Newbie Questions

[aethyr 0]

I'm sure this question has been asked before, so please bear with me.

 

I'm new to IP cameras and have only been researching for about a week. In my searching, I'm getting a bit confused and admittedly frustrated not only by the choices, but the pricing as well.

 

I understand that an IP camera is a complex machine - it not only is a camera (with the required lens and image sensor) but also a small computer, having to process/compress/encode the video in real time and then send it over the network.

 

However, what I don't quite understand is why 1080p at 30fps is such a challenge (so expensive) when say, a Flip camcorder is essentially the same thing (h264 real time encoding), but the only thing is missing is transmitting over the network. And yet the Flip is only $150. Of course the lens and light sensitivity won't be as good, because certainly not all 1080p are equal. Yet I don't think I've found a single 1080p/30fps IP camera for $150. What am I missing?

[buellwinkle 0]

Sure, but Flip was so cheap that Cisco killed it. Sure, I get it, heck my cell phone does 1080P video and audio and does it pretty well.

 

My only explanation is market size/scale. Cisco probably sold millions of Flips, so they can mass produce them for cheap. It's not the electronics, how complex it is, optics, network, blah, blah, it's economy of scale, how much it costs to support and market a product. So if it takes so many engineering, accounting, management, marketing, sales dollars to do millions of cameras, and a surveillence company has the same engineering, marketing, management, acounting and sales costs, but only sells a hundred thousand cameras, clearly the cost per unit is far higher to produce a surveillence camera than a camcorder that's ubiquitous. Then there's manufacturing costs, I can't imagine it costs more to manufacture a 1080P IP camera vs. a 1080P camcorder of comperable quality. Hence, you have a $99 Flip that outperforms 1080P surveillence cameras costing 5X more. But that's changing, as surveillence cameras become more ubiquitous and there's more competition, you'll see prices drop but I doubt to camcorder/cell phone levels. My guess is that low end camcorders and p&s cameras won't even exist in a few years, all replaced by smart phones and tablets.

[aethyr 0]

Sure, but Flip was so cheap that Cisco killed it. Sure, I get it, heck my cell phone does 1080P video and audio and does it pretty well.

 

My only explanation is market size/scale. Cisco probably sold millions of Flips, so they can mass produce them for cheap. It's not the electronics, how complex it is, optics, network, blah, blah, it's economy of scale, how much it costs to support and market a product. So if it takes so many engineering, accounting, management, marketing, sales dollars to do millions of cameras, and a surveillence company has the same engineering, marketing, management, acounting and sales costs, but only sells a hundred thousand cameras, clearly the cost per unit is far higher to produce a surveillence camera than a camcorder that's ubiquitous. Then there's manufacturing costs, I can't imagine it costs more to manufacture a 1080P IP camera vs. a 1080P camcorder of comperable quality. Hence, you have a $99 Flip that outperforms 1080P surveillence cameras costing 5X more. But that's changing, as surveillence cameras become more ubiquitous and there's more competition, you'll see prices drop but I doubt to camcorder/cell phone levels. My guess is that low end camcorders and p&s cameras won't even exist in a few years, all replaced by smart phones and tablets.

 

That makes sense. However, you have companies like Panasonic and Sony, both which have experience in consumer camcorders. You would think it would be easy to take the consumer camcorder internals, repackage into an IP camera.

 

I know from my research that camcorders are beginning to have wifi capabilities to upload and act as surveillance cams. Has anyone looked into these as possible IP cams?

 

Here's a link to an article about some recent camcorder offerings: http://tech.lifegoesstrong.com/article/jvc-turns-its-camcorders-security-cameras

[buellwinkle 0]

Pansonic and Sony cameras of decent quality actually command a premium price. I received a consumer grade Panasonic camera, a BL-C230, you can buy it at Best Buy for $299. For that money you get a VGA camera, cute cube packaging, no external lighting, poor low light capability, limited pan/tilt capability, mic/speaker, no internal SD card slot, WiFi, certainly nothing close to a Flip in image quality or resolution. Again, economy of scale and from what I understand, Panasonic is #2 in IP camera sales behind Axis so they have better economy of scale than other companies in the business.

 

There are WiFi SD cards, I guess you can stick that in any camera and read it via WiFi on any computer/tablet/phone assuming you have software to make it work.

