Is Q-See Equipment any good?

[buster74985 0]

Im looking at the Q-See Elite series of equipment. Does anyone have any experience or comments on this equipment?

[buster74985 0]

Specifically looking at:

QT536 16ch DVR

QD6002D Dome Camera

QD6501B Bullet Camera

QD6502 Bullet Camera

[shockwave199 0]

It's gonna be really tough to find anyone here who's used that gear specifically. Most would even say it's crap- spend your money on better quality. However, I've been using a q-see 408 dvr for the past year and it's been very good. I don't use q-see cameras with it, but the dvr is good for me. My one observation is that their tech support is marginal. They often refer you to their online documentation instead of personally helping you- very frustrating when you've already read all their documentation. And an RMA could have you waiting for a replacement for upwards of a month. It takes two weeks on average just to get an RMA number, let alone getting the replacement product moving to your door. So for after purchase support, they get a fail from me.

[ctbaker 0]

I am in the same boat. I lurked and posted on the forums a few months ago and eventually put my system on hold for lack of finding the "perfect" camera. I had figured on going with a Dahua based DVR setup and then was waiting for the 960H DVR (i.e. DH-DVR1604HF-S-E) that was supposed to launch any day at the time and just gave up.

 

Then the wife sent me an email today for a Q-See 600TVL 8-camera setup from Costco for $500 after $300 discount and now I am sniffing around and trying to get back up to speed. I know you get what you pay for but trying to find the perfect setup is giving me a headache.

 

http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?whse=BC&topnav=&prodid=11612358&ec=BC-EC877-CatHome&pos=8&lang=en-US

 

I am sure that piecing the Dahua DVR with some Qvis, KT&C or other brand of cameras would be superior and worth the extra cash but sometimes you just want to take the easy path with a canned system that is not top shelf.

 

Anyways, sorry to hijack your thread....back to your regular programming.

[tomcctv 190]

Costco for $500 after $300 discount

 

 

i. made BY TVT. something with a $300 discount has a problem. yes it will be fine connected to a monitor but if you want remote viewing then your not going to get it from that model and there is no firmware update

[shockwave199 0]

As far as a current update-

 

http://qsee.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1275/kw/QT426-841-5

 

But I'd do nothing and see how it goes. If you know how to tweak your wireless network, it's a good bet the default OS in the dvr will be fine. If anything, buy with money back policy, hook up the cameras and set them on the table or floor, get the dvr going remotely, and see where you're at. You need to be comfortable with tweaking your router, port forwarding, and dynamic address settings, that's all. That whole thing is what trips up most users when it comes to remote viewing. Watch this amazing course on it and you'll be well informed-

 

http://wifi-wiz.net/

 

Good luck with your choices. And try to fear not, too much.

[tomcctv 190]

As far as a current update-

 

 

that update is from last year.

 

If you know how to tweak your wireless network, it's a good bet the default OS in the dvr will be fine.

 

it has nothing to do with a router is looking at dvr data with IE9. it is not supported. yes you can use ie8 but in a few months most will be on ie9 so then you have NO remote connection

 

there is a reason for a $300 discount

[groovyman 0]

Costco for $500 after $300 discount

 

 

i. made BY TVT. something with a $300 discount has a problem. yes it will be fine connected to a monitor but if you want remote viewing then your not going to get it from that model and there is no firmware update

I think remote viewing is pretty much covered. From the Product Details section:

- Compatible Operating Systems: Mac OS X 10.6 & 10.7, Microsoft Windows XP/Vista/ 7

- Compatible Internet Browsers: Internet Explorer (7-9), Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and MAC Safari 5.0/5.1

- CMS software is available

- Apps for iPhone, iPad, Android, Windows Phone 7, BlackBerry, Windows Mobile Pro 6, and Symbian

 

Firmware version 3.1.9 for QT426 was released on 03/30/2012

http://qsee.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1275/kw/QT426

 

Here's the product information page at Q-See.com

http://www.q-see.com/products/product_description.php?cId=38&pId=73&id=38&pid=28

[shockwave199 0]

And then there's the remote software, which spanks the crap outa active-x web application manager anyway. But I've been happily using IE8 and have no plans on moving to IE9. It looks like most q-see dvr's, including mine, now have an update for IE9 if you wish. Even the remote software now supports Mac. And to your point about 300 bucks of spelling a problem- a retailer carries CNB's for 165, quite a bit below what other places charge. That makes it an attractive deal- it doesn't spell a problem for the product.

