Wide angle view camera / outdoor

[Toaster 0]

I'm new to this whole cctv/security/surveillance camera scene... and I'm learning stuff quick! Not all good though.

 

ANYWAY: I now know I need at least 2 wide angle outdoor camera's.. I have a 4 channel setup at my house and at my store, I'm concentrating on the store right now - I have some 3.6mm "wide" angle camera's but the are simply not wide enough. I NEED TO "see" MORE. The camera's I currently have were part of a bundle system (dvr+cameras) and there is no "spec" for how wide this angle is, so I don't know how to tell anyone what I have now, and knowing that amount is insufficient - how to buy another camera with a wider angle.

 

Basically what I have is a camera facing my parking lot outside the store, and one in the back of the store. I'd like to get a "fish eye" view in the front and see more than the 3 parking spaces directly in front of my store, and possibly even directly under the camera where my front door is. Same for the back. HELP.

[bpzle 0]

3.6mm is already a pretty wide lens... 2.8mm is probably the widest you'll find within a reasonable budget.

 

Keep in mind that the more you zoom out, the less pixels you are putting on the target area. Yes you can see something is there, but very little detail can be seen on objects more than a few feet away from the lens. Pretty much worthless for evidence.... Cameras can only yield so many pixels, it's best to put as many as you can on the target. Think news anchor. If a camera pulled out to give an entire shot of the studio, you could see there were people sitting at the desk, but have no idea who it is.

 

For a parking lot, what you need is more cameras covering the area, not a wider lens.

 

For a front door, a 2.8mm lens would be fine but I would mount the camera approximately eye level near the entry of the door so that the camera would be within 2 feet of the target area: people's faces.

[leeline88 0]

Agree with you.Good suggestion and learned,Tks.

 

 

3.6mm is already a pretty wide lens... 2.8mm is probably the widest you'll find within a reasonable budget.

 

Keep in mind that the more you zoom out, the less pixels you are putting on the target area. Yes you can see something is there, but very little detail can be seen on objects more than a few feet away from the lens. Pretty much worthless for evidence.... Cameras can only yield so many pixels, it's best to put as many as you can on the target. Think news anchor. If a camera pulled out to give an entire shot of the studio, you could see there were people sitting at the desk, but have no idea who it is.

 

For a parking lot, what you need is more cameras covering the area, not a wider lens.

 

For a front door, a 2.8mm lens would be fine but I would mount the camera approximately eye level near the entry of the door so that the camera would be within 2 feet of the target area: people's faces.

[rory 0]

That 3.6mm may have been 1/4" which would not be wide angle then.

Check into whether that was 1/4" or 1/3".

As mentioned 2.8 is wider but in a fixed lens there can be alot of blur on the edges, even on varifocal lenses at 2.8 there is a very little blur on at least one side but it is acceptable and much better than the fixed lens, though cameras will differ also. Check out the CNB VBM-24VF or VCM-24VF, they are vandal domes with 2.8-10.5mm lenses. Also KT&C have a TDN IR Bullet with 2.8-11mm lens, havent used that yet myself but am waiting to do so.

 

1.78mm or "fish eye" really does lower the quality of the image and the edges on those are blurry for certain. But if your goal is just to see what is going on then they will work fine. Some cameras you can add the wider lenses some you cant, for example the Fish Eye lens is much larger and wider and so cant fit on most IR Bullets or IR Domes due to the IR ring mostly, and also small bullets, unless you leave the front cover off. Additionally with the color bullet to get a focus it went to far in and cracked the fixed IR Cut filter which is a piece of glass glued over the chip's glass cover.

 

For the record Ive recently tried a 2.8mm and 1.78mm fixed lens on Day Night IR Bullets, Color IR Vandal Dome, Color Bullet, and an Indoor Color dome. Actually left the 2.8mm installed on the indoor dome, thats the CNB DFL-20s, and that is mounted outside under an eave, but the client (my friend) mounted it and he knows the risks.

[gmask 0]

what do you reccommend for a 2.8 outside IR camera, preferably with a fixed and not a varifocal lens?

[gmask 0]

what's the difference between a 2.8 1/4'' and a 2.8 1/3'' lens? which is wider? any example?

[Soundy 1]

A given lens focal length will always project the same size image. When you put a smaller sensor behind it, though, you're picking up a smaller portion of that image. Thus, the smaller sensor (1/4") will have a narrower view than a larger sensor (1/3", 1/2", etc.)

 

2.8mm on a 1/3" sensor will give you about an 81-degree horizontal field of view. On a 1/4" sensor, you'll only get 65 degrees.

[Toaster 0]

Just to update this topic, I recently tried a 1/3" sensor 3.6mm camera, and the viewing width increased most impressively. On the original 1/4" sensor camera's, I would get roughly 3 parking spaces in the parking lot... Replacing the camera with a 1/3" sensor camera in the exact same mounting spot I now get the ENTIRE 6 space parking lot area, the bottom of the roof line on the bottom edge, and street in the top edge... " title="Applause" /> AMAZING. 1/4" sensor sucks.

[Inventour 0]

I am looking at the Panasonic WV-NW484S ipro SDIII camera,

this will be for the outdoor driveway area in the front of the home.

 

 

Has anyone used these before and how are they working?

 

My pal is using them for most of his outdoor now, any reply would be kind.

[Soundy 1]

The 484 series are great cameras. Little spendy on the whole, but what they do well (particularly, handling bad backlighting with the SDIII), they do REALLY REALLY well.

 

We've used the CP484 (box) and CW484 (dome) extensively for years specifically to handle harsh backlighting situations.

[Toaster 0]

wow...those are 'spensive......................................