hardwired

Night shot... Here you go, set at 1/30, no frame integration, 3MP MJPEG mode, adaptive black stretch on. BTW, if you are going to use them with Exacq, you need their beta driver at this point. Click on them twice to get full resolution. Daytime Will try to get 1.3 MP H.264 samples, and some WDR shots (only available in 1.3 MP mode) More to come.

Wireless is BAD if you look at it as a cheap and lazy substitute for running a little bit of cabling, expecting to be able to throw things together, and run away. Wireless is GREAT if you put it in it's proper context- an option to make a system come together in a way that would not be feasible with other connectivity options. Wireless has NEVER been my first choice for connectivity. Why? Because I have a lot of other options available that are a better choice in most cases (more labor/cable, twisted pair analog, DSL converters, Etc.) Sometimes, though, there is no other option. I have a 37 camera, two server Milestone install with 14 hardwired IP cameras, 10 cameras on DSL extenders, 10 IP cameras on three wireless 2.4 Ghz links (all Ubiquiti /Mikrotik hardware, by the way) and three IP cams on a long range 900 MHz non-line of sight link (also Ubiquiti /Mikrotik), and a 5.8 Ghz backhaul between the servers and offices. Oh, and we had to avoid interference with two different wireless ISP's running in the area. Planning was a VERY significant part of that job, but that job just could not have happened a few years ago, for sure. Different objective, different results. You do have to look at wireless as just another tool in our toolbox, sometimes you use it, sometimes you don't, but use it appropriately. BTW, I would not touch analog wireless again with a ten meter cattle prod. There is no comparison between the results you can get with IP wireless, and what you get with analog, especially if you plan on more than one camera.

If you are looking at domes, the Panasonic WV-NW484S (IP) and the WV-CW484S (analog) look the same, perform very well, and install easily. If you search here, you will find many positive reviews of these cameras, mine included.

A great source for wall fishing and other odd tools is Labor Saving Devices, http://www.lsdinc.com/content/main ... And I think I'm working in the wrong places, how come no one mentioned needing a flashlight? I use a DeWalt 18 volt one so I can use my same batteries, plus I have a small LED one in my pocket for backup (and yes, I have used it, there's a gap between a cooler box and exterior wall that ate one of my previous flashlights!)

If you are in a rack with an existing switch, and you need to power more than a few cameras, the Phihong midspans are a nice solution. They are not a switch, they just inject PoE onto 8, 16 or 24 individual isolated ports. They make a good single port PoE injector, too.

Great find hardwired!!!! Wireless will work but don't count on it will consumer grade linksys access points. YOU MUST DO SITE SURVEYS and look into Engenius and Ubiquiti for your wireless solution. In my experience if you can get a wire there it is cheaper and more reliable to run the wire. If you have to trench a parking lot and you have LOS, go wireless. Indeed, wireless is not a "plug & pray" solution, it takes a fair amount of planning to make a reliable system. I neglected to mention another solution I have used at an apartment complex: DSL extenders. If you can get access to unused pairs from phone trunk cables in the complex, this provides a very reliable solution for sending IP video around. Take a look at this for the headend http://netsys-direct.com/proddetail.php?prod=NVF-2400S ,and this for the cam end http://netsys-direct.com/proddetail.php?prod=NVF-200R These provided me with a rock solid 15 meg per link at the distances in the complex I installed it at.

For that many cameras, I'd think about using "N" rate wireless. I have been using some new equipment from Ubiquiti that is working great, and would not cost too much for your application (much less per cam than the difference in cost between Axis models). Take a look at http://ubnt.com/products/nsm.php ,this unit will also allow you to power it and a PoE camera through it with one cable. The wireless "N" protocol is also optimized for carrying multiple streams. It also provides more resistance against interference, and at apartments, you are going to have quite a bit of it. Their stuff is designed for wireless ISP's, where cost and performance are both concerns. Also, if you have more than one camera in a location you can cable back to a single point, you'll save even more over Wi-Fi type cameras. Plus, the camera is not always going to be in the best spot for the wireless link back to the headend.