 

I get that you don't like q-see and think it's crapola Tom. I'm just sayin- base your assertions on bench testing everything you're claiming before you factually state there's massive problems with remote networking. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that's probably just not a fact, especially since you're back pedaling with an old senario that was true of MANY brands of dvr's- no support for IE9. As with anything that costs this amount of bucks, buy with a good return policy and kick the tires and see if it's all working before you just plunk the whole thing into place. And seriously, if remote viewing is a big factor, just know you'll have to do some network tweaking to make it all work. Not hard to do, but some find it a very difficult and frustrating part of the equation- no matter WHO makes the dvr. What it often comes down to is customer support, and I've already spoken to that.

[Soundy 1]

The problem with a lot of these bargain-basement brands is that they don't make or support any of their own equipment; they just buy someone else's stuff and slap their own name on it. So Q-See got a bad name by selling someone else's cheap crap; now they're sourcing better stuff that seems to be much improved; but tomorrow they could start sourcing junk again and you don't know which you'll end up with until you get it. And when you're selling something someone else made, you're largely reliant on them for the patches, fixes, updates, software, etc. - ship a bunch of stuff from a manufacturer that then goes under, and good luck ever getting patches again.

 

That's not to say this is a bad thing in itself. That may not be the case with Q-See and a lot of similar vendors.

[tomcctv 190]

I get that you don't like q-see and think it's crapola Tom. I'm just sayin- base your assertions

 

 

 

based on fact and to save people money and problem. to new members of the forum.

 

these are direct from q-see (not me) and i will leave the complaints that costco have listed in the passed 3 month.

 

Step 10) Some of our DVRs do not support Internet Explorer 9,

 

This DVR cannot be seen on Internet Explorer 9 . You will need to downgrade to Internet Explorer 8. The DVR software is not compatible with Internet Explorer 9.

 

 

 

shockwave199 both direct from q-see website. SO PLEASE DONT SAY these are MY opinions.

 

 

you have a PC based system and NOT a TVT. we have seen more TVT/q-see/lorex systems over many years (we are 30 years old this november)

 

 

you are right q-see has no problem with other rebranded units they sell but you have a windows system (nothing to do with TVT) so you dont know or see the problems from the standalone. windows based or PC are always better and are easy to place add on

 

a standalone is not. its reliant on updates via new software or firmware. and if not available then things like ie9 problems can not be fixed.

 

buy with a good return policy and kick the tires and see if it's all working before you just plunk the whole thing into place. And seriously, if remote viewing is a big factor, just know you'll have to do some network tweaking to make it all work. Not hard to do, but some find it a very difficult and frustrating part of the equation- no matter WHO makes the dvr.

 

 

there is a very good reason for that. 1 its a waste of money and time. this is what the forum is for buying once saves money.

 

if remote viewing is a big factor, just know you'll have to do some network tweaking to make it all work. Not hard to do, but some find it a very difficult and frustrating part of the equation- no matter WHO makes the dvr.

 

 

it is a massive problem if the dvr is not supported. you can have the best network. pc. router if its not supported its not going to work.

 

 

like i said TVT has big returns. so has costco (which are under q-see name) not there problem but TVTs as there supplier.

 

 

q-see now have a new website and i do have a problem with some of there new sales pitches .

 

Q-see brings the $12,000 DVR that the casinos use to catch card cheats down to the price a homeowner can afford. I recommend any home first install (well you just have too)

[shockwave199 0]

but you have a windows system (nothing to do with TVT) so you dont know or see the problems from the standalone. windows based or PC are always better and are easy to place add on

 

a standalone is not. its reliant on updates via new software or firmware. and if not available then things like ie9 problems can not be fixed.

