GrouchoBoucho

but this is effectively what you're doing when running multiple cameras off that power. three cameras' power on three pairs will see the same loss as one camera on one pair. how many pairs you need to use depends on the camera's draw and the voltage used. i've successfully run two cameras on 12v for almost 200' on a single cat5e - one pair for video, one pair for power for each. but these were quality non-ir cameras that require <200ma each.

no.

looks like a bad vga cable that's not sending sync signal. try a different cable.

Please correct me if i am wrong but what u mean is that no DVR can record from any input source from the Ethernet via lan cable??? well, a "hybrid" can. which is essentially a dvr/nvr combo unit. on a standard dvr though, the ethernet port is meant for remote client access, not for recording. I have 6 WANSVIEW NCB541W cameras. your basic "toy" cameras. few if any hybrid dvrs or nvrs would directly support them. they *may* work with an onvif-compliant recorder, or with a higher-end recorder that allows you to specify a custom url for the h.264 stream. generally these types of cameras are designed to work with their own software and nothing else. Well initially my plan was to wirelessly record on my PC (router being centrally placed in the house and the PC being in another room). However i overestimated the routers wireless transfer capacity and now can barely get footage from 3 cameras and that too at a paltry 4-5 fps.So yes if nothing else works hard-wiring may be the last option but which will be very cumbersome and hence i require a solution where i can place a recording equipment (like DVR) near the router and connect it manually and record. consider that even under ideal conditions, your wifi connections only realistically give you half the advertised speed... and then the connection to the recorder (pc) has to handle the combined bandwidth of all the cameras. and you will lose signal quality as distance and obstacles (walls) come between the router and pc. camera feeds also typically just send a steady output stream with no communication back from the recorder to tell it whether the recorder is receiving properly. so if you get dropped frames or a spotty signal, the dvr can't tell the camera to resend the data; the camera just keeps sending it and the recorder has to keep up. Thanks for ur reply... As my router is centrally placed (to get the wifi signals from all cameras placed at different corners of house) and the PC being in another room, i was looking for a solution where i could connect the router to a DVR(or any such recording equipment). So yes a PC/Laptop would be an obvious solution but will have to move the same near to router....and that would be the last option if nothing else works.... what's so hard about taking your recording pc and moving it beside the router? if you can do it with a separate dvr, why not with a pc recorder? keep in mind you really shouldn't be using your regular desktop pc as a security recorder - you should always have a dedicated machine for this purpose. doing other work on the computer will take up bandwidth to that machine, and other disk i/o that can also affect the camera feeds writing to disk. it's just not a good idea. realistically, most "standalone" dvrs/hybrid dvrs/nvrs these days are just small-scale pcs running on minimal hardware using an embedded version of linux or other linux-type os.

that's what the axis spec sheet says... given a 1/3" sensor that doesn't really agree with most lens calculators, at least not for the most commonly used horizontal fov. i think axis is over-stating things on their ad copy.

no, this is not possible. a dvr is designed to record *analog* cameras connected directly to it. what you're looking for an in nvr (network video recorder). the catch is, you need one that supports your cameras specifically. what cameras do you have? the other problem is that the cameras are probably taking up all the wireless bandwidth by themselves. changing your recorder won't help that. connecting your computer directly to the router rather than by wireless may help, but ultimately, your best bet is hard-wiring your cameras to a switch.

what size sensor are you calculating for, aps-c?? on a 1/3" sensor (which i believe that axis uses), 6mm will give you 43 degrees horizontal; 12mm gives you 22 degrees. keeping in mind that you probably won't be changing the focal length much once it's installed - you can't move the camera remotely so you can only ever zoom in on the center of the frame. the *range* is broader... but the 6mm model will go wider overall. at its 2.5mm end, it will give you an 85-degree horizontal fov; at its widest of 3.3mm, the 12 will only give you around 70 degrees. in other words, don't worry about the range the lens is capable of... worry about the area you need to cover and the lens required for that. looking at your drawings for cameras 2-4, you could use either because you need to cover a fairly narrow angle. camera 1 is showing close to a 90-degree coverage angle though, so you'd definitely want the wider lens. don't worry about the tight end of the range (6 or 12), you're not likely to go anywhere near it in these applications. as for the front of the house with the streetlight, i'd prefer the p3384-ve - it's wdr and supports 'lightfinder'. it's only 1.2mp, but it will handle the lighting a lot better.

for one, i don't know if you could get a doubler for this application. two, it will double the focal length over the full range - if for example, a 35x zoom 4-140mm, a doubler would make it 8-280mm, so you'll lose the wide end of the range. on a 1/4" sensor, 4mm gives you a 48 degree fov; 8mm gives you 25 degrees, so you lose anything wider than 25 degrees with a doubler. in short, it doesn't turn a 35x into a 70x, it just turns a 35x into a 35x with a different start and end point. three, a when you double the focal length on a given size aperture, you effectively add an f-stop - in short, the doubler cuts the light transmission in half. and of course, adding more glass elements will always reduce your image quality - may or may not be noticeable, but there *will* be a reduction. remember, there's always a trade-off.

