Lowest Price 4K 30 fps surveillance cameras

[LittleScoobyMaster 0]

Anyone know how much the lowest cost 4k surveillance cameras are that can do 30 frames per second?

 

I see Axis is releasing one in a couple months but I think the price will be close to $999 when it launches.

 

Are there presently any that can reach 30 fps in the <$500 range yet?

 

AXIS P1428-E

 

http://www.axis.com/corporate/press/releases/viewstory.php?case_id=3386

[myiicu 0]

Bosch has a 4K 30fps box camera.

 

Bosch Dinion IP ultra 8000 mp

 

http://resource.boschsecurity.com/documents/NBN_80122_Data_sheet_enUS_14878683787.pdf

 

 

I don't expect 4K cameras to be in the $500 price range for at least 2 years.

 

Camera manufactures will need to recoup research and development costs.

 

VMS software and NVR support will need to catch up before 4K cameras sell in volume.

 

Also, 4K lens will be very very very very expensive!!!

[thewireguys 3]

4K cameras aren't even released yet and he is looking for 500$ versions

 

 

I have yet to see a VMS that can support 4K cameras and I can't wait to see the client machine requirements to display more than one camera at a time.

 

Also keep in mind at the first gen 4K cameras are going to suck in low light.

[Brenning 0]

Waiting for Hikvision to release one

[buellwinkle 0]

Just get 4 1080P cameras, you'll have 4K now at 30fps. The least expensive deal is the 10MP ACTi E77, a little over 4K resolution and 30 fps (6 fps in 10MP mode) and under $300.

 

I don't even think you'll see 4K cameras with 30 fps at any price for a while. Even the ones that have been announced from Axis and Bosch likely don't do too well at night.

[LittleScoobyMaster 0]

Just get 4 1080P cameras, you'll have 4K now at 30fps. The least expensive deal is the 10MP ACTi E77, a little over 4K resolution and 30 fps (6 fps in 10MP mode) and under $300.

 

I don't even think you'll see 4K cameras with 30 fps at any price for a while. Even the ones that have been announced from Axis and Bosch likely don't do too well at night.

 

Yeah, the E77 is the one I have been looking at quite a bit lately and that's the reason for this post. I read your review of it previously and it looks great, I just wish it could do closer to 30 fps instead of only 6, heck, even if it could do 15 fps like the Hero Black (different type of cam but still 4K under $400 w/o night vision \ stream).

 

I'm guessing that since the E77 exists and is 4k and is only $300 right now, that by the end of the year or early next (around the tradeshow times), we should start to see closer to 20 to 30 fps at 4k. It's just I want one today.

 

 

See, the thing I don't get about the Acti E77 is that it can do a nice 30 fps at 1080p, but then, it can only do 6 fps at all these resolutions:

 

3648 x 2736, 3648 x 2160, 2592 x 1944, 2048 x 1536

 

So, the question is, why can't this camera do more than 6 fps at 2048 x 1536? That makes absolutely no sense to me.

 

If the camera can handle 3648 x 2736 at 6 frames per seconds, surely, it should be able to handle 2048x1536, or 2592x1944 at greater than 6 frames.

 

And, most of thier 4k cameras are this way (in the similar 4K camera style \ spec).

 

It's almost as if they are purposely limiting 2048x1536 and 3648x2160, etc. to the crazy slow 6 frames. Why?

 

I'm wondering if anyone has seriously started to look at the firmware yet on the E77 to see if 2048x1536 or 3648x2160 can break out of this seemingly 6fps software lock.

 

I almost think this might be similar to the Flir hack from last year whereby they produced a camera that could do a much higher resolution but they gimped the camera until the firmware unlocked it:

 

http://hackaday.com/2013/11/04/manufacturer-crippled-flir-e4-thermal-camera-hacked-to-perform-as-high-end-model/

 

Could a similar fate be happening with this E77 in regards to those other resolutions that should have no problem with greater than 6fps?

 

I think I will ask Mike to take a look at the firmware on the E77 just in case it's a similar deal. It would be awesome to unlock 2048x1536 at say 20 fps, etc. which it should be able to handle, or 3648x2160 at say ~10+ fps.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Guest

[LittleScoobyMaster 0]

4K cameras aren't even released yet and he is looking for 500$ versions

 

 

I have yet to see a VMS that can support 4K cameras and I can't wait to see the client machine requirements to display more than one camera at a time.