I ummm, have a stand alone 408 dvr from them. A modest one yes, but it's still kickin and doing great. I can't speak for every single dvr they offer, true. I haven't had any experience with anything other than the 408's. Which ones have you personally had in line with these problems lately Tom? I think we agree on some cons about q-see, but from my experience only- it's not a certainty you're getting busted equipment. And it is a certainty there are higher quality options with better customer service. The choice is yours.

[groovyman 0]

I'm not here to defend nor put down QSee DVRs. Just want to mention that if some of their DVRs are not compatible with IE9, so what? What's the big deal? I'd rather use the remote access software vs. a web browser anyway. To say that if a DVR is not compatible with IE9 there will be no remote access is absolute nonsense.

 

I have clients with DVRs that were installed 6-9 years ago where the web viewers aren't compatible with IE8 or 9 and some have no mobile device support (even with IP Cam Viewer), but remote viewing with the remote access software works just fine even on Windows 7 64-bit systems. I have just one system where the remote software gives a problem and that's a Dedicated Micros D4RS. The Web Viewer won't work and the Network Viewer won't install correctly on 64-bit systems. 32-bit Vista or 7 and, of course, XP and XP Mode in Vista or 7 is no problem, so that's what's used.

 

The times have changed. In the early 90's a decent computer cost $3,000, but by the early 2000's more powerful systems were $500 (even less) and that pricing remains in place today even as the systems get more and more powerful. I think the same thing has happened to the DVR industry. In my opinion you can't look at a $300 DVR today and say it's crap solely based on its price. It certainly won't be the solution for every situation, but may be just what's needed in some situations. There's a cover for every pot, so to speak.

 

Bottom line: a DVR isn't compatible with IE9? Big deal. That will not prevent having remote access. The DVR company doesn't come out with firmware updates anymore? Some of my clients have systems where the last firmware update came out in 2005, but they're remotely accessible using remote access software. Some of these systems cost thousands (excluding cameras), not $200-$400 - and these $200-$400 systems have more features and better video quality.

[niceguymr 0]

 

This DVR cannot be seen on Internet Explorer 9 . You will need to downgrade to Internet Explorer 8. The DVR software is not compatible with Internet Explorer 9.

 

 

Tom, Thank you for your input in this thread. This system (the QT426 +8 QM6006B bundle fron Costco for $499) is the exact system I'm looking at too. In fact, I already ordered mine and it is arriving this week. That being said, I'm having some doubts as to whether or not I'm going to keep it.

 

Can you please provide a link (source) that directly points to the information you have quoted referring SPECIFICALLY to the QT-426? I trust you're only trying to help, but I would like to be absolutely certain with the facts.

 

Also Tom, I cannot find any Customer Reviews on either the Costco website or Amazon that specifically reference incompatibility with IE9 and THIS UNIT (The Qt426). Please point me to any of that if you can.

 

Shockwave, Also thank you for your fair and balanced input. I appreciate all the feedback you've provided as well.

[Soundy 1]

Just want to mention that if some of their DVRs are not compatible with IE9, so what? What's the big deal?

It's not a big deal... unless you happen to be the Average Home User (who these products are aimed at), happily plunking away watching your DVR from your laptop's browser, until one day Microsoft essentially shoves this update down your throat, and suddenly you can't connect to your DVR anymore. To make matters worse, what if the manufacturer won't respond to your questions (unless you pay), and the re-seller is some shady online eBay store who won't respond or has just up and vanished? Or even Costco, for that matter, who will simply refer your questions back to the manufacturer?

 

Maybe half of your "average home users" will figure out to Google the problem (and might even stumble on some search terms that won't link them to porn sites), and perhaps be lucky enough to come across the solution... the rest will be hooped, potentially having to pay a Geek Squad member or some other $100/hr. rent-a-nerd who is just as proficient at Google-fu, to fix a problem... THAT SHOULDN'T EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE WITH A RESPONSIVE MANUFACTURER.

