LittleScoobyMaster

Do you know which Acti bullet cam is similar to this dome cam? I wonder if it would be the B410, B414, E37, E414, or the E48. Curious if any of those are the corresponding \ similar bullet version of the E77 dome or not. Curious if Hikvision \ Dahua have a 4K camera that is similar to the E77 as well. On Hikvision's site I only see 5MP cameras presently.

I would call that 8.8Mp What do you call tomatoes?

It is definitely a stretch, especially considering that most 4K resolutions are thought of to be 4096 x 2160, however, even people in the movie industry get confused and also consider 3840 x 2160 (UHD) to also be 4K, even though, technically, 4K is supposed to be 4096 x 2160 and not 3840 x 2160, however, so many TV manufactures are calling 3840 x 2160 4K sets that it then blurs the lines between what really is 4K versus UHD, etc. Besides Wiki is filled with so many inaccurate pieces of info it can't even be considered an authoritative source. And even though the Acti E77 is not a true 4K resolution (3648 x 2160) instead of 4096 x 2160 or 3840 x 2160, it's so damn close that they have updated their marketing to call it 4K. Just looking at the Wiki article about what 4K actually is shows how confusing the term 4K really is. The first line of the Wiki states "4K resolution is a generic term for display devices or content having horizontal resolution on the order of 4,000 pixels". Well 3648 is on the order of 4000 pixels. It's so close that they probably are just lumping it in as 4K. But also the E77 can do 3648 x 2736 which is greater than a 4K resolution (vertical only). But either way, most of the time when you see 4K mentioned, it doesn't include frame rates, because it is more about the resolution than frames per second. Because of all the confusion, 4K now means so many different things to so many different people. For me, when I think of 4K, I think of anything that has a resolution of 3840 x 2160 or 4096 x 2160, with the 4096 being the 'true 4K' resolution and 3840 and all of the others being "on the order of 4,000 pixels" type of 4K, an "almost 4K" resolution, but never do frames per second enter the picture because even a PC background, or any photo shot in 4096 x 2160 is still really a 4K resolution. And if I'm playing a PC game at one of the 4K resolutions, if it dips below a certain frame rate, it's still being played in a 4K resolution. If I receive a digital photo that has a resolution of 4096 x 2160, I would consider that to be a 4K photo. If I have some surveillance footage that has been recorded in a resolution of 4096 x 2160, I would consider it to be 4K, regardless of the frame rate. It would be nice if the tv manufacturers would not call 3840 x 2160 4K, but unfortunately they do. It's been a real mess of confusion the industry has brought on themselves, but the confusion is here to stay. Despite all the confusion around exactly what 4K is and is not, I still want to know how this Acti E77 can handle 1920 x 1080 resolution at 30 frames per second, but then, at only a tiny bump up to 2048 x 1536, if falls all the way down to only 6 frames per second. That makes no sense. From the spec sheet: "6 fps at 3648 x 2736; 6 fps at 3648 x 2160; 6 fps at 2592 x 1944; 6 fps at 2048 x 1536;" How can all these resolutions be running on hardware that only provides 6 frames across all these resolutions? On almost any piece of hardware, when you bump the resolutions up, you always start to have performance bottlenecks, but with the E77 (and the many other Acti "claimed 4K" cameras), they all have this performance wall that makes no sense, unless the hardware is capable of better frame rates at some of these resolutions, and they are locking the frame rates down similar to what FLIR did with the E4. How can this 2048 x 1536 resolution not have at least 15 frames per second at 2048 x 1536 on the hardware the camera is using if it is getting a whopping 30 fps at 1920 x 1080? Has anyone taken a close look at this firmware yet, or determined what the hardware should be capable of at these other resolutions?

4K is really just a resolution. They can do 4K resolution up to 900fps. There's no minimum fps for 4K. http://nofilmschool.com/2012/09/4k-at-900-fps-for-a-ft-one-high-speed-camera/ Acti is claiming that this camera can do 4K in the hardware documentation for the camera: http://www.acti.com/download_file/Product/hardware_manual/E77_Hardware_Manual.pdf (10 Megapixel with 4K/1080p) And, there are even 4K wallpapers that you can download for your computer. And if you have a decent video card you can even play a PC game in 4K, sometimes at 15 frames per second, and with a good card up to 60+ frames per second. But either way, it's nice to see that Acti is starting to pave the way for 4K and higher than 4K resolutions at very reasonable prices with their newer cameras. And that one from Bosch looks great but that one looks to be quite a bit more expensive than the E77 but it does look amazing. Looks to be out next month or so. It sounds like, at the moment, the E77 is still the lowest cost (4K claimed resolution) surveillance camera out right now. Just noticed that Amazon reduced the price to only $266.89 + $12.64 shipping for the E77. Not bad. It just needs a frame rate boost, which might be possible with a firmware adjustment.

