Some considerations when buying a camera

[Jeroen1000 0]

I've read about 12 pages of the forum and wow, I learned a lot of stuff in the process.

I do still have quite some grey spots so I'm hoping we talk about them a little. I'm guessing many people will run through the maze and end up with similar questions. I really love learning about this stuff. Very interesting stuff indeed!

 

Small intro:

I've decided to go the IP-camera way because I feel NTSC/PAL do not provide ample detail and often such setups equire multiple camera's: for 'close by' and 'a little further'. I know there are also IP-camera's in that (NTSC/PAL) resolution range, but I can't igonore the resolution bump that is possible now. And I also have an 8 TiB NAS with plenty of free space . I previously thought about getting camera's but decided to wait and see, and now I feel the time is right!

 

I do have a budget, however, I won't be buying stuff that does not meet my demands. I need 1-3 camera's and realisticly, I won't be spending more than 600 dollar per device.

 

Considerations:

 

1) How do most IP-camera's get the data to the NAS. I know for instance, Mobotix can write directy to an NFS share. Does this imply that many other vendors need PC/Mac/Linux based software to write to an NFS share? I'm not to keen on having my PC-run 24/7. I am aware storage cards can be imbedded in the camera but I am keen on using a NAS.

 

2) Do most IP-camera allow for H.264 compression? Probably listed in the spec's but this one suddenly came to mind. There's no way raw HD-resolution can travel over current IP based ethernet in home installations.

 

3) I've read that the night capabilities of megapixel devices have actually gotten worse when the resolution went up. The reason would be that the sensor surface has not gotten bigger so that each pixel receives less light than was the case with lower resolution camera's. How big an issue is this really? Can someone bring this into perspective. Perhaps dedicaded IR-lighting is now mandatory for good results?

 

4) My least understood area, lenses. So a lens, is like a permanent zoom right? The optical zoom can still zoom in further. Are these lenses camera specific or is there some standard? Is a camera with interchangeable lenses a good idea (I'd say yes if there is some standard). Finally, are these lenses specially made for surveillance or are they equal to (photo) camera lenses.

 

5) I've read a PIR-sensor can be useful. But that thought conflicts with an earlier assumption of mine. I believed all camera's for surveillance purposes had motion detection and area's could be excluded (like branches from a tree that wave about all day).

 

6) Can a camera be blinded by aiming a bright light at it? Like Xenon headlights from a car for instance.

 

 

Phew, I hope I was clear. Knowing what I knew, I went forward and looked for a camera that I liked: the Mobotix M24. The first spot I'd be guarding with it would be my drive way.

 

Easy lay out: it is 15-20 metres long (beyond PIR-range right?) and 5 metres wide. One of the cars is on the far end so I would need to clearly recognize faces if one decides to vandalize it

 

A penny for your thoughts:)

 

Cheers,

Jeroen

[koolmer 0]

1) How do most IP-camera's get the data to the NAS. I know for instance, Mobotix can write directy to an NFS share. Does this imply that many other vendors need PC/Mac/Linux based software to write to an NFS share? I'm not to keen on having my PC-run 24/7. I am aware storage cards can be imbedded in the camera but I am keen on using a NAS.

Most cameras will need a NVR for recording. Only few cameras are able to write directly onto a NAS, flash drive or SD card.

 

2) Do most IP-camera allow for H.264 compression? Probably listed in the spec's but this one suddenly came to mind. There's no way raw HD-resolution can travel over current IP based ethernet in home installations.

Raw HD-resolution cannot be send over an IP network and there is no camera that does this. All IP cameras use a codec. You should check the differences between H.264, MPEG4, MJPEG, etc. On Megapixel you should consider MJPEG. It does consume more space and bandwidth, but also has better image quality than the others.

 

3) I've read that the night capabilities of megapixel devices have actually gotten worse when the resolution went up. The reason would be that the sensor surface has not gotten bigger so that each pixel receives less light than was the case with lower resolution camera's. How big an issue is this really? Can someone bring this into perspective. Perhaps dedicaded IR-lighting is now mandatory for good results?

I have no practical experiance here, but if you are concerned about low light, you should buy an IP camera with two chips and two lenses. One multi MP CMOS is for the day and one 1 MP CMOS for the night. Mobotix has good cameras like that.

 

4) My least understood area, lenses. So a lens, is like a permanent zoom right? The optical zoom can still zoom in further. Are these lenses camera specific or is there some standard? Is a camera with interchangeable lenses a good idea (I'd say yes if there is some standard). Finally, are these lenses specially made for surveillance or are they equal to (photo) camera lenses.

