Best Camera for WebCam
sid
cam, two days ago I setup a D-Link DCS-900, but the picture quality
did not even compare. It was nice that it was all self contained.
Is it the face that the Logitech uses PC based drivers to tune the
image or did I just choose the wrong camera to compare it to ?
Any input is appreciated.
Thanks
Eli.
h...@40th.com
>image or did I just choose the wrong camera to compare it to ?
The dlink 900 (cas/defunct now) is the worst
ip camera there is. Well, if you don't include
Gadspot and similar (aviosys). For some reason,
you have to pay to get quality. Don't confuse
usb webcams with ip cameras. Webcams serve a
purpose, but maybe only as expendable sewer
cams (aha). The sweet spot starts at around
750 American for a good ip camera. Made in
Japan is a good stamp. Taiwan is okay, too.
Made in China (mainland) is bottom of the
barrel, almost as a rule. To make it all the
more fun, many, many ip cameras are junk and
priced way, way over their worth (frankly,
they are all priced over their worth, but you
have to work with that).
Low-priced but good bang for the buck? I'd
say most Vivotek 7000 series cams are, but
I'd avoid the book-like ones (e.g, ip7135).
http://www.vivotek.com/products/network_cameras.php
Rebrands of vivotek include 4xem, level-one,
and others I can't think of. Made in Taiwan.
If you're buying with US dollars, I'd say
the prices of Asian-sourced cameras are going
up. The newest of vivo's cams (iz7151, ip7151,
and upcoming pz7152) aren't that much better
than the previous 7000s or the ptz6112, but the
prices are jacked up a lot.
Axis has some good little cameras, too. The
207 line is not bad, and the megapixel (207mw)
gets you a fine picture so long as you give it
enough light, but then most cameras are the
same and need at least some light. The less
light, the slower the fps. Many drop to 5 fps
without a lot of light. Some do better.
Panasonic HCM 580/581 cams do well in low light,
and have nice zoom (optical zoom is the only
zoom that matters), and pan/tilt like a slick
robot moves.
mpeg4 is more common from ip cameras today.
You shouldn't be able to tell the difference
between a good mpeg4 stream and a mjpeg stream,
except the mjpeg is about 10x the size. If
an ip cam doesn't do mpeg4 it's very likely
very outdated (a lot of ip cams for sale are).
Some software only does mjpeg; some even only
does jpeg snaps. With the right software/
design, you can run more than a dozen mpeg4
ip cams at 640x480 @ 30 fps with bandwidth
and CPU to spare. Multiple monitors help,
and even in 2d, a fast gfx card helps since
the system->video memory speed comes into
play with all that video going on.
... etc.
--
40th Floor - Software @ http://40th.com/
iplay.40th.com - Advanced PPC audio player
phantasm.40th.com - The final destination
sid
So can any of the DLink Cameras be considered. For example the
DCS-3220 or the DCS-1110 ?
Or should I just stay away from the DLink line of cameras ?
Thanks
h...@40th.com
>DCS-3220 or the DCS-1110 ?
Neither of those are PT, nor I think wifi.
The dlink 3000s are like the vivotek ip3000 series.
(pretty sure; they're old). The dlink 5000s are
vivo pt3000s. The vivo pt3000s (and any dlink
based on those) are h.263 only (no mjpeg as far
as remember), Those old things are using a small-
sized CCD and only really do 352x240. Those look
like they software-scale to get higher. The dlink
6620 (the 10x optical PTZ) is like the vivotek 6112,
which is a good camera but also dated (mpeg4/sp)
and has a small CCD (but it's good in really low
light). The dlink 5220 is like the vivotek 3112.
"Like" means same hardware, just a little different
code and cosmetics.
>Or should I just stay away from the DLink line of cameras ?
No reason to pay more. Vivos are the same, and
cheaper, and have better updates. The d1100 is
(maybe) from the maker of the 900 and 950: cas is
the short name, I forget the company name, but its
long gone. Sparklan took over the assets and
probably do those dlink low-ends now.