It is true that the acti is 10MP, but 3648 is so close to 3840 that its a wash. (4k is not limited by frames per second). The Hero Black for instance, can do 4K resolution, and it can only do 15 frames per second at that resolution. 4K is the resolution, not the frame rate. In fact, 4K movie cameras are many times only shot at 24 frames per second, not 30, and are still considered to be 4K. The actual 4K resolutions are 4096 x 2160 and a few others then you start to get into UHD versus 4K, etc., but the E77 can do greater than 4K resolution on the vertical. (it can do 3648 x 2736)

. The Acti E77 is 4K, (it just has a puny 6 frames per second rate) but it is only $300 now. I say that before the end of the year \ early next, it definitely will be possible to score a 4K 20 to 30 fps cam in or very near the $500 range. http://www.networkcameracritic.com/?p=2254 My client systems handle 4K right now with out breaking a sweat but I use Revo drives (350 out soon) and other lightning quick hardware. http://ocz.com/consumer/revodrive-3-pcie-ssd

Yeah, the E77 is the one I have been looking at quite a bit lately and that's the reason for this post. I read your review of it previously and it looks great, I just wish it could do closer to 30 fps instead of only 6, heck, even if it could do 15 fps like the Hero Black (different type of cam but still 4K under $400 w/o night vision \ stream). I'm guessing that since the E77 exists and is 4k and is only $300 right now, that by the end of the year or early next (around the tradeshow times), we should start to see closer to 20 to 30 fps at 4k. It's just I want one today. See, the thing I don't get about the Acti E77 is that it can do a nice 30 fps at 1080p, but then, it can only do 6 fps at all these resolutions: 3648 x 2736, 3648 x 2160, 2592 x 1944, 2048 x 1536 So, the question is, why can't this camera do more than 6 fps at 2048 x 1536? That makes absolutely no sense to me. If the camera can handle 3648 x 2736 at 6 frames per seconds, surely, it should be able to handle 2048x1536, or 2592x1944 at greater than 6 frames. And, most of thier 4k cameras are this way (in the similar 4K camera style \ spec). It's almost as if they are purposely limiting 2048x1536 and 3648x2160, etc. to the crazy slow 6 frames. Why? I'm wondering if anyone has seriously started to look at the firmware yet on the E77 to see if 2048x1536 or 3648x2160 can break out of this seemingly 6fps software lock. I almost think this might be similar to the Flir hack from last year whereby they produced a camera that could do a much higher resolution but they gimped the camera until the firmware unlocked it: http://hackaday.com/2013/11/04/manufacturer-crippled-flir-e4-thermal-camera-hacked-to-perform-as-high-end-model/ Could a similar fate be happening with this E77 in regards to those other resolutions that should have no problem with greater than 6fps? I think I will ask Mike to take a look at the firmware on the E77 just in case it's a similar deal. It would be awesome to unlock 2048x1536 at say 20 fps, etc. which it should be able to handle, or 3648x2160 at say ~10+ fps.

While I agree it is not the optimal solution to have a ptz behind a window, and it limits the camera drastically, there are many scenarios where having it behind a window can be an adequate solution for people if you disable the built in IR via firmware or other means, and use an outdoor IR unit preferably pointing to the scene from a different direction from where the camera is located. There is also something to be said for using stealth methods and not broadcasting to the world that a camera is present. I have time and time again witnessed people acting differently when they notice a camera is present. Not to mention, some people may not want others to know from a privacy standpoint that the area is being monitored. And sometimes, the site of outdoor cameras is just begging for bb\pellet\splatball guns \ green lasers to be used against them by people who just don't care if they are picked up on the cameras (transients, jokers, lamers, etc.). The bright bulbs of the neighborhood. It is a shame to have to limit a ptz that way, but there are so many times when it can really be an effective tool. Plus, ptz's are so much fun to use. They can brighten up your day just by using them.

