videobruce

This sounds just like a typical consumer marketing scam. CCTV is not an entertainment media. FYI; the voting doesn't appear to be active.

I already did research a HDMI to composite and the only decent ones are around $80 which is ridiculous, but I was planning on using the HDMI out for local monitor. I also looked into using that mostly useless VGA with a format converter, but the reviews of those were terrible! Poor reliability & poor quality. Anyone out there that has a DVR that has a composite out that is running HD-TVI (or IP) and at least tried the composite out to a LCD display?

That seems to clash with everything I have read about TVI. CVI being a one manufacture product for starters. www.supercircuits.com/lp/compare-hd-ana ... eo-formats www.security-camera-warehouse.com/knowl ... se/hd-sdi/

Wouldn't TVI be better?

The reason I made the Ford vs Chevy comment is what I stated in my previous post. I see this are mostly marketing. A reason to sell new equipment. I do understand the more pixels the better clarity, but there still are many things that limit the final result. And yes, analog (better known as NTSC) stinks.

yes, when unusual terms are used and the poster assumes everyone knows what they mean.No one should half to do a search for uncommon terms or abbreviations.

So was I, I only mentioned cameras as a comparison.

After reading the pros & cons of HD TVI vs CVI, TVi seemed the logical choice to upgrade four composite analog cameras. I realize IP seems to be the most popular here and elsewhere, but using the existing cabling is important. (Besides, I'm not a fan of IP ) Anyway, I'm kinda surprised that this new format isn't as popular as I would of thought. More troublesome is the lack of compatible HD TVI DVR's. Worse is finding DVR's ones with composite out since the monitors that are being used are all in other rooms and are wired for composite (naturally). Most are only HDMI & VGA. Why VGA is still available is beyond me. I thought that mostly died with S-video. VGA to composite adapters basically don't work, or at least work poorly according to dozens & dozens of reviews (one would think otherwise) unless you want to spend $72 or $84 for one which is ridiculous. The HDMI port will be used for a single local monitor, so that can't be used w/o a DA (dist. amp), adding more unneeded expense & complexity. Anyones two cents would be appreciated.

"ONVIF encoder" ??

"Blue iris"???

There is a point of diminishing returns. The best example is the 'scam' of these formerly called 4k, now called UltraHD TV's which SHOULD be called 2160 (keeping consistent using horizontal resolution). If you sit close enough and/or have a large enough screen, there is a slight difference provided you can have actual 2160 material which is rare. 2160 isn't enough now, so now the 'con artists' are now going for 8k. Of course most of these are still LCD tech which are poor for off axis viewing especially if they are edge lit. Point is, how much resolution do you really need here? is there some contest or is is just ego's?

Gee, a Ford vs Chevy thread.

Look for dealers that offer longer warranties, 'trial' periods on equipment & decent support. Of course that comes art a cost, but should be worth it. There are so many cameras out there (too many). Find a few models, try those out and see what you think. I only use box cameras with zoom lenses (at least 3x) which I feel give the best quality. You never know what you will need as far as field of view. This way you it can always be changed. Fixed lenses are never optimum.

A driveway security gate?? Must of really be paranoid other than having too much $$. Dump what is there and start fresh. BTW, cables are not "ugly" if they are run correctly. Beside you will never have reception problems that way.

It's also grossly overpriced & overrated! Amazing just how many 'suckers' are out there that fall prey to marketing scams like what Samsung started with their "LED TV's" which are nothing more than LCD TV's with LED backlighting.

I am aware of the ability of a switchable composite/TVI output of TVI cameras. Some even have dual ports for local setup using a portable composite monitor. The only DVR's I found that have composite out are from a clueless Chinese supplier that doesn't respond to messages or direct e-mails. That knocks them out of the running inspite of their prices that are 1/2 to 1/4 the price of comparable items. Worse yet, their DVR's DO have composite outs. .

I forgot to add, the existing cameras are all 13 year old base level Panasonic 'box' cameras w/ auto iris zoom lenses (lenses would be reused). Bottom line, using that arraignment with a composite feed to larger screen TV';s how much of a image improvement would there be?

Can one manufactures PTZ controller be used with other manufactures cameras with the possible exception some functions might not work?

Questions about using IP PTZ cameras; 1. If I understand this correctly, since ethernet only uses two out of the four pairs within a cat 5 cable, can the other two pairs be 'ganged' together to supply power so as to eliminate the need another separate power cable if the distance is less than say 100'? This is other than PoE which I am only aware of not sure of the peticulars. 2. The control signals form the PTZ functions are within the same pairs as the video signal off the camera? 3. Using a existing router with three stand-along computers (only one or maybe two on at a time) is there any bandwidth issues when not accessing the internet? 4. Going the IP route as opposed to using composite analog cameras, eliminates the need for a capture card? The reason for all of the above is I'm looking for a 'better' image than what analog provides along with a PTZ control and the idea of software subsistuting for a PTZ controller. Coupled with the advantage of using a PC instead of a separate DVR.

What is up with the Wintel only chipset motherboards for these Geovision capture cards? Why won't/don't these work with the more popular, non Wintel & choice of most PC enthusiasts' Via chipsets?

Thanks for that input. Regarding powewr comsumption, I didn't think of having a heater or fan. Withunits that DON'T have those options, I can't see how a small circuit board and a small motor would raise power comsumption to a level that a ganged pair of 26 guage wires couldn't handle with a acceptable voltage drop?

Anyone else on this? Other than power, those 2 pairs include the video and control protocol for the PTZ, correct?

I have four Panasonic WV232/242 series of cameras and all of them have burns. One is from white garage doors that gets sunlight for a few hours, another is from a white railing that never received any sunlight at all (it was under a porch). Orginally all had manual iris lenses and the cameras were set to use the shutter. All of those leneses were replaced with auto-iris lenses, but the burn is still there. The one with the burn from the railing is in another location, but the 'burn' never went away.

Haved you checked it on another monitor ot see if it is the monitor or the camera? Or turn the color level on the monitor down all the way and see if the monitor is 'grey'. If it isn't the monitor, it's not the LEDs', at least, not durning the day.

These will all cost considerably more than $500 and none can do more than 640x480 pixels. The OP is looking for high res. The IK-WB21A does have SXVGA (1280 x 960), but at a lower frame rate.