Normally cameras have no optical zoom (some exceptions) There is a standard, but it doesn't always apply to IP cameras. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cs_mount CS mount is the standard on analogue and many IP cameras today. Mobotix has it's own standard AFAIK.

 

5) I've read a PIR-sensor can be useful. But that thought conflicts with an earlier assumption of mine. I believed all camera's for surveillance purposes had motion detection and area's could be excluded (like branches from a tree that wave about all day).

I never tried PIRs to trigger camera recording. A decent camera has enough motion setup options for me. You can specify where the motion must be in order to trigger recording or an alarm. I do believe it's trickey when you are outside and have lots of trees, plants, etc. Then it might be worth to try a PIR.

 

6) Can a camera be blinded by aiming a bright light at it? Like Xenon headlights from a car for instance.

Good cameras are not blinded that easily. I think MP CMOS chips can cope pretty well with bright light and still give a good image. I have seen a comparison between a CMOS and a CCD IP MP camera and the CMOS gave a perfect picture, while the CCD had some problems with sunlight reflecting from cars.

[Soundy 1]

In addition to koolmer's well-stated points...

 

1) How do most IP-camera's get the data to the NAS. I know for instance, Mobotix can write directy to an NFS share. Does this imply that many other vendors need PC/Mac/Linux based software to write to an NFS share? I'm not to keen on having my PC-run 24/7. I am aware storage cards can be imbedded in the camera but I am keen on using a NAS.

There aren't a LOT of cameras that do this, but there are more coming out all the time, as it IS a popular feature.

 

You probably don't want to change NAS units now, but there are several out there that actually include NVR functionality and will work with the bulk of cameras. Check out http://www.qnapsecurity.com, for example (QNAP's basic NAS units have reduced NVR capability as well).

 

2) Do most IP-camera allow for H.264 compression? Probably listed in the spec's but this one suddenly came to mind. There's no way raw HD-resolution can travel over current IP based ethernet in home installations.

I've successfully run two 1.3MP MJPEG cameras over a 10Mbit network. As koolmer notes, all IP cameras stream compressed video, so massive network capability isn't necessary until you start getting into the range of "several" cameras.

 

3) I've read that the night capabilities of megapixel devices have actually gotten worse when the resolution went up. The reason would be that the sensor surface has not gotten bigger so that each pixel receives less light than was the case with lower resolution camera's. How big an issue is this really? Can someone bring this into perspective.

This is true, in general... however, different cameras compensate in different ways and some actually get pretty good low-light results. Some slow the shutter down, some do some fancy processing to boost the light and clean up the noise... a true day/night camera will help a lot with this.

 

4) My least understood area, lenses. So a lens, is like a permanent zoom right? The optical zoom can still zoom in further. Are these lenses camera specific or is there some standard? Is a camera with interchangeable lenses a good idea (I'd say yes if there is some standard). Finally, are these lenses specially made for surveillance or are they equal to (photo) camera lenses.

Wow, this is a BIG question...

 

Okay, first, don't compare too much to photographic lens designs and concepts. Remember, first of all, that unlike an SLR camera, a surveillance camera, once in place and configured, will not usually be moving around and changing its view, and thus not need constant adjustment.

 

There are two basic types types of lenses for CCTV: fixed and vari-focal... in photographic terms, prime and zoom; these are all optical zooms. As with SLR lenses, zooms come in a wide selection of ranges, depending on your needs... but again, once set, there's not usually much need to change things.

 

Pretty much ALL CCTV lenses are removable/interchangeable, even in things like cheap domes and sealed bullet cameras. There are two common mount designs: what's often called call M12 (refers to the machine thread, actually), which is the smaller type used on board cameras and the like; and C/CS-mount, which are functionally the same except the "C" has a longer "nose" sticking out the back (the S in CS is for "short") and may not fit SOME cameras (some will allow you to use a C-mount lens with a space; others have adjustable backfocus to allow you to compensate).

 

Again though, you're not likely to be swapping lenses on a regular basis... one, cameras are often in poorly-accessible areas that aren't conducive to regular tinkering, and when you do change a lens, it DOES usually require a fair bit of tinkering to get everything dialed in.

 

If you do need to move and change the view, you'd be looking at what's called a PTZ, or Pan, Tilt, Zoom camera. These typically have an integrated lens with remote-controllable "power zoom". They also tend to be a lot more expensive.

