SportPlumber

Hey Bull, Don't you sell them at Wrightwood cheaper than that? Why is $169 a good price or am I confused on camera model?

+1 on the fiber. Only way to go that far reliably. Well depending on your environment, you could go RF really inexpensively with UBNT. But the fiber would be the optimum choice.

JPEG 2000 is a Wavelet compression compared to DCT macro block compression in MPEG. So it fails much more gracefully. If bandwidth is reduced, it will just appear less sharp in the image rather than the total loss of blocks in h264. It is very popular in the Broadcast TV world for transmission of HD events back to the Studio. Most of the Telco digital lines were 270Mbs the SD-SDI bitrate and so compression was needed to get the 1.5Gbs HD stuff down the smaller pipe. 1080i HDTV over JPEG2000 at 100Mbs looks really good and you can actually run 2 streams down a 270 which could give you 3d or higher frame rates. Also MPEG encoders tend to have a "footprint" due to the GOP and when you concatenate, they can look pretty bad especially on an ATSC MPEG2 box. So using the JPEG2000 gets rid of that. It is really cool technology for video and never meant for stills. But I think h264 wins when bandwidth is small. So as stated by thewireguys, it is a specific tool for some circumstances.

Not sure where you garage is, but RF is essentially Physics and that little box is unlikely to perform well. There is no magic here, just a lack of understanding. In order for RF to work there must be good signal to noise ratios. This can only be obtained by good path. A poor path can be somewhat mitigated by higher power, which this little product does not and cannot possess. Modern modulation schemes such as COFDM have greatly improved on poor path performance, that's why your cell phone works so well. But there are still variables that will cause outages. Can you hear me now?

You might post a question in this forum's HD-SDI sub forum. I have only experience with the SMPTE 292 and 424 varieties and you are correct, the high bit rate signals do not travel very far on coax. I believe there has been some development of a version just for security cameras and it has a more tolerant format. Not sure what the bit rate is but the 1.5 and 3.0 Gb/s stuff is hard to work with. Although for production, it is great. Usually it is transported on a SMPTE fiber cable. Expensive stuff.

Whenever possible you are far better off staying wired. Probably would help to know the location layout of your install. Clear line of sight with no obstacles will be desirable. So if you have to go wireless, I have had some very go experiences with UBNT. I have used two of these little guys http://www.streakwave.com/Itemdesc.asp?ic=LocoM2-US NanoStation Loco M2 USA Being directional is a big plus for signal path and even security. Another interesting feature with Ubiquity is if you are using their equipment on both ends of a link, you can "channel split". They move the channel centers so other devices won't "see" the link. You can choose different bands as well. I think the devices you linked would work and both offer WPA encryption, but UBNT is a pretty nice step up. They have a great user forum with lots of expert advice as well. Good Luck!

If you are navigating an ROV underwater, latency could be a concern. Seems like any IP based solution will have a certain amount of latency due to compression codecs. You might consider HD-SDI. High frame rates might be useful if you are trying to capture fast motion objects. Seems to me binning in a low light application such as this is a good thing, but I could be missing your intent.

Yes, mine is working fine with a 2100. Can't speak for other models. The NVR found the Dahua just like a Q-See.

This is not vignetting, in this case. The lens is actually seeing the edge of the housing it is in. I noticed this too playing with DX lenses I ordered. Compared to a factory 3.6, it looks to me that this DX lens is just a bit shorter and somewhat recessed from the front glass of the housing. But the quality of the ones I played with were pretty good.

That looks pretty sweet if you use UBNT's silly 24 volt stuff. And why wouldn't you? It is great and cheap wireless. The only PITA is the non-standard POE. So looks like they figured it out. I really want to try one of these. The ZxXEL switches are nice but larger than some of the others out there. I do agree the non-walwart power supply for ZyXEL is a big plus.

I have heard the term "Megapixel Lens" before and it seems a marketing ploy. Doesn't it just mean the previous lenses were really bad but the cameras were so bad you couldn't tell?

That may not be in the manual which is not uncommon in cameras costing much more than these. Actually I was quite impressed with the effort Q-SEE went to to create documentation and the ease of setting one of these systems up. But when you are able to see the features available through the Web Service, you might consider a retraction. These re-branded Dahua cameras are a very good value looking at what is on the market in their price range. Best Regards!

When you get the ability to log directly into the camera web service, you will see the functions you want are there along with lots of other cool stuff. For example you can change the default "auto" day night mode to "color" and force the camera to remain in color mode. Also you can define a time period for it to switch modes or leave it in black and white. Who knows, you might even click the like button on Q-SEE's facebook page...

Maybe I missed something but can't you just log on to the camera in IE and go to the Day and night setting and select "color" or "BW" or "switch by period" ?

bike who is "dx" have a link? http://dx.com/p/replacement-fixed-iris-lens-for-cctv-camera-3-6mm-45189?item=2 Check Buellwinkle's post on page one of this thread for more info.

Curious which 3.6mm? the $2.70 or the $2.10?

Hey Brutus, Was that the 3.6mm lens you swapped out and is that the "port-holing" you mentioned? Still a pretty good image though. The 6mm can be a bit tight for a lot of situations would be nice to find one as good or better than the OEM lens.

Unfortunately that is correct. No "scrub" , you drag the pointer on the timeline but the video doesn't start until you release the mouse button.

Yes. I just got mine today (4 channel ordered on 11/5) and it is now recording four cameras. Two are Dahua 2100, one is a costco and the other is another re-branded version the forum won't let me type. Pretty cool box, wish I had gotten an 8!!!

Do you recall which 3.6? I believe there are two on the site. One was $2.10 and the other $2.70.

What are you saying? did you power up the Qsee camera from Costco and try to flash the Dahua firmware? And it didn't work? Details? Maybe it is me but having trouble following your post.

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 Dilemma and Knot. But you win on the Dutch thing. After reading this thread, I think I have to agree that updating FW is a reasonable use of the product. I stand corrected and thanks for the info and pics

Clearly you have uncovered the conspiracy.

I spell one word wrong and now it's mistakes plural, but putting your arrogance aside, this is Costco's return policy (including its one spelling error). If I can't hack something properly, then I'm not 100% satisfied. You're right, it was arrogant and I apologize. But you misspelled 3 words...

Spelling mistakes aside, might I respectfully suggest you stick to superficial camera reviews? Your example is not at all the same. If the restaurant did not perform to their obligation, they are liable. Certainly if the banana is rotten or the sandwich bad, they have not lived up to the bargain. But Costco has provided a pristine product that you advocate violating and if it destroys that product as a result of your actions, they must bear the financial burden because you say "return it". Do you really not know the difference? Your moral compass is askew.