Why are IP cameras so expensive!?

[howardino 0]

Hi,

 

I'm looking to get CCTV for my property. I've been disappointed by the quality of images from the traditional "state-of-the-art" analogue CCTV cameras which goto 700TVL - people and cars go into blur beyond 5m or so, very difficult to make out make/model of car, or describe type of clothing on a person etc

 

IP/megapixel cameras appear to be quite expensive in comparison, often north of £300 - and this for 1.3 or 2MP camera!

 

Why is this when you can get digital cameras that can also record video and take 10MP images for £45 upwards. The sensor also being 1/3" CCD. Digital cameras have a whole host of digital wizardry to boot - face detection! which would be useful in CCTV.

 

So what justifies the CCTV megapixel cameras being so expensive, especially when you consider they are providing such a basic function compared to digital cameras!

[tomcctv 187]

Why is this when you can get digital cameras that can also record video and take 10MP images for £45 upwards

 

 

 

Hi. yes true but if you only want say 1 or 2 pictures a day or a few minutes of video .... have no networking have no viewing (live)

 

 

much much more to look into than cost.

[howardino 0]

Why is this when you can get digital cameras that can also record video and take 10MP images for £45 upwards

 

 

 

Hi. yes true but if you only want say 1 or 2 pictures a day or a few minutes of video .... have no networking have no viewing (live)

 

 

much much more to look into than cost.

 

thats missing the point, its the same sensor, lens being used in a digital camera that is being used in an IP megapixel camera - and you still have to buy an NVR or like to do the recording. I wasn't trying to say use the digital camera as a cctv and use it to do recording - my point was that the digital camera comes with so much more functionality and electronic wizardry wherase the IP megapixel cctv camera provides a barebones camera functionality and yet costs a ridiculous amount of money! yet the same technology is available in the digital camera market for a fraction of the cost - go figure!?

[tomcctv 187]

my point was that the digital camera comes with so much more functionality and electronic wizardry wherase the IP megapixel cctv camera provides a barebones camera functionality and yet costs a ridiculous amount of money!

 

 

 

 

hi. you do have that the wrong way round.

 

can your pocket cam send you footage .... can you record away from your pocket camera. ..... can your pocket camera run for more than a hour........ will it last outdoors in all weathers for more than a few months

 

 

remember your not taking pictures which your camera may do but the video is not 10mp

[650HPAMG 0]

my point was that the digital camera comes with so much more functionality and electronic wizardry wherase the IP megapixel cctv camera provides a barebones camera functionality and yet costs a ridiculous amount of money!

 

 

 

 

hi. you do have that the wrong way round.

 

can your pocket cam send you footage .... can you record away from your pocket camera. ..... can your pocket camera run for more than a hour........ will it last outdoors in all weathers for more than a few months

 

 

remember your not taking pictures which your camera may do but the video is not 10mp

 

Not a helpful answer at all and it seems you are missing the point completely or else in the industry protecting the high markup of these units. Your answer just comes across as defensive.

 

The OP has legit concerns. IP cameras are overpriced-from a certain perspective. Has little to do with the housing at all.

 

The bottom line IMO is more demand and supply. Yes, cheap point and shoots blow away IP cameras for the most part, but to integrate and then market something that would not see the volume requires a higher markup vs a point and shoot. Either way the initial investment needs to be recuperated. Thus again, supply and demand.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Guest

[SEANHAWG 1]

Tom is correct. There are several IP cameras which are basically an all in one surveillance system. You can stick a SD card in there and make it turn into a DVR/Camera all in one. Not to mention all of the other aspects that go into it, such as remote monitoring, email alerts, MD recording, alarm connections, etc. None of what you can do with a device that basically just takes pictures. There is alot more that goes into it than just the image elements which is what you guys are simply focusing on. I understand your concerns as I wondered that myself at one time, but when you look at the whole picture, there is more that goes into an IP camera than a picture taking camera. With that being said, there are several IP cameras that are overpriced, but not all IP cameras are overpriced as a whole.

[650HPAMG 0]

Tom is correct. There are several IP cameras which are basically an all in one surveillance system. You can stick a SD card in there and make it turn into a DVR/Camera all in one. Not to mention all of the other aspects that go into it, such as remote monitoring, email alerts, MD recording, alarm connections, etc. None of what you can do with a device that basically just takes pictures. There is alot more that goes into it than just the image elements which is what you guys are simply focusing on. I understand your concerns as I wondered that myself at one time, but when you look at the whole picture, there is more that goes into an IP camera than a picture taking camera. With that being said, there are several IP cameras that are overpriced, but not all IP cameras are overpriced as a whole.

