wireless DVR box and camera bought separate?

[gadgetbest 0]

I have been thinking a lot about the advantages of building one's system from scratch. Not only does it allow to save some money, but also makes one much more free to choose between different options.

 

I am a newbie, so my question may be somewhat naive. I would like to know if wireless DVRs are usually compatible with wireless cameras bought with a different set. When I search for different cameras I usually find that they sell wireless DVR + camera together. If I buy one of those, can it be used with a different camera? How do you do in order to allow your DVR to communicate with your wireless camera and not your neighbours? Do they use a password or something like that?

 

I would be interested in a wireless DVR with motion detector and the possibility of recording with a secure digital card. It should have video-out as well, so that I could send the signal through a long-range wireless antenna if I so desired. The key here is modular design and the possibility of building your own system from scratch little by little, adding to it other pieces in the future, without being compelled to buy them all in one sitting.

[scorpion 0]

I do not know which Wireless DVR you are speaking of, and I have never sold, or installed wireless DVRs.

 

You may need to get another persons opinion rather than mine.

 

I have sold a lot of wireless cameras, and I know the limitations of most wireless systems.

 

PROBLEM NUMBER ONE.

FREQUENCY.

 

You must buy a license from the FCC in order to use wireless.

 

SOLUTION

Use a license free frequency such as 2.4 GHZ. Great! Now you share the same frequency as cordless phones, 802.11 wireless routers (N series is in the 5.8GHz freq range), and many analog wireless video devices such as "baby monitors", and "TV extenders".

 

If the system that you are looking at is analog then everyone can see your cameras.

 

 

PROBLEM TWO

WATTAGE.

 

If the transmitter is inside the camera then heat is a problem. To overcome this keep the wattage low. Most wireless cameras will be about 100 milliwatts, or about the same as a childs walkie talkie.

 

Never use the distance rated on the box. Cut it in half! If is says 300 feet line of sight then cut this in half, and only use it at 150 feet.

 

LINE OF SIGHT

This is exactly what it means. The two antennas must see each other. If you penetrate a wall then you have to get the transmitter, and receiver closer together to keep that same energy level up. If you transmite through several walls then you really need to get them closer together to keep up that same energy level to see the video.

 

SOLUTION

Raise the wattage! You cannot have high wattage transmitters inside the camera. It will be too hot, and it will burn the camera up.

 

You will need to use a separate transmitter, and connect a regular camera to the transmitter.

 

The farther away the transmitter, and receiver are, (or the more things you have to penetrate such as walls, or trees) the more you will need to use external antennas.

 

Most people complain about wireless cameras, but that is due to using the products outside of what they were designed for.

 

Ge advised that wireless cameras are not truely wireless!!

 

They still need power to work. You can change a battery everyday, or you can run a power wire back to a transformer, and plug it in.

 

http://scorpiontheater.com/wireless.aspx

[zmxtech 0]

Wireless DVR and Cams are rubbish that local electronics stores push out on mass.

[sviviani 0]

unless by wireless you mean wifi?

[zmxtech 0]

Even with WIFI you have to know what your doing otherwise it will be crap

[Squiffy 0]

I'd only suggest using wireless cameras in locations where a video cable simply cannot be run under any circumstances.

 

There are wireless cameras that use 1.2GHz but that is illegal in most countries (the allocation is usually for licenced radio amateurs). It's also prone to radar interference in some areas. Beware that many transmitters are not PLL so will drift with temperature changes, in other words they're useless.

 

In the UK there is an allocation for CCTV wireless at around 1.394GHz but most cameras will use 2.4GHz which as stated are prone to serious interference, the worst being from microwave ovens. While only intermittently used they can create havoc.

[HeadsUp 0]

i have never seen a camera with built in wireless that wasnt garbage

 

never buy a transmitter and receiver seperately , buy them only as pairs.

 

 

700 milliwatt 2.4 Gig transmitters and receivers are available on ebay , and do give a very good quality signal .

 

i have also seen 3000 mW units on ebay that might be okay on a big farm but in a city area you would be broadcasting to 10,000 people and interfering in any other 2.4 G signals.

I believe they would also be illegal.

 

many countries dont have licensing requirements for 2.4 Gig , but some countries place a limit on the maximum power at 250 mW max.

 

problem is Microwave ovens as mentioned above , which cause jagged lines across the video screen image while they are operating.

 

I am actually hoping to find a way to shield microwave oven radiation , because i have two wireless fitted cameras fitted in a location that cant be serviced any other way.

 

also , the antennas will be prone to lightning strike if you stick the antenna through an iron roof as i have done , however there are lightning surge protectors available to screw between the antenna.

 

if you have to use wireless and must use a low powered transmitter for legal reasons , you can improve transmission range with a yagi antenna on the receiver.

 

 

i wouldnt recommend using wireless cams inside a home due to the lack of security , but for outside , sometimes there is no other way

 

( like me being unable to lay cable under 100 metres of hard rock to a remote workshop )

[Soundy 1]

So various technical and legal concerns aside, the biggest problem to mixing-and-matching wireless cameras is the complete lack of standards throughout the industry... unless you use WiFi.

[scorpion 0]

So various technical and legal concerns aside, the biggest problem to mixing-and-matching wireless cameras is the complete lack of standards throughout the industry... unless you use WiFi.

I do not think is is a lack of standards perse as more of the price range that people are willing to spend.

 

Based on that value then there are manufactures who are using parts with wide percentages of tolerance. One receiver may swing to the left of TDC of the freq, and another manufactures transmitter may swing to the right of TDC of the freq. This is why buying RCVR/XMTR as a set is more recommended. The higher in price/quality the less of a problem this may be.

 

2.4GHz is the standard, and for FCC the wattage is a standard. Everything else is based on a ROI.

 

For the high end P.I.'s then you would be surprised to see them using a $2,000.00 wireless camera / receiver set.

 

____________________________________________________________

XMTRs built in to cameras:

 

You say they are garbage (maybe those $35.00 sets are) but they really are not. I find them more used outside an envelope for what they were designed for.

 

With the design in mind you can get some pretty good use out of them. If you can spend more than there are def better choices.

[Soundy 1]

So various technical and legal concerns aside, the biggest problem to mixing-and-matching wireless cameras is the complete lack of standards throughout the industry... unless you use WiFi.

 

I do not think is is a lack of standards perse as more of the price range that people are willing to spend.

 

Well, to put the two thoughts together: it's the lack of standards, within the price range that people are willing to spend. Upper-end stuff does use established standards... unfortunately those standards are themselves pretty upper-end and thus rather pricey.

[HeadsUp 0]

in answer to the guy who started the thread.........

 

i would like to see transmitter / receiver sets that have shielded directional point to point antennas

 

intent being to both reduce the amount of interference imposed on other peoples equipment , improve security even where the signal is ecrypted , and also out of consideration for the public and reduce the amount of EMF imposed on humanity where we dont know the long term health affects.