megapixel man 0 Posted November 1, 2009 Ah, but then the question of the lens really comes into play. I based my reply on the manufacturer specs: 0.1 lux minimum illumination Lens f stops obviously effect ALL cameras but in this case I am highlighting that the manufacturers spec of 0.1 lux, regardless of what lens it has, is not good enough for a day night application in "most" cases. I really dont need to know what lenses are available for that camera either, as I would never buy a $15,000 camera. If I did not know Rory, then I would have said "Great Job" in finding this flaw, but I do not expect anything less from him anyway - You are the best man.. and I mean it! Interestingly enough that spec alone will kill any deal that may be cooking at the moment... How can someone pay this type of pricing (not including similar level of lens pricing or higher) and then have this type of lux level... Wow... I will add one more: - Lossless JPEG2000 compression Are you kidding me?? Most of the known systems are spitting out H.264 compression and this camera at that price is pushing antiquated compression?? I did not have a chance to see who the manufacturer is or the product code... can anyone please provide this info if available? LMAO, antiquated ???, do some research on the Avigilon adpotion of JPEG2000 with HDSM and then JPEG2000 Compression in general. Start with HDTV's H.264 and why, then HD Cinema's JPEG2000 and why. Then start thinking about why JPEG2000 for Surveillance with High Megapixel Cameras. Then research the impacts of High Megapixel Cameras with H.264 in a Surveillance application, then get back to me and well talk some more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soundy 1 Posted November 1, 2009 Ah, but then the question of the lens really comes into play. Remember, where your average CCTV lens has a maximum aperture anywhere from f/1.2 to f/1.8, f/2 is considered VERY fast for most EF-mount lenses, especially with varifocals (talking in the upper-mid range, four-digit-pricetag range), and f/2.8 to f/4 is far more common. The Sigma 300-600mm beast seen in the "Megapixel images" thread is f/5.6 *at best*, and with the 2x converter on the rig shown there, it won't open beyond f/11. In a nutshell, unless you're spending as much on the lens as you are the camera, most of the lenses you're putting on the Avigilon are at least two stops slower - or one-quarter the light transmission - than typical "low-end" megapixel C/CS-mount lenses. At f/11, that's a full SIX stops slower than f/2... or 1/64 the amount of light. Very good observation... What is the key on this is how you describe - as unless someone is spending as much on the lens as for the camera, the outcome will never be optimized. Well.. not necessarily. A Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 can be had for <$200 *new*. But the point is, lens aperture DOES come into play a lot more than it does with C/CS-mount lenses, simply because there IS a much wider range available. I don't think I've seen a C/CS lens under 70mm that wasn't AT LEAST f/1.8 or faster, making it a factor that doesn't often need as much attention. Very few manufacturers actually may even support this high end MP cameras... just makes no economical sense to produce them, since usage will be bare minimal... in some cases these lenses actually costs twice as much as the camera itself... As far as EF-mount lenses for the Avigilon cameras... it's plenty economical, since there are 20 years' worth of Canon SLRs that use them. A number of third-party manufacturers actually have full lines of lenses with a number of different mounts available (for Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Konika/Minolta, etc.), which makes it even more economical for them. However, with the larger sensor, you need substantially longer focal lengths to achieve the same FOV... and for the same aperture, that means a much larger lens structure overall, and a lot more glass. And with the higher resolution, that also means higher manufacturing tolerances than is needed for standard CCTV cameras. All that equates to more expensive lenses... but as with everything, you get what you pay for. Keep in mind too, that a lot of these Avigilon samples are using Canon L-series lenses, which are their high-end professional models that often cost 4-5 times as much as similar "consumer" lenses. We have been toying around with very high end IP cameras from DALSA with extremely high res (higher than 16M) and lenses at the same level... Picture quality is out of this world and ability to zoom multiple time and almost no pixelization is the gravy... Not a technology for mainstream, but has its potential military and government uses.. They are already the main supplier for space exploration projects... They tried in movie industry (the last 007 (Quantum of Solace) movie was shot with their technology cameras), but decided to pull back due to limitations on how many of these cameras can they sell... Might be part of the reason Avigilon went with the EF mount - there's a HUGE market out there already for the lenses, and several third-party manufacturers, which makes the lenses a lot more economical than they might be if they were proprietary to the cameras. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