[Soundy 1]

Hence, you have a $99 Flip that outperforms 1080P surveillence cameras costing 5X more.

Then you have to quantify "outperform". How does it work with low light? How does it work with high-contrast lighting? How highly compressed is the output stream? Does it allow you to use specialty lenses?

 

CCTV cameras have to be capable of handing far harsher environments and wide temperature ranges... they have to operate 24/7 for years at a time... they typically provide far more control over image factors than a $99 handicam.

 

By this same token, why are there $500 point-and-shoot cameras when you can get this $99 handicam (or a $50 webcam, for that matter)? Same answer: they tend to be more flexible, more durable, more rugged, of higher build quality, give more control, more options, more features...

 

Go ahead and mount that Flip camera under your eaves in the middle of winter, and see how long it lasts recording constantly. Try hauling 1,000 pounds of bricks in the back of a Mini, because it costs less than a truck. Same difference.

[buellwinkle 0]

The Flip can do things a $500 surveillence 1080P camera can't do, it comes with 8GB of storage and can store 2 hours of video internally, has a color LCD display, it's very small, it has a battery and it actually performs quite well in low light, maybe better than 1080P cameras costing $500 as you know, an 1080P IP camera costing $500 is not necessariy high end. My point is from a manufacturing point of view. I can't imagine it costs more for the parts and labor to make a Flip camera vs. a low end 1080P IP camera, in my world, I would think it would cost more to make a Flip because of the cost of the 8GB storage, memory, LCD display, buttons, flip out USB port. Sure, there's components in each that are very different but I can' t imaging that pure manufacturing costs can justify a $400 difference between the two and I think that's the OP's point, why does it cost 5X more for an 1080P IP camera vs. a Flip and why can Sony or Panasonic mass produce a low cost 1080P surveillence camera. And my answer is economy of scale, nothing else.

 

And before you say IP cameras are so wonderful in harsh conditions, below is a link to my adventures in the jungles of Misiones province in northern Argentina bordering Brazil going on a boat ride that took us under the Iguazu waterfalls and filmed with my Flip. Not to mention that a few days later we were at the southern tip of Argentina chilling with Penguins on the Isla the Martilla in Tierra de Fuego, again with my trusty Flip. Took to the pounding water of the waterfalls and the salt water of the Beagle canal pretty well. Good trip, good Flip camera. I did have it inside the Flip waterproof housing.

 

[Soundy 1]

You also noted that the Flip no longer exists... maybe it's actually a $400 camera that they lost money on selling it at $100? I could sell you a $500 IQEye camera for $100 too, but I wouldn't last very long doing it. Just because something sells for that price doesn't mean that's its "value".

[aethyr 0]

You also noted that the Flip no longer exists... maybe it's actually a $400 camera that they lost money on selling it at $100? I could sell you a $500 IQEye camera for $100 too, but I wouldn't last very long doing it. Just because something sells for that price doesn't mean that's its "value".

 

Flip no longer exists for whatever business reason that cisco decided on. There are still plenty of competitors out there that have similar features. And I doubt they were taking a $400 hit. That would be a foolish business decision.

 

The only hardware that takes a hit are things like xbox/ps3 or printers because they make the money back from the ink cartridges or games or other consumables. Or cell phones because they make money from the service.

 

So basically it appears that the only reason why IP cameras cost so much more for equal or worse image quality...is because they can. IP cameras cater to businesses. And it would seem that everything "business" class costs more because businesses are willing to pay it.

 

My timewarner cable modem service at home costs me $50/month. The same exact service, same bandwidth at my business? $100/month.

 

I thought there was something magical going on with IP cameras. But in the end, it appears its just good old fashion market segmentation. Sigh.

[aethyr 0]

The Flip can do things a $500 surveillence 1080P camera can't do, it comes with 8GB of storage and can store 2 hours of video internally, has a color LCD display, it's very small, it has a battery and it actually performs quite well in low light, maybe better than 1080P cameras costing $500 as you know, an 1080P IP camera costing $500 is not necessariy high end. My point is from a manufacturing point of view. I can't imagine it costs more for the parts and labor to make a Flip camera vs. a low end 1080P IP camera, in my world, I would think it would cost more to make a Flip because of the cost of the 8GB storage, memory, LCD display, buttons, flip out USB port. Sure, there's components in each that are very different but I can' t imaging that pure manufacturing costs can justify a $400 difference between the two and I think that's the OP's point, why does it cost 5X more for an 1080P IP camera vs. a Flip and why can Sony or Panasonic mass produce a low cost 1080P surveillence camera. And my answer is economy of scale, nothing else.

