Soundy

Like Rory says, you can use just about any sort of cable for the power - 18/2 or 16/2 lamp cord will work. Speaker wire, station wire, Cat3 phone wire, Cat5 network wire... really doesn't matter as long as you have enough thickness there vs. the length of the run. In an extreme pinch you could even use another run of coax for power, although that would actually cost FAR more than simple Siamese cable. However, if you do do this, do it right, and home-run the power. Don't just "link" the two cameras: that will double the total current draw over the first segment (between the power supply and first camera), and if it's already near the limit and starting to drop voltage, it will make the drop even worse for BOTH cameras. It will also substantially increase the chance of a ground loop and thus the chance of noise in the picture. Ultimately though, Tom's advice is good: if this customer is THIS cheap, it's probably better to just walk away. Tell him when he's ready to spend the whole extra $20 to do it RIGHT, you'll come back... or he can get someone else to wire it up half-assed, and then THAT person will get to come back and deal with the headaches it causes.

Looks like that's what it's designed for. The second picture is a VBM style (V1000 series), The third picture is a VCM (V2000 series) without the back-box. Personally, I just attach them straight to the wall with the back-box.

What's the difference? Well for starters, I've NEVER had to return an IQ for being broken out-of-the-box... and I've installed easily five to six times as many IQs (mostly 501/511s, and A11 domes) as I have Areconts. The A11's gimbal setup is WAY simpler, WAY more solid, WAY less shaky/sloppy, and WAY WAY WAY easier to adjust (no hidden locking screws) than the AV3155's, too. Take a good look at the gimbal/yoke in the 3155 sometime, it just looks and feels REALLY cheap and flimsy. The only advantage the Areconts really have is better low-light and day/night performance, and unfortunately, once you get past the extensive installation headaches, that's what ultimately matters the most. But the subject of this rant: the main difference is, the Areconts appear to have NO QA at final assembly... I can't see this kind of damage happening during shipping; there are parts that are actually put together wrong (and I've seen this on a previous install as well). The more assembly steps the thing goes through after that, the worse QA looks for nobody catching it.

We use the VCM-24VFs for both indoor and outdoor...

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=21952 viewtopic.php?f=5&t=22332 viewtopic.php?f=5&t=22326 viewtopic.php?f=5&t=21540 viewtopic.php?f=5&t=21501

From what I can find on this system, it appears to use proprietary all-in-one video/power wires with mini-DIN connectors... if so, it's unlikely you will be able to connect "real" cameras to your existing DVR.

Typical "cheap" IR cameras use LEDs that produce IR just on the edge of human vision, so they still produce a faint visible red glow. Your "black" LEDs use a longer wavelength, further from what our eyes can see, so the glow is not visible. See this thread for more info: viewtopic.php?f=19&t=20861&p=124480

Baluns don't NEED UTP... they'll work with just about any type of wire. I've used them with station wire, speaker wire.... I see no reason they shouldn't work fine with that stuff.

What is "detection flagging"?

Distributor...

They would have had to disassemble them and then re-assemble them in the wrong sequence for this kind of damage. Same thing though, if the plastic bits were put together elsewhere and then the whole thing assembled in Arizona, then someone "elsewhere" really botched the assembly, and someone in Arizona REALLY REALLY $#!t the bed in letting it slip through. Keep in mind this is not a one-off - I have two cameras out of four on-site last night that were broken, and the boss found two more when he checked our stock in the office.

As promised...

I can't imagine it's shipping damage - this is to the plastic parts inside the dome. Some of them are just plain assembled wrong. Had the boss check the others in stock at the office... he found two more that were broken internally. After six hours on a graveyard-shift install, opening a brand-new camera up to find it's assembled wrong and broken FROM THE FACTORY is not left-turn you want the day to take. BTW, of the four we had on-site, besides the two broken ones, a third had a lose locking screw on the backfocus adjustment which left the lens slopping all over the place. Nice. For as well as they perform, these cameras suffer from poor design, cheap construction, and a complete lack of QA.

Welcome aboard!

Not necessarily true. It depends on the number of cameras, the resolution and framerate they run, the codec they use, and to a fair degree, the NVR software used. Some here have built NVRs using Exacq on Atom processors. That's a little overstated as well. That's wholesale on an upper-mid-range megapixel, but there's lots available out there for less.

First, let's differentiate: IP cameras can be any resolution, including standard 4CIF/D1/VGA resolutions - IP is just a different way to get the signal into the DVR. A VGA IP camera won't necessarily give you any better picture than an analog camera with a quality capture card. Now that said, IP gives you the capability to run megapixel (MP) cameras; with megapixel, you most certainly get higher resolution than analog... at least four times the resolution VGA = 640x480; 1MP = 1280x960. Actual image quality is dependent on several other factors, but IN GENERAL, megapixel will be higher quality than analog. IP does not required ANY additional hardware. If your PC has a network adapter, then all you need is the appropriate software. Yes. There are a couple ways to do this: run DVR software that supports hybrid operation (recording both by its capture card, and via the network); or get a straight NVR (network video recorder) and use analog-to-IP converters (aka "video servers") on each analog camera. GeoVision will allow you to do all three. The main cost difference will be analog cameras + capture card, vs. IP cameras + IP licenses (for the GV software).

...or just use a spacer between the nipple and the box. Edit: actually... no spacer or trimming required, the camera protrusion doesn't even cover half the hole... lots of room for wires to come through beside it.

A static IP is preferable, but you could use a camera that has DDNS support built-in... or most routers have some form of DDNS support.

The VBM is a single large enclosure... the VCM is lower-profile overall, with a small (3-1/8" diameter, 2" deep) protrusion out the back for the camera internals. You use a hole saw to make a 3-1/8" or 3-1/4" hole for it to sit in.

Yup... sounds more and more like your problem is the card(s).

Ummm... wow, I dunno where you're looking... but 99% of IP cameras out there should support PoE, and some of them can be found (granted, on fleaBay - buyer beware) start at $150 and up. PoE doesn't need to be a deal-breaker, anyway... all of these can be powered normally (12VDC and/or 24VAC), PoE is just a convenience.

CCTV systems are designed for 75-ohm RG-59 or RG-6. If the cable you're using has a different impedance, it can definitely affect image quality. You also don't mention what resolutions you're actually viewing/recording at. The card(s) and/or software could be limiting it.

Okay, I'll rephrase: there's no reason the video balun wouldn't WORK, but I wouldn't expect it to help any potential noise issues. If anything I'd expect it to lower the audio level somewhat. I suspect they were used more just to provide the BNC termination. The size of the wire makes no difference to the audio.