 

Finally, there is ONE brand of camera that can actually use SLR lenses: Avigilon's "professional" cameras use a Canon's EF or EF-S (depending on which model) lens mounts, allow you to use any lens designed for a Canon SLR/DSLR. That includes the super clean, super-expensive L-series lenses like the $7000 Canon EF 200mm F/2L IS USM Naturally, these cameras cannot be had within your $600/cam budget, either

[Jeroen1000 0]

In addition to koolmer's well-stated points...

 

You probably don't want to change NAS units now, but there are several out there that actually include NVR functionality and will work with the bulk of cameras. Check out http://www.qnapsecurity.com, for example (QNAP's basic NAS units have reduced NVR capability as well).

 

Superb point. I had not taken those feature filled NASes into consideration. I do not know to what extent a dedicated NAS is a good idea or not. I mainly use the current NAS for streaming movies. Judging from the bandwidth used, my current NAS isn't even breaking a sweat.

 

I've successfully run two 1.3MP MJPEG cameras over a 10Mbit network. As koolmer notes, all IP cameras stream compressed video, so massive network capability isn't necessary until you start getting into the range of "several" cameras.

I haven't looked into it fully, but I believe H.264 is the superior codec (bandwidth and compression wise). But this topic is within my area of interest so I should be able to manage

 

This is true, in general... however, different cameras compensate in different ways and some actually get pretty good low-light results. Some slow the shutter down, some do some fancy processing to boost the light and clean up the noise... a true day/night camera will help a lot with this.

 

I don't like the sound (no pun intended )of slowing down the shutter speed. I want to avoid blurring motion too much. Am I correct to say that 1/60 of a second is ideal and going any slower will blur fast moving objects like cars and people that are running?

 

Wow, this is a BIG question...

Sorry. But having read so many times that a lens can make such a hughe difference, it is high on the priority list.

 

There are two basic types types of lenses for CCTV: fixed and vari-focal... in photographic terms, prime and zoom; these are all optical zooms. As with SLR lenses, zooms come in a wide selection of ranges, depending on your needs... but again, once set, there's not usually much need to change things.

This is probably such a noob question but here goes: does varifocal mean that a lens could be ajusted from like (making it up here) 35 mm to 60 mm. This adjustment would be manual (as in turning a ring on the lens)? This lens could then 'optical zoom' to for instance 80 mm (optical zoom being a software setting). Where as a fixed lens could also be 35 mm but can also optical zoom to for instance 60 mm. OR I got it all wrong, and manually turning the ring IS optical zoom?

 

Pretty much ALL CCTV lenses are removable/interchangeable, even in things like cheap domes and sealed bullet cameras. There are two common mount designs: what's often called call M12 (refers to the machine thread, actually), which is the smaller type used on board cameras and the like; and C/CS-mount, which are functionally the same except the "C" has a longer "nose" sticking out the back (the S in CS is for "short") and may not fit SOME cameras (some will allow you to use a C-mount lens with a space; others have adjustable backfocus to allow you to compensate).

 

To fully comprehend, I hope when looking up backfocus, it is a common term lol.

 

If you do need to move and change the view, you'd be looking at what's called a PTZ, or Pan, Tilt, Zoom camera. These typically have an integrated lens with remote-controllable "power zoom". They also tend to be a lot more expensive.

Hmm are normal optical zoom settings not remote-(software) controllable?

 

Finally, there is ONE brand of camera that can actually use SLR lenses: Avigilon's "professional" cameras use a Canon's EF or EF-S (depending on which model) lens mounts, allow you to use any lens designed for a Canon SLR/DSLR. That includes the super clean, super-expensive L-series lenses like the $7000 Canon EF 200mm F/2L IS USM Naturally, these cameras cannot be had within your $600/cam budget, either

 

I can only say One a different note, this company was on my list after Mobotix lol.

[Soundy 1]

In addition to koolmer's well-stated points...

 

You probably don't want to change NAS units now, but there are several out there that actually include NVR functionality and will work with the bulk of cameras. Check out http://www.qnapsecurity.com, for example (QNAP's basic NAS units have reduced NVR capability as well).

 

Superb point. I had not taken those feature filled NASes into consideration. I do not know to what extent a dedicated NAS is a good idea or not. I mainly use the current NAS for streaming movies. Judging from the bandwidth used, my current NAS isn't even breaking a sweat.

Might want to check how it's doing for disk-I/O though... that could easily become the bottleneck.