I made the reference about ONSSI /Milestone not as meaning to be really disparaging, just that when you ask about each other at ISC or ASIS, they look at you funny, and say "oh, well, that's,er,um, well, hang on and let me finish with this guy over here" and never give a straight answer. What's your take on PSIA as a comparison? It seems to address a broader scope of interoperability with other devices that might be useful.

I use Milestone a lot, and am happy about everything except the pricing, they seem to think it's made of gold. If ONSSI's gui is better, use it. One of them is the other one's bastard stepchild, not sure which. Upside of using one vendor for cams and management S/W- one company to yell at when something goes wrong, and usually a little bit better control over the cams. Downside of one vendor is that you lose a lot of the interoperability and choices in products that you get with someone like Milestone, etc. that only does management S/W. Someone needs to settle the ONVIF /PSIA thing (VHS/ Beta, anyone?) and get on with it. That will be a great day for software designers when they don't have to write new drivers every week.

You need to fill in a few more blanks for us. Do you mean that you want all daycare IP cameras transmitted wirelessly to the church for recording / viewing, or the reverse, and at what frame rate? Having said that, some of the Acti 1.2 MP domes (3511 inside, 7411 outside) would be a pretty good choice for the daycare, too. Acti does pretty well at a price / performance balance, I use their products frequently, along with Arecont, Panasonic, Pelco, and others. If you are looking at live (20-30 fps) recording for the stage, Acti may not be the best choice there. You will have 8FPS at 1.2 MP, you could do 640X480 at 30 FPS, though. If you are looking for true 30 FPS, test it well before trying it at a large function, 30 FPS from a single cam is often hard to do without hiccups. By the way, thanks for being discerning enough to ask for PROFESSIONALS here, we will do our best to steer you right.

I am currently building systems with either Conexant/Brooktree 878 or Techwell TW2804 Encoder chipset boards, using Intel P35 and P45 chipset boards from Gigabyte, and Nvidia video cards with no problems. You might ask tech support for your boards directly, they may have newer info than their documentation. A lot of them wrote their specs a long time ago (like when I was building them on Win98... Yeah, that's what the daily reboot option was for, memory leaks like a sieve!) Most encoder manufacturers design around Intel chipsets. I have had problems with older Via Chipsets, and Sis was a major problem.

Attenuation is the figure that most accurately reflects the impact of the cable on the signal, mostly at higher frequencies. As Survtech noted above, baseband video is more affected by DC resistance. However, most people do not have access to test equipment that can display attenuation in dB directly (or camera resolution, ), so DC resistance is the easiest test available to help troubleshoot / compare cabling.

If the Esprit was one with the integrated optics package (autofocus,etc) then it is usually the same imager module that is in the Spectra. The Spectra is one product Pelco does well, a lot of their other items are house labeled stuff, but I have used quite a few Spectra's and been happy with them. Fans and slip rings fail from time to time, but that's likely with any PTZ.

Exacq has the replay feature you are looking for, as well as being a hybrid DVR/NVR. They are only MPEG4 on the recording, though, although with disk prices dropping as fast as they are, that may not be as much of a concern as before. The remote viewer will also allow you to create view groups across different units, which is a nice feature.

I've had pretty good luck with the Orion monitors, they are a true CCTV monitor like the Panasonic.. take a look at http://orionimages.com/product/20RTC.asp 2.56" deep, with a glass screen cover, holds up to cleaning better. Little lower res, though. I have used this one, though, and it looks good. They also make a higher res one, http://orionimages.com/product/20RTH.asp, but it is somewhat thicker (3.23").

Here's an online calculator from Pelco... Lets you calculate field of view or lens size either way. http://www.pelco.com/support/tools/lenscalc.aspx

Possibly, but most manufacturers of twisted pair converters have designed them for Cat5 / 5e. You will probably not want to use SHIELDED Cat 5 or 6, though. The added capacitance causes problems with video over twisted pair. Like Soundy, I've run video through all kinds of funky wire (fairly) successfully. It does look like the OP just got some really crummy cable, though. There's stuff coming in from offshore that is actually copper plated aluminum, and lighter gauge, and all kinds of other problems.

