thewireguys

So here are my thoughts on the Mobotix product after 5 days. Mobotix is the most powerful and customizable security system I have ever seen. I have been in the business for more then 10 years and I haven't used anything more feature rich. So if you want a top of the line anything you can think of system this is it. Only problem is you have to read the manual. The feature set on the Mobotix camera makes Axis look like a baby toy.

I spent the last 2 weeks with zoneminder (ZM). I used the same hardware as I use with LuxRiot (LR), just different Hard drive. Unplug one HDD with windows, plug in another will Linux. Makes comparison more fair (I was not writing to disk for most of my comparisons). After nearly succeeding with ZM (frame rate too low 1/2 what I was getting with LR), I decided to go with LR (placed order today). My main complaint with LR was slow frame rate and somewhat variable record rate (plus I don't like $300 for 4 cameras when I'll likely only have 2). After using wireshark on both windows and Linux with both the 3130's built in web page using firefox, and LR on windows, and ZM on linux, I've concluded a number of things. The 3130 uses TCP for communication, which means its speed is a function of how fast the destination gets back to it with acknowledgments. The fastest rate I could get for 1 image fetch (using HTTP/1.1) was about 28 Mbps, which is a long way from the advertised "up to 55 Mbps". Yet this may be the fault of either my switch as "thewireguys" suggests, my motherboards Ethernet NIC, or the underlying TCP stack. Using firefox on both linux and windows, I noticed vastly different performance. On windows, with a frame rate set to just 1 fps, and using wireshark, you could see all of the data was there for a 1280x1024 BW frame (130kbytes using the settings I had), in 45 milliseconds(~22 fps). But on linux, while it took the same time for most the data, the last acknowledge from the host to the camera took an additional 20-40 ms. I blame this on the TCP stack, but it might be something else. The same was true when using LR and ZM. The HTTP commands to the 3130 were identical. The data transfer times were very similar except for the last acknowledgement from the host (on linux with ZM an additional 20-40 ms). This meant I could get around 24 fps using LR on a BW frame at 1280x1024. But only around 5 fps with ZM. At any rate, I've ordered LR and will see it I can live with that. My reason for high frame rates is actually gone (I bought an IR led, so can use short exposure high SNR captures), so I will likely end up with about 5-10. I just want 1/60 sec shutter speed. Now for the rant: I do not believe TCP should be used for IP cameras. Rather, extremely simple UDP, with a fixed (programmable) frame rate. Power up the camera, program the IP address of the host, port number, frame rate, other parameters, save them on camera NVM. Then on power up, the camera and the camera spits out constant UDP datagrams with no user programming. They fall on the floor if you have no program listening. (Just like a traditional camera's video, if you don't plug it in). User program simply opens a socket and starts reading. Header in UDP datagrams says what's in each datagram. (e.g. could define each UDP datagram to be 1 line of image (up to 20 kpixels/line of 3 byte each). Header would include camera settings, # rows, # cols, shutter speed, time tag, line number. If your software could not keep up, just lower fps. You will not drop data on a small network (with proper network settings). End of rant I would like to see the results if you where using Areconts software. Tried it tonight, it uses TFTP with the host acknowledging each packet, and the results were: with a 1280 by 1024 BW frame, with 43 by 2, 1486 packets =128 k bytes in 0.02803 seconds or 36 Mbits/sec (timing first packet to last ack, not time between frame requests). Funny thing was, the sequence was full frame, half frame, full frame ... being transfered. I don't know what that was about. I had the recording disabled. I like what your doing. I have seen my frame rates on the 3105 to 13/14 at full res. Try setting the camera to D1 res and see how much bandwidth it uses. Could you help me with Wireshark and I can run the same test on my Linksys switch. See if we can duplicate your results.

Check out www.streakwave.com All they sell is wireless. I haven't used Ubiquiti products but my contact at streakwave can answer any questions you might have about them. We have had good luck with the EnGenius product..... if you need a cheap long range outdoor product check out EOC-2610

Dumb question did you peel off the lens protector?

