Best IP security camera solution?

[Rosscow]

At work we had wiring installed for external IP cameras some 6 years (Cat 5e), but we've never used them.

They terminate back to a point in the office. After a spate of dodgy goings on in our yard, we would like to install some cameras.

What would people recommend? I'm thinking a stand alone NVR? Ideally the cameras would be day/night cameras with good performance in very low light levels (we are rural so no street lights, although we do have several LED PIR security lights).

We're talking about a maximum of 4 cameras.

Thanks in advance!

[dmsims]

Hikvison

edited to be more helpful!

The 3MP turrets are very good (and attract a lot less spiders), you can get them in different lens sizes as well, model DS-2CD2332-I

They do a four port NVR which has POE built in model: DS-7604NI-E1/4P/A

Edited by dmsims on Monday 30th November 13:23

[Rosscow]

Cheers!

Turrets look good but these will be going on a vertical wall. These look good though? http://overseas.hikvision.com/en/Products_accessri...

[dmsims]

You can get wall mounts for the turrets



There are a few issues with the 4MP cameras and they are not much better than the 3MP

[Henry-F]

From what you have described you don't actually need to limit yourself to IP cameras. Technology has evolved in CCTV to the point where you can use CAT5 cable to wire High Definition 1080P analogue cameras to a stand alone DVR. The DVR can be remote accessed either locally or over the internet.

The wiring is simple and connections only need a small screwdriver.

https://www.cctv42.co.uk/help-advice/installation/...

The single CAT5 cable can provide power for the camera and take video signal back from the camera to the DVR. Using our suggested 1 pair for video 3 pairs for power you vastly reduce the chance of voltage drop over longer cable runs allowing you to use more powerful cameras.

It is essential that you take time to choose the right cameras for each location. The camera you linked to has a fixed lens which means you can't adjust and balance between angle of view and detail captured. The 4mm version in particular is quite wide angle, so ignore the 30 metre IR "range". The camera won't have an optical range anything like that. As a guide our cameras range from 2.8mm to 50mm so 4m or 6mm is very much at the wider end of the spectrum. The camera linked to would only be suitable for quite close up applications.

By all means give us a call, we are happy to chat over your requirements whilst looking at the site using internet mapping. We can take accurate measurements and from there provide a list of what you will need. In particular which cameras you will need. Absolutely no obligation and no follow up marketing afterwards.

Henry

[Aviz]

dmsims said:

Hikvison

edited to be more helpful!

The 3MP turrets are very good (and attract a lot less spiders), you can get them in different lens sizes as well, model DS-2CD2332-I

They do a four port NVR which has POE built in model: DS-7604NI-E1/4P/A

Edited by dmsims on Monday 30th November 13:23

I have these hikvision. Amazing quality. I think I paid abut £60 from aliexpress. The later models are 3 axis so can be mounted vertically on a wall without a bracket. Use Poe as well so no power to worry about.
http://www.exactcctv.com/products/3mp-ir-fixed-foc...

Edited by Aviz on Monday 30th November 22:22

[Aviz]

Have a read through here ..

http://www.ipcamtalk.com/

[Henry-F]

At the risk of repeating myself everything being linked to here is very wide angle. This means detail deteriorates quickly as you move away from the camera. You can see stuff and if you know who someone is you might even hazard a guess as to who they are, but you won't get enough detail more than a few metres from the camera to do any damage.

As a rough guide you can film up to a maximum of about 8 metres wide at 1080P and identify someone. Narrower than that is good because you increase detail capture. Do some basic maths using a 110, 90 or 75 degree angle of view to see how close to the camera 8 metres width is. It will surprise you.

Because I love you I'll even throw in a handy tool so you don't have to go into the attic & dig out your school text books

Handy angle calculator

Angle "A" needs to be half the angle of view.
Side "a" needs to be a maximum of 4 (half of 8 metres). Less gives more detail, entering 3 would give a 6 metre wide image.

Hit "calculate"

All of a sudden the claimed "ranges" of 20 metres plus don't seem so realistic

edited to add: The number you are looking for is distance from the camera "b"


Henry

Edited by Henry-F on Tuesday 1st December 09:31

[dmsims]

A 4MP 4mm Hikvison can provide "recognition" (i.e. 150ppm) at 15m

6mm (which gives 45 degree view) does the same at 22m

[Henry-F]

dmsims said:

A 4MP 4mm Hikvison can provide "recognition" (i.e. 150ppm) at 15m

6mm (which gives 45 degree view) does the same at 22m

Those distances sound incredibly optimistic to me. I'm not really interested in recognition, I'm more interested in being able to identify someone if something happens. To me recognition is a bit like IR "range".

I would suggest a 6mm / 45 degree angle of view camera has an effective range up to 8 or 9 metres but ideally I'd be thinking in terms of 6-7 metres at 1080P or 2.1 megapixel. To double that distance you need to quadruple the number of pixels so 8 megapixel would equate to 12-18 metres depending how much detail you want.

At 70 degrees or 4mm I'd be suggesting 4-6 metres at 1080P so at 8 megapixels about 8-12 metres.

If you spread the jam too thin you won't enjoy your toast.

The single biggest mistake I see with CCTV is cameras filming at too wide an angle.

Henry

[dmsims]

Henry

instead of talking about feelings quantify it!

6MM 2.1MP 1/3" sensor at 6.5 metres is 366ppm which is completely OTT in terms of what is needed for identification and very bad advice

[Henry-F]

dmsims said:

Henry

instead of talking about feelings quantify it!

6MM 2.1MP 1/3" sensor at 6.5 metres is 366ppm which is completely OTT in terms of what is needed for identification and very bad advice

My upper figure for that lens was actually 9 metres if you read my post. I'm struggling to think of the last time the police chastised someone for having too much detail. Too good an image.

I stand by my thoughts that suggesting a usable range of 22 metres is misleading for people planning systems.

"Detail" is subjective not objective. What works for one may not work for another so giving people the right tools for the job such as varifocal lenses in a series of ranges is, in my humble opinion the way forward.

Merely throwing pixels at the wrong lens serves little purpose. It's like building a 500 hp monster then running it on 135mm Econostar re-moulds.

Henry

Edited to add:

Have a read through This guide from Axis. In section 3 & 4 they suggest a pixel density of between 250 (good conditions) and 500 pixels / metre (challenging conditions ). So if your calculations are correct I'm struggling to see how my 366 pixels per metre could be construed as "very bad advice".

The article actually quotes pixels per cm so multiply by 100 for ppm.

I don't want to have an argument here but I'm keen that people reading the thread aren't mislead. Let's try and promote best practice rather than the usual industry wide lies and false claims.

H.

Edited by Henry-F on Wednesday 2nd December 01:01

Edited by Henry-F on Wednesday 2nd December 13:46