 

Apples for apples please. There are DSLR cameras that take video which blow away IP cameras but are we going to toss them in the mix as well?

 

Think the OP is referring to a simple $100 point and shoot and comparable CCTV units. Good analysis otherwise.

[SEANHAWG 1]

No problem. Please explain how you would set up a $100 point and shoot camera to be used in a simple surveillance system. Keep in mind that most people will want to view their cameras remotely, and well, record.

[tomcctv 187]

The OP has legit concerns. IP cameras are overpriced-from a certain perspective. Has little to do with the housing at all.

 

 

 

it does have alot to do with housings. ok let him stick his $100 10mp camera out in the rain snow heat. it would not last 5 minutes.

 

so add a little more money to his $100 camera. then you need network connection so add a little more money to his $100 camera. software add some more money to his $100

 

 

you dont need a calculator to see he needs to spend a little more for a security camera

[650HPAMG 0]

Well and that is the point. No pun..... :0 I know my cameras can live feed to a PC and I can access the PC remotely, never tried though I know it can be done, and I don't play with P&S cameras though many do appear to be impressive on paper. Thus the advantage of the real thing.

 

To be honest, I think most things in life should cost more, especially gas in the US which should be triple current rates, but that is just me.

[650HPAMG 0]

The OP has legit concerns. IP cameras are overpriced-from a certain perspective. Has little to do with the housing at all.

 

 

 

it does have alot to do with housings. ok let him stick his $100 10mp camera out in the rain snow heat. it would not last 5 minutes.

 

so add a little more money to his $100 camera. then you need network connection so add a little more money to his $100 camera. software add some more money to his $100

 

 

you dont need a calculator to see he needs to spend a little more for a security camera

 

Really, 5 minutes? Can't take any of your post seriously after that comment. Just shows again the extent your willing to go to back up your arguments. Keep it real.

 

And very expensive CCTV cameras FAIL, often as well. Someone could easily stick their P&S out a window to capture what they are looking for. Of course I agree it is not a substitute for the real thing which is designed for this. However many P&S cameras have weather protection as well.

 

A CCTV camera is just that, a camera. There is not magical technology beyond what mainstream cameras use. They are geared for different purposes. Mainstreams sell hundreds of thousands, CCTV sells thousands. Thus the margin increase. I would never say they are better made, more like they are designed to what they are marketed for.

 

How many here take their CCTV camera to the zoo with the family for pics? Or for video?

Edited April 24, 2012 by Guest

[SEANHAWG 1]

Point and shoot cameras cannot:

 

- Be accessed with IP, sure you can run a big long USB cable to it, but there are length limitations to USB and that really would not work in real world surveillance scenarios

- They are not built with electronics to be ran 24/7

- Do not have motion detection capabilities

- Do not have the ability to intelligently search through recordings (they just put a bunch of files in a folder and thats it)

- Cannot send email alerts

- cannot be accessed remotely to actually manage the settings of the camera

- Cannot be used to record with alarm devices such as PIR motion detectors

 

I am sure you could MacGuyver the camera to make some of the things work above but most people are not Macguyvers. I get the gist that the OP's question was why are IP cameras generally more expensive than P&S cameras, the reasons above, which are extremely important reasons for surveillance scenarios, are why IP cameras are more expensive. Again, there is alot more that goes into most IP cameras than just taking pictures and videos, and I think that is what is snagging you up.

[650HPAMG 0]

Point and shoot cameras cannot:

 

- Be accessed with IP, sure you can run a big long USB cable to it, but there are length limitations to USB and that really would not work in real world surveillance scenarios

- They are not built with electronics to be ran 24/7

- Do not have motion detection capabilities

- Do not have the ability to intelligently search through recordings (they just put a bunch of files in a folder and thats it)

- Cannot send email alerts

- cannot be accessed remotely to actually manage the settings of the camera

- Cannot be used to record with alarm devices such as PIR motion detectors

 

I am sure you could MacGuyver the camera to make some of the things work above but most people are not Macguyvers. I get the gist that the OP's question was why are IP cameras generally more expensive than P&S cameras, the reasons above, which are extremely important reasons for surveillance scenarios, are why IP cameras are more expensive. Again, there is alot more that goes into most IP cameras than just taking pictures and videos, and I think that is what is snagging you up.

 

 

And a CCTV camera cannot take video like a Nikon D800 or Canon 5D can. So.............Show me a CCTV camera for under $200 that has all of the features above you listed. From what I see OP just wanted to know COMPARABLES, and not trying to compare some little Cadi to a Porsche.

