Cat5 Cable + and -

[cctv_down_under 0]

I am looking for anyone who can give me a pro's and cons for using CAT5 cable vs RG59.

 

Thanks in advance

[phred 0]

Can't think of anything you won't already know but just for a kick off -

 

Less RFI and EMI in cat5 so you can have longer runs than RG59.

More conductors in cat 5 so can handle several signals at once.

More lines of cat5 will fit in trunking.

Cat5 will work with IP cams.

 

Downside for cat5 - Baluns

 

Cat 5 also holds knots, so better for tying your gal to the bedstead.

[rikky 0]

agree with the +'s as mentionned.

 

On the - side, you should take into account that most baluns don't have AGC build-in, leaving you in many cases with a video signal which is out of balance, meaning no 1Vpk, deformed sync puls and colour burst.

This can result in the DVR not willing to take the video signal into account.

 

Therefore the best is still to have a scope on-site, in order to be able to tweak the video signal with the potentio meters build-in the active receivers.

[hzoskiers2001 0]

hi have you done 4 cameras with cat 5 and baluns did it work

[VST_Man 1]

yes, CAT5 with 4 camera's....furthest out is 800ft. works fine. camera's are mounted on metal buildings so I mounted waterproof plastic boxes first to eliminate any ground loop......

[securitymonster 0]

Its been my experience that Passive baluns are junk, if your going to use Cat5, use active baluns.

[survtech 0]

Its been my experience that Passive baluns are junk, if your going to use Cat5, use active baluns.

We use passive baluns all the time with at least 500 of 1000 cameras. No problems. Picture quality is as good as with high-quality RG-59.

 

We do use active receivers when the run is longer than about 500ft., though.

[G-MEN 0]

Price, CAT5 is much cheaper.

[Bryann 0]

I can't really think of any cons related to CAT5E, except for the fact that you have to use baluns, which doesn't prove to be as cost effective on smaller installations. However, there are quite a few pros.

 

1. Far higher resistance to interferance.

2. Almost no loss in video quality or signal strength when joining.

3. Can carry up to 4 cameras on one cable.

4. Can be easily spliced and joined for splitting and teeing off

(again, almost no loss)

[rory 0]

I can't really think of any cons related to CAT5E

 

Thin cable, easily damaged. Need Amplifiers with video over 150' for high quality video.

[GunRunner1 0]

Can someone tell me how to use cat5 . connection's and so?

I looked at some Baluns that looks like the way to go .Which baluns should I buy?

 

Thanks,

[acableconnection 0]

ive picked up some rca female modular jacks, that you can punch down your cat 5 onto, at home depot or lowes. then you might need an bnc-to-rca connector, or you might not, depending on your camera. or you can just buy the rca connectors at radio shack, that you hook up the cat 5 to the rca yourself.

[survtech 0]

Need Amplifiers with video over 150' for high quality video.

Hardly! We have very high quality (most cameras better than 470 lines) and don't need active transmitters or receivers (usually the latter) until we reach at least 600'.

 

ive picked up some rca female modular jacks, that you can punch down your cat 5 onto, at home depot or lowes. then you might need an bnc-to-rca connector, or you might not, depending on your camera. or you can just buy the rca connectors at radio shack, that you hook up the cat 5 to the rca yourself.

No. You can't just punch down, solder or otherwise connect twisted-pair directly to an unbalanced connector like bnc, f or rca. You have to use either a balun or an active system at both ends.

Edited October 30, 2007 by Guest

[griffonsystems 0]

ive run cat5e with cat3 vertical with nvt baluns with no issues but i hate to terminate cat5, with baluns u dont have 2 but when you running ip cams you do... its prob just lack of practice but getting the right colors and crimping it into the end sucks

 

coax can take a beating and still trasmit high quality video, cat5 cable isnt as forgiving as i remember

[C7 in CA 0]

ive run cat5e with cat3 vertical with nvt baluns with no issues but i hate to terminate cat5, with baluns u dont have 2 but when you running ip cams you do... its prob just lack of practice but getting the right colors and crimping it into the end sucks

 

 

Yep, That is a problem with regular data as well. Us data guys will go to great lengths to avoid crimping RJ45's.