 

And before you say IP cameras are so wonderful in harsh conditions, below is a link to my adventures in the jungles of Misiones province in northern Argentina bordering Brazil going on a boat ride that took us under the Iguazu waterfalls and filmed with my Flip. Not to mention that a few days later we were at the southern tip of Argentina chilling with Penguins on the Isla the Martilla in Tierra de Fuego, again with my trusty Flip. Took to the pounding water of the waterfalls and the salt water of the Beagle canal pretty well. Good trip, good Flip camera. I did have it inside the Flip waterproof housing.

 

 

This gives me an idea. Can your Flip record while connected to a PC? In other words, could I share the Flip's SD card as a networked folder while its recording? While I may not have a "live view", I could certainly copy the local videos onto a remote server from the Flip as its recording...

[Soundy 1]

Flip no longer exists for whatever business reason that cisco decided on. There are still plenty of competitors out there that have similar features. And I doubt they were taking a $400 hit. That would be a foolish business decision.

Or, they weren't selling at all until the price was dropped to take a loss.

 

Ryobi's Tek4 line of power tools are a good example of this: my coworker and I had long admired this line of rugged devices that all used the same 4V Lithium batteries, but found them too expensive for what they were. Home Depot in Canada discontinued them because they weren't moving, and we picked up a bunch of them at some killer prices - like the inspection scope that normally went for $170 that we each got for $50. Does that mean that all the other similar scope designs should now sell for $50, rather than the $150-$300 that most of them go for? Does that mean the more expensive ones are now a rip-off, because one vendor decided to blow out their version due to poor sales?

 

Another recent example: HP's TouchPad tablet and webOS. Initially sold in the $300-$400 range with other similar tablets, until HP decided they didn't want to be part of that market, and people snatched them up at $99. So does that mean other Android tablets still selling for $300-$400 is a rip-off, or just good marketing?

 

So basically it appears that the only reason why IP cameras cost so much more for equal or worse image quality...is because they can. IP cameras cater to businesses. And it would seem that everything "business" class costs more because businesses are willing to pay it.

Go back and read all the reasons: durability, flexibility, etc. Run that flip 24/7 and let me know how long it lasts. Can you change lenses on it in case you need to get closer? Will it withstand living in a hot and duty ceiling space or inside a sealed housing outdoors at -30, and keep running perfectly for years on end?

 

Get back to us when you find out.

 

My timewarner cable modem service at home costs me $50/month. The same exact service, same bandwidth at my business? $100/month.

Business service typically costs more, in part because they expect it to see heavier usage. Most providers also give a higher grade of service and support to business customers. As with the difference between $20 analog cameras and $300 analog cameras, you're partially paying extra for better support. What support is there for your discontinued Flip if it fails?

[buellwinkle 0]

Wow, you guys ask the tough questions, but can an IP66 surveillence camera be submerged in water to a depth of 30', my Flip can with it's Flip underwater case that only costs $30. Cisco got rid of Flip becaue they realized that eventually cell phones were going to take over the 1080P video market. Heck, most $100 p&s 14-16MP p&s cameras can do 1080P video, so why buy a dedicated device for this. So no, they did not sell a $400 camera for $100.

 

My cell phone, which also happens to also be a 1080P camcorder is on 24/7, everyday, business depends on it, it subject to being dropped daily (try dropping a IP camera every day, see how long it lasts).

 

As for recording a Flip while it's connected via USB, I doubt it, the display says something like USB when it's connected. You can get the new GoPro Hero2, it will give you live streaming and I believe record at the same time.

[Soundy 1]

So why do I still use my $1000 DSLR when a $100 P&S is higher resolution and does HD video?

 

Simple: performance, flexibility, durability, quality.

 

When my DSLR was broken and I was limited to the P&S, I realized one of the biggest differences: the P&S was slow to focus, iffy to lock on, and gave me no control over focus points. It drove me nuts.

 

I'm also not stuck with the single lens the manufacturer shipped the camera with. I can put on my big 400mm to get in close with crystal clarity. Or switch to my 50mm f/1.8 for that crisp low-DOF shot.