I spent the last 2 weeks with zoneminder (ZM). I used the same hardware as I use with LuxRiot (LR), just different Hard drive. Unplug one HDD with windows, plug in another will Linux. Makes comparison more fair (I was not writing to disk for most of my comparisons). After nearly succeeding with ZM (frame rate too low 1/2 what I was getting with LR), I decided to go with LR (placed order today). My main complaint with LR was slow frame rate and somewhat variable record rate (plus I don't like $300 for 4 cameras when I'll likely only have 2). After using wireshark on both windows and Linux with both the 3130's built in web page using firefox, and LR on windows, and ZM on linux, I've concluded a number of things. The 3130 uses TCP for communication, which means its speed is a function of how fast the destination gets back to it with acknowledgments. The fastest rate I could get for 1 image fetch (using HTTP/1.1) was about 28 Mbps, which is a long way from the advertised "up to 55 Mbps". Yet this may be the fault of either my switch as "thewireguys" suggests, my motherboards Ethernet NIC, or the underlying TCP stack. Using firefox on both linux and windows, I noticed vastly different performance. On windows, with a frame rate set to just 1 fps, and using wireshark, you could see all of the data was there for a 1280x1024 BW frame (130kbytes using the settings I had), in 45 milliseconds(~22 fps). But on linux, while it took the same time for most the data, the last acknowledge from the host to the camera took an additional 20-40 ms. I blame this on the TCP stack, but it might be something else. The same was true when using LR and ZM. The HTTP commands to the 3130 were identical. The data transfer times were very similar except for the last acknowledgement from the host (on linux with ZM an additional 20-40 ms). This meant I could get around 24 fps using LR on a BW frame at 1280x1024. But only around 5 fps with ZM. At any rate, I've ordered LR and will see it I can live with that. My reason for high frame rates is actually gone (I bought an IR led, so can use short exposure high SNR captures), so I will likely end up with about 5-10. I just want 1/60 sec shutter speed. Now for the rant: I do not believe TCP should be used for IP cameras. Rather, extremely simple UDP, with a fixed (programmable) frame rate. Power up the camera, program the IP address of the host, port number, frame rate, other parameters, save them on camera NVM. Then on power up, the camera and the camera spits out constant UDP datagrams with no user programming. They fall on the floor if you have no program listening. (Just like a traditional camera's video, if you don't plug it in). User program simply opens a socket and starts reading. Header in UDP datagrams says what's in each datagram. (e.g. could define each UDP datagram to be 1 line of image (up to 20 kpixels/line of 3 byte each). Header would include camera settings, # rows, # cols, shutter speed, time tag, line number. If your software could not keep up, just lower fps. You will not drop data on a small network (with proper network settings). End of rant I would like to see the results if you where using Areconts software.

I spent the last 2 weeks with zoneminder (ZM). I used the same hardware as I use with LuxRiot (LR), just different Hard drive. Unplug one HDD with windows, plug in another will Linux. Makes comparison more fair (I was not writing to disk for most of my comparisons). After nearly succeeding with ZM (frame rate too low 1/2 what I was getting with LR), I decided to go with LR (placed order today). My main complaint with LR was slow frame rate and somewhat variable record rate (plus I don't like $300 for 4 cameras when I'll likely only have 2). After using wireshark on both windows and Linux with both the 3130's built in web page using firefox, and LR on windows, and ZM on linux, I've concluded a number of things. The 3130 uses TCP for communication, which means its speed is a function of how fast the destination gets back to it with acknowledgments. The fastest rate I could get for 1 image fetch (using HTTP/1.1) was about 28 Mbps, which is a long way from the advertised "up to 55 Mbps". Yet this may be the fault of either my switch as "thewireguys" suggests, my motherboards Ethernet NIC, or the underlying TCP stack. Using firefox on both linux and windows, I noticed vastly different performance. On windows, with a frame rate set to just 1 fps, and using wireshark, you could see all of the data was there for a 1280x1024 BW frame (130kbytes using the settings I had), in 45 milliseconds(~22 fps). But on linux, while it took the same time for most the data, the last acknowledge from the host to the camera took an additional 20-40 ms. I blame this on the TCP stack, but it might be something else. The same was true when using LR and ZM. The HTTP commands to the 3130 were identical. The data transfer times were very similar except for the last acknowledgement from the host (on linux with ZM an additional 20-40 ms). This meant I could get around 24 fps using LR on a BW frame at 1280x1024. But only around 5 fps with ZM. At any rate, I've ordered LR and will see it I can live with that. My reason for high frame rates is actually gone (I bought an IR led, so can use short exposure high SNR captures), so I will likely end up with about 5-10. I just want 1/60 sec shutter speed. Now for the rant: I do not believe TCP should be used for IP cameras. Rather, extremely simple UDP, with a fixed (programmable) frame rate. Power up the camera, program the IP address of the host, port number, frame rate, other parameters, save them on camera NVM. Then on power up, the camera and the camera spits out constant UDP datagrams with no user programming. They fall on the floor if you have no program listening. (Just like a traditional camera's video, if you don't plug it in). User program simply opens a socket and starts reading. Header in UDP datagrams says what's in each datagram. (e.g. could define each UDP datagram to be 1 line of image (up to 20 kpixels/line of 3 byte each). Header would include camera settings, # rows, # cols, shutter speed, time tag, line number. If your software could not keep up, just lower fps. You will not drop data on a small network (with proper network settings). End of rant Nice work

