Dahua 4300S vs Hikvision 2032

[Snd1234]

Quick contribution based on some experience with both cameras.

• Bought Dahuas on ebay (from China)
• Bought Hikvision on Amazon
• Hik firmware V5.1.0 build 131202
• Dahua firmware 2.420.0002.0.R, build: 2014-06-21
• Using Synology DS1812+/DS412+ back end for the recording and monitoring of all cameras
• Hik camera is using ONVIF profile

http://i57.tinypic.com/a3egzp.jpg

• Hiks are running 720p 15fps
• Dahuas are running 2048x1536 15fps

I originally started out using Hikvisions but got turned off after reading more because I thought I was being robbed on FOV which is important to me because I need large coverage areas. I don't like domes because of the lack of mounting flexibility. So I bought the Dahuas and just finished installing two at the same site where I also installed a Hik. Bandwidth conservation is VERY important to me because my sites are remote and we use microwave IP backhaul to deliver the livefeeds to an operator who is watching the cameras.

So after installing the Dahuas I feel like the Hikvisions are basically superior in every way that matters to me. I am not unhappy with the Dahuas, it's just I won't be buying more for the following reasons:

1. Dahua's image quality "looks" worse than Hik's in that they are duller
2. Dahua's VBR bandwidth at 720p is a consistent 600kbps - 1000kbps
3. Hikvision bandwidth at 720p is 350kbps brief keyframe followed by 20-30kbps for still good quality.
4. I think that the FOV of the hik is better horizontally than Dahua even though the Dahua has 3.6mm lens.

Most of these reasons have already been mentioned here, but I wanted to pound on the bandwidth issue. I know in the example I am running 3mp but even at 720 there was no way I was getting close to matching the Hikvision's bandwidth performance. Without any improved quality or FOV tradeoffs, I can't justify using Dahuas out in the field for my application. I'm not going to replace the Dahuas but I really only see a reason to use them in a scenario where I need to capture a shot that has a need for a large vertical FOV.

If anyone knows of a configuration where the Dahuas can match the Hiks on bandwidth/quality I would love to hear it. However, I toyed with all the settings and couldn't get near the Hik. Note that the Hik only gets this low when operating in ONVIF mode with the Synology. If I don't use ONVIF the bandwidth savings don't show up.

BTW, for indoor applications at my HQ where bandwidth is irrelevant, I prefer Acti E12 cubes over both Hik and Dahua.

Thanks all!

 

[fenderman]

Welcome to the forum and thanks for the comparisons...As you can see the hikvision has a wider horizontal fov (when in 2mp or 720p, if you run the hik in 3mp it will result in less horizontal fov but probably still more than dahua)... I too prefer the hikvision image...one reason it looks better is because its over saturated...the dahua is actually closer to the real image colors...you can up the saturation to get it closer to the hik...dont know about bandwidth as it makes no difference to me...
As far as domes and mounting, 3 axis domes can be mounted any which way (hikvision 2732, 2532) but the best of both worlds is the turret 3332, no ir reflection and you can mount it any which way and is also available in 2.8mm so you get an ultra wide view (at the expense of clarity)

 

[Snd1234]

For most applications, the bandwidth is of course irrelevant. At HQ on a gigabit LAN with large hard drives in the DVR it's really irrelevant.

However, I probably wouldn't have even bothered with this review if it wasn't for the bandwidth. For remote sites with a small pipe, I think the Hik is pretty awesome. I wanted to vocalize that to the world because I wasn't sure that had received enough play.

I will check out that dome, but I'm really comfortable with bullets except that the low-end models don't have the 2.8mm lenses unless I want to step up to varifocal.

 

[fenderman]

The turret is better overall than the domesif you dont need audio or sd card capability...it doesn't suffer from IR reflection issues..its ir led is separate from the lens which should help with respect to spiders and bugs...

 

[vector18]

I'm sorry, but none of my dahua cameras look like that. Do you have WDR turned up all the way or something? And why would you want variable? I would keep the bit rate at the constant rate that
you chose.

 

[vector18]

This is a 3mp Dahua and that's a pretty large view and not as washed out as yours.

