video cameras - CCTV

[rick]

Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8 core alarm cable (DC supply & switching) to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

Though it seems world has moved on and no need for wired camera any-more ... ARLO, NEST, BLINK, RING etc

For those that know welcome your advice.

Needs ... HD Colour (by day) camera LED illumination for night vision Recording - with at least 15 days storage Ideally motion activated - with adjustable zones

2-way voice only needed on one camera Remote monitoring & alarm to a phone app

Welcome advice on anyone who has installed such a system ... Don't really need WiFi Really want mains powered cameras (or remote DC supply) - changing Batteries on high up cameras is not what I want to do.

Can you for example mix other cameras with Arlo system .... could use 2 high up cameras connected using the existing cable .... and WiFi (with remote power for other 3.

[spuorgelgoog]

That's a shame.

If you'd used Cat5 or better you'd have been able to use IP cameras with power over ethernet, or analogue with baluns. Alarm cable probably rules out any IP cameras.

Have a look at Network Webcams who despite the name do proper IP CCTV. The Nest/Hive/etc and similar stuff has very limited or no adjustment for zoom or focus and is sometimes linked to a subscription model (or may be in the future) where if they stop supporting it or you stop paying for their cloud your cameras stop working/recording.

Owain

[Bill Wright]

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

Oh no, wired every time.

No, use a decent low light capable camera and install dawn to dusk visible lighting. Deterrent value exceeds CCTV value. Have a look on

picture with the grey car is lit only by 10W LEDs, one of which is near the ramp and the other is near the car. The vans in the distance are lit by a 10W LED that's a long way from the vans. The camera is not set to frame store. If you do that you can record in what to the eye is near total darkness.

No, just record everything. But have a high frame rate. 25 or 30 fps. Anything less can miss things, surprisingly.

Bill

[rick]

what cameras ... tried a few companies they all pushing POE as way to cable. The CT100 & 8-core is in ... cant change it

[Bill Wright]

We use Nite devils

Bill

[Marland]

They are great, I use one of the little ones in the pond because it is very easy to make fully submersible . Tadpoles ,Newts etc are as savage to each other as sharks when viewed close up.

GH

[T i m]

I like the idea of natural low light abilities, possibly enhanced with traditional PIR Led flood lamps?

Which ones in particular or what would you recommend for yer typical back garden with the camera under the soffit?

Cheers, T i m

[Dave Liquorice]

That's a curious statement Bill. Baseband video implies only SD resolution, which is pretty crappy by todays standards at nominally

720x576.

My old (approx 5 years) and cheap (£100 ish) IP camera can do

2048x1536 @ 20fps. Wouldn't be surprised to find 4k (3840x2160) IP cameras in the same price range these days.

[Bill Wright]

Of course it doesn't. TVI is baseband analogue.

Bill

[Dave Liquorice]

nominally

My "new thing for today", thanks Bill. B-)

However from a quick google TVI maxes out at HD (1920x1080), which is better than SD but it's still less than my old my old IP camera.

It will run over that coax, assuming that the coax isn't too long, giving too much loss at the high frequency end resulting in soft images. Probably not an issue for a domestic instalation.

[Graham.]

Better than French 819 line then.

[RobH]

I have cctv ip cameras, 3 hikvisions and 1 merit lilin, and they all take pictures and record to my NAS server.

[Bill Wright]

It only goes up to about 10MHz so losses are minimal. It's easy to compensate for HF losses with a slope filter.

Bill

[tony sayer]

Can you say why that is Bill?...

[T i m]

;-)

Have you tried others OOI and were they not as good (lightwise) in those conditions or were they not used for other reasons?

Cheers, T i m

[Bill Wright]

We find it to be more 'solid' and less prone to interference.

Bill

[stephenten]

If it's wireless IP then yes there would be potential for lack of robustness and interference.

But if it was wired ethernet IP those problems go away surely?

[Marland]

Ignoring some experiments waterproofing an old Microsoft webcam with one of those liquid tape products with limited success the first attempt approx 8 years ago using a commercial camera was one of these which were widely available for years from various suppliers with resolutions increasing as time went on.

It turned out to be pretty useless for what I wanted it for which was to watch the wildlife in the wildlife pond as the slightest murk reflected the light back from the built in LEDs so nothing could really be seen beyond.

So I took a punt on one of these from the nite devil range,

They come with different lens sizes so one for close up detail can be chosen over one that has a wider field of view as even with powerful illumination the water of a wildlife pond is rarely so clear that some light isn?t reflected back and hides things so you are not going to be looking too far.And the beauty of these nitedevils is that they don?t need a lot of light to give an image and don?t come with LEDs attached, a light source from elsewhere where it is illuminating the target area rather then than from the camera where it just reflects back is far better but not really needed in normal daylight the nitedevil workimg well on ambient light penetrating to the 15? depth it was supported at . The manufacture claims they are waterproof, that isn?t quite true out of the box. What is waterproof is the camera and the short length of cable to the connectors in the attached mounting bracket . The connections to external cables then have to be made waterproof after connecting if the whole assembly is being submersed, I did ours by potting them in resin. When I purchased ours it was about 540 line and that gave a reasonable image on the TV screen but I see now they are 700. Ours did eventually fail but that was after three years of submersion and I suspect was the cable failing rather than the camera.

I will replace it but the supplier hinted they may introduce a HD version soon so will wait to see if they do.

GH

[Rob Morley]

Did you try adding a polarising filter?

[Marland]

No, but even if I had thought of it the units don?t really lend themselves to having one fitted which would mean gluing one the front. But thanks for the suggestion , I have a cheap and cheerful camera aimed for angling use which has a small submersible camera with some leds whose cable links to a base unit containing a battery and its own WiFi transmitter which I could experiment with.

GH