the toss

Reliability really has nothing to do with the technology used. AHD is the newer kid on the block but I dont think it has anything to offer over TVI or CVI

Analogue standard def cameras are yesterdays technology , there is still a place for high quality B/W analogue cameras purely for their low light performance. So that leaves us with High Def cameras which may be analogue (HD-SDI , HD-TVI , HD-CVI ) or digital (IP). You have correctly identified that IP cameras have their own set of shortcomings like any networked device. In most cases there is no need for the CCTV system to be on a network. HD-SDI was developed for use within TV studios & not with the intention of CCTV use & so has its own set of problems (mainly cost & cable length). HD-TVI & HD-CVI are pretty much the same animal and was developed specifically for the CCTV industry to run HD cameras over existing coax cable infrastructire. The IP brigade will most likely disagree but HD-CVI & HD-TVI are my preferred technologies. Next year - who knows

Does it have a HDD installed?

It will depend on the type of glass (laminated , hardened , etc) but for standard window glass you will be getting around 90% attenuation.

I'll say for the millionth time - RG6 is NOT designed for CCTV , it has poor noise immunity properties at CCTV baseband frequencies and certainly if it is buried I wouldm't be taking the chance of you having to replace it when you find it less than ideal. Pure copper RG59u with >90% shielding will see you good

Check your earthing . It is not so much an earth loop as a missing earth which is being obtained via the shielding of another camera via the -ve/power supply. It usually only invoves one other camera so you have done a really good job.

That will drive some plumber nuts in years to come There is probably some regulation/bylaw that will be contravened by doing this as most conduit & plastic pipe is colour coded for it use. yellow pipe = gas. White conduit = comms, purple pipe = grey water etc. Generally speaking (in Aust) burial is 100mm under hard paved surface, 300mm under non hard paved non trafficable area & 600mm under non hard paved trafficable area

Call me blind but I cant see the line you're talking about

Not really. Just wondering why (if it were your full time job) you would be asking for this type of info on a internet forum. I dont mind advising DIYs on what they need for their home job but I jack up at advising self titled professionals who should have the skills required but so often dont and so reflect poorly on the industry as a whole

Is this your daytime job or something you do on the side?

Good post Jerome. $25 isn't much to ensure all the other money you have spent is not wasted

No

You have demonstrated the effect of multiple terminations while ignoring impedance matching. The first split (over a short run) to your first monitor is ok , the second split to the second monitor is useable and the third split to the TV ( over shielded audio cable) is the longest run & is terrible. To start with replace that thin audio cable terminated with RCA's with 75^ coax. If the monitors you are using are really monitors then they should have a switch to set the input impedance to either 75^ or high impedance ( may be labelled "term or bridgeing") All monitors should be set for high impedance except the last ( furtherest) which should be set for terminated (75^). This method is only good for 2 or three monitors at most and after that you will need to be using a VDA (video distribution amp)

From the info you have supplied it would seem to be caused by EMI which would indicate poor shielding and /or earthing. You give very little info as to cable distances & types. So more info please

Your 12V 5A power supply should easily run your camera and while 60m is not all that far it is the most likely source of your problem if you are using the thin pre-made cable.

I've just read back over the posts to try & find out why your project has gone pear shaped for you. I think your main focus has been to save as much as possible and make do instead of focusing on the outcome. I've got no idea why you have to buy 1000' of two different types of cable or weatherproof boxes. I'll go over my suggested method step by step with approx pricing. * 4 cameras mounted on garage. Flying leads through wall to inside * each camera wired to a central point using RG59 siamese & BNC 4 x 10m siamese = $40 8 x BNC = $8 * 4 way balun & 5A plugpack Balun =$35 Plugpack =$15 * House end - 4 way balun = $35 4 RG59 patch leads with 8 x BNC about $15 OK garage done. One cat 5/6 with RJ45 plug each end now runs back to the house end & plugs into the other 4 way balun then with another 4 RG59 "patch " leads into the DVR. Total cost of cabling the garage (not incl conduit , labour etc) $150. $150 is not much & it's simply not worth trying to save a couple of dollars when you end up with unsatisfactory outcomes.