Does the E77 allow you to shut off the built in IR in case you are using the camera through a window with standalone IR units outside? (I know Hikvision originally didn't have this feature until 5.1 firmware was released so I'm curious if the E77 has this feature built into the current firmware or not). Also, is the E77 still one of the better priced 10mp cams out right now, or has something else surpassed it in the past month or two? Also, what is the deal with the 6fps limitation on all the higher rezzes? I can see the 36XX x 26XX rez capping at 6 fps, but the 36xx x 20xx rez, that should have at least a couple more frames per second as the resolution is less. Same with the other resolutions. Any chance this camera can be hacked to have higher fps on the other high resolutions under 36xx x 26xx?

How does the 64bit version of Xprotect compare to the latest Geovision NVR version? I've been using Geovision for over 10 years but I'm getting really sick of the lack of basic OS functionality from within the software. Geovision still has the old wonky interface from 10 years ago and it is in such a dire need of updating it's almost unbelievable how it has existed for this long. Does Xprotect blow Geo out of the water in most respects, or is Geo still worth the hassle? Thinking about installing Xprotect and taking it for a spin soon.

I'm interested in this one. I have a Panasonic WV-SC385 and I am wondering how this one compares for home use. The WV-SC385 Panasonic does 1280x960 resolution with 18x optical. They still want quite a bit more for it than this new Q-see (almost double the price). Is that because Panasonic forgot to lower the price over the past 2 years, or does the SC385 have something on this new Q-see? (besides name recognition, U.S. office, higher standards, etc.) I'm looking to add another PTZ and have been happy with the SC385 but I want full 1080p resolution (and a lower price point) which this Q-see appears to have. I think the zoom ratio seems kind of close. 1280x18 = 23040 and the Q-see (1920x12 = 23040). Panasonic seems to win on the vertical though (960x18 = 17280 versus the Q-see 1080x12 = 12960). Buellwinkle, you reviewed the WV-SC385 about 2 years ago. Do you know why the SC385 is still selling at almost double the price of this new Q-see? Any chance you are planning a review of this new Q-see or did you already do one for the similar Dahua? Also, you mention a newer 30x zoom from Dahua you are planning to review. Do you know the model # of the new 30x? Just curious. thanks SC385 review from 2 years ago: http://www.networkcameracritic.com/?p=377

Wondering the same thing. Seems like a nice PTZ.

Indeed. Most Nvidia cards that have been released in 2013 support 4k via standard hdmi spec, albeit at only 30hz, however, for surveillance purposes, we don't need more than 30 frames per second as most surveillance IP cameras top out at only 30 frames per second anyway. Many people are starting to use the 39 Inch Seiki as a dedicated PC monitor for setups that are ok with 30 fps. It's a nice 'in-between' low cost 4k monitor that seems to be perfect for surveillance purposes. But, Geovision, isn't like most pieces of software unfortunately. It is a hodge-podge mess sometimes. Especially with the way they designed the GUI for it. The way they have those crazy templates set-up for different resolutions. (i.e. when you maximize an application in windows, it should maximize perfectly, and when you make it into a smaller window app, it should shrink to fit in perfect manner as something like IE, Word, Execel, etc. does when you shrink the windows size). Geovision is not at that point yet and most likely never will be until they do a full overhaul of the software. Presently, this Seiki seems like a nice fit for many applications, especially considering the price. For only $499 you get a 39 inch 4k display. Dell has a 28 Inch 4k monitor out on sale for $629 but, that's 11 inches smaller in size and it costs more. But either way, I think 4k screens are at the price point where they are starting to make sense as surveillance monitors. I know that Blue Iris would work fine on these 4k screens, but Geo is a different beast. I could use the Geo web app for viewing cams, but since this is my primary Geovision system, I like to use the full GV-NVR software on it and not the web app. Hope that makes sense. i1O9bdQ_AyY

I thought the same thing. Try using an enclosed dark space that could not possibly have any dust in it. I thought, when I did a similar test, one with no possible way for dust to enter, I still saw the anomalies on the camera. I could be crazy though. That is why I thought maybe it wasn't really dust at one point in time. But now, I think maybe I was just crazy, but I'm still unsure. It is odd though. None of my other ir cameras do that with dust. For some reason, if it is due to dust and not something else, it seems like it goes overkill on the ir during the dustings.

Hey Pavel. Are you still using your SC-385 with GV-NVR? If so, can you post your settings by any chance? I thought I used to use Onvif to connect with h.264 on this camera, but between camera firmware and Geovision upgrades, I lost the capability to do H.264 via onvif on GV-NVR. If I can compare to what you have, I should be able to troubleshoot the issue.

