metafizx

to answer some of the questions...

the purpose was to use the 207w in an outdoor environment.

there was no housing available, so with very cheap materials, I came up with one pretty quickly. The camera costs under $300, and the housing materials were less than $20. ignoring my time, I think there is nothing this good on the market for that money. if I am wrong, pls tell me. (oh, and if you want IR then add the cost of the IR lens and IR lamp..)

the 207w is the only low cost wireless camera I have used that seems to have a good picture and is reliable. it is also smaller than most. however no standard outdoor housing will really work with this, that is why I had to make something.

so far it works fine, but I don't have it directly exposed to weather, so it is not a great test of "weatherproof". but it has been working fine for months now.

time was a few hours to do a nice job, but I could make another one in less than an hour.

as for the night vision part, I did put in a IR lens, and with the IR lamp it works great. you have to have the IR lens to make it see in the dark.

with a stronger IR it would illuminate better, right now it is a little dim, but very useable. I am not sure I can get a jpg from it, because it is in my customer's home.

build a seperate network for it, use poe, get decent IP cams, and select a decent software to record it.

 

axis ip cams are good for indoors. arecont for out.

can you elaborate on "decent software" ?

thx

Down here though, cat5 is about the same price as RG59 coax .. and Switches are $50 each, not to mention the extra weatherproof housing or location for them

 

I guess with short runs it would be worth it though.

Seems that Wifi is where the IP technology really shines.

I can't see where WiFi is good for IP cameras. at 54 Mbps, even with a half decent connection, it isn't anywhere as reliable as a wire.

I have a wireless install that has made me pull out lots of hair. For the life of me I can't get the frame rates solid. Interference on the 802.11G band, I don't know, but it is just crappy.

also most IP cameras use only WEP.

maybe you mean some other kind of WiFi ???

thanks. that does make sense, depends on the case, and the legal wrangling that occurs.

people tell me different things, it just seems like either they really don't know and are blowing smoke...

This one company was telling me that proprietary video format and 3 FPS min were required. Then another company was saying that watermarks are required.

I would assume the more bullet proof that your video is with these features would make it less susceptible to being thrown out.

hi,

Can someone tell me what the legal requirements are for captured video, as being admissable as court evidence ?

What is acceptable and what would be thrown out ?

I have heard that these are criteria:

1. minimum 3 FPS

2. must be in dvr proprietary format

(for example .AVI is _not_ valid since it is too easily modified)

what about a timestamp? is that required ?

and resolution, is there any requirement ?

is watermarking mandatory ?

what else ??

I checked out the I-Flashback demo and it looked pretty nice.

anyway back to this issue...mysteriously some of the 207w's still drop off and go to sleep for some unknown reason.

I noticed the NTP time server was all zeros and the time/date was set back to some default time. It looked like it was trying to access the time server, and it gave up. Have no evidence that would cause any problem however.

signal is strong from the AP, as the cameras are only 15-20 feet away.

Frame rates are good coming in from all the cameras (3x 207w's 1x 221 wired). but then one of the 207w's frame rate will drop to nothing, and then go offline. Sometimes it comes back, but after awhile I have to reboot the camera.

This happens on 2 of the 207w's.

increditable, but how about water proof ?

it should be fairly weather resistant, as it uses an outdoor outlet box with a gasket.

The acrylic lens is sealed, and the mounting hardware has rubber gaskets, so pretty sure it will keep out med - light rain. I wouldn't trust it in a all out downpour.

this is meant to go under an eave or somewhere with some protection, not really designed to use out in the open. this housing is good enough to keep out dirt, bugs, moisture, winds, and medium level percipitation.

IPv4 is what has been the industry standard till now for ip addressing, IPv6 is the new specification.

Check out this site for more details:

http://www.ipv6.org/

Axis is a little more than other cameras, and of course more than analog. However you do get what you pay for, so as a 'professional' solution I'd recommend Axis. But if the client wants cheap, that's what they'll get and as long as you clarify that with them...they can't blame you later for crappy video.

I just checked out your site, cool !! the demo looks really good.

I would suspect the access point or router, maybe some overlap with something else.

 

We use 11 207w's in one location without issue so the camera alone probably isn't the issue.

hi user1,

do you have all the 207w's on one channel ? or on multiple channels (multiple AP's) ?

may I ask what wireless setup you have ? that would be awesome.

thanks....

just updating with what I've done on this issue, for whomever is interested

1. upgraded the firmware to 4.40.1 - this is the latest release (was 4.40)

no apparent improvement, just did it

2. disabled UPnP which is not needed

no expected improvement

3. verified that the wireless mode was set to "managed" (as opposed to "auto")

Seems like the wireless throughput varies quite a bit, which causes the frame rate on the cameras to vary from 7-8 fps to less than 1 fps. Signal levels are 80% or greater, as the cameras are not far away from the AP.

