Which DVR for 600 TVL camera?

[EndlessGrowthDoom 0]

Hello,

I'm new here but have a moderate knowledge of camera tech. I am looking at installing a new system at my house and I really only need 1 camera right now, maybe 2. I want quality video though, since I've seen enough people get ripped off with it all on camera, but they couldn't ID anything/anyone due to poor video quality.

 

I've decided to start with the camera and build around that since I can't seem to find a better deal than the Lorex LBC6050 600TVL @ $190:

http://www.frys.com/product/6420782?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG

 

Any ideas on the least expensive (of course) DVR that will provide a good image with this camera? I figure I need at least 480 recording/playback.

I'm just going to assume 4 channel for future expansion.

Assume h.264 capable.

Triplex or better.

I'd like to have a network connection for home lan +internet viewing if possible (free ddns?)

500 or 320gb drive? I'm not sure of the recording time difference- but I shouldn't need but 1 week minimum w/ 24/7 recording.

Fast searching, so 32x or better.

 

I was looking at the local Fry's in stock items, so the Lorex 320 GB LH304 & LH314, or the Swann 500GB DVR4-2500/SW-342, or Lilin 500GB DVR204. The Swann & Lilin appear to have the exact same specs, except Lilin is Taiwan and the manual printing sucks (so maybe quality too?)

 

Swann & Lilin are 500gb & record/display in 704x480; while the Lorex 304 is 320gb & displays 1280x1024 & records in 640x480. Which do you think is better?

 

How about other DVR's better for 600 TVL cam?

 

Any thoughts on this other system I stumbled upon? 500gb, 540TVL, 1cam, 1920x1080 display, 720x480record

http://www.closeoutcctv.com/1-Ch-Camera-DVR-Security-Surveillance-CCTV-Package-

p/cl-1propk512sh.htm

[Electryko 0]

Hello,

 

If you can afford it, what about the german Bosch divar 700 series XF.

It's a hybrid system for analog and h.264 cams as well.

It handles analog cams up to D1.

Web access and control software all included.

 

I've seen and installed this one and it's really good.

(for web access through the internet you do need a good upload speed if you use hi quality on this recorder.)

 

Greets,

Electryko

[bpzle 0]

Don't go to Frys for cctv. Its trash. All of it. I've tested everything they have on their shelves... well at least 2 years ago I did just as an experiment and learning experience.

[Soundy 1]

480 vertical pixels (NTSC) is the most you'll find on any analog DVR. D1 is D1 on any brand.

[bpzle 0]

Pixels are only a small piece of the puzzle... I've seen CIF look 10 times better than "D1" many a time... the compression quality and bit rate are very important. Funny though... you'll never read about that in spec sheets.

 

H.264 CAN look really good and comparable to less compressed codecs, but it's been my experience that "budget DVRs" lack the processing power to properly compress a good quality image in h.264. Manufactures have misled people into thinking that if it's h.264, then it's the best! Not so much. I'd rather have 10 days storage of good footage in MPEG4 than 30 days of worthless footage in a poorly compressed h.264.

 

Again, h.264 can be a good thing... but ONLY if it's executed properly.

[rory 0]

dont forget, difference between a camera with an IR Cut Filter and one without it ...

not to mention other features that make a difference at different times of the day/night.

For example with a camera without an IR cut filter, the brighter the sun gets the worse the image is.

So you could have the best highest resolution DVR and yet still garbage in .. garbage out.

 

LEFT - 480TVL ............. Right - 550TVL ...

 

LEFT - 380TVL ............ RIGHT - 550TVL ...

[ak357 0]

dont forget, difference between a camera with an IR Cut Filter and one without it ...

not to mention other features that make a difference at different times of the day/night.

For example with a camera without an IR cut filter, the brighter the sun gets the worse the image is.

So you could have the best highest resolution DVR and yet still garbage in .. garbage out.

 

Rory can u plz provide shot in D1 or VGA rez for single cam ?

Thx

[Soundy 1]

IR cut and codecs aren't really relevant to the question though. The OP is looking for a DVR that will make best use of a 600TVL (or more to the point, a >480TVL) camera. Anything that does 4CIF/D1 is already at the effective limit of analog video, and all else being equal, will work just as well for a 600TVL camera as any other.

 

The only way you'll improve on the resolution is with a DVR that samples at non-standard resolutions. Good luck finding those.

[bpzle 0]

Codecs and compression quality should be very important to the OP and his question. That greatly affects the finished image of any camera he chooses... Who cares if something can record (or even worse upscale) in 720x480 if the compression quality is garbage? He's doing research and trying to make an educated decision for a cctv system that meets his needs. In order to do that, I'm helping him to think of questions he probably otherwise would not know to ask... Look at the overall picture, literally.