the unit i linked is not complicated at all. there are four screw terminals - two for ac in, two for dc out - and a jumper to set it for 6, 12, or 24 vdc out. it can also be set as adjustable, but you don't need to worry about that - it comes set to 12v by default, so all you need to do is connect the wires into the terminals. in fact, the connections are pretty much the same as in the active-vision unit, it's just open-frame instead of in a little black box.

might be able to get something in a pelco esprit. would probably need a non-standard lens to get that kind of range, the base models are something like 24x and 35x. expect to pay around $3k-$4k for the 35x esprit: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/651795-REG/Pelco_ES31CBW352N_ES31CBW35_2N_Esprit_Positioning_System.html

give a man a fish, he will eat for a day. teach a man to fish, he will never go hungry. personally, i prefer this version: build a man a fire, and he will be warm for a day. set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

first, i'd recommend one active balun and one passive for that distance. you *might* be okay with both passive, but an active unit at either end will be more reliable. second, i'd strongly recommend using all three other pairs for power. how much loss you might see will depend on the actual current draw of the camera - if it has ir (something swann probably does), that's going to cause a lot more draw, a lot more voltage drop, and probably cause the camera to drop out at night when the ir switches on. assuming ir then, it's a safe assumption the camera will draw at least 500ma with ir on... based on this calculator, at 500 feet (the highest distance it will accept) and using three pairs, you see about 1.5v loss at the camera end. double that for 1000', and you'll have to feed 15vdc into the run to end up at 12vdc at the camera. some cameras will handle that (some dual-voltage cameras will work with anything between 10-30v ac or dc), but i wouldn't count on this one having that kind of latitude. looking at the page you linked, that shows two pairs for power... not sufficient at that distance. the balun doesn't really do anything with the power - it just connects the wires from the power jack direct through to two of the spring terminals. power distance is affected by nothing other than ohm's law. what i'd recommend, if you have the space at the camera end, is sending 24vac over the wires, then adding a 12v regulator at the camera end to knock the voltage down. something like this will work nicely: http://www.electronicproductonline.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=2237&osCsid=49b51fb1cbae214fe8c0428d9b914bd5

i have a p1204 (different mounting design, indoor only, but same guts). image quality is so-so with the pinhole lens, but that's to be expected with a pinhole. i believe there's a 'regular' type lens available as well that's probably better. low light is pretty lousy though. it's color-only, no night mode, so it won't work with ir, and it gets really noisy when the light drops. i'd only use one in a situation with good lighting.

see your other thread...

pull a length of utp (cat5e, or even cat3 will do), then put baluns on both ends (*real* baluns, not the crappy ebay utp-to-coax adapters so many people seem to end up with). the twisted pair has noise-rejection properties of its own, and the balanced line created by the baluns adds another level of noise rejection to that.

$2-$5 at any computer store, radio shack, etc.

gv is crap.

agree with the others, this sounds like some sort of signal problem or mis-match between the dvr and the monitor, nothing to do with the cameras. could be the cable, could simply be a resolution or refresh problem. or it's possible the monitor is failing.

I can sympathize. I ordered a box set of Blu-rays from Amazon UK back in December (before Christmas) and they are expected to be delivered January 24th. Apparently delivery by steam trawler is still an option. maybe they're using carrier swallows. european, of course, as the african swallow's not migratory. and the cameras would have to weigh less than a coconut.

first, go to ipchicken.com to get your 'true' outside address. then look at the 'wan' address in the router status to make sure it matches. some isps perform extra routing themselves and your router gets an ip on their internal network. also, if they've provided you a modem/router combo device and you're adding your own router after that, the ports will need to be forwarded in the modem as well as in your router. second, try setting your dvr's address in the 'dmz' section - that will forward *all* otherwise-unassigned ports to it. third, the router may not support loopback (meaning you can't connect to its outside ip from the inside network); if your phone is on your wifi, that's what it would be trying to do.

i assume you used one of these? yes, splitting the signal this way will cause problems, as each monitor is only getting half the signal level. use an *active* splitter instead. http://www.screencapturenews.com/2009/10/15/vga-splitters-explained-active-or-passive/

low light performance is one reason. i can get the dahua 2mp minidomes for the same price as a cnb vcm-24vf... but some locations are low or difficult lighting. one recent install is a good example: in some areas i used the mini-domes because i know there will be good lighting, but in other areas i stuck with the cnbs because i knew the dahuas won't handle the lack of lighting.

then what does this mean? : http://www.synology.com/support/camera.php?lang=us&brand_id=35 it's hard to get a clear picture.. that means the synology's minimalist nvr supports the cameras. what thewireguys is talking about is some cameras' ability to write directly to network storage. one is the nas doing the work, the other is the camera doing it.

how would you "ring" the nas in the first place if it's not connected to the internet? for that matter, how would it send the reply email??

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=22353&hilit=arecont+fail