Soundy

this will be your problem. max run for cctv 100m. you will need to add a booster to get to 200m He just said there's no problem with that setup...

I don't understand how you're running through the LAN - you're running via video/IP encoders, and then decoders at the monitor end? That would certainly induce a time delay, although 2 seconds seems a little excessive. Bit of an expensive work-around too, no? What monitors are these? Do they have BNC inputs? If you already have coax in place, that would be your best bet, to just plug in directly - DVR1 out to MON1 in, DVR2 out to MON2 in. I don't know why it would work with a DVD player but not with the DVR, unless theres something else incorrect about how you have it connected.

What is the reason for this move? Perhaps there's another way around it...

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=sony+camera+adapter+CMA-10CE It's the power adapter for the camera. Whether it's usable for other cameras... hard to say.

So I've just been asked to look into this... Potential client with a monster home of some sort, wants up to 12 cameras around the place... from what I've been told so far, it sounds like most if not all will need to be wireless, and most if not all will be indoors (I get the impression that this may be an old house where adding wiring will be difficult if not impossible... I also get the idea that cost is little to no object). Based on other threads, I'm thinking the Ubiquiti products look pretty good for IP and suggested we could go that way with all IP cameras, or cams with encoders where necessary. The VideoComm indoor analog stuff someone linked to in nickCR's thread looks potentially usable as well. What are the thoughts on these products, or others, for an all-or-mostly wireless, all-or-mostly indoor setup? Remember we're talking about a big place, so some fair range will be needed. Boss wants me to recommend some specific equipment... I'm trying to tell him it's impossible to do that without seeing the place and where the cameras will be going to determine what sort of structure will be required for the system... *sigh*

Hey, U-Matic was the mainstay of the broadcast industry until barely 10 years ago.

35mm, pfft, our little rural school could only afford 8mm. Then we got our table-sized, top-loading VHS player...

What output are you using on the DVR, VGA or BNC? Either way, there should be no lag - going wireless certainly wouldn't speed things up any, in fact it would probably ADD lag. When you say you get "double images" using the coax, do you mean you get two of the same view side-by-side, or that you get "ghosting" in the image? The former would indicate an incorrect setting in the monitor; the latter would probably be a physical problem with the cabling. What exactly does the client consider "laggy" here? It's hard to troubleshoot the problem, let alone prescribe a solution, without knowing exactly what the problem looks like.

Not exactly. A 6.8mm focal length, at 7' away, you'll see an area about 5' wide. Move the camera farther away, you get a wider view. Whether it's detailed enough to read the money clearly will depend on the resolution of the camera - ie. how many pixels that area is divided across.

Wow, for someone named "hardwired" you seem to have a lot of wireless experience Thanks!

Thanks, I was in AV Club

Classic.

Most of them out here use something like this: ...combined with one of these to measure the pull: Put them all together and you get: (These pictures come from www.taymer.com)

For me at least, there is no universal preference here - it's whatever works best in a given situation.

Neither is affected by "interference" as such. Where the problem arises is with cheap DC-powered cameras that use the same ground connection for video and power: with baluns, the video ground connection then passes through two transformers (one at each end), which makes it substantially longer wire path. You then get two separate ground paths between the camera and the DVR, one of them much longer than the other... and that leads to ground loops, especially as you add more cameras. Better cameras with regulated supplies, including dual-voltage and AC cameras, avoid this because the video and power don't share their grounds. Again, the GND is there to meet UL spec. It will almost never be used in common practice. Probably the result of using cheap baluns.

Your wiring is correct; ground connection is not needed. It's on there to meet a certain spec, but I've never once used it.

Thanks! The option for IP-over-power (or even video-over-power) had crossed my mind as well at one point, and then slipped it again as the boss started getting into the whole wireless thing. I'll be sure to mention that as well.

Well, I was hoping if it came to that, those things could be tucked in the ceiling somehow. I did point out too, that no matter what, we still need to get power to the cameras, too. Gotta convince the boss, not me I told him several times it would be almost impossible to come up with anything without at least a vague idea of the house. I guess at this point what I'm looking for is just more ideas of manufacturers, product lines, etc. that might be suitable, as a starting point. That was my initial suggestion... I did reference some of what you were doing in your thread. I'll mention that. I think they just want to record them all, no guards watching live or anything. .There's that too... I did point out that if ceiling access was a problem, there's also the option of putting cameras on or near walls where wiring could be pulled through into utility spaces or whatever - ie. adjust camera placement to match what will work for wiring. I'm no pro, just throwing out some solutions.

Using the lens calculator here: http://www.isorainbow.com/lens_calc.htm Assuming a 1/3" sensor, 7' away, to cover a 5' wide area, you'd need a 6.8mm lens. Since you probably want to cover the registers as well, add another 2-3 ft. to that, that would be 4.3mm. Really, not enough to get a lot of detail unless you get into a >5MP camera. You're probably going to need two cameras...

I did mention that, but let's assume for the sake of discussion that staying away isn't an option...

^What he said The 223m would do the job with the appropriate lens... what lens is appropriate would depend on how high the ceiling is (ie. how far the camera is from the registers).

No idea. I'm just guessing that it's old, though... hoping it's newer, which would allow us to run wires more places. That's the thing, the boss is pushing me to find out about an all-wireless solution and I'm trying to say it's pointless until we know more specifics about the site... *sigh*

I've picked up a few things from this thread as well... which lead me to a thread of my own that I'm off to start now, for a job that's just dropped in my lap...

Bet you thought you were just gonna pop in here and get a quick and easy "Provider A or Provider B" answer and be merrily on your way, didn't you? Now aren't you sorry you asked?? Glad you've found this all useful... and even more glad you're actually taking the time to learn about what you're dealing with. I think I speak for most here when I say, we like well-informed customers (not to be confused with "smart" customers - see the thread elsewhere - who arm themselves with just enough disjointed information to be dangerous and then dive into the deep end). I'm sure the Exacq dealer is glad you found him now, so you're coming to him with reasonable expectations!

Do you want to do this with one camera, or are you willing to use two (one per register)? How large is the area you need to cover (ie. the area the bills will be within)? If you must have one camera for both registers, how far apart arethe registers? What lenses have you tried already, on what cameras?