 

I've successfully run two 1.3MP MJPEG cameras over a 10Mbit network. As koolmer notes, all IP cameras stream compressed video, so massive network capability isn't necessary until you start getting into the range of "several" cameras.

I haven't looked into it fully, but I believe H.264 is the superior codec (bandwidth and compression wise). But this topic is within my area of interest so I should be able to manage

This is a topic of much debate in the industry. IN GENERAL, H.264 can provide better compression and thus require less storage and bandwidth than MJPEG or MPEG-4 (the other two most common codecs). However, H.264 is optimized for full-motion 25/30fps video; surveillance video often records at lower framerates, especially when it comes to storage considerations... plus most lower-end megapixel cameras don't do full framerate at full resolution (the IQEye IQ511, for example, will only do 15fps at the full 1280x1024 resolution). As framerates drop, H.264's bandwidth edge drops, as it tends to not be as efficient.

 

It's also generally accepted that, when it comes down to fine detail, H.264 *does* make some sacrifices vs. the others; in other words, it's often not as clear.

 

And finally, it requires a lot more processing power on BOTH ends - both at the camera, for encoding it, and at the NVR for decoding on display. Depending on the specific implementation, some versions of it are worse than others (I recently found out, for example, that Pelco's implementation in their Sarix cameras puts a HUGE load on the NVR - displaying or playing back more than a few cameras would bring all but the most powerful systems to their knees.

 

Yes, it does have its advantages... but it's not the be-all and end-all Holy Grail of CCTV. As with everything else, there are trade-offs.

 

This is true, in general... however, different cameras compensate in different ways and some actually get pretty good low-light results. Some slow the shutter down, some do some fancy processing to boost the light and clean up the noise... a true day/night camera will help a lot with this.

 

I don't like the sound (no pun intended )of slowing down the shutter speed. I want to avoid blurring motion too much. Am I correct to say that 1/60 of a second is ideal and going any slower will blur fast moving objects like cars and people that are running?

 

Wow, this is a BIG question...

Sorry. But having read so many times that a lens can make such a hughe difference, it is high on the priority list.

Well, it CAN, but there's really so little variation in CCTV lens designs, it's not usually worth getting your knickers in a twist over unless you have tons of money to spend on mission-critical solutions.

 

When it comes to megapixel cameras, you have two primary concerns: megapixel-type lens vs. non, and whether your camera has a 1/2" sensor, in which case you want to use a 1/2" lens(1/2" lenses will work fine on 1/4" and 1/3" sensors, but won't usually give you enough benefit to offset the increased cost).

 

Beyond that, the same rule applies to all: the wider the aperture, the more light you can collect, but the less depth of field you get - again, it's all in the tradeoffs and which factor is more important for your needs.

 

There are two basic types types of lenses for CCTV: fixed and vari-focal... in photographic terms, prime and zoom; these are all optical zooms. As with SLR lenses, zooms come in a wide selection of ranges, depending on your needs... but again, once set, there's not usually much need to change things.

This is probably such a noob question but here goes: does varifocal mean that a lens could be ajusted from like (making it up here) 35 mm to 60 mm.

Correct.... although in the CCTV world, 3.5mm-6.0mm would be more common Technically, it means "variable focal length".

 

This adjustment would be manual (as in turning a ring on the lens)?

Usually, yes.

 

This lens could then 'optical zoom' to for instance 80 mm (optical zoom being a software setting).

No.... OPTICAL zoom means exactly what it says: the zoom/magnification is done by the OPTICS (ie. the lens). What you're talking about (doing it in software) is more commonly known as "digital zoom", and all it's effectively doing is cropping out a smaller section of the center of the image, then blowing it up to fill the frame again.

 

Pretty much ALL CCTV lenses are removable/interchangeable, even in things like cheap domes and sealed bullet cameras. There are two common mount designs: what's often called call M12 (refers to the machine thread, actually), which is the smaller type used on board cameras and the like; and C/CS-mount, which are functionally the same except the "C" has a longer "nose" sticking out the back (the S in CS is for "short") and may not fit SOME cameras (some will allow you to use a C-mount lens with a space; others have adjustable backfocus to allow you to compensate).

 

To fully comprehend, I hope when looking up backfocus, it is a common term lol.

Yes. All it does is adjust the position of the sensor and thus the distance between it and the back of the lens. Some cameras include rings that you put between the lens and mount (like washers) to achieve this. More advanced cameras have "auto backfocus", which have a servo drive to adjust it automatically, to achieve an autofocus-type function. This is usually initiated by a small button on the camera, because again, it's normally something you only set once, not something that gets tweaked constantly.