Protech Piramid sensors http://www.protechusa.com/products.htm are a dual-tech microwave/ PIR sensor that work really well for false alarm rejection, I used about ten of them in combination with cameras for a remote guard tour/ monitoring setup at an industrial park, they had almost no false alarms with them. They also have a model with a camera in the same housing, I haven't tried that one yet, though. Not cheap, but you get what you pay for with them.. I've noticed them around our local National Guard base, too...

Had a dozen of these at a high end home calling presets on Pelco Spectra's through a Pelco 6700 matrix... trick stuff, at the time... http://www.optexamerica.com/productpage.aspx?l1=2&l2=&id=38 The batteries will last 2+ years, with Lithiums....

Thanks... so the bead isn't required for "proper" operation, just to fit the rules. Good to know ...Assuming the cam does not generate enough interference to lock up a switch, etc..... Not likely, but a possibility, nonetheless. My point was that the beads were just another sign of a design that wasn't fully thought through.

I'm gonna play this one down the middle. I am a believer in the Arecont implementation of H.264, We have a customer that needed 2+ years of archive from five 5MP cameras.. still took 48TB, but that one just was not going to happen before H.264. As far as 3MP decoders and monitors, for my customers, at least, that is not the point. They are using the cams in a post-event mode for their zooming capability. I've also used Panasonic cameras for over ten years, and I have always liked their performance, especially in WDR situations. The Panasonic rep said once CMOS imagers are good enough for them, they'll use them... Until then, CCD it is. I happen to think most proponents of megapixel cams that say manual iris lenses are good enough are wrong....once it gets dark, and you have a camera already handicapped by small pixels, and a CMOS imager, why handicap it further with a lens closed down to F4.0 or tighter? As far as the H.264 capping at 1.3 MP, (I think) that is the limit of the "standard" implementation of H.264.. beyond that are non-standard implementations, which I think Panasonic is trying to avoid.

The ferrite beads, unfortunately, are often another sign of design/ manufacturing problems. When a manufacturer goes into (VERY expensive, by the hour) UL / CE labs certification for electromagnetic interference testing, the tech will usually have a pocketful of different ferrite beads in his pocket. If the design doesn't pass, he'll throw on beads until it does. The beads then become required to be packaged and installed on the finished product to meet the certification requirements.

I'm not sure I understand your question. With baluns, connect the same color of a pair to the (+) side of the balun at each end and do the same with the (-) side. I think he meant, does it need to be a individual twisted pair, and not a split pair between multiple pairs in the cable... That's a big YES, you need a true pair for correct impedance, common mode rejection, and avoiding a lot of other problems.

Allow me to repeat a note I made on another thread.. "There was a key point there in mentioning standards as set forth by the Japanese manufacturers, in that I think you would be hard pressed to get suppliers from other offshore countries to be as truthful, and, without enforcing third party testing, the printed specs would only be worth the paper it is printed on. Nonetheless, I think we may be looking at this question from the wrong end, perhaps we need to be looking at raw imager capability, like scientific / astronomical cameras specify. That seems to be a more reproducible, quantifiable standard than anything supplied for our industry." Anything after the imager is processing voodoo.. Although some manufacturers do that voodoo better than others, by far. Also, the methods set forth by Axis are still more applicable to analog video signals than IP cameras, there need to be better measurement standards for IP cameras. For example, the pixel-to pixel low light nonlinearity / noise of CMOS imagers is not quantifiable by CCTV standards, but is available data for scientific cameras. Since it is not in (most) manufacturer's best interests to report this data accurately (the ones who do, often risk being compared badly by uninformed consumers), is it time that we, as the people who can see and understand the difference, to create some type of reasonably priced testing methodology that we can use to share our experiences accurately with each other?

I got (4) AV5155DN's for a job a while back. They will be the last I order. Problems were that the first batch sent out did not have the "yaw" adjustment at all, due to a initial manufacturing problem, and they were sent with really poor lenses. Arecont did, after some discussion, send new lenses, requiring another visit to the job site, and that's when I discovered what I consider to be the biggest flaw: the dome cover is HORRIBLY distorted... worse than any fifty dollar offshore dome. If you happen to have one, hold it up and turn it as you look through it... Really bad. Creates areas of bad focus in the field of view, you have to keep turning it to find the best spot. Also, do any of you really try to stuff that ferrite bead in there, or do you just leave it off?