 

[vector18]

another example if you need one

 

[fenderman]

@vector which model is that? are those the default settings?

 

[vector18]

These are the HDW-4300S, the 3mp eyeball cameras. For color settings and stuff, yes, default settings. I only really enable WDR if I have to.

 

[vector18]

These are the 4300C's, similar to the hik turrets, except the Dahua's have audio. In these, I have WDR turned on.

 

[Snd1234]

1. My camera model # is IPC-HFW4300S. CMOS identical to the dome. Lens obviously different, though.
2. I'm not watching birdfeeders with a camera directly tied over cat5e to my DVR. These are unmanned remote tower sites in the middle of nowhere that each require 3-5 cameras for good coverage. The feeds all stream back in real-time to HQ for monitoring and recording. Bandwidth is important. That's why I do VBR. Not that it matters since I can clearly see the Dahua bandwidth on the wire is constant even in VBR mode. So maybe their VBR algo just sucks or something.
3. CBR may seem like it's about control but really you lose control. Typically, VBR will use less bandwidth in an environment like mine where there is almost no activity. However, the Dahua VBR functions a lot like a CBR from what I'm seeing. Also, the Dahua won't even let you go down below 1000kbps on CBR or VBR anyway.
4. It is a fair point about the saturation settings and yes I am using WDR but the picture has always looked about like I showed in my pic. I think you can also find the "Dahua = Duller" review throughout this and other boards when there is a comparison between Dahua and Hik. I turned the "saturation dial" up to 11 and it looks more like the Hik. However, PQ wasn't my main complaint and the PQ on the Dahua certainly isn't better than the Hik.
5. However, let's grant that there is no difference in picture quality between Hik and Dahua. There is a huge difference in bandwidth usage between the two that I found while using ONVIF tied to my Synology. I'm talking about 720p15fps vs 720p15fps. Yes, that's a very specific situation but I think that is pretty important information to someone trying to budget for a multi-site system that doesn't use much bandwidth.
6. Attached are my Dahua settings after I rammed up the saturation.

The Dahua is also a little more expensive than the Hik on AliExpress.

Again, to repeat myself -- I am going to use the Hiks for my application based on bandwidth and FOV compared to 4300S. I still give Hik an edge on PQ but jacking up the saturation does mostly eliminate the dullness. However, bandwidth is a critical thing in specific applications and I haven't been able to get close to what the Hik can do.

 

[fenderman]

Dont know if this would help, but try messing with the encoding profile..you should be able to choose between h.264h (default) and h.264 and possibly h.264b..see if that makes a difference...Also do changes to the "video quality' make any difference in bandwidth..

 

[vector18]

sounds like he has already made up his mind

 

[networkcameracritic]

What you describe as duller is actually just a choice the vendors have made. Hikvision decided that appearance was more important and shoots for a more saturated, over processed image that people like, I usually have to tone it down to be more natural. Dahua decided to go for an under processed image where next to the Hik, I feel I have to crank up saturation and contrast side by side. Each by itself would be less noticeable. I prefer Hikvision, but for other reasons. The Dahua has better natural dynamic range and may provide the better image for forensics. Actually because if it's naturally better WDR, I find turning on WDR is redundant. I prefer a lesser processed image, preserving what the sensor saw so i can later process the image say in Photoshop to bring out the detail I want in a controlled matter. You look for pretty colors and high contrast, I look for details in shadows.

 

[Snd1234]

I made up my mind based on hours of tinkering with the Dahua and never cracking below 700kbps for what the Hik could do between 100-300kbps, apples to apples on resolution and fps. I even posted a graph detailing the wire speed on the port that the Hik is connected to. Someone want to show me a Dahua at that level I'd love to see it.

Doesn't sound like there's much knowledge of or concern for bandwidth issues here. That's OK since it seems like a minority concern for exotic scenarios.

I remember starting out trying to pick a camera. I came here and other places to try to make sense of the features of the various cameras and compared them to what I was trying to do. Maybe 6 months from now a guy in my situation is trying to figure out what he needs. He'll come across this thread and see my feedback and then yours. He'll probably think maybe the OP's quality issue was overblown but notice that no one directly refuted the bandwidth concern nor the FOV differences. Then he'll move on and read other reviews.