megapixel man 0 Posted November 1, 2009 Ah, but then the question of the lens really comes into play. Remember, where your average CCTV lens has a maximum aperture anywhere from f/1.2 to f/1.8, f/2 is considered VERY fast for most EF-mount lenses, especially with varifocals (talking in the upper-mid range, four-digit-pricetag range), and f/2.8 to f/4 is far more common. The Sigma 300-600mm beast seen in the "Megapixel images" thread is f/5.6 *at best*, and with the 2x converter on the rig shown there, it won't open beyond f/11. In a nutshell, unless you're spending as much on the lens as you are the camera, most of the lenses you're putting on the Avigilon are at least two stops slower - or one-quarter the light transmission - than typical "low-end" megapixel C/CS-mount lenses. At f/11, that's a full SIX stops slower than f/2... or 1/64 the amount of light. Very good observation... What is the key on this is how you describe - as unless someone is spending as much on the lens as for the camera, the outcome will never be optimized. Well.. not necessarily. A Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 can be had for <$200 *new*. But the point is, lens aperture DOES come into play a lot more than it does with C/CS-mount lenses, simply because there IS a much wider range available. I don't think I've seen a C/CS lens under 70mm that wasn't AT LEAST f/1.8 or faster, making it a factor that doesn't often need as much attention. Very few manufacturers actually may even support this high end MP cameras... just makes no economical sense to produce them, since usage will be bare minimal... in some cases these lenses actually costs twice as much as the camera itself... As far as EF-mount lenses for the Avigilon cameras... it's plenty economical, since there are 20 years' worth of Canon SLRs that use them. A number of third-party manufacturers actually have full lines of lenses with a number of different mounts available (for Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Konika/Minolta, etc.), which makes it even more economical for them. However, with the larger sensor, you need substantially longer focal lengths to achieve the same FOV... and for the same aperture, that means a much larger lens structure overall, and a lot more glass. And with the higher resolution, that also means higher manufacturing tolerances than is needed for standard CCTV cameras. All that equates to more expensive lenses... but as with everything, you get what you pay for. Keep in mind too, that a lot of these Avigilon samples are using Canon L-series lenses, which are their high-end professional models that often cost 4-5 times as much as similar "consumer" lenses. We have been toying around with very high end IP cameras from DALSA with extremely high res (higher than 16M) and lenses at the same level... Picture quality is out of this world and ability to zoom multiple time and almost no pixelization is the gravy... Not a technology for mainstream, but has its potential military and government uses.. They are already the main supplier for space exploration projects... They tried in movie industry (the last 007 (Quantum of Solace) movie was shot with their technology cameras), but decided to pull back due to limitations on how many of these cameras can they sell... Might be part of the reason Avigilon went with the EF mount - there's a HUGE market out there already for the lenses, and several third-party manufacturers, which makes the lenses a lot more economical than they might be if they were proprietary to the cameras. Even a Canon L Series 400mm (non IS) is no where near as much as the 16MP camera, dont know where people get their information from Plenty of reasonably priced EF Mount lenses for the 11 and 16MP cams: Sigma 20mm, f/1.8, 84 Degree Horizontal angle of view Sigma 28mm, f/1.8, 64 Degree HAV Canon 50mm, f/1.4 and f/1.8, 40 Degree HAV Canon 85mm, f/1.8, 24 Degree HAV All the above lenses between $200-800. Of course there are Canon 50mm and 85mm F/1.2 lenses that cost a bit, but at around 1/5th or less the cost of the camera. Now that 600mm Sigma with the doubler in the shot taken from the other thread may be an exception, but where on earth would you use a lens like that for an every day surveillance application Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
megapixel man 0 Posted November 1, 2009 The "HDSM" technology from Avigilon is the first I've heard with these capabilities. Ingenious for saving bandwith and CPU power... Probably helps out tremendously for remote internet clients.Anyone know of other companies with similar technology? The stuff I'm experienced with only allows for throttleing of the entire systems remote connection quality and network bandwidth. This makes playing with megapixels over the internet no fun. Bingo, someone gets it! No, i dont know of any others that use this type of technology. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soundy 1 Posted November 1, 2009 Even a Canon L Series 400mm (non IS) is no where near as much as the 16MP camera, dont know where people get their information from Like I said, this is where lens "speed" and aperture really comes into play. I'm guessing most people here won't be getting dealer pricing on SLR lenses, so going by retail listings, so using one of our local brick-and-mortar retailers here as a reference: Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM: $1489.99 Canon EF 400mm f/4.0L IS USM: $6899.99 Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM: $8999.99 While the IS does add a bit the price, the big difference is the sheer amount of glass needed for the faster lens... and additional care that must be used in the lens's manufacturing. Now that 600mm Sigma with the doubler in the shot taken from the other thread may be an exception, but where on earth would you use a lens like that for an every day surveillance application According the B&H Photo link where I found it, that lens retails for $9,999. The converter is only $300. Of course, if you want to get really crazy, B&H lists a Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 zoom for a mere $28,999... or if that's too rich for ya, the Canon EF 800mm f/5.6 IS USM goes for a measly $11,499. The Sigma 200-500 lists at 34.6 lbs, BTW... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cglaeser 0 Posted November 1, 2009 I'm guessing most people here won't be getting dealer pricing on SLR lenses, so going by retail listings, so using one of our local brick-and-mortar retailers here as a reference: Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM: $1489.99 Why are you posting the prices of 400mm lenses? It's nice to know that with the EF mount you *could* use a 400mm lens if you really needed the reach, but, c'mon, let's be realistic. It's extremely rare that a security application uses that kind of reach. Best, Christopher Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bpzle 0 Posted November 1, 2009 OK!! We all get it... you guys know ALOT about lenses... but enough about that. If you want to wow people with your rare lens knowledge do it on another thread. Back to the header please... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soundy 1 Posted November 1, 2009 I'm guessing most people here won't be getting dealer pricing on SLR lenses, so going by retail listings, so using one of our local brick-and-mortar retailers here as a reference: Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM: $1489.99 Why are you posting the prices of 400mm lenses? Just for comparison purposes, showing the difference in price for different apertures. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cglaeser 0 Posted November 1, 2009 ∙ 0.01 lux minimum illumination At what shutter speed? Best, Christopher Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CCTV_Suppliers 0 Posted November 1, 2009 thewireguys, I am very relaxed and extremely calm... you or anybody can not give me any reason to get upset about anything... After all, I thought we are sharing ideas here.. Next time please do not assume on anything - you do not know who your audiences are - some may not reply and some will. If someone asks a question (a question that had nothing to do with any specific brand for that matter), it does not quantify that they do not know anything about it. Rather, they may be testing you and others to learn everyone elses opinions... If my type of questions offend you, then you do not have to respond. I really care less about attitudes created from nothing - in my case asking a simple question.. If you do not want to share your estimated costs for such Enterprise Software solutions, then don't... but do not take a different stand that has nothing to do with the question. Your questions do not offend me but your unprovoked attack did. So, if it is not my questions, then must be Lamborghini comment? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thewireguys 3 Posted November 1, 2009 thewireguys, I am very relaxed and extremely calm... you or anybody can not give me any reason to get upset about anything... After all, I thought we are sharing ideas here.. Next time please do not assume on anything - you do not know who your audiences are - some may not reply and some will. If someone asks a question (a question that had nothing to do with any specific brand for that matter), it does not quantify that they do not know anything about it. Rather, they may be testing you and others to learn everyone elses opinions... If my type of questions offend you, then you do not have to respond. I really care less about attitudes created from nothing - in my case asking a simple question.. If you do not want to share your estimated costs for such Enterprise Software solutions, then don't... but do not take a different stand that has nothing to do with the question. Your questions do not offend me but your unprovoked attack did. So, if it is not my questions, then must be Lamborghini comment? Why don't you recommend some software? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bpzle 0 Posted November 1, 2009 Good idea buddy! lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CCTV_Suppliers 0 Posted November 2, 2009 Enterprise software solution? Well, how about Intellevision! It has over 52 installed bases right now mainly in military and government locations with special requirements... pertinent to resolution requirements and more importantly video analytics using FLIR cameras... This is the software that will be released on December to general public for use at no cost... with limitations up to 1028 cameras capable, native H.264 compression at the server side and more... Dependent on application and besides Intellevision, the Genetec looks good and as well as Eyesoft, Exacq and even Milestone.. Some of the priopetary once are ok - Avigilon looks great and so does D-Link and others... My one beef with all these various solutions is the cost... and of course that is a different thread all together... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ak357 0 Posted November 2, 2009 Enterprise software solution? Well, how about Intellevision! It has over 52 installed bases right now mainly in military and government locations with special requirements... pertinent to resolution requirements and more importantly video analytics using FLIR cameras... This is the software that will be released on December to general public for use at no cost... with limitations up to 1028 cameras capable, native H.264 compression at the server side and more... So the way I understand "Intellevision" is your "secret Linux weapon" u have been talking about ? just curios Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
megapixel man 0 Posted November 2, 2009 Enterprise software solution? Well, how about Intellevision! It has over 52 installed bases right now mainly in military and government locations with special requirements... pertinent to resolution requirements and more importantly video analytics using FLIR cameras... This is the software that will be released on December to general public for use at no cost... with limitations up to 1028 cameras capable, native H.264 compression at the server side and more... Dependent on application and besides Intellevision, the Genetec looks good and as well as Eyesoft, Exacq and even Milestone.. Some of the priopetary once are ok - Avigilon looks great and so does D-Link and others... My one beef with all these various solutions is the cost... and of course that is a different thread all together... Can you please explain what you mean "native H.264 compression at the server side"? this does not make any sense to me. What cameras does this software curently support? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CCTV_Suppliers 0 Posted November 2, 2009 Enterprise software solution? Well, how about Intellevision! It has over 52 installed bases right now mainly in military and government locations with special requirements... pertinent to resolution requirements and more importantly video analytics using FLIR cameras... This is the software that will be released on December to general public for use at no cost... with limitations up to 1028 cameras capable, native H.264 compression at the server side and more... So the way I understand "Intellevision" is your "secret Linux weapon" u have been talking about ? just curios No secret bud.. just another application that has been maturing in very high profile locations.. I know that it will evolve more as the time goes by, but for now, the release timeline still is intact... - but then again, this is not the thread to address this software... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CCTV_Suppliers 0 Posted November 2, 2009 Enterprise software solution? Well, how about Intellevision! It has over 52 installed bases right now mainly in military and government locations with special requirements... pertinent to resolution requirements and more importantly video analytics using FLIR cameras... This is the software that will be released on December to general public for use at no cost... with limitations up to 1028 cameras capable, native H.264 compression at the server side and more... Dependent on application and besides Intellevision, the Genetec looks good and as well as Eyesoft, Exacq and even Milestone.. Some of the priopetary once are ok - Avigilon looks great and so does D-Link and others... My one beef with all these various solutions is the cost... and of course that is a different thread all together... Can you please explain what you mean "native H.264 compression at the server side"? this does not make any sense to me. What cameras does this software curently support? Guys, lets not change the topic of this thread... if you do not understand the comments, then we will address it in a different thread about it. At the moment, it works with 33 different cameras (including IP PTZ domes) that we could get our hand on... and more should come soon... some manufacturers give them to us and some we buy... So, what is your favorite and why... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CCTV_Suppliers 0 Posted November 2, 2009 Good idea buddy! lol Just in case, American Dynamics IP software (Triedent) is one of my favorites too (linux based)... and the Bosch Enterprise software too (Windows based)... We toyed around with Panasonic version, but it did not do well... they OEM the software from someone else, not sure who... OnSSI looked very nice... But as always, the cost of these solutions is what I have a serious problems... cost per IP connection, cost for the software, yearly costs (maintenance or otherwise), etc... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thewireguys 3 Posted November 2, 2009 IPconfigure is a great solution. http://www.ipconfigure.com/ No client software to install because it is entirely web based, with support for unlimited cameras and unlimited users. This software is a little difficult to install but once it is the web interface is the easiest I have used, very little training required. The motion detection is server based but they do it differently then everyone else so it does not require a lot of CPU cycles. Advantages: No Client Software Map Interface Unlimited cameras Unlimited users Independent live and recording frame rates Auto discovery of IP cameras Active Directory LPR Disadvantages: Not the best for smaller setups No audio support Xeon pro and Windows Server 2003 32bit required Limited camera support not the easiest to install Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rory 0 Posted November 2, 2009 Browser based apps suck. Best to install a client. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bpzle 0 Posted November 2, 2009 Browser based apps suck.Best to install a client. uh oh.... i smell a cat fight! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thewireguys 3 Posted November 2, 2009 Browser based apps suck.Best to install a client. Well it must not suck that bad since it beat out Onssi, Milestone, and Genetec to win the United States Postal Service. "ipConfigure won the largest deployment of IP video surveillance software in the history of IP. Since 2009, ipConfigure has supported 50,000 cameras and 1,500 locations for the United States Postal Service" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rory 0 Posted November 2, 2009 Well it must not suck that bad Guess I need to repeat myself: Browser based apps suck. Best to install a client. If they want to use crappy software, thats their rights. But ofcourse, everything posted on this forum is just a persons opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thewireguys 3 Posted November 2, 2009 Well it must not suck that bad Guess I need to repeat myself: Browser based apps suck. Best to install a client. If they want to use crappy software, thats their rights. But ofcourse, everything posted on this forum is just a persons opinion. How do you know their software sucks? Because that it is very bold statement if you never used it. It worked very well when I tested it for 2 months. The only reason I am not using it for our solution is I want one NVR software solution to support and their software doesn't make sense for smaller camera counts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rory 0 Posted November 2, 2009 How do you know their software sucks? Because that it is very bold statement if you never used it. It worked very well when I tested it for 2 months. The only reason I am not using it for our solution is I want one NVR software solution to support and their software doesn't make sense for smaller camera counts. Im really getting tired of how anal some of you guys are. Its like talking to 10 year olds sometimes. I dont have explain anything but I said BROWSER BASED APPS SUCK. Anything that has to run within a browser sucks. That is my opinion. I could explain it more in depth but I dont see any point as I dont care whether you or anyone else uses it or not. End of story. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