 

I understand the point your trying to make, but again, your outside the scope of the initial question. I'm not disagreeing, I agree and have stated the reasons why a CCTV is more expensive. Just trying to keep it on a level field. Just seems the 'industry folks here come out swinging to defend their livelihood.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Guest

[tomcctv 187]

Really, 5 minutes? Can't take any of your post seriously after that comment. Just shows again the extent your willing to go to back up your arguments. Keep it real.

 

 

 

you dont have to take it seriously. if you dont understand thats your problem but i will try to explain it better for you.

 

 

$100 p&s is not waterproof. ...... cant be mounted to wall ..... cant be out in all weathers ....... cant be networked

 

 

so YES IP will be a little more expensive because of the way it is made (why is that so hard to figure out ???)

[650HPAMG 0]

Really, 5 minutes? Can't take any of your post seriously after that comment. Just shows again the extent your willing to go to back up your arguments. Keep it real.

 

 

 

you dont have to take it seriously. if you dont understand thats your problem but i will try to explain it better for you.

 

 

$100 p&s is not waterproof. ...... cant be mounted to wall ..... cant be out in all weathers ....... cant be networked

 

 

so YES IP will be a little more expensive because of the way it is made (why is that so hard to figure out ???)

 

OK, and a $100 IP camera cannot be taken out, zoom, powered on it's own, take pictures, face detection, auto focus, and have a removable memory card. So what is your point? As stated they are geared for different purposes.

[tomcctv 187]

And a CCTV camera cannot take video like a Nikon D800 or Canon 5D can

 

you do need to do some homework. but go on throw a $3000 into the thread.

[SEANHAWG 1]

If you are saying point and shoot cameras take better quality images than most IP security cameras, then I would have to agree with you there. They dont compress the video and images as much as CCTV cameras. CCTV cameras compress video more because if not, you would have a hard drive eaten up in no time, which is not realistic for surveillance storage. But they arent that far off, especially on video.

 

But the OP said

So what justifies the CCTV megapixel cameras being so expensive, especially when you consider they are providing such a basic function compared to digital cameras!

 

The problem with his question is, that they are not providing such a basic function compared to digital cameras. IP cameras do alot more functions. They have built in web servers and perform other intelligent duties that P&S cameras cannot do.

 

If his question or statement was something like "P&S cameras provide a higher quality picture than most IP cameras but cost less" then he would have a valid point. But what most people dont stop and think about is you cannot use P&S cameras in surveillance scenarios without doing some major jimmy riggin.

 

Hope this info helps.

[howardino 0]

I wasn't actually advocating physically using a P&S camera as a CCTV camera - I was trying to say the guts of a P&S camera i.e. lens, sensor etc is the same for an IP camera - yet the IP camera can cost 3 or more times.

 

The lens and sensors are mass produced, the exact same lens and sensor are put into a P&S as that into an IP camera - so its not like they are producing lenses and sensors specifically for the CCTV industry.

 

I take your point regarding web servers etc but surely the cost of these doesn't justify the multiple price tag. Plus P&S do equally have just as complicated electronics if not more so all do with photo taking - like my P&S can automatically take shots based on when people smile!

 

I would imagine like a previous poster has mentioned it is probably more to do with economies of scale and getting a decent profit.

 

Just on a slight different note, in the IP world have we got facial or person recognition yet. With my P&S the software that came with it, can trawl through all the photos and recognise faces and tag them.

I would very much like to see this in CCTV world. I would love to have my CCTV system, such that when anyone comes up my drive, my CCTV would alert me to say e.g. postman coming up drive, or if unknown to say like 3 unknown visitors coming up drive! The software/technology exists to do this - has anyone done it!?

[thewireguys 3]

the exact same lens and sensor are put into a P&S as that into an IP camera - so its not like they are producing lenses and sensors specifically for the CCTV industry.

 

You sure about that? I have yet you see a P&S that has a CS mount lens

 

like my P&S can automatically take shots based on when people smile!

 

Key word here shot! one single image!!!!!! not 24/7 video day or night. Speaking of night images how do they do without the flash in a low light environments?

 

 

And a CCTV camera cannot take video like a Nikon D800 or Canon 5D can

 

I so happen to have a couple Canon cameras including a 7D and played with the 5DII. I also sell IP MP cameras the use the same full frame sensors used in those DSLRs.

 

The DSLRS take fantastic video when setup for your scene. So unless you wanna hang out by your camera with lighting and adjust the settings for a 24/7 operation they are not gonna cut it for a CCTV application.

 

Also I know this has been brought up before but the P&S/DSLR cameras are not designed to run 24/7 in the summer and winter. You can send me your D800 and I will gladly install it on top of one of our ski resort customers mountains in the winter and let see how long it will last.