The closer cameras have a more consistent framerate of 3-4 fps.

what I can't understand is if each frame is only 30KB, at 5fps the data rate should only be around 1.5Mbps. does anyone know what the overhead of wireless 802.11g is ?

my next try is a different wireless router, instead of the access point.

luxriot works well with all Axis models. I have used Luxriot in installations and it works pretty good, not too expensive.

people recommend milestone as well, although I have never used it.

a cheapie program that works pretty good for the price is

pysoft's Active Webcam for a mere $89. But beware it has some bugs.

you need to look at the error log on the AP and see what is causing it.

ie: a cisco 1231 AP would be sh diag ---- or show log etc

might have to telnet or serial cable to get there.

 

z

thanks I will check that.

would like to see the video grabs -pics with and with the IR lamp on,

 

I think someone said the lens's that come with the 207 are "IR poor" and you can replace them with a normal "IR passing" one with good results but they use a shim not screw in? [aghhh!]

that's right. I put in a IR lens. Simply use a wrap of teflon tape to get the lens tight. you can get the kit from wilife

I really like the 207w, but running into a problem where they won't reconnect to the WLAN after awhile.

This system has (3) 207w cameras connected to the same Access Point and a wired Axis 221 going to a Linksys router. Access Point is an Engenious 3220, 802.11G only, 128bit WEP. Auto Channel is on (but doesnt seem to be the reason).

There is never a problem with the wired camera, so it seems to be a wireless issue.

Initially when powered on, the 207w's all connect and work well, but after a period of time some (or all) of the cameras will disconnect and not come back up until the camera is rebooted (powered off/on). Sometimes they will come reconnect but then drop off some time later.

The amount of time varies, they can stay connected for hours or days.

I have tried the Linksys Wireless Router by itself, and the same problem happens. The wireless signal reported by the 207w varies from 60% to 90% for the Linksys router, and 100% for the Engenious AP. I don't think it is the signal power.

I have a Panasonic BL-C30 connected to the same system, and that always stays connected. So I wonder if it is a problem with the 207w?

has anyone run into this issue, and have a fix or suggestion for this problem ?

Hi,

made a cheap housing for Axis 207w. To my knowledge there are no housings available for this camera. There is one for the 207 (non wireless) cam but unless you dismantle the antenna, it wont fit.

Anyway, it looks a little home brew, but hey, it didnt cost much.

Uses a standard PVC outdoor electrical box w/ one inlet hole (for the wires). I had to cut out the top two posts to get the camera to fit. The rest is a simple hole for the lens area, and mounting hardware. I added the IR lamp on top since it fit nicely up there. I glued the clear plastic window on with AquaSeal (super tough marine quality cement). Silicone probably would be ok as well.

also I cut the little notch off the bottom of the antenna so it could swivel down. sharp razor blade does the trick. and used a piece of teflon tape to keep the lens tight. there is a rubber grommet in the bottom to allow the power cord through, but keep out the anything else.

The kit for the IR was $60 which includes the IR lamp and wide angle IR lens. it's from Lukwerks (wilife).

For a little under $400 you have a nice outdoor cam with IR.

I wouldn't trust this housing in direct exposure to rain, but it should keep out most weather conditions.

I'm a true believe in 'you get what you pay for' so yes the 211w is more expensive than the 207w. The 211 is indoor/outdoor while the 207 is not. The 211 is absolutely a more reliable, sturdy camera but the 207 can be a good option.

 

Isn't there an enclosure for the 207?

yes for the 207/206 but doesnt fit for 207w

Not reading all the many replies, it boils down to a couple things.

 

IP is the future, not many serious people can deny it. So from a consumer standpoint, if making a 'significant' investment it would be wise to go IP. If putting a few cameras in a gas station then yes, a dvr with analog video still works. But we've all seen the news and you get what you pay for.

I guess this is a matter of application. IP cams are great for some installs but the good ol' analog (cctv) cams to a network dvr is hard to beat.

for example if a vandal destroys an analog cam, or it dies out due to environment, or other reason, it is way cheaper and easier to replace than a corresponding network cam. The network cam will be 2x the cost atleast, and will require a tech knowledgable about the system to install.

I can go on and on, but I don't think you can say that network cameras are the future. There are good reasons to use both kinds, depending on the application.

For ref on the Axis 207w:

 

Axis do a vandal resistant indoor housing for the 206 and 207. I'm not sure if the 207w would fit, but you might be able to make this watertight with a bit of sealant if you're really strapped... It's pretty cheap I think.