 

For those not privy-- If the install will allow, punch the cable down to a jack in the ceiling or in a jbox and run a patch cable to the camera. It might add 5 dollars per camera, but if it lessens the possibility of callbacks it will pay not cost. If you have to crimp, use a quality crimper.

[rory 0]

Hardly! We have very high quality (most cameras better than 470 lines) and don't need baluns until we reach at least 600'.

That was not relative to Coax, just cat5.

 

Surely you arent running cat5 without baluns or UTP Transceivers at 500'?

[survtech 0]

OOOOOOps. I meant we don't need active until at least 600'. Passive baluns work well at shorter distances. Original post corrected!

[rory 0]

Yep we went over this already though, not all Passive Baluns, not even the expensive and well known ones, give you good quality over 150', as both I used for example, were from well known brands. Guess you have been lucky so far

[survtech 0]

It's possible you encountered incompatibility with your cameras or other equipment or some other problem like cable or termination issues. Many in the casino industry have had excellent results with twisted-pair and passive baluns.

[rory 0]

nah, was different cameras, cables, etc, I tried everything. Ive seen images before from others that looked the same at similar lengths using baluns.

[empak 0]

I have had days that I wished I had run coax cable instead; the picture did not look right running the cat5e and baluns.

I have had weird problems running 12volts down the cat5e and balun. The Voltage was good but the camera sure did not like it, this happened two different times.

Can you run active on short camera runs?

[tmescan 0]

are you having to run a separate power wire with the cat5 method? if so do you run each power to a local power source by each camera or run them all to the same power distribution box

[cctv_down_under 0]

Ok so I have done quite a few jobs with Cat5 and Cat5e now and on the last one I made some comparisons...

 

I noticed that if every camera was connected by Cat 5 that the picture looked excellent, that was until the last site...on this site I did 50/50 comparison, the problem is that unless you have something to compare against you wont notice that all the Cat5 run cameras have bad colour burst.

 

I also noticed a problem called Skew, this is where any bright image produces a shadow next to it...hard to see at first and unlikley to be noticed, but introduce a very bright light and it is obvious.

 

I later learned that Cat5E was a no-no without active Baluns, it has something to do with the amount of twists, it seems that unless you cut the cables and terminate with exactly the same amount of twist...then you risk the colour burst being wrong...this is not the case for Active baluns.

 

I also did the sums...so ok Cat5 is easier to run (lighter) can take more bends, is cheaper etc...the downfall is it takes longer to terminate and if using more than one camera per cable, it means if that cable breaks you loose more than one camera.

 

My verdict is that as long as you use Active Baluns then Cat5 is not as good as RG59

[CollinR 0]

Cat5 supports IP gear, I have been doing Cat5 only for almost a year now.

 

Sometimes I will splice and run more then one cam together, often I homerun it so I can upgrade the cams in the future.

[survtech 0]

I also did the sums...so ok Cat5 is easier to run (lighter) can take more bends, is cheaper etc...the downfall is it takes longer to terminate and if using more than one camera per cable, it means if that cable breaks you loose more than one camera.

Longer to terminate, how so? With the baluns we use it's either 2 screws or 2 IDC connectors - click,click. Compare that to stripping, trimming and 2 crimps (center pin and outside) for coax. CAT-5 is, in my opinion, far easier and quicker.

 

I have also compared CAT-5 side-by-side with coax on table games (very critical views) and can not see any noticeable difference on $800 500-line 21" CRT monitors. No "skew"; no color burst problems; in fact just as good in all respects.

 

In fact, I have found that active (at least receivers) often cause more problems than baluns. Active receivers often introduce noise and distortion into the signal. Active transmitters may be less problematical but they are also difficult to install in a tight dome and require additional power at the camera end, not always easily available.