 

In the end, that's the real issue: IE9 has been available to developers for over two years, and in public release for 13+ months now. The affected manufacturers KNOW (or certainly SHOULD know) that they have a problem... and as yet don't appear willing or able to fix it. Almost all computers BUILT in the last 12 months should now come with IE9 standard, so that negates the ability to backlevel to IE8. Not everyone wants the hassle of installing the thick client; they just want to pull up a browser (maybe on a relative's computer when they're visiting somewhere out of town, or in an internet cafe), plug in their DDNS address, and have it work they way they've always known it to work. Things change, people get confused, then frustrated.

 

It's indicative of a larger issue, too: if a manufacturer can't or WON'T address a well-known issue like this, what will they do (or not do) with other problems that arise? How will they be with delivering updates for improved functionality? What if you want to replace your 250GB drive with a 1TB drive, but you can't, because the last firmware available for your machine doesn't support anything over 500GB?

[shockwave199 0]

IE isn't the only game in town either. Chrome/mozzilla are supported with one extention add on- simple. When it comes to q-see specifically in terms of remote viewing, I prefer their 1st generation CMS software for camera veiwing and having the web app open in chrome, simultainiously. Between the two I have immediate access to channel tweaking and searching/playback. Later on for casual searching and playback, I prefer CMS for way more functions than a web app can give.

[groovyman 0]

I want to start out by saying that Soundy, please don't take anything I write here as starting a flame war or a personal attack. I have too much respect for you and your knowledge of CCTV. I think I watched too many presidential debates and I just have to respond This is intended as just a rebuttal

 

It's not a big deal... unless you happen to be the Average Home User (who these products are aimed at), happily plunking away watching your DVR from your laptop's browser, until one day Microsoft essentially shoves this update down your throat, and suddenly you can't connect to your DVR anymore.

This has happened many times over the years, from IE6 to 7, 8 and now 9. Technology changes all the time and not all manufacturers, even responsive manufacturers like Dahua, will make all of their product compatible with newer technologies. At some point manufacturer support will stop.

 

Maybe half of your "average home users" will figure out to Google the problem (and might even stumble on some search terms that won't link them to porn sites), and perhaps be lucky enough to come across the solution... the rest will be hooped, potentially having to pay a Geek Squad member or some other $100/hr. rent-a-nerd who is just as proficient at Google-fu, to fix a problem... THAT SHOULDN'T EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE WITH A RESPONSIVE MANUFACTURER.

You're right. Let's take Dahua for example. I have some ICRealtime and Mace DVRs that were installed around 2005-2006. I came to find out that these DVRs were actually manufactured by Dahua. With both of them the web viewer was extremely buggy in IE6, a pain to get working in IE7 and will not work with IE8 or IE9. The stand alone viewers worked better, but when 64-bit Windows OS became the norm they wouldn't install properly, and forget about running the software on wide screen laptops when they became the norm - error messages up the wazoo (talk about things changing, people getting confused & frustrated - whooo boy). By this time support for these DVRs in terms of updated firmware and software were long gone. Same goes for some Dedicated Micros and GE Kalatel systems some of my clients have installed. Getting them to work with Windows 7 & IE9 is a challenge (Virtualization & XP mode to the rescue ). Most don't have smartphone support either, and I doubt they ever will.

 

Not everyone wants the hassle of installing the thick client; they just want to pull up a browser (maybe on a relative's computer when they're visiting somewhere out of town, or in an internet cafe), plug in their DDNS address, and have it work they way they've always known it to work. Things change, people get confused, then frustrated.

I agree that any recent DVR should be compatable with IE9 and I would like to see compatability with other web browsers and operating systems as well. But, do you really think that in a few years from now when future generations of browsers hit the market the systems being sold today are going to be supported? What's going to happen when the DVR installed today is not compatable with IE10, 11, 12, etc? How long do manufacturers provide updated firmware for their models, especially after they discontinue them? Manufacturers are always coming out with new models and discontinuing support for older models - that's just the way things are.