 

If you do need to move and change the view, you'd be looking at what's called a PTZ, or Pan, Tilt, Zoom camera. These typically have an integrated lens with remote-controllable "power zoom". They also tend to be a lot more expensive.

Hmm are normal optical zoom settings not remote-(software) controllable?

Nope. That requires a motor on the zoom ring (and since changing the zoom affects the focus, it needs one on the focus ring as well). Then you need some way (specific electronics) to control them. It adds a lot of cost, and unless the camera pans and tilts, it's not generally cost-effective, as the ability to zoom in on one fixed point is of limited usefulness in most cases.

 

In short, it CAN be done (and is; I have a fixed camera with a built-in remote-zoom-focus lens) but it's not common because the cost-vs.-usefulness factor is so low.

 

 

Finally, there is ONE brand of camera that can actually use SLR lenses: Avigilon's "professional" cameras use a Canon's EF or EF-S (depending on which model) lens mounts, allow you to use any lens designed for a Canon SLR/DSLR. That includes the super clean, super-expensive L-series lenses like the $7000 Canon EF 200mm F/2L IS USM Naturally, these cameras cannot be had within your $600/cam budget, either

 

I can only say One a different note, this company was on my list after Mobotix lol.

 

They do have cheaper, "standard CCTV" styles as well... but probably still on the upper end of the price scale.

[Jeroen1000 0]

I'm telling you, it's 10 times easier to build a computer than selecting a camera . I'm very thankful for the pro advice as often, installers in my country don't appear to be be in the loop. I found one installer who knew the ins and out but he asked 300$ more than the retail price for a Mobotix

[thewireguys 3]

I'm telling you, it's 10 times easier to build a computer than selecting a camera . I'm very thankful for the pro advice as often, installers in my country don't appear to be be in the loop. I found one installer who knew the ins and out but he asked 300$ more than the retail price for a Mobotix

 

 

Sorry but there is a reason he charges 300$ more then retail for Mobotix cameras. He knows what he is doing and he will support you and this all costs money.

[buellwinkle 0]

Clearly there advantages to both, writing directly to a NAS vs. having a computer. At home, I have 6 cameras, 4 of which are megapixel cameras (not h.264) and use a small Atom processor based PC that's tiny, doesn't use much power and I have to have a PC to view the cameras and manage the recordings anyway, so not a big expense, not a lot of maintenance. Cost me $300 for the PC and $50 for BlueIris software. I've also setup Mobotix cameras writing to an inexpensive NAS, like a WD World Edition, but keep in mind, this is a very low end NAS, no RAID capabilities and handling more than 2-4 cameras would be a challange this low end of a device. Step it up to something like a ReadyNAS to handle more cameras and the price jumps too.

 

If you have a lot of megapixel cameras, you can always split them into seperate subnets and put like a 4 port ethernet card in your PC. Then there's a tradeoff, using H.264 require more processing power then mjpeg, so while you may have lower bandwidth requirements, your CPU requirements just shot up. For example, I personally avoid using h.264 because it would overwhelm my Atom processor.

 

Then it depends on what you want the cameras to do. For example, at our cottage, we have cameras that just email us pictures on motion detect. I then can connect to each camera remotely and view the live feed. I have no requirements to record events as videos. But if you do, there's a few brands that have this capability and not necessarily on all of their products. Mobotix and IQinVision Pro will not only write to a NAS (usually via CIF more so than NFS) but will also provide the built in NVR software to view and manage the recorded events. Vitotek will write to a NAS, but don't think you can view the recorded events, you are on your own to play each one using external software.

 

As for fixed lenses vs. changable lenses, your choice. Mobotix does the fixed lens thing on their M12D and they are crystal sharp, never needs focusing, can only be changed at the factory. They do offer the comperable D12 that's a dome with the same features as the M12 but with interchangeable lenses. I'm very chareful on lens choice, so I prefer the M12. Outdoors I also use ACTi acm1231's which have a 3.3-12mm varifocal lens that is theoretically changeable, but there's nothing that I can find that's better. Varifocal allows you to change the focal lens similar to a zoom, but keep in mind that doing so also means you have to refocus the lens, a true zoom would only require focusing once. This is useful if you don't have a clue what you need and you can adjust the focal length on-site, not something you want to change every day. The downside is you get distortion, barrel distortion at wide angle, pincushioning at telephoto, it's a compromise between fixed focal length and zoom lenses photographers have had to deal with for many years.