 

They say that the 207W is not compatible with the Axis housing for 206/207

 

I like using the Axis 207MW BUT there is no weather proof version in this price range. If I could stuff the 207MW into a housing and add POE for the same price I'd be happy!

I am trying to come up with a decent housing for the 207W/MW.

I found a few acrylic dome housings that might work, but adds $150 to the cost of the camera.

I thought of just getting a PVC case from home depot and siliconing a window in the top plate. mounting the camera inside that. Worried about heat dissipation, which isnt much.

Also consider the fairly new Axis 211w...it's a little nicer than the 207 and can be used with an outdoor enclosure (of course anything can with a little creativity). I am also in agreement to use wired when possible...the PoE is REALLY nice for installing and resetting.

 

I have used 18 wireless cameras in one location with no issues. Let me know if any more questions regarding software, hardware.

yeah but the 207 w is only $300 and the 211 w is $700 !

IMHO wireless is a no-no.

I have tried to have a reliable network wireless camera system, but there are 2 things that usually cause trouble:

1. wireless may disconnect and not recover until the camera is rebooted. this can be a problem if the camera is located in a hard to reach spot.

2. wireless interference and signal variations can cause wide fluctuations in the frame rate.

You never know when another wireless station will pop up in the area, and might be on the same channel. of course auto channel is supposed to take care of this, not all cameras are auto channel.

various building materials and objects can create major headaches in getting sufficient signal strength. if the signal path is in the way of cars, doors and other barriers, the signal strength can fluctuate as the environment is altered (car parked then leaves, door open/closed, etc).

also you still have to get power to the camera, so it isn't really "wireless", unless the mounting spot already has power.

also keep in mind that each wireless channel (assuming 802.11 G) is 54Mbps. it should be isolated from any other potential users to keep the network free of unwanted bandwidth loss.

maybe there are tricks that can make wireless stable and reliable, but I have not found this to be true.

The main wireless camera that I used of any quality was the

Axis 207w.

Wireless Routers are notorious for dropping connections, and having issues with wireless. Just a never ending battle to get it working and stay working. I always seem to buy the worst wireless router on the market, there are so many duds.

Never had a problem with wired network cameras. in the long run its cheaper and more reliable.

I'd really like to know what wireless routers and cameras other people have been successful with.

with some ndvrs you have to port forward more than one port.

there is usually the http port (80) and maybe a control port.

make sure you are putting in the correct LAN IP address in the dvr, and have that same ip address in the port forward section of the router.

also you may have to reboot your router (unplug and plug back in) to get it to recognize the port forward.

additionally if you have dynamic IP service (which is usually the case for home users) then you will have to setup DDNS (Dynamic DNS) to keep track of the IP. most new routers will handle DDNS.

hope this helps.

I am pretty happy with the Avermedia 1304net. it's a 4 channel.

you can add more units to get more channels, the software allows you to control multiple dvrs.

the web interface is good, and so far working reliably.

Just wanted to add my initial review of the EB1304MOB.

 

 

The first unit I got failed very quickly, but the dealer sent a new one out the same day.

 

Once everything was all plugged in the recording quality seems to be pretty good - example videos coming. The manual doesn't speak to how to connect the power in a manner that allows the unit to run/record one when the engine is running. After contacting tech support at Aver I got my answers but there were still not tremendously clear.

 

The USB software doesn't work on my Vista laptop but works ok on my 2000 laptop. The speed of exporting video to AVI or MPG is surprisingly slow - It's taked 20 minutes to get 52% into a 5 minute video.

 

 

Suggestions for Aver:

 

1) Don't have the DVR default to video loss alert becuase when the buyer turns it on the first time it's unlikely to have all cameras connected and they have to spend a minute or two figuring out how to turn off the beep!

 

2) Please be more clear about the power inputs. Can it run at 10v for short periods (1-5 seconds, during crank) or will it shut down? If it loses power unexpectedly then will it corrupt the hard drive? Is it ok to plug the power into switched ignition source and allow that to power the DVR only when the car is running? Is it ok for the DVR to be turned out by simply taking the power away, or do I need to stop the recording first? blah blah

 

3) Please label the screws for the hard drive and the mounting strips. I stripped the heads on a couple of the hard drive screws trying to use them for the mounting strips. They are the same size, just a slightly diff thread pitch.

 

4) Please release a vista version of the USB software. You're aware you can only buy Vista new these days, right? Nobody is buying XP or 2000 any more.

lots of stuff doesnt work on VISTA. it's a crime IMHO committed by M$.

vendors are having a hard time being compatible. mostly display and security issues with VISTA, and also being "certified" by M$.

if you want to blame someone, blame M$.