 

It's indicative of a larger issue, too: if a manufacturer can't or WON'T address a well-known issue like this, what will they do (or not do) with other problems that arise? How will they be with delivering updates for improved functionality? What if you want to replace your 250GB drive with a 1TB drive, but you can't, because the last firmware available for your machine doesn't support anything over 500GB?

I'm going to use your words against you here. If a person doesn't want the hassle of installing the thick client and just wants to pull up a browser to remotely view their DVR, how sophisticated are they going to be to know that updated firmware exists, then look for it, download it, install it or even have the guts to take a screwdriver to the case and swap out the hard drive? This isn't something for the casual user. This is something for the "$100/hr. rent-a-nerd." Do your clients do this themselves or do they call you? Do they even know when new firmware becomes available? Do they even care? I'm sure some do, but do you think the average home user has a clue?

 

I don't care what is bought today. At some point manufacturer support will stop, computer operating systems and applications will be updated and people are going to need the "$100/hr. rent-a-nerd" to help solve issues. It's just the nature of technology - it always changes and those with the knowledge are called upon to correct any issues that arise.

 

I'll go out on a limb here and state that every installer here has run into the same issues with systems installed 5+ years ago. Manufacturer support has stopped, clients have since updated their computers and problems arose when connecting to their DVRs the way they were used to. Then, you get a call, make it work and charge a fee for your service.

 

So, I agree that any new DVR should have IE9 compatability. But, if a DVR does not have IE9 compatability there are other solutions to enable remote viewing. As time goes on and operating systems and browser versions change, those solutions become more complex, especially when manufacturer support stops, and at some point it will, I don't care who the manufacturer is.

[Soundy 1]

This has happened many times over the years, from IE6 to 7, 8 and now 9. Technology changes all the time and not all manufacturers, even responsive manufacturers like Dahua, will make all of their product compatible with newer technologies. At some point manufacturer support will stop.

I'm not saying a manufacturer needs to continually support every browser/OS/etc. in all perpetuity... but when a year-old DVR model isn't being updated to support a year-old browser, that's a really bad sign.

 

What's going to happen when the DVR installed today is not compatable with IE10, 11, 12, etc? How long do manufacturers provide updated firmware for their models, especially after they discontinue them?

Maybe it would be a better idea for those manufacturers to clue in and start supporting browsers besides just IE. Something Java-based, for example, will not only work on IE, but on just about any browser on any platform, including many mobile platforms. Look at VideoInsight's DVR and NVR systems - their web-based client (I think using DHTML, but don't quote me on that) works on every browser I've ever tried it on, including my older Windows Mobile phones (www.demovi.com, give it a shot). They've been doing this for over six years, too... why are all the manufacturers stuck on using ActiveX in the first place??

[shockwave199 0]

They've been doing this for over six years, too... why are all the manufacturers stuck on using ActiveX in the first place??

Amen to that. Remote viewing is a huge feature to many users. Supporting that and making it as robust and flexible as possible should be a top priority with any and every dvr that is still supported. Q-see has been keeping up with updates for the dvr's they carry from what I can tell. The drag is if you want or need to update the firmware, it usually involves backing up your current settings and after the update it defaults out and you have to get your current settings back, blah blah blah- a PIA. For me an update has to absolutely fix a problem that's affecting me in a big way before I venture down the road of firmware updates for anything, least of all my cctv dvr. But that's me and my update luck, which sucks most of the time.

 

[nDAlk90 0]

For me an update has to absolutely fix a problem that's affecting me in a big way before I venture down the road of firmware updates for anything, least of all my cctv dvr.

 

As the old saying goes:

"If it ain't broke don't fix it."

[groovyman 0]

I love doing updates. Manufacturer comes out with a firmware update and I'm there, especially if it adds new features. I have a few Aver Nano DVRs installed and I always put on the latest firmware updates. They just came out with one last week that added some new features. When QSee came out with updates for the models my clients have I'd install them too. Most other DVRs I maintain are a few years old and support stopped a while ago.