 

And with the larger sensor, yes, I get FAR better low-light shots.

 

My cell phone, which also happens to also be a 1080P camcorder is on 24/7, everyday, business depends on it, it subject to being dropped daily (try dropping a IP camera every day, see how long it lasts).

So why aren't you using cell phones as security cameras?

 

Heck, even my phone is almost the same resolution as my DSLR, but I'd never think that one could replace the other. They're just not suited to the same jobs.

[tomcctv 190]

Flip were cheap because they would never last. 30min of use and it would overheat lost files and the HD recording was not quite HD it was a lot lower. hence direct upload to the likes of youtube.

 

 

the only people that bought them were people that have never bought or used a camcorder. (but they wish they had)

 

 

i would say a flip can only be put in the range of 1.3mp IP camera. sanyo HD 35s kill the image of a flip.

[akelley 0]

Don't forget that software is a big cost of the end product. I'm talking about firmware and end user software as well. I owned three flip camcorders which all broke within a year and had several issues with connecting to both PCs and Macs. I would argue that Flip (before they were bought by Cisco) did a decent job with the hardware integration, but not such a good job with the software (firmware and likewise). It's true that electronic parts are commodities, but you separate the men from the boys in your software engineering department. Apple is a perfect example of this - 90% of the iPhone/iPod/iPad is off the shelf components, yet no one else (even Microsoft) having access to the same components, can produce a product that works as well, at any price point.

 

A Flip camcorder only shoots video in limited lighting situations (they were crap in less than well lit scenes), had no built in features like motion detection, i/o interfacing for alarms/events, and has been correctly stated, doesn't need to stream the video anywhere (most IP cameras can stream multiple streams simultaneously to multiple clients using multiple codecs).

 

Hardware is certainly a cost factor, but that's a commodity which price is affected merely by volume. Software costs a bunch more in research and development (regardless of how many units you can sell). And finally, the last part of the equation is the company itself and its ability to support the customer base. Part of the reason for Cisco to end the Flip was because support costs were so high, relative to the income generated by a $150 camera. There simply wasn't enough profit margin to support the continued research and development and consumer support that was required in the consumer space. Keep in mind, these $1000 IP cameras you see are not being bought by someone in Best Buy - they're being installed by professionals and supported by professionals, backed up by a company committed to the product.

[buellwinkle 0]

I do use my phone as a surveillence camera, what makes you think I didn't? I detect something that needs recording, it gets recorded. Works everytime. Can your camera make phone calls? Haha, try that with your fancy surveillence camera (actually the Mobotix can).

 

The original question was not why a Flip is good or bad, why Cisco shut it down, but why can they make a Flip for $99 and it costs many more times that for an equivalent 1080P camera. Didn't say it had to work outdoors, didn't say it had to last more than a year, didn't say it had to record at night or include illuminators.

 

Software is the easy part, you make it for one camera, it typically works across the vendor's product line.

[tomcctv 190]

The original question was not why a Flip is good or bad, why Cisco shut it down, but why can they make a Flip for $99 and it costs many more times that for an equivalent 1080P camera. Didn't say it had to work outdoors, didn't say it had to last more than a year, didn't say it had to record at night or include illuminators.

 

 

 

 

as Flip found out it could not be done. loaded with problems / made cheap and it failed when needed.

 

why put that into a IP camera........ lucky they did not.

[buellwinkle 0]

as Flip found out it could not be done. loaded with problems / made cheap and it failed when needed.

 

why put that into a IP camera........ lucky they did not.

 

They already do and you can buy them on eBay straight from China But why are they still more expensive than the Flip.

[tomcctv 190]

you can buy them on eBay straight from China

 

 

yes but they dont work from ebay and over priced for what they are from ebay china sellers.

 

 

 

or do a price build IP external with a flip.

[ak357 0]

I do use my phone as a surveillence camera, what makes you think I didn't? I detect something that needs recording, it gets recorded. Works everytime. Can your camera make phone calls? Haha, try that with your fancy surveillence camera (actually the Mobotix can).

 

Yes, camera can make direct ph call to your phone

my does it

and reverse

I can call directly to camera

Going to promote this product very soon

[buellwinkle 0]

OK, lets talk real money here, no more theory. Requirement, low cost 1080P IP camera comperably priced to a cheap camcorder, that's it, no other requirement. Flip Video Utra HD Video camera, currently at $199 at Amazon. The Flip is HD, but really only 720P HD.

