The points to which you attach more importance in IP camera?

[yeliya 0]

I know this is a old and old topic,but good advices can stimulus improvement. All of us benefit from this,whether you are potential buyer or manufacturers.

Like me, I attach more importance to easy setup, So I will choose those IP camera that can be easily set up. If you are a manufacturer, what would you do in terms of this? Perhaps you will invest more to simplify this part.

Once this aspect is improved, who will be the beneficiary---Youself.

I also believe that most of us are interested in this. So, sincere ideas will be much appreciated.

[jorgejanifer 0]

Once this aspect is improved, who will be the beneficiary---Youself.

I hope so. I just want the camera comes with Motion detection and cause me less trouble.

[buellwinkle 0]

What you may call complexity, I call flexibility, features, options. For example, Arecont has the least amount of features I've ever seen in an IP camera, hence they are simpler to setup but I would never buy one. Mobotix makes some of the most complex cameras to setup, but that I would buy. not because it's complex, because it can do stuff most others can't.

 

So like cars, there is no perfect car, if there were, life would be easy, everyone would just buy that one.

[Soundy 1]

Simplicity of setup only matters once: when you set it up. If you're choosing a camera that's easier to set up, over one that has better imaging, better performance, better features, better almost-anything-else, you may be making your own life easier, but you're potentially doing your customer a disservice.

 

"Hey, this camera sucks in low light!"

"Yes, but it was really easy for me to configure!"

 

Areconts are a double-whammy because they don't have many features, AND they're a pain in the arse to install and configure

 

As to which points are more important... that will depend on the specific use. I'll look at what the situation requires, then decide which points matter most for that purpose.

[buellwinkle 0]

"Areconts are a double-whammy because they don't have many features, AND they're a pain in the arse to install and configure

 

Hahahaha!

[MaxIcon 0]

I've been playing with a lot of different cameras, and here's what's important to me:

 

- Ease of setup, but not low complexity. That is, it's important to be able to quickly and easily tweak camera settings and see the results, without using proprietary software, and ideally using any web browser. Some cams take a long time to update after setting changes, or need special software, and that's a problem.

 

- Flexible camera settings, especially in terms of streams, resolution, compression, etc. Some cams will only let you run certain combinations of streams (for instance, h.264 on stream 1 disables mpeg4 on stream2, only allowing mjpeg, and limits the resolution to boot). I like to be able to adjust each stream independently for whatever I'm using it for. In general, more setting flexibility is better, as they help you solve problems and optimize settings.

 

- Flexible cabling. I'm getting to hate cameras that have a bundle of cables that can't be removed, if you don't need the alarm signals, DC power, analog out, whatever. Being able to go easily from a single network cable to any combination is a good thing. Having an actual RJ45 jack inside the camera is awesome.

 

- Connect strings and ports listed in the firmware. If I want MJPEG, RTSP, snapshot, whatever, I should be able to log on in a web browser and read the connect strings to get the stream I want. I hate having to dig through manuals to find out what the NVR connect string needs to be.

 

- Frame rates that can actually meet the specs at full quality and resolution. If not that, at least tell me what it can really do in the specs.

 

- Easily changeable lenses. Don't make me take half the camera apart to swap the lens.

 

I'm sure I'll come up with more, but these are some of the things that annoy me when I can't do them right.

[Soundy 1]

Flexible cabling. I'm getting to hate cameras that have a bundle of cables that can't be removed, if you don't need the alarm signals, DC power, analog out, whatever. Being able to go easily from a single network cable to any combination is a good thing. Having an actual RJ45 jack inside the camera is awesome.

That's a good point. I've run into a few of these, domes that have big thick cable bundles for analog out, network jack, alarm I/O, power, RS-485... when all I need is the network jack. Fortunately I was able to disassemble the camera and unplug all the unneeded cables from the mainboard, but not everyone is as creative/daring as I am.

[yeliya 0]

- Ease of setup, but not low complexity. That is, it's important to be able to quickly and easily tweak camera settings and see the results, without using proprietary software, and ideally using any web browser. Some cams take a long time to update after setting changes, or need special software, and that's a problem.

 

- Flexible camera settings, especially in terms of streams, resolution, compression, etc. Some cams will only let you run certain combinations of streams (for instance, h.264 on stream 1 disables mpeg4 on stream2, only allowing mjpeg, and limits the resolution to boot). I like to be able to adjust each stream independently for whatever I'm using it for. In general, more setting flexibility is better, as they help you solve problems and optimize settings.

 

- Flexible cabling. I'm getting to hate cameras that have a bundle of cables that can't be removed, if you don't need the alarm signals, DC power, analog out, whatever. Being able to go easily from a single network cable to any combination is a good thing. Having an actual RJ45 jack inside the camera is awesome.

 

- Connect strings and ports listed in the firmware. If I want MJPEG, RTSP, snapshot, whatever, I should be able to log on in a web browser and read the connect strings to get the stream I want. I hate having to dig through manuals to find out what the NVR connect string needs to be.

 

- Frame rates that can actually meet the specs at full quality and resolution. If not that, at least tell me what it can really do in the specs.

 

- Easily changeable lenses. Don't make me take half the camera apart to swap the lens.

 

Nice job.

You almost list all that we are thinking about.

I can agree any more on two points,Flexible cabling and Frame rates.

I also hate those so many cables placed disorderedly, annoying me too much.

Frame rate is so important for it can support frequent videos.

[Soundy 1]

It's good if an IP camera honestly states the frame rates it supports at given resolutions, but the reason this parameter tends to be overstated/exaggerated is because its importance tends to be over-emphasized. As with DVRs, everyone thinks they want 30fps, but few would be able to tell the difference between that and 15fps, yet 15fps will generally use half the bandwidth and half the storage space. Most people would be hard pressed to even see a difference between 30 and 10fps.

 

http://www.panasonic.com/business/security/demos/PSS-recording-rates.html

[yeliya 0]

It's good if an IP camera honestly states the frame rates it supports at given resolutions, but the reason this parameter tends to be overstated/exaggerated is because its importance tends to be over-emphasized. Most people would be hard pressed to even see a difference between 30 and 10fps.

 

Actually, we cannot figure out the difference between 15 and 30 fps.

As I search, the boundary point we can feel is about 15 fps. And 30 fps is not so high that we can't feel their difference.

Ya, Exaggeration is a question. As you know, to what extent do they(IP camera) exaggerate?

This is important issue.

[Soundy 1]

Even at 10fps, unless you're watching fast-moving objects, most people might feel that something looks a little off, but would be hard-pressed to put their finger on just what.

 

As for exaggeration... it's not that figures are inflated or falsified, I don't think, but more like... well, say you have a 3MP camera that will only do 15fps at full resolution, but can do 30fps at 2MP... so on the shiny brochure and packaging they'll put "3MP" and "REALTIME 1080p" in big letters (not right together, of course), but the fact that if you do run at 3MP you only get 15fps is relegated to the fine print, or worse, only listed on the spec sheet.

 

No different really, than DVRs proclaiming "REALTIME RECORDING" in big letters, but not telling you up front that that's only at CIF, or only on one or two channels.

[yeliya 0]

Even at 10fps, unless you're watching fast-moving objects, most people might feel that something looks a little off, but would be hard-pressed to put their finger on just what.

 

So, how do like those IP camera coming with "15fps or 30fps"?