custom exposure setting default setting one when it was raining for fun

hi,my friend,our Dome camera have the IP 66,also the perfect effect at night,you can contact me as follows,then i will send the demo at night to you. _________________ MSN: ytdvr_sales@hotmail.com Skype: ytdvr_sales Why not just post a link so everyone can view it? i really don't care someone will buy our products or not, but don't speak ill of others behind their backs.You make me sick ! Why don't you start a thread about your company / product instead of rudely forcing your products on to everyone. By the way I am not impressed with your product for professional installs.

You could save alot of money if you went with the NUUO MiniNVR. For less then $1000 you can have a 4 channel NVR that supports 5 megapixel cameras and h.264. Pair that up with a ACTi 1231 or 4701 for outdoor needs and 3401 or 4201 for indoors and you will have very cost effective megapixel camera system. And do your self a favor and get a good switch like the ones that where suggested. http://www.nuuo.com/product.php?id=13

That's really advanced. Never knew that existed before. Sounds like a great camera with exceptional features and a large learning curve. I'm paying attention to this one.... I am having a hard time rapping my head around everything this camera can do. Also your min and max exposure settings are 1 sec to 1/8000 sec. Mobotix recommends a max exposure setting for moving objects to 1/60.

If your looking for a megapixel camera for difficult lighting conditions I would take a look at the M12. You can setup multiple custom exposure windows for both lens and for each of the 8 zoom levels for both lens. Also the camera can tell you the lux value for each lens.

Are you using the Mobotix software or 3rd party.

3130 1.3mega night shot (moonlight) (Quality) setting (Balanced) setting (Speed) (high speed 30) M12 1.3mega night (default setting)

Arecont 3105 to compare

And there isn't many auto-iris megapixel lens on the market. Also I wouldn't use the auto-iris on Arecont cameras they just are not needed with cmos.

I would suggest to ask about Horizontal distances of given object ( from left side to right side of the whole pix) for example his first pix of yellow sign is about 42 pix H second pix about 22 pix H and u can clearly see the difference just my opinion First image is 3megs second image is 1.3 megs. And the children sign is about 50 yards away. The lens in the L43

I'm really fond of the IQ Invision stuff myself. What would you like the NVR software to do? Since we write our own software, we could probably help you. I would like a full featured web client, mapping, support for the cameras manufactures on my list and access control integration with HID edge products. do you have a demo I can try out?

out of the box images

C'mon Man! Your killing me here! What's taking so long?!.. Seriously though I'm looking forward to your take on this one. Complicated!!!! Comes with 2 manuals one is 92 pages and the other is 288 pages. The image is very nice but this camera is not for the beginner.

UPS man just dropped off a M12 at my door can't wait to play

This is great pricing on top of the line products.

ok I guess we will have to ask you "No motion blur when setup right." care to share ? Are you asking me how to set them up? I recommend attending Arecont training and they will so you how to use the settings in the camera and the AV100 software.

Thanks John.... I couldn't remember the name.

I am really curios What do "they " mean "when setup right" Sorry, I am saying that.

The images are from Arecont I didn't take them. They are using a 25mm lens but I don't know which one it is on there list. No motion blur when setup right.