HD-cvi use QAM (quadrature amplitude modulation) which is a combination of amplitude modulation & quad phase modulation using four different phase shifts. As such there is no reason signal splitting won't work as long as correct termination principles are adhered to and will include careful consideration as to the length of the signal paths.

I know lots of people here will tell you that IP cameras are the way to go - BUT I'm yet to be convinced. If the system is to be a closed system (ie not part of a network) then I can see no real advantage over a HD analogue system. A HD analogue system can give comparable results at a lower cost & without the associated network problems. It can still be netwoked if required and there is a huge amount of development being undertaken. People talk as if IP is a "super species" when in fact it is only an information transport technique.

All the analogue HD cameras I've used have a monitor point that is normal composite video

The cap probably does fit me & I dont mind wearing it. *** disclaimer - non of the following is directed at anyone in particular. I've come across numerous people who ask a question on this forum & want only a yes or no answer. They become offended when you provide an little bit of explanation as well. I think this reflects on their personal insecurities. If all they want is a fix with no understanding then they should pay a professional and leave it at that. I simply cannot understand why,if they want to do something themselves, they dont want to understand what it is they are doing. I was never like this when I was younger , but as I've grown older have developed a lust for knowledge. I dont think you should ever be ashamed of not knowing something - there are plenty of people willing to help & explain, all you have to do is ask. While all my tertiary education is in electronics & telecommunications my current passion is automotive engineering. This is a self learning process & I'm helped along the way by a couple of really knowledgable people I've met online. One is a suspension geometery engineer at Nissan helping me grapple with the complexities of Ackerman Angles. So if I go over the top in any replies just tell me to shut my trap - in a nice way. Back on topic - I/P = input You don't need a "powered splitter" unless the cable lengths are such that signal amplitude becomes an issue. In theory the closest termination to the source should be in a bridge mode (ie high impedance ) to reduce signal loss & impedance mismatch. The furthest termination should be terminated in a "matched" impedance (75^ for video). Many monitors (not tvs) are designed with a switch to enable the input (I/P) to be terminated in either 75^ or Hi Z (high impedance bridging) Leaving the T's in wont cause a problem if there is only one side terminated. All the cameras I use have an inbuilt High impedance monitoring point to plug into.

I think Numb Nuts may be talking about me. So being both a TECHNO-BORE and an instructor bore here we go. Like so many things in life you can do whatever you want until something goes wrong. Like Sunny said if you parallel two devices I/ps you will halve the I/P voltage to each. Actually the I/P voltage will be less than half due to the impedance mismatch as well as a standing wave reducing the source power. This in itself is not usually a problem as most modern DVRs , monitors etc are designed to cater for a wide dynamic source I/P. Phasing interference can also cause problems if the split signal paths are of a reasonable distance. So if the devices are of good design and the signal paths are short then you can probably get away with it.

Then maybe you could fill us in Numby

I've been digging for a while with not much results but I'll give you the bits Ive got. Basically HDcvi , HDtvi & Ahd are transmission techniques based on Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM). Now QAM has been around for about 40 yrs so there is nothing new there - I think the secret is all about the chip technology which is used as both receiver & transmitter. So while they say the transmission technology is open market I suspect the chip technology isn't which explains why it is so hard to get any tech info beyond "it uses QAM"

I think you need to keep in mind just what baluns are. They are simply an impedance matching transformer - nothing more nothing less. The better ones have a small amount of filtering built in but unless that is an issue then it would come down to manufacturing quality. There is nothing mystical about HDCVI.

Like anything electronic the greatest stress on the components is when you power it up/down. So I would say its longetivity might decrease if constantly powered up/down. The other thing to keep in mind is that the switching contacts will be in the alarmed state when powered off. If the HX40 has formC contacts (changeover) then you should be ok