 

And btw- nothing you do to a Lorex camera will make it look good. While Lorex is probably the best brand you'll find for cctv at Fry's, stay far away from their cameras. A few of their DVRs are decent, but still a far cry from what an experienced CCTV supplier could offer you...And for probably less money too.

[rory 0]

Rory can u plz provide shot in D1 or VGA rez for single cam ?

Thx

 

$30 Color IR camera I'm testing overnight, hows this?

 

 

$50 Indoor Color dome

 

[normicgander 0]

The simple answer is none that I know. Seems this has been discussed before on some old threads. DVRs use COTS ADC and compression ICS. Typically the ADC ICs are produced to meet the ITU 601 recommendation and will not effectively encode 600TVL cameras.

 

It wouldn't be so bad, but the real problem is excessive image compression (all that low, med, hi, superior etc stuff which is appllied to the same D1 or CIF signal). But D1 is D1 right? Or is it low-D1 or High-D1?

 

DVR manufacturers should provide specs in TVL, but we would be very disappointed if they did. Even if we could encode 600TVL cameras we would still have the problems (motion within the target scene) associated with analog interlaced video. Recording in CIF or 2CIF (fields) fixes that so they say. Perhaps we can install a a sign saying: "Please walk slowly, you are being recorded in Superior-D1"

 

Did see some encouraging HD CCTV standalone progressive scan recorders at ASIS ....

[tesc_cctvpro 0]

Indeed! many great points.

 

Some manufacturers such as ours - dahua, have been developing h.264 for many years - there are others just jumping on the bandwagon. There is no standard regulating the encoder that is used to process H.264 and so you will get some really bad .264 DVR's- where motion is poorly managed. For instance the entire top half of a tree will blow in unison during wind, rather than individual branches and leaves, or people's faces are blurred during motion, even at close range.

 

While I agree that no ordinary dvr will currently record the 600TVL, it is highly likely that the output of that 600 TVL camera is nowhere near 600TVL. If you are talking NTSC- i would be surprised if anything more than 330TVL comes out of that camera. The only benefit of a 600TVL rated camera in most instances is that you will be more likely to get the maximum resolution the dvr can record -480TVL.

 

Sadly, those vendors who are quite happy to take your $100 for the camera won't tell you that it's basically worth as much as a 480TVL camera

[normicgander 0]

NTSC broadcast viewed on TVs have horizontal resolution limitations around 330TVL (the Kell factor etc which is often debated). Keep in mind that the horizontal resolution for NTSC broadcast was limited or low-pass filtered around 4.2Mhz in order to meet FCC channel spectrum constraints of 6Mhz. Yes some OEMs cheat (i.e. the whole LUX thing), but I think some can produce 600TVL cameras. H.264 is standardized by the ITU, but is implemented differently by the applicators (the amount of bits/s output for example). On many of the IC encoders this can be adjusted.

 

The problems with analog DVRs in general are:

 

1. Excessive image/video compression regardless of the method.

 

2. The recording of 2 time incoherent interlaced fields such that any significant motion of a target of interest will produce poor video still images (the police what a still image frame for investigative and court proceedings). Deinterlacing is never perfect and many folks drop a field (and the intended goal of higher frame resolution) when trying to get a useful still image.

 

I think motion blurr because of the camera exposure setting is more of an issue and is sometimes confused with motion distortion do to video compression.

[EndlessGrowthDoom 0]

Thank you all for the information. I too purchased everything at Frys (since they were the only store around that had a supposed wide selection of surveillance equipment, & I could return items) in order to test and learn more. Indeed it is all junk as far as I'm concerned (for that kind of money). I'm just not going to pay that kind of money, upwards of $800, for VGA/D1 recording. I've seen enough people and places get ripped off right on camera, but video quality was not sufficient to make ID's. Even the $200 VGA Axis M1011 ip camera I tried looked better (but the Axis-only plug'n'play wouldn't function in my NAS- hence my search for a stand alone DVR). Now I'm pretty convinced that I need a MP camera and so IP for the quality I'm looking for. Besides that, I now feel that analog is just plain outdated and doesn't seem to have much use (for me at least) other than seeing if "someone" was there at some time, or for general live viewing, etc.

 

After looking around some smaller specialized shops here in San Diego, CA, I stumbled upon an amazing gadget- the Mobotix q24 hemispheric camera. I think I will be purchasing this if I can make it work with my temperamental ix4-200d NAS, otherwise I'll just buy a small cheap network drive for the camera alone. It is an IP camera up to 3MP w/a built in 32GB max card slot, and almost 360* coverage w/o fisheye effect, 2 way audio, all the different triggering, virtual ptz.... http://www.mobotix.com/por_PT/content/view/full/25611

 

And I can just use one camera to cover my entire front property continuously, with no ptz motors/etc; and it costs about as much as a crap dvr & cameras were going to cost me... and it doesn't look like a camera at all.