 

Also keep in mind at the first gen 4K cameras are going to suck in low light.

.

 

The Acti E77 is 4K, (it just has a puny 6 frames per second rate) but it is only $300 now. I say that before the end of the year \ early next, it definitely will be possible to score a 4K 20 to 30 fps cam in or very near the $500 range.

http://www.networkcameracritic.com/?p=2254

 

My client systems handle 4K right now with out breaking a sweat but I use Revo drives (350 out soon) and other lightning quick hardware.

http://ocz.com/consumer/revodrive-3-pcie-ssd

Edited May 18, 2014 by Guest

[thewireguys 3]

That ACTI camera is not 4k its 10MP and 6FPS. For a camera to be true 4k it must be 30fps.

[LittleScoobyMaster 0]

That ACTI camera is not 4k its 10MP and 6FPS. For a camera to be true 4k it must be 30fps.

 

It is true that the acti is 10MP, but 3648 is so close to 3840 that its a wash. (4k is not limited by frames per second). The Hero Black for instance, can do 4K resolution, and it can only do 15 frames per second at that resolution. 4K is the resolution, not the frame rate. In fact, 4K movie cameras are many times only shot at 24 frames per second, not 30, and are still considered to be 4K.

 

The actual 4K resolutions are 4096 x 2160 and a few others then you start to get into UHD versus 4K, etc., but the E77 can do greater than 4K resolution on the vertical. (it can do 3648 x 2736)

[thewireguys 3]

Lets not start this again as this same subject came up when IP cameras switched from 1MP/2MP to 720P/1080P... 1MP/2MP/10MP is a resolution 720P/1080P/2K/4K is a standard. In the consumer electronics world they are now talking about 4K 48FPS or 60FPS.

[ssmith10pn 0]

I can't wait to see the client machine requirements to display more than one camera at a time.

 

I know some that can handle it. But they are 15,000 dollar work stations.

 

 

 

http://kotaku.com/nvidia-debuts-the-gtx-titan-z-a-3-000-video-card-for-1551309130

 

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2455405,00.asp

[LittleScoobyMaster 0]

Lets not start this again as this same subject came up when IP cameras switched from 1MP/2MP to 720P/1080P... 1MP/2MP/10MP is a resolution 720P/1080P/2K/4K is a standard. In the consumer electronics world they are now talking about 4K 48FPS or 60FPS.

 

4K is really just a resolution. They can do 4K resolution up to 900fps. There's no minimum fps for 4K.

 

http://nofilmschool.com/2012/09/4k-at-900-fps-for-a-ft-one-high-speed-camera/

 

Acti is claiming that this camera can do 4K in the hardware documentation for the camera:

http://www.acti.com/download_file/Product/hardware_manual/E77_Hardware_Manual.pdf

(10 Megapixel with 4K/1080p)

 

And, there are even 4K wallpapers that you can download for your computer. And if you have a decent video card you can even play a PC game in 4K, sometimes at 15 frames per second, and with a good card up to 60+ frames per second.

 

But either way, it's nice to see that Acti is starting to pave the way for 4K and higher than 4K resolutions at very reasonable prices with their newer cameras. And that one from Bosch looks great but that one looks to be quite a bit more expensive than the E77 but it does look amazing. Looks to be out next month or so.

 

It sounds like, at the moment, the E77 is still the lowest cost (4K claimed resolution) surveillance camera out right now.

 

Just noticed that Amazon reduced the price to only $266.89 + $12.64 shipping for the E77.

 

Not bad. It just needs a frame rate boost, which might be possible with a firmware adjustment.

[ssmith10pn 0]

First off,

Trying to market a security camera as 4k is about as far as you can stretch marketing BS without flat out lying.

Oh wait that is lying.

So how would a camera with a spec of 4k resolution @ 6fps even be compared to 4k in the motion picture industry?

 

"Oh hey there is a new movie out. Let's go watch it. It's in 4k resolution but since the equipment can't handle the data stream it's at 6fps"

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution

[LittleScoobyMaster 0]

First off,

Trying to market a security camera as 4k is about as far as you can stretch marketing BS without flat out lying.