Anyone try the Panasonic WV-SC385 with GV-NVR yet by any chance? If so, how did it perform, or did it work at all with GV-NVR? Or did it blow up in a small tiny thermonuclear reaction of some kind? http://www.networkwebcams.com/ip-camera-learning-center/2011/02/08/panasonic-wvsc385-evaluation-review-rating-buying-advice/ I see that it is not on the GV-NVR compatilibilty list yet for some reason. http://www.geovision.com.tw/english/Datasheet/Datasheet_NVRV85.pdf Also, I know this is an indoor camera, but if you used it indoors facing out a window that does not face the sun, would that work pretty well? It would be for home use just to test out some of these megapixel PTZ's with high optical zooms.

In case anyone is looking to purchase a good IP thermal camera used for surveillance purposes for under a grand, the FLIR E4 can now run at 320x240 resolution and it produces an IP stream that can be used with many surveillance packages. Not a bad way to have a good thermal imaging camera hooked up to your surveillance DVR for under a grand. It's about time this technology comes down in price. "An amazingly simple mod (with an awesome teardown video) that turns a $1000 thermal imaging camera into the high-end $6000 model." http://hackaday.com/2013/11/04/manufacturer-crippled-flir-e4-thermal-camera-hacked-to-perform-as-high-end-model/ http://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/flir-e4-thermal-imaging-camera-teardown/msg321956/#msg321956 Info on using the live stream of the E4 for a DVR stream is listed on this page: http://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/flir-e4-thermal-imaging-camera-teardown/2295/

Any update on when the next firmware update will be ready for these Swann-Hikvision cameras?

Are you certain those are flying dust particles? I thought the same thing at first but now I think those little particles are something else entirely, like maybe even a camera defect. The reason I think this is because I have many other ir cameras that do not have those large flying anomolies. It's difficult to explain but I think the HD-820CAM model may have some strangeness going on in IR mode.

Anyone besides me ever get this error when setting up a camera to use an h.264 stream from an IP camera? I get this on Geovision 8.5.7.x. I had h.264 streams working before on these cameras. Pano WV-sc385's. The specified H264 Profile or MPEG4 Profile is not supported.

Uninstall Webcomponents and let the new version install. Cheers, re-installing the web components was what resolved the issue. New features i can see from having a quick browse through are two new frame rate options (18 & 20 fps) a new option called "SVC" under the video config (on / off options) and a NAT tab under the network options which i havent noticed before (appears to be able to nat ports through to external IP). Anyone know what SVC is? Brenning How about IR? Did they add the option to disable IR yet? (without switching to daytime mode) This feature is planned for version 5.1, however, I wouldn't be surprised if they added it in this version for us to start testing.

I second this inquiry. Is it the same? "first of all, thank you for your detailed feedback. We have had that feedback from other customers as well and we truly appreciate hearing the concerns about our products as well as what customer desire to see in our products. The concerns you raise are valid issues with integrated IR from both a performance and application standpoint. This upgrade has been in our roadmap and will be available in a firmware upgrade (v5.1) before the end of this year."

* Live view resolution on mobile devices from CIF to VGA using GV-AView V1.3.1 (for android devices) and GV-iView V2.3 (for iPhone and iPod Touch) Anyone know the exact CIF and VGA resolutions that Geo I-view uses? I'm curious what the previous CIF Geo was using and what the new VGA resolution Geo is using for I-view. Did this double the resolution or anything close to being that substantial by any chance? WebCam and Remote Applications Support for notifications with pre-event and post-event recordings attachments for the following event types: Video Lost, Video Signal Resumption, Intruder, Missing Object, Unattended Object, Crowd Detection, Advanced Unattended Object, Advanced Scene Change, Advanced Missing Objection (for Center V2 and Dispatch Server) Notifications mechanism of GV-System for Center V2 and VSM server, which allows for notifications to be sent according to user-defined schedule without installing I/O devices to the GV-System Support for Multi Windows on Chrome, Safari and Firefox, with which the user can now remotely select and display up to 16 out of 32 GV-System live views Live view resolution on mobile devices from CIF to VGA using GV-AView V1.3.1 (for android devices) and GV-iView V2.3 (for iPhone and iPod Touch)

Dongle Dongle Dongle!

Just curious if anyone who has set up GV-NVR using the ONVIF protocol has seen this error on this version (or any version) of GV-NVR? The specified H264Profile or MPEG4Profile is not supported. That's exactly how it looks when I try to set up an IP camera with the H264 codec, which worked fine in a previous version of GV-NVR running a previous firmware of the Panasonic WV-SC385 IP camera.