 

If it doesn't work out for some reason, it is still one of the coolest gadgets I've seen in a really long time. I recommend everyone see a demonstration- I was sold (barring any future technical difficulties)!

[SEANHAWG 1]

Megapixel cameras are the way to go if you want to catch detail from a wide view. However you can still pick up some detail using Analog cameras. You may just need a stronger lens. Of course the more you zoom in a lens, the field of view becomes narrower. But from what I have noticed, people put alot of thought into the cameras they purchase by purchasing super high rez, but they dont put alot of thought into lens strength, which could be crucial to picking up details.

 

The biggest request that we get is "I wanna see a license plate". Well it will be tough to capture a license plate that is 100' away with a typical 4-9mm lens or therabouts. And I see alot of people trying to do just that. With Analog, its just hard to get a one size fits all camera no matter how good the resolution is. Sometimes its just advantageous to have 2 or more cameras set up for a scenario, one for a wide view, and one zoomed in on a particular area such as an exit to capture details such as license plates. From what I have seen, its still cheaper, when all costs are considered, to get 2 or 3 good analog cameras, compared to one good name brand megapixel camera. I am sure I will get some disagreements but thats just what I have seen. I am sure, in a couple of years, that will not be the case anymore.

[Bean00 0]

Also keep in mind that if you need any recording at night, the Q24 is not the right camera for the job. Love the camera, but it's a color only camera with a megapixel sensor that wants a lot of light to get the job done.

 

As SEANHAWG mentioned, D1 recording with the right lens selection can usually get the job done quite well.

 

If your sold on the mobotix and recording directly to your NAS box consider the following:

Mobotix Q24 + lighting(if you are concerned about night recording)

Mobotix D12 With one color and one black/white sensor.(For day and night.)

 

Even with a Black/white sensor in the D12 though you do need some lighting.

[tesc_cctvpro 0]

Interesting comment on analog -- we moved all our analog system into the "legacy cctv" category on our website about 1 month ago.

[Soundy 1]

Analog... how quaint

[ViewCam 0]

wait for couple more weeks, we're gonna to have a new SONY " EFFIO " E series,that is high sensitivity, high resolution with 650TVL and excellent color reproduction, this is a newer innovation sensor from Sony.

 

This is a Entry DSP sensor model : CXD4122AGG- CXD4127GG.

 

try to type this DSP sensor model on the YAHOO search page, U will find out more info for this new camera.

 

The problem is, The DVR system, I guess and probably U have to wait till end of this year for this new model sony camera, for now, I will test the new sample with the latest real D1 compression standalone DVR, will update to U.

[rory 0]

Well ive tested several so called GOOD new True Day Night Infrared Bullet cameras over the past few weeks and none of them can match the performance of an old school True Day Night Infrared Bullet .. i have them here also. I dont know what camera manufacturers are thinking but they are going backwards, BIG TIME!!! Not to mention i havent seen so much blatent misrepresentation of the facts pertaining the specs of cameras as there are now .. on OEM and Manufacturer websites .. its so bad now it is sickening, that so many are wasting hard earned money to buy something that doesnt even have certain features they claim, or can barely perform as they say. Manufacturers you need to start REALLY TESTING these cameras before you make claims and post marketing hype about this and that - thats all I have to say on the matter.

[sidoffice 0]

its a combination of decent dvr and good tvl camera.. we have an instore demonstration which also demonstrates our DVR outputting via vga to a tft screen, same dvr outputting via hdmi to dvi to another screen and again same dvr outputing via composite to a television. Now although all three monitors are displaying the same image the tv screen is by far the clearest with less pixelation.. so what i am saying it is also the type of screen you use which provides a good clarity image.

 

Yes TVL on cameras does matter greatly as it is dots per inch providing clarity of image. Stay away from swan range dvr's as the recording quality is very poor, also in monitoring mode is not a clear.. blurry images. it is indeed an inferior system and very low end of the market.. if you dont care about quality along with functions and features on dvr system and just want a camera and recording device with a minimal budget in mind then stick with the swan

[nicksonnl 0]

Hi all,

 

We tested recently some Viscoo camera's. They have recently launched 700TVL models with the sony Effio E system, like Viewcam mentioned. These models have the Sony 960H chip embedded. Absolutely fine working models, we have tested as well the gimball models as the outdoor IR cams and we can't say anything bad about them. In color mode they reach up till 700TVL and at night they even reach up to 800TVL. At the sony wesbite can you find more info about the effio system. The described it pretty well.

 

Now the DVR manufactures have to catch up again with some newer models.

 

Best regards,

Nick