Oh wait that is lying.

So how would a camera with a spec of 4k resolution @ 6fps even be compared to 4k in the motion picture industry?

 

"Oh hey there is a new movie out. Let's go watch it. It's in 4k resolution but since the equipment can't handle the data stream it's at 6fps"

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution

 

It is definitely a stretch, especially considering that most 4K resolutions are thought of to be 4096 x 2160, however, even people in the movie industry get confused and also consider 3840 x 2160 (UHD) to also be 4K, even though, technically, 4K is supposed to be 4096 x 2160 and not 3840 x 2160, however, so many TV manufactures are calling 3840 x 2160 4K sets that it then blurs the lines between what really is 4K versus UHD, etc. Besides Wiki is filled with so many inaccurate pieces of info it can't even be considered an authoritative source.

 

And even though the Acti E77 is not a true 4K resolution (3648 x 2160) instead of 4096 x 2160 or 3840 x 2160, it's so damn close that they have updated their marketing to call it 4K. Just looking at the Wiki article about what 4K actually is shows how confusing the term 4K really is.

 

The first line of the Wiki states "4K resolution is a generic term for display devices or content having horizontal resolution on the order of 4,000 pixels". Well 3648 is on the order of 4000 pixels. It's so close that they probably are just lumping it in as 4K. But also the E77 can do 3648 x 2736 which is greater than a 4K resolution (vertical only). But either way, most of the time when you see 4K mentioned, it doesn't include frame rates, because it is more about the resolution than frames per second.

 

Because of all the confusion, 4K now means so many different things to so many different people.

 

For me, when I think of 4K, I think of anything that has a resolution of 3840 x 2160 or 4096 x 2160, with the 4096 being the 'true 4K' resolution and 3840 and all of the others being "on the order of 4,000 pixels" type of 4K, an "almost 4K" resolution, but never do frames per second enter the picture because even a PC background, or any photo shot in 4096 x 2160 is still really a 4K resolution. And if I'm playing a PC game at one of the 4K resolutions, if it dips below a certain frame rate, it's still being played in a 4K resolution.

 

If I receive a digital photo that has a resolution of 4096 x 2160, I would consider that to be a 4K photo. If I have some surveillance footage that has been recorded in a resolution of 4096 x 2160, I would consider it to be 4K, regardless of the frame rate. It would be nice if the tv manufacturers would not call 3840 x 2160 4K, but unfortunately they do. It's been a real mess of confusion the industry has brought on themselves, but the confusion is here to stay.

 

Despite all the confusion around exactly what 4K is and is not, I still want to know how this Acti E77 can handle 1920 x 1080 resolution at 30 frames per second, but then, at only a tiny bump up to 2048 x 1536, if falls all the way down to only 6 frames per second. That makes no sense.

 

From the spec sheet:

"6 fps at 3648 x 2736; 6 fps at 3648 x 2160; 6 fps at 2592 x 1944; 6 fps at 2048 x 1536;"

 

How can all these resolutions be running on hardware that only provides 6 frames across all these resolutions?

 

On almost any piece of hardware, when you bump the resolutions up, you always start to have performance bottlenecks, but with the E77 (and the many other Acti "claimed 4K" cameras), they all have this performance wall that makes no sense, unless the hardware is capable of better frame rates at some of these resolutions, and they are locking the frame rates down similar to what FLIR did with the E4.

 

How can this 2048 x 1536 resolution not have at least 15 frames per second at 2048 x 1536 on the hardware the camera is using if it is getting a whopping 30 fps at 1920 x 1080? Has anyone taken a close look at this firmware yet, or determined what the hardware should be capable of at these other resolutions?

[ssmith10pn 0]

If I receive a digital photo that has a resolution of 4096 x 2160, I would consider that to be a 4K photo.

 

I would call that 8.8Mp

[LittleScoobyMaster 0]

If I receive a digital photo that has a resolution of 4096 x 2160, I would consider that to be a 4K photo.

 

I would call that 8.8Mp

 

What do you call tomatoes?

[LittleScoobyMaster 0]

Just get 4 1080P cameras, you'll have 4K now at 30fps. The least expensive deal is the 10MP ACTi E77, a little over 4K resolution and 30 fps (6 fps in 10MP mode) and under $300.

