Soundy

Not to sound like a twit or anything, but... are you on glue? You won't find a *good* analog PTZ with those specs for under $1000... forget a network/PoE (presumably MP) model.

QFT: bad caps are very easy to see in a visual check. These days, this is the first thing I look at for just about any issues that seem hardware-related, because it's quick and easy to either confirm or rule out.

We're still using them regularly (well, the VCM version). Still solidly among the best performers in their class.

Something like this would probably be a lot more effective for you:

There is no clear answer, because the data rate depends on so many different variables. If you're running a camera/codec that supports constant bitrate (CBR), then the rate is whatever you determine it should be, and the camera adjusts other parameters to achieve that. If it's VBR (variable bitrate), then actual dataflow will change depending on scene complexity, sharpness, amount of movement, level of compression, saturation level, codec used, and so on. A view of a static grey wall will use a fraction of the bandwidth of, say, a busy freeway scene, assuming all settings are the same between both.

Did you miss the part where we already covered this and the OP stated he is working with IP cams?

If u can check and change MB capacitors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor_plague Note: this sort of damage is not generally heat-related, it's just a result of bad caps.

You'd need two for video - one for each end. That's it. Right. The BNCs on the camera and DVR are typically female connectors; the baluns have the male connectors. No balun needed, just connect the wires directly. For me, I typically use the blue pair in the Cat5 for video, orange and green pairs for power, and the brown for control, or for a spare (most often for a second video feed). There's no particular reason for that, just a scheme we came up with that made sense to us.

The camera should have terminals labeled for control, usually something like "RX(A)" and "RX(B)" (or maybe "RX+" and "RX-"). These would connect to the corresponding TX pins on the DVR (TX(A) to RX(A), etc.). Most baluns have a male BNC, so they would connect directly to the DVR and the camera. I normally use these ones: You COULD solder them... personally, I'd just twist them together and then insert that into the terminals on the DVR.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ethernet+repeater Keep in mind that this particular limitation applies to ethernet, not Cat5 itself. Other types of networking that also use Cat5 are not subject to the same limitations. Still others are even more limited.

Hmmm, the specs listed on that camera make no sense... it says it draws "1.5A (9W)" at 12VDC... 1.5A at 12V is 18W; or, 9W at 12V would be only 750mA draw. That COULD make a difference whether it's feasible to run the power via the Cat5e. If you have an adjustable voltage regulator, though, you could probably pull it off, just dial up the voltage a little if it needs it. In any case... yes, you can run power, video and control over a single Cat5e. Use one pair with baluns for the video, another pair for control, the other two pairs for power. You can get baluns that split out tails for control and power, but those don't do anything special; they're just a convenience.

A switch would be like... camera <--- up to 100m ---> switch/repeater <--- up to 100m ---> DVR With extenders, you could do camera <--> extender <----------- up to 1200m -------------> extender <--> DVR

An ethernet *segment* is limited to 100m, not the entire run. So a "midspan repeater" could be a simple $20 10/100 5-port switch anywhere that keeps both segments to <100m. That may not be convenient in a setup like this, however, as you would need to find somewhere in the run to install and power the switch/repeater. An extender would be something like these (for example): http://gemelec.com/index.php?page=shop.browse&category_id=68&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=1 - those would simply require one at each end.

Not entirely. It depends on what type of "data" you're sending. 100m is the design limit for ethernet. If you're using IP cameras via an ethernet connection, you'll need to use an extender(s), or some sort of midspan repeater. If you're doing this, and there are multiple cameras, I'd recommend running all the cameras into one switch at their location and having only a single data connection back to the DVR location, to keep costs down, as extender/repeater options can get expensive. HOWEVER... if you're talking about analog cameras, then you're not using ethernet, you're just running a video signal over a twisted pair, and basic cheap passive baluns will easily give you a few hundred meters... more if you use active baluns.

If you can get a cable between the two locations, that's within the 330' maximum for ethernet. Otherwise, you could look at something like Ubiquiti for wireless products.

I just plug a wireless router into the switch with the cameras, then use my netbook via WiFi to adjust all the cameras, no repeated plugging-and-unplugging required.

Realistically, the only way I'd do wireless is with IP... and that DVR won't support it. Even at that, wireless is usually a last resort when there are no wiring options left... there's almost always a way to get wire there (remember that you still have to get power to the camera too - video-over-powerline may be a better option).

The reason you want to focus in low light is that, when it's bright, an auto-iris camera will narrow the iris, thus giving you greater depth of field (for example, you might focus on something 20' away and everything from 5' to infinity is also in focus). But when it gets dark and the iris opens up, you lose a lot of that depth, and the area you want might be out of focus (example, your DOF when focused at 20' might shrink so that only things from 15' to 30' are in focus, so if your main subject is something at 10', it will now be blurry). You can also use something dark in front of the lens - ideally, a photographic Neutral Density (ND) filter, but I've used welding goggles or even just sunglasses.

http://www.3xlogic.com/prod/983/mvr-series-micro-video-recorder Just installed my first one of these the other day, these things are TINY. Was recording one analog and three 2MP cams and handled them all quite nicely.

One "good" wireless camera will probably cost as much as his entire system...

We're using the composite out on IQ-A11 domes on a couple sites to feed an LCD customer-awareness monitor, it look just fine... I think you can expect it to be VGA resolution in most cases. Keep in mind that not all cameras will output composite at full framerate (the A11 only outputs at 15fps), or all the time - the IQ-511s, for example, output composite for only the first few minutes after power-up, then turn it off... and while it's active, the composite output displays a box in the center half of the view with a 100% crop and a "focus meter" specifically for focusing and aiming.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=active+BNC+video+splitter

Yeah, too bad they don't actually show as links until he's been here a while

Were you using coaxitron for your home test as well? I forget, was distance to power considered? Is the power supply sufficient? I know Pelco recommends at least 75VA *per camera*, with fairly substantial power wire needed for any significant distance (16/2 up to 12/2 depending on the length). The timing of it suggests things may be working fine until the heater/blower kicks in and causes a voltage drop... have you measured the voltage AT the camera? (Sorry, too lazy to look up the other thread right now... actually, maybe I'll combine them to keep things tidy...)

The GV *software* is a free download if you have a legitimate card... if you paid someone for it, you got ripped off. That message you're seeing is usually a Windows message, stating that you probably have a pirated version of Windows. Are you sure this is a legit copy of Windows?