 

The latest Aver Nano Firmware update (for 4 and 8 channel) included, but not limited to:

 

- Support Remote import/export configuration file by remote setup software.

This means that I can remotely export and save the DVRs configuration file. Previously I would need to be at the DVR with a flash drive to do this. I like saving configuration files whenever I make a change.

 

- Support HDD Calculator.

Although you have to be at the DVR to do this, it will calculate approximately how much video storage there is at the current settings. Doesn't make a difference on how the DVR performs, but I think it's neat.

 

- Support Backup by time.

Many other DVRs have this feature already, but the Nano didn't. You would need to back up video in 1 hour intervals and saving video that went past the hour would require 2 backups. Went quick, but now it lets you specify times. Again, this needs to be done at the DVR.

 

- Support using “admin0000” to reset password.

This is nice. If you forget the admin password you can call Aver and they can generate a PIN that will allow you to logon and change the password. Not that I've ever forgotten a password

 

- Support firmware easy upgrade the firmware, import configuration file, and IP cam patch

at the same time mechanism.

This goes directly to what shockwave199 was just saying about having to get your settings back. It can all be done at the same time.

 

The firmware update previous to this one added support for ONVIF, Dyndns and updated the Web Viewer software. The one before that added a different way to apply Daylight Savings Time. And all the previous firmware updates added new features and fixed bugs. Need to read the release notes and decide if the update is important to you. Me, I'll always put it on.

[groovyman 0]

Maybe it would be a better idea for those manufacturers to clue in and start supporting browsers besides just IE. Something Java-based, for example, will not only work on IE, but on just about any browser on any platform, including many mobile platforms.

I agree with that 100%.

[nDAlk90 0]

I love doing updates. Manufacturer comes out with a firmware update and I'm there, especially if it adds new features. I have a few Aver Nano DVRs installed and I always put on the latest firmware updates. They just came out with one last week that added some new features.

 

With IP Hybrid NVR maybe its different. I agree.

 

But generally with analog only DVR customers don't bother with firmware updates unless there is a new feature added that they really want or need.

[groovyman 0]

With IP Hybrid NVR maybe its different. I agree.

 

But generally with analog only DVR customers don't bother with firmware updates unless there is a new feature added that they really want or need.

I don't think it's necessarily different with Hybrid DVRs - it's just the way I am. I always look for bios & driver updates for my computer equipment too. One thing I don't like is when an update comes out and there aren't any release notes to go with it.

 

Many years ago I was a product manager for a tech company that produced hardware & software products. I took bug fixes, updates and release notes very seriously. I always felt our customers deserved to be informed of known bugs, fixes and new features - many of which were customer requests.

[nDAlk90 0]

I don't think it's necessarily different with Hybrid DVRs - it's just the way I am. I always look for bios & driver updates for my computer equipment too. One thing I don't like is when an update comes out and there aren't any release notes to go with it.

 

Many years ago I was a product manager for a tech company that produced hardware & software products. I took bug fixes, updates and release notes very seriously. I always felt our customers deserved to be informed of known bugs, fixes and new features - many of which were customer requests.

 

Analog DVR's there really isn't all the security loop holes like there might be in IP systems. Since the analog systems tend to be older, most quirks were worked out.

 

With IP systems when an update is available I recommend NOT to update right away because you don't know how it will affect the system reliability. (Why are major corporations usually 1-2 versions behind on operating system?)

 

Let me give you an example:

 

You have a business with security cameras. An update comes out with an additional feature you don't really need but feel is "cool to have". You immediately update saying "oh great I will have the latest and greatest" After the update all goes well until you go to review recorded video and realize the system starts to malfunction. What then? Ooopss....

 

My point is you risk system reliability when you update right away without waiting for a few weeks for issues with the software / firmware release to be reported by other customers.

 

Unless you like being a Ginnie pig...