[Jeroen1000 0]

@thewireguys. I checked both in Holland and Germany (neighbors:)) and it is considerably cheaper for the very same product. It's just the purchase of the item without installation (just to be clear). I think you assumed the 300 dollar 'extra' included installation?

[Jeroen1000 0]

@Buellwinkle My requirements are rather simpel or perhaps not so: Guard my drive way (see first post). Specifically I want to clearly recognize faces, both during day time and at night. So I began drafting my spec's like:

 

- IR-cut off filter

- IR corrected lens

Both of the above on a fairly good camera (good frame rate so no hughe shutter slowdown, good lux rating, ...)

 

And of course, suitable IR-illuminator(s).

 

I'd spend around 600 dollar on the camera and I don't have a real budget yet for the illuminators. I'd say below 150 dollars should be realistic.

[rory 0]

@thewireguys. I checked both in Holland and Germany (neighbors:)) and it is considerably cheaper for the very same product. It's just the purchase of the item without installation (just to be clear). I think you assumed the 300 dollar 'extra' included installation?

$300 would probably include his markup.

[buellwinkle 0]

$600 is not going to buy a Mobotix, but it can buy an ACTi acm-1231, Messoa NCR875 or Vivotek IP7361. They all make cameras with built in illuminators good for about 15m. The Vivotek is 2MP, the others are 1.3MP but I feel that the Vivotek is soft, so 2MP may not be much better than 1.3MP from a better camera. Vivotek will write to a NAS though and an internal SD card. The ACTi will write to a NAS via FTP and I can comfirm that it works. The Messoa's benefit is a better illuminator (about 25m) and a 5MP sensor used to create a 1MP image that is sharper and better at night. I never used a Messoa, so don't know if it can write or ftp to NAS. They all have varifocal lenses, they all have IR cut filters, they all PoE, I believe they all come with free NVR software (not sure of Messoa, but for sure ACTi and Vivotek).

 

As for a high frame rate, it's overated and it's under the best lighting conditions, not at night for many of these cameras. I would think that for what you need it for, probably anything higher than 10 fps just means you'll fill up the disk faster.

[3RDIGLBL 0]

Hey buellwinkle,

 

Looking for my first all Vivotek install. Tons of Acti's have been installed but I have done no Vivotek yet.

 

This install would require about 8 of the IP7361 cameras and you said they appear soft. Wondering if you could elaborate a bit on that. This install would be in a cold environment hitting as cold as -40 but most often -10 to -20 during winter evenings. The camera is rated to -4F but my experience with cameras has been as long as they are running they should be fine. In the past 4 years I have had zero camera failures even for cheapy $45 bullet cameras that rate to 32F. Not much cold experience that I havee found online so I hope the same holds true for this bullet cam.

 

Has the over experience been OK with the Vivotek cam? I'm assuming you have used the bullet from Vivotek as well as the one from ACTi so which do you prefer for overall picture quality and night time performance?

 

IF anyone can answer this I would appreciate it any review or feedback.

 

Thanks

[thewireguys 3]

I would stick with the 8000 series. All of the images and video I have seen are much better then the older Vivotek and any Acti I have seen or installed.

[dvarapala 0]

@thewireguys. I checked both in Holland and Germany (neighbors:)) and it is considerably cheaper for the very same product. It's just the purchase of the item without installation (just to be clear). I think you assumed the 300 dollar 'extra' included installation?

$300 would probably include his markup.

 

Doesn't the MSRP already cover that?

[rory 0]

@thewireguys. I checked both in Holland and Germany (neighbors:)) and it is considerably cheaper for the very same product. It's just the purchase of the item without installation (just to be clear). I think you assumed the 300 dollar 'extra' included installation?

$300 would probably include his markup.

 

Doesn't the MSRP already cover that?

No thats just a suggested price.

For example they may charge more depending on what if any warranty they will provide, such as direct replacement of the camera in the case of failure instead of just the user paying to ship the product back to the retailer/distributor or manufacturer warranty, all that time costs money, generally more than the suggested retail price can provide.

 

Also, if they live in another country for example such as myself, we pay say $250 to ship 8x $150 (first cost) cameras from the US to here which would be UPS and Customs at 10% duty, but sometimes they charge us 40-50% duty and due to the time it takes to get them to sort it out we generally just pay it, and that has to be rolled over to the customer in the end price, so the camera would cost 2-3 times the suggested retail sometimes to cover ourselves.