I have one of these
It works fine, but the streaming speed is very disappointing most of the time. It is connected wirelessly - the signal is very strong - all the other equipment around the house is wired.
The camera supports up to 25fps, but apart from a short period last week where is suddenly started to stream at 22-24fps I have never seen it working at over 10-11fps, and often at only
Have you checked for firmware updates?
Yes, I have the latest.
I wouldn't be too bothered had I not seen the camera streaming at a high speed. My setup is clearly capable of it, I just cannot see what stops it from doing it all the time.
JoeJoe pretended :
That is fair for a wireless link, if you need more you need it to be wired. Wireless is much slower than wired anyway, then both out bound and in bound have to share the capacity, collisions and any external interference reduce that even more, as will other devices sharing your wifi.
I understand all that, however:
- Without making any change to my setup saw the link holding 25fps.
- There are no other devices sharing the wi-fi.
- No other network in the vicinity.
- Pretty much line of sight between router and camera.
This is why I am a little puzzled bout the low speed...
Only WiFi points that are broadcasting an SSID show up on a "network scan". Point to point links generally don't and there is an awful lot of other kit that uses 2.4 GHz, like video senders.
You can have too much signal that causes overload of the recievers. My phones WiFi really doen't like being within 3' of the WiFi access point.
Then use 5GHz...
recievers.
access
What makes you think that would make any difference? Anyway the AP doesn't do 5 GHz and was free as in skip.
It makes a big difference to clashing with other 2.4GHz stuff.
I did a standard bottom-post response to your whole response - but you only quoted half - the bit that was not relevant.
If you mean the, "Then use 5GHz..." post then that was all it contained, no snippage that I can see.
===== On 06/12/2014 23:20, Dave Liquorice wrote: > On Sat, 06 Dec 2014 15:14:02 +0000, JoeJoe wrote: > >> - No other network in the vicinity. > > Only WiFi points that are broadcasting an SSID show up on a "network > scan". Point to point links generally don't and there is an awful lot > of other kit that uses 2.4 GHz, like video senders. > >> - Pretty much line of sight between router and camera. > > You can have too much signal that causes overload of the recievers. > My phones WiFi really doen't like being within 3' of the WiFi access > point. > Then use 5GHz... ====
My entire response, sans sig, was as above. I thought that it was fairly clear that 5GHz was as opposed to 2.4GHz.
What makes you think that 5 GHz receivers are less likely to suffer from overload? I think you are missing the point, it's not the number of different signals (thiugh that doesn't help) but how strong even a single signal is. Move my phone to 12' from the AP and it's much happier.
I think I must have fallen into a strange parallel universe in which the words I use, which appear to make sense to me (on context) don't to others. :-(
If you are able to hop over to 5 GHz then you avoid competing with all the crap like video senders. Round here, it also reduces the number of visible Wifi signals.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.