Edited April 25, 2012 by Guest

[ak357 0]

 

I take your point regarding web servers etc but surely the cost of these doesn't justify the multiple price tag. Plus P&S do equally have just as complicated electronics if not more so all do with photo taking - like my P&S can automatically take shots based on when people smile!

I would imagine like a previous poster has mentioned it is probably more to do with economies of scale and getting a decent profit.

 

 

Can your camera automatically take shots based on when people cry

because that what I want to do after reading all those posts

[thewireguys 3]

^^

[camera-newbie 0]

To overstate what's been already said, the P&S cameras are meant to take a few thousand shots (ok -- perhaps 100k for simplicity sake) and be put away after a shoot.. An IP camera has to do its job 24x7 for potentially YEARS -- we're talking MTBF! I suspect IF you could rig up a P&S to constantly take shots, that something would wear out rather quickly.. Ultimately the engineering is completely different as the environment/use-case for them is a 180 from the way a P&S is used. I doubt, for instance, that overheating of a P&S is much of a design concern for Canon, Nikon and whatnot but is I'm sure a concern on IP cameras that are shoved into an enclosure and can literally 'cook' in the wrong conditions. YMMV!

 

Can we put this to bed now ?

[akelley 0]

Why do we keep answering this stupid question? Really. It's a stupid question being asked by, I'm sorry to say, stupid people. There is no comparison between a consumer camera and a surveillance camera. They are two totally different devices for completely different uses. Why even try to compare them? If you think surveillance cameras are over priced, then don't buy them! Simple as that. Use a webcam set up to your laptop. Lots of people do that and lots of people are happy.

 

And the OP's question is not even accurate... there are plenty of sub $100 IP cameras you can purchase today. Is that considered expensive to people? Does it shoot 10MP images? Of course not. But your $300 point and shoot doesn't have a built web server and can stream video over the internet. It comes down to what you need, and what features you're willing to compromise. IP camera means an IP stack with webserver capabilities. I know of no consumer P&S that offers this at ANY price. So, I think the OP needs to admit that this is a stupid question because there's no fact in the original statement to begin with (what consumer P&S camera are you comparing to the sub $100 Foscam IP camera to determine that IP cameras are so expensive?).

 

Maybe what you're really asking is why are IP cameras so low in MP (i.e., image quality) where my P&S for $100 has many MP? Well, the answer to that is the DSP in the IP camera that has to compress each MP image (up to 30 per second), whereby your $100 P&S has to compress only 1 image - and some need considerable time to recyle before taking another picture. Take a Canon DSLR that can shoot perhaps, at most, 10 FPS in burst mode, which can only do this for about 2 seconds. And that DSLR isn't going to be $100. Then keep in mind, your $100 IP camera has to take this video feed, compress the image 30 times every second, then send it over the IP network - sometimes, to multiple clients.

 

So this notion that a consumer P&S is the same technology as an IP camera is factually incorrect and therefore, shouldn't even be compared in terms of price.

 

Personally, I think it's amazing that you can find sub $100 IP cameras; perhaps the question then should be, how come consumer P&S cameras can't do what IP cameras can? Meaning, why can't that Canon digital Elph not be a webserver? Why can't it stream multiple video feeds across the Internet in realtime? Why can't it take video in pitch black with built in IR? Why can't I set the camera on a table and have it take a picture when someone walks by, send me an email alert, trigger an external alarm, and store the video of the person walking by onto a NAS device?

 

Yeah, IP cameras are way overpriced for what they do. Despite that no one can actually compare functionality to anything in the consumer P&S market to baseline what "expensive" means, we continue to see this stupid question being asked.

[akelley 0]

The lens and sensors are mass produced, the exact same lens and sensor are put into a P&S as that into an IP camera - so its not like they are producing lenses and sensors specifically for the CCTV industry.

 

Actually you do have special optics for video cameras over still cameras. If you know anything about cameras you'll know (all things being equal) "it's in the glass". The sensor and the optics work together. If you have two cameras using the same sensor (CMOS or CCD), one may have superior optics, and that camera will produce a better image. And yes, you cannot take the same sensor in a P&S and plop it into a video camera and expect the same results. Also, the optics do vary significantly between still and video, particularly in surveillance depending on the application (facial recognition, IR, etc.) And post processing is also completely different between video and still image cameras.

 

Of course, what you do get when you take a sensor and optics that was designed for a P&S and put it into an IP camera is the sub $100 IP cameras you see on eBay and Amazon. These cameras are for the "home" use and wouldn't stand up to the requirements and environmental conditions of the surveillance market.