If you want a PT (no zoom), with wifi, and
usable low-light, get a vivotek PT7137 or a
LevelOne WCS-1060 (same camera just a little
different shell). The fps drops a lot (to
5 fps) in low light but it has a great (excellent
really) picture at 640x480, even in low light.
Compare that to most other cameras in low light
which are very noisy (grainy, dark, etc.) and
you'll be pleased. The 950, for example, is
terrible in low light. By low light I mean,
say, a 40w lamp in a typical room.
If you don't need wifi there's the PT7135 (not
the IP7135 which is something else) or the
FCS-1060.
Or, save up and get something better. I don't
see -much better- cameras on the horizon compared
to what is available today, but the stuff today
is a lot better than what was available two or
more years ago, and -all- the dlinks are at least
that old. Just because a camera says "new"
doesn't mean it's not old tech.
sid
The one attractive feature that I see in the DLink DCS-1110 is the
POE.
I don't see that feature specifically on any of the Axis cameras. Is
it there and not listed ?
Should it not be used ?
Thanks
h...@40th.com
>POE.
>I don't see that feature specifically on any of the Axis cameras.
http://www.axis.com/products/video/camera/productguide.htm
POE is over-rated if you ask me. You either
need a switch that supplies the power (48V to
start) or have an injector at around $40 a pop.
If you look at the link, where it says "splitter",
you'll need yet another thing to hook in, but
this time on the camera end of the cable.
Either way, it's extra cost and another thing
to go wrong. Switches with POE (on a limited
number of ports, usually) run $300+. That'd
be costly to replace. Or, an injector for every
camera adds up to a tidy sum, too. Wherever I
run a camera I run two ethernet cables. The
second cable is for 5 or 12V power. I use a
small computer power supply that can run okay
even with no load on a rail (most PSs need at
least some load or they blow up real good, real
fast).
If you want a plain POE, Vivotek's ip7131 has
that built-in, along with audio in and out, an
I/O block, and the same picture quality as the
PT7135/37, but no PT. Not much $, either.
sid
> sid (sidwe...@alexian.net)[Sun, 13 Apr 2008 09:23:25 -0700 (PDT)]:
Thanks for the input on the POE. Why is the POE (not built in) so
expensive?
I like your idea of running a second cable, but why not just solder up
your own ?
Make yourself a 6" patch cable with RJ45 couplers and cut into it and
tap some of the pairs not in use ?
If standard Ethernet is only using the [1,2],[3,6], Correct me, but
I think [4,5] and [7,8] are left over.
That way, 1 camera, 1 cable.
Do you ever have issues with the length of the cable and/or low
voltage at the camera
h...@40th.com
>...
>I think [4,5] and [7,8] are left over.
POE wire locations are standard so if you
wanted to do your own you could. POE expects
48 VDC - good for very long runs but not
that common. It's easier for me to do
separate runs, one for ethernet and one for
power. Set up a remote switch with PS and
UPS, run all the cam cabling to that. What's
left is to run a single ethernet cable from
the remote switch to the main computer. For
just one camera, though, it probably doesn't
matter how you do it.
sid
So is the POE stuff interchangeable ?
Can I use an Axis POE hub and a D-Link splitter ($35) as opposed to a
Axis splitter ($90) ?
h...@40th.com
>So is the POE stuff interchangeable ?
Probably. I'd test it out no matter what.
48V on the ethernet side of the wires is
bound to let the smoke out of something.
I'd go with a vivotek pt7135 (or 37) before
I'd go with an axis 207(w). The 207mw I'd
have to think about, though. The 207(w) pic
is not as good, and the lens adjustment (on
any 207) is just terrible; one is very likely
to break the thing trying to focus. It's a
design flaw: the threads have what appears to
be teflon tape (just a little), and that jams
the threads so if you try to focus, what you
wind up doing is separating the glue! from the
two-part focus deal. The only way to focus
after that is to unscrew the outer cover off
(it's not supposed to do that) and, with the
lens right there to fall out, turn the little
plastic lens holder, the thing whose threads,
as you may recall, are wrapped with the teflon-
like tape. I've got a 207w and a 207mw and
they both are exactly as bad. Others have
reported this so it's not isolated. They are
SMALL, but not that good, really.