 

[Snd1234]

Dont know if this would help, but try messing with the encoding profile..you should be able to choose between h.264h (default) and h.264 and possibly h.264b..see if that makes a difference...Also do changes to the "video quality' make any difference in bandwidth..

Thanks for the advice.

The video quality changes don't really help much. I have one Dahua at 4 and the other at 1. It didn't shave off much bandwidth and the images looked basically the same to my eye. The Dahua only has H264, H264-High, and MJPEG for options on the encoding.

I made every modification and tried every setting except MJPEG and then compared it to what the camera was spitting out on the wire. I work at a TV station and understand VBR, CBR, Mpeg4, h264, high profile, main profile, etc because that stuff is used professionally to deliver our content. The best bandwidth-to-quality ratio settings should be at high profile with VBR along with long keyframe intervals (when the most bandwidth will be sent) and a low cap on the bit rate. That's what I got with Hikvision. Dahua doesn't respond that way. The Hikvision will send a large key then only update the pixels where there has been a change until the next key frame. For a situation like mine where there ideally should be NO major movement (remote, unmanned sites) this is the way to go. The Dahua didn't respond the way the Hik did even with longer keyframes. The keyframe just ballooned to like 3mpbs and then the non-key frames only dropped down a couple hundred kbps which was not really a net positive thing.

My "mind is made up" is a pretty funny way of saying "I tested extensively and found one did a wildly better job on bandwidth in a specific scenario." No, I'm not running a science fair project and I didn't test earlier firmware revisions. That's what I gave the specs above so people could have some basis for what I am working with.

I could probably dial back the FPS on the Dahuas to 10fps but it's still not going to match Hik at 15fps.

Maybe future revisions of firmware will improve this. I'll definitely be in a position to check since I'm not going to rip the cameras down. They are good overall. I'll just only be putting up 2032s moving forward, unless the situation calls for a 4300S or the 4300S feature set improves with newer firmware.

Thanks, all.

 

[fenderman]

You are correct in that bandwidth is almost never a concern for 99 percent of the users...however, you haven't tinkered with the dahua properly...just for kicks i ran a 4300c in CBR, 1024, 15fps at 3mp....its about 125kB/s
at 4096, it jumps back to 500....what are you using to measure your bandwidth use?

 

[Snd1234]

125kBps = 1000kbps. That's what I'm getting with the Dahua more or less. I was actually getting more like 700-800kbps at 720p on the Dahua, VBR or CBR.

The Hik checks in at 300kbps (38kBps) for the keyframe and then drops down to 20-40kbps on the non-keyframes. When I first started using 2032 I didn't believe the measurements they were so low. But months later I've been using it and can confirm it's the real deal holyfield.

I use a Mikrotik router to measure. I can pull up the realtime port traffic. I can also use a program called Torch in the mikrotik to show the traffic being generated and received by each IP address. I feel pretty good about the measurements.

Bandwidth has to be a concern for more than 1%, especially professional users with more than 10 cameras (I am up to 25 and headed to 40.) Bandwidth directly affects the required resources as you scale out... CPU, disk, connectivity.

 

[fenderman]

wow you really require very little bandwidth..again the is only for specialized situations which come into play in way less than 1 percent of installs....most of these systems are installed using the manufactures own NVR on a solid network...some folks write to nas, use pss or use third party software and most of those dont come close to saturating the network and or disks, i dont blame dahua for not making this a priority..that said, i myself prefer the hiks..

 

[Snd1234]

If Camera A can produce similar quality to Camera B but use 25% of the bandwidth, that is a major thing frankly. Whether or not everyone needs it that's another thing. It's not really hard to point at one feature and say this isn't important to X% of the users.

Like I said before, if you are just watching your bird feeder in your backyard then yeah who cares, right?

I just want this datapoint out there on the internet and am happy to put it here so that traffic can drive to your site. If you google hikvision dahua bandwidth this is already the number #1 result.