Soundy

Can you post some stills or video clips showing the problem?

More for the Installation Hall of Shame can't believe somebody got paid for this install

That's one thing with IQ, I've always found their support responsive and very helpful.

If your computer has a serial port, you should be able to use that:

That one says 0.4lux color, 0.08 B&W. I was going to suggest that, but the catch with a board cam is that almost all of them use M12/M13 lens mounts which greatly limits your lens options, and I'm guessing you probably want something with a pretty substantial focal length.

That is correct.

Yeah, I don't see anything that indicates it supports auto-iris. It is a TDN camera so it will need an IR lens... the 3MP version is a 1/3" sensor though, so you don't HAVE to go to a 1/2" lens (it'll work, but it's not required).

Er, oops, you didn't say what models the IQs were...

The 511 isn't TDN so you don't need an IR lens for it. You SHOULD try to get megapixel lenses for these, though - standard lenses will work, but you won't get the full quality possible with a megapixel cameras. BTW, remember that the 511s don't have auro-iris controls, so those will need manual-iris lenses as well.

It's power zoom as well, you could probably get some good coin for it on fleaBay...

Correct - almost twice as much.

I looked at the specs and, certainly the 1 Lux minimum illumination is not at all competitive with their analog box cameras (the CNB BBN-24F has a listed min illumination rating of 0.000025 Lux). But where did you see that the IGP1030 cannot use IR illuminators? It doesn't state anywhere that it's a day/night camera (TDN or otherwise), nor does it state that it has a monochrome mode... ergo, chances are 99.99999% likely that it has an IR cut filter over the sensor... and therefore will not work with IR illuminators.

IR-corrected lenses will generally say, at the very least, "IR" right on them. Some also go as "day/night" lenses. These are not required for low light... they ARE preferred for true day/night cameras (ie. those with movable IR cut filters). If the camera doesn't state that it's TDN or ICR (or other similar acronym), then you don't need an IR lens.

See http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090411085814AAkeOll Video-drive lenses are rare these days - IF the camera supports it, there would be an option in its settings to select VIDEO instead of DC. I would guess that this camera has no such option.

Your best bet, really, would be to look for a small B&W camera, since you really don't need color for this purpose, and a B&W camera would reduce a lot of the additional electronic complexity as well. Edit: something like this might be better suited - it's small (4-1/4 x 3-3/4 x 4-1/2"), light (about 10oz), and still gives you a C/CS lens mount: http://www.pelco.com/sites/global/en/products/camera-solutions/range-presentation.page?p_function_id=15006&p_family_id=20012&p_range_id=2859

Agreed. There is a solid reason why this is THEORETICALLY the case - more pixels in a given sensor size means smaller pixels with less ability to collect light. However, as is the case with analog, there's more to low-light performance than just the pixels; otherwise a $30 eBay cam would look just as good at night as a Monalisa cam.

Normally the only time you'll see an IR cut filter mentioned is if it's a removable type (ICR) in a "true day/night" (TDN) camera. Generally safe assumptions are: If it's a B&W camera, it has no cut filter. If it's a color camera, it does. If it's a color camera with IRs, it does not. If it's a "day/night" camera (as opposed to TDN) it does not. Remember the reason for the IR cut filter in the first place: CCD and CMOS sensors are sensitive to IR light, but with color sensors it can adversely affect color balance and possibly exposure, and because it focuses differently than visible light, it can make it difficult to attain a sharp focus. Thus the cut filter is used on color cameras to help achieve proper color rendition and prevent focus issues. Without it, your colors may be off, but you may also get slightly better night performance.

By "snapshots" do you mean screenshots (using the PrintScreen key or a screen-capture utility), or using a function in the program? If the client has a feature to export video clips, it should be able to export still images as well. The problem is, the original video is at D1 or lower resolution... but the web viewer is expanding it to 913x696 pixels. Right there, it's losing quality, clarity and sharpness. Any comparative stills someone else posts WILL look better, assuming they're exported properly, simply for the fact that they're not being up-sized in the process. Actually, resizing the posted image down to 480 vertical, the horizontal becomes 630 pixels, which indicates it's either being cropped as well, or it's not being resized evenly. Going from 630x480 back up to 913x696 is a 145% size increase, which is something of an oddball number that doesn't lend itself easily to smooth resizing. Here are some examples of what I'm talking about. This is a D1 export, 704x480 (click the images to see them full size - the board itself is resizing the display, so the differences aren't as noticeable): Now here it is resized by 145%, using a "resize" function (saved at 100% JPEG quality): And again, resized 145%, using a "resample" function, with a "Lanczos" filter (slowest, but best quality): Note that those images are now 1021x696, maintaining original aspect ratio. Now here's what happens if I scale it to 913x696: Note how it's squashed horizontally. A major part of the reason for your poor quality is the way your web client displays it, plain and simple. That doesn't even account for it potentially compressing the video more (common for remote clients).

Well, yes... but at the same time, it could just be left alone - in the dark, the camera will automatically switch to B&W mode and move the filter out of the way. The camera should also have an option to lock it in night mode all the time. If you've already got it apart, then no harm done, but in the future, disassembling the camera to remove this isn't necessary to achieve your goals. I understand you're also trying to shrink the size of the whole assembly, but keep in mind that to be able to focus properly, the sensor should maintain its relative position to the lens mount - removing the ICR may allow you to place the sensor closer to the lens mount, but then you may not be able to focus properly, or depending on the lens, the back end of the lens may contact the sensor, damaging one or both. Not necessarily. These sensors are sensitive to IR; however, IR light on a color sensor can adversely affect the white balance, resulting in odd color tints, and in some cases could adversely affect the exposure. IR cut filters are implemented on color cameras to counter this, but are not needed on B&W cameras, which is why the latter usually tend to have better low-light performance. Cheap "day/night" cameras are simply color cameras with no IR cut filter... "true day/night" cameras use the movable filters like you have there, to achieve the best of both worlds. So yes, you can still use the camera day or night with the filter removed, the color will just look a little strange in the day.

^^Make sure you use the proper BNCs on that. RG6 has a thicker OD and the center conductor has a thicker insulator than RG59, so with a few rare exceptions, RG59 connectors won't work on RG6.

^Try reverting it to 12VDC and see if that helps. I know it SHOULDN'T make a difference, but it's worth a shot... I'll do some more in-depth diagnostics with mine when I get the chance.

Looking at it now at home on a bigger screen... it looks like it's not switching to night mode. Weird thing: a 24VF I have here at home, since I switched it from 12VDC to 24VAC, isn't switching to night mode either. I'll investigate this a bit further...

It's hard to say because it's not clear how you're saving this picture. At the very least, the resolution it's at doesn't conform to any actual xCIF/D1 resolution, meaning it's up-scaled by an uneven factor. Is this a screenshot from the remote client? A photograph of the screen? Or is this using a function on the DVR itself? From your description, it sounds like you're just taking a photograph of the screen, and there's no way that will give an accurate idea of what the camera actually looks like.

TV coax is usually RG58 - 50 ohm, and not at all suitable for CCTV. You want 75 ohm, RG6 or RG59 (the latter tends to be more readily available, cheaper, and easier to work with). Make sure the core is solid copper (not copped-clad alloy), and the shield is pure copper braid at 95-98% coverage. Avoid aluminum-foil shielded!