 

Here's three IP cams that can be had for about the same price as the Cisco Flip -

 

OpenEye CM610 - 1080P indoor dome. Twice the resolution of the Flip

 

Avtech PushVideo Series (AVN801, AV80X, AVN812) - indoor cube cameras, 1.3MP (or 720P), loaded with features like SD card slot, 2 way audio, free smartphone apps, PIR motion detect, led light.

 

Vivotek - not the best but they also make a 720P cube in this price segment, I think it's the IP8132

[Razer_SE 0]

For what it is worth I have used a flip type of camera as a survielance camera with great results. This was a similar camera, but not the actual flip brand. 1080p, and I think it was $119.

 

I connected it with the composite out to a coax cable via an adapter and connected it that way. Not recording in HD then, but I was just needing a basic shot and had it handy so I connected it to try. I worked for 2.5 years and was still working the last time I saw it. The only issue it ever had was the flip out screen went bad, all covered in lines, but it still streamed video just fine. The picture was definitely better than most cheap analog cameras though both day and night, though no IR ability. This was indoor use btw.

 

That said, for $300 or so the Vivotek ip8332 is worlds better and works great so why bother with a flip nowadays? I wish for more MP like everyone else, but it's going slow. I have 16mp on my phone now, 16mp! I know there has to be a huge margin in the cameras, the parts do not add up to the cost by any means. It is what it is until someone turns it on it's head though. End the end most of the profit goes back into R&D and such I assume and there is some real long term support you are getting too, or at least hopefully getting. I would still like to see 4mp in the range of today's 1mp prices and 8-12mp as the real high end units. Gonna be a while though lol.

[dirkdaring 0]

Good thread, I've had the same questions being new to cctv as well. After looking through footage (still looking for what system I'll end up buying) and just scratching my head wondering why the video in ~$3-400 ip cams is so horrible compared to my Samsung Fascinate cell phone that takes amazing video day or night for a cell phone. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfPwpWsadPw. I guess the market just isn't 'there' yet. [edit] That Vivotek IP8332 looks pretty good btw! Have not seen it before now.

[buellwinkle 0]

Haha, you are comparing Las Vegas at night to images taken in real surveillance situations. Sure, Vegas at night is like most places during the day. I have a weekend hangout in downtown SD. The lights from the city at night are very bright compared to suburbia. I can show you images taken from my balcony with a cheap surveillance camera that would look good and from my suburbia home, would look awful. I've also compared pictures taken with my Nikon DSLR whch has excellent low noise images in available light that side by side look as good a comparably priced surveillence camera. So you have to take the video side by side, same lighting, same moment, same angle, same shutter speed.

[Soundy 1]

I do use my phone as a surveillence camera, what makes you think I didn't? I detect something that needs recording, it gets recorded. Works everytime.

And how much is missed while you're pulling it out, unlocking it, and and starting the recording?

 

The original question was not why a Flip is good or bad, why Cisco shut it down, but why can they make a Flip for $99 and it costs many more times that for an equivalent 1080P camera. Didn't say it had to work outdoors, didn't say it had to last more than a year, didn't say it had to record at night or include illuminators.

But that's exactly the point: you want a camera that will do all these things, it costs more than $99. You want to pay only $99, you get something that won't measure up to a lot of the demands that a professional surveillance camera has to meet.

 

It's really no different than the reason why $800 analog cameras are still made - and still sell - when you can get $20 analog cameras: you get what you pay for.

[dirkdaring 0]

Haha, you are comparing Las Vegas at night to images taken in real surveillance situations. Sure, Vegas at night is like most places during the day. I have a weekend hangout in downtown SD. The lights from the city at night are very bright compared to suburbia. I can show you images taken from my balcony with a cheap surveillance camera that would look good and from my suburbia home, would look awful. I've also compared pictures taken with my Nikon DSLR whch has excellent low noise images in available light that side by side look as good a comparably priced surveillence camera. So you have to take the video side by side, same lighting, same moment, same angle, same shutter speed.

 

Sorry, was just one of the first videos I could find for my phone. I'll totally admit to my noobness about cameras, but I'm learning as I read more.