 

Do you know which Acti bullet cam is similar to this dome cam?

 

I wonder if it would be the B410, B414, E37, E414, or the E48. Curious if any of those are the corresponding \ similar bullet version of the E77 dome or not.

 

Curious if Hikvision \ Dahua have a 4K camera that is similar to the E77 as well. On Hikvision's site I only see 5MP cameras presently.

[Lee Tracey 0]

Interesting that so many of you guys have sussed out the main stream of camera manufacturing has decided that 4K is 3840 X 2160 when we all know it is not. However as we are but minions in the commercial pool I think we have to accept that the CCTV industry standard understanding of 4K will be, and is, 3840 X 2160. The Axis price for such a camera appears to centre round the $1,000 mark, I also know of another China based manufacturer who will sell you a 4 K ( 3840 X 2160 ) also for about $1,000.

 

However I have discovered one Chinese Manufacturer producing a " 4K " camera of 3072 X 2048, but is quoting a price of about $440. The loss in resolution is not so bad when considered against the high price drop - The lower spec is based on a 6 megapixels sensor and the 3840 X 2160 on a 12 megapixel sensor.

 

I am trying to acquire one of these cameras in order to discover how many " ONVIF" NVR's it will work with. If I succeed I will post the data.

[Brenning 0]

Interesting that so many of you guys have sussed out the main stream of camera manufacturing has decided that 4K is 3840 X 2160 when we all know it is not. However as we are but minions in the commercial pool I think we have to accept that the CCTV industry standard understanding of 4K will be, and is, 3840 X 2160. The Axis price for such a camera appears to centre round the $1,000 mark, I also know of another China based manufacturer who will sell you a 4 K ( 3840 X 2160 ) also for about $1,000.

 

However I have discovered one Chinese Manufacturer producing a " 4K " camera of 3072 X 2048, but is quoting a price of about $440. The loss in resolution is not so bad when considered against the high price drop - The lower spec is based on a 6 megapixels sensor and the 3840 X 2160 on a 12 megapixel sensor.

 

I am trying to acquire one of these cameras in order to discover how many " ONVIF" NVR's it will work with. If I succeed I will post the data.

 

Be interesting to see who is selling these? some of the users on here might jump at the chance to purchase some

[Don Stephens 0]

Does anyone actually have a real world application where they need these right now? I'd like to know the scenario if anyone has one.

[Lee Tracey 0]

The comment from - Brenning - above is interesting. If there are any in addition to me, interested to purchase one of the cameras I have identified, then please contact me with your email address. We can obviously get a better price if I can quote a quantity. Once I have your email I will send you a full specification on the two I have discovered and once I know how many then I will tell you what price is being asked. The price I will get will be Ex works Shenzhen so if there are a number in the UK and a number in the USA then we will need a single purchaser/shipping import address for the USA - I will do it for the UK. The 3840 X 2160 4K version may not be any cheaper than the Axis version but it may have a better specification - for instance it has automatic back focus.

 

Lee Tracey - dvrdigital@gmail,com

 

UK

[Lee Tracey 0]

Does anyone actually have a real world application where they need these right now? I'd like to know the scenario if anyone has one.

 

Probably not, but curiosity sometimes gets the better of us. On the other hand one could cover a much larger area with a single camera and wide FOV lens thereby saving having to fit four 1080 cameras. A while back I built a special "one-off" camera for UK Police that could watch an area outside a railway station and while the storage had to be on site it was possible to electronically post zoom and obtain a clear drivers face and the numberplate at over 100 yards. The frame rate was only one per second but one was all we needed for intelligence and evidence. I still have a still from this camera if anybody is interested in a copy.

 

Lee Tracey - dvrdigital@gmail.com

[Lee Tracey 0]

I have further bad news for 4K camera lovers.

 

After extensive research I am convinced that no NVR exists that can handle 4K cameras. The cheapest 3840 X 2160 @30IPS camera that I have found so far is £540 delivered in the UK. Axis UK price is £682.

 

So all we can do at the moment is buy a 4K monitor and watch as the video goes by but records in something much less.

[Don Stephens 0]

Has anyone looked into a PC based system as an option for recording? Is there any way to record these things at the 4K resolution at this point?

[ericq 0]

It'll be curious to see how well these 4K cameras perform with someone's vms.