IR light - 5 model comparison

[tigerwillow1]

I tried 3 LED lights with the camera FOV about 80 degrees:

1. CMVision IR3, advertised coverage "60 to 80" degrees. The result was the same as in the first post of the thread, big hotspot in the middle and poor coverage at the edges.

2. CMVision IR40, advertised coverage "60 to 80" degrees. This one had the most even light distribution but didn't quite reach the edges of the camera FOV. With a 60 degree FOV camera this would be the best of the three.

3. Univivi U6R, 6 LEDs in a 3x2 array, advertised coverage 90 degrees. This one had a brighter center hotspot than the IR40 but covered to the edges of the camera FOV. Of the three, the best one for the 80 degree camera FOV.

However, the very best result was using two IR3s, each one angled out from the center of the camera coverage. This gives the best coverage to the FOV edges, without a nasty center hotspot. Using two IR3s takes the same power as the single Univivi U6R.

Power-wise, it pretty much one watt per LED with these three devices. All three have constant-power supplies, i.e. when the voltage goes up, the current goes down. I tested in the range of 8 to 15 volts. The IR3 was dead-on consuming 3 watts. The IR40 pulls about 3.4 watts, 0.85 watts per LED. The U6R pulled 6 watts, but doesn't have as large a usable voltage range. Its power draw tapered off when the voltage went below 12.

I found one more interesting thing on the following web page. Looks like using a diffuser with the lights can really help in some situations. I'd assume however that it reduces the maximum distance the light is good for.
IR Illuminators

 

[GFM]

I think I'll try lowering the camera with a junction box, I picked up a nice white one for this purpose. This would also allow a bit more of a view of the horizon (weather conditions). -20 this am so will wait for some warmer weather to do this, don't want to break anything.

Lower the cam a bit away from the soffit with a junction box or such, or move it closer to the fascia.

Nice comparison, and the mylar might be a good diffuser. Wonder if it causes the units to heat up more than without the diffuser if installed behind the glass? Maybe one could replace the glass with the mylar diffuser? Wonder if there is an effect on the light sensor with a diffuser in front?

it reduces the maximum distance the light is good for.

 

[weigle2]

I tried 3 LED lights with the camera FOV about 80 degrees:

1. CMVision IR3, advertised coverage "60 to 80" degrees. The result was the same as in the first post of the thread, big hotspot in the middle and poor coverage at the edges.

2. CMVision IR40, advertised coverage "60 to 80" degrees. This one had the most even light distribution but didn't quite reach the edges of the camera FOV. With a 60 degree FOV camera this would be the best of the three.

3. Univivi U6R, 6 LEDs in a 3x2 array, advertised coverage 90 degrees. This one had a brighter center hotspot than the IR40 but covered to the edges of the camera FOV. Of the three, the best one for the 80 degree camera FOV.

However, the very best result was using two IR3s, each one angled out from the center of the camera coverage. This gives the best coverage to the FOV edges, without a nasty center hotspot. Using two IR3s takes the same power as the single Univivi U6R.

Power-wise, it pretty much one watt per LED with these three devices. All three have constant-power supplies, i.e. when the voltage goes up, the current goes down. I tested in the range of 8 to 15 volts. The IR3 was dead-on consuming 3 watts. The IR40 pulls about 3.4 watts, 0.85 watts per LED. The U6R pulled 6 watts, but doesn't have as large a usable voltage range. Its power draw tapered off when the voltage went below 12.

I found one more interesting thing on the following web page. Looks like using a diffuser with the lights can really help in some situations. I'd assume however that it reduces the maximum distance the light is good for.
IR Illuminators

Nice review. A very good IR light with a diffuser is a Tendelux AI4. It comes with a built in diffuser, with very decent and even coverage. Says it will go 80ft. I'm testing one of these now, and compared to the CMvision CM6, it's a more even light output at about the same brightness.

 

[looney2ns]

I tried 3 LED lights with the camera FOV about 80 degrees:

1. CMVision IR3, advertised coverage "60 to 80" degrees. The result was the same as in the first post of the thread, big hotspot in the middle and poor coverage at the edges.

2. CMVision IR40, advertised coverage "60 to 80" degrees. This one had the most even light distribution but didn't quite reach the edges of the camera FOV. With a 60 degree FOV camera this would be the best of the three.

3. Univivi U6R, 6 LEDs in a 3x2 array, advertised coverage 90 degrees. This one had a brighter center hotspot than the IR40 but covered to the edges of the camera FOV. Of the three, the best one for the 80 degree camera FOV.

However, the very best result was using two IR3s, each one angled out from the center of the camera coverage. This gives the best coverage to the FOV edges, without a nasty center hotspot. Using two IR3s takes the same power as the single Univivi U6R.

Power-wise, it pretty much one watt per LED with these three devices. All three have constant-power supplies, i.e. when the voltage goes up, the current goes down. I tested in the range of 8 to 15 volts. The IR3 was dead-on consuming 3 watts. The IR40 pulls about 3.4 watts, 0.85 watts per LED. The U6R pulled 6 watts, but doesn't have as large a usable voltage range. Its power draw tapered off when the voltage went below 12.

I found one more interesting thing on the following web page. Looks like using a diffuser with the lights can really help in some situations. I'd assume however that it reduces the maximum distance the light is good for.
IR Illuminators

I purchased #2 to give it a try, and it's doing very well in my situation. Better than the Tendalux 4, much better through.