts, but they're still limited to what size lenses will physically fit because of the dome. Every single one of them IS interchangeable, though. There is zero, zip, zilch, no reason that either will be more or less sensitive to IR or to light in general. The sensor, filters, and processing are not specific to the enclosure type - put the lens in front of the same sensor and run the signal through the same chipset, in a box camera body and in a dome, and they'll yield the same results. Technical aspects aside, a box camera does need an additional enclosure if you want to use it outdoors, and domes CAN be much more vandal-RESISTANT (there's no such thing as vandal PROOF). So in the end, the main choice comes down to aesthetics, where you want to use the camera, and whether you need to use more specialized lenses. As far as your past experience, that can probably just be chalked up to crappy camera design, rather than the fact that they were domes. Cheap domes commonly use low-quality electronics that are susceptible to heat buildup, or to fluctuations in supply voltage (non-regulated transformer-type 12VDC adapters actually put out 14-16VDC, and I've seen a number of cheap cameras killed by this).

Okay, I had a whole big long thing typed out and somehow my browser ate it. Anyway... Main thing is, the CNB has better low-light performance, due to two factors: one, it has a movable IR cut filter, which gives proper color rendition in the daytime and better light collection at night; and two, it has CNB's Monalisa processor, which among other things aids the low-light image. It doesn't have the IR LEDs because it doesn't really need them. None of the other cameras list an actual minimum illumination level, even on the actual QVIS spec sheets - they state "0 lux (with IR on)" but don't actually tell you how well they do without it - that should be a clue right off the top.

Vigil has something similar - you can set any combination of motion, constant, and alarm recording on a schedule. Alarm recording can be triggered by external source, by motion areas (set separately from regular motion recording), or by analytics.'

Resolution does not automatically equate to quality. The 480 vertical resolution is a limitation of the NTSC analog video standard. It looks that way, doesn't it? Check the specs, though: a lot of "HD" webcams actually use low-resolution sensors and generate an HD image through interpolation. Webcams typically use very cheap plastic lenses in front of very tiny sensors, meaning very low image quality regardless of resolution - doesn't matter what the resolution is if you don't have a clear image projected on it. The small sensor also means very poor capability in low light - "night vision" isn't an answer, it's just a gimmick. What happens if you want a wider shot than your webcam provides - can you swap the lens? What if you want a lot closer shot? Digital zoom isn't an answer - can you swap the lens? If a $40 webcam was really that great for security uses, you think you'd see them used a lot more, wouldn't you?