Ok - Thanks!
Looks good! And I suppose the 90 degree position is not that much of an issue really.
INT
Looking for a good door intercom, any info on Dahuas VTO3211D-P2 and VTH1560CS
- Thread starter Steff
- Start date
Looks good! And I suppose the 90 degree position is not that much of an issue really.
INT
flynreelow
Known around here
- Dec 12, 2016
- 1,348
- 1,233
Hi @Steff,
is it just me for is that the picture of the VTO3221D-P2 seems a lot more blurry than the one of the VTO2000A - despite the VTO3221D-P2 offering a lot more coverage !?
Especially looking at the green bush. It could be b/c of the instance you took the example.
How would you judge the picture quality comparing both of them in general?
You have written '...more sensitive camera module...' but it did not say that much about the pix quality - even
if that not the most important part for a intercom (it needs to be sufficient and not great necessarly).
Thanks,
INT
is it just me for is that the picture of the VTO3221D-P2 seems a lot more blurry than the one of the VTO2000A - despite the VTO3221D-P2 offering a lot more coverage !?
Especially looking at the green bush. It could be b/c of the instance you took the example.
How would you judge the picture quality comparing both of them in general?
You have written '...more sensitive camera module...' but it did not say that much about the pix quality - even
if that not the most important part for a intercom (it needs to be sufficient and not great necessarly).
Thanks,
INT
Last edited:
Yes INT, you are right. I had the same impression yesterday before uploading the images, the VTO3221D seems a bit out of focus. At my initial comparison in December I clearly liked the image of the VTO3221D more. Perhaps it changes in the dark.
But anyhow both are equally bad if you compare them with a “real” surveillance cam like the HDBW5231R-Z. And even the non-Starvis SD29204T-GN-W is far better.
So a second cam at the door is necessary anyhow.
For me the actually available intercoms are an interim solution. Both of the tested VTOs have the functionality I needed and work Ok. If something great shows up in future, I might change: the cables are now at and above the door.
But I doubt that there will be something in the next months thats better and without cloud.
But anyhow both are equally bad if you compare them with a “real” surveillance cam like the HDBW5231R-Z. And even the non-Starvis SD29204T-GN-W is far better.
So a second cam at the door is necessary anyhow.
For me the actually available intercoms are an interim solution. Both of the tested VTOs have the functionality I needed and work Ok. If something great shows up in future, I might change: the cables are now at and above the door.
But I doubt that there will be something in the next months thats better and without cloud.
Last edited:
Could maybe the codec make a difference here? Since by the sheer numbers VTO3221D runs out VTO2000A by roughly 50% - so it should be capable of showing more details.
May the lenses or the codec being used (bitrate?) accounts for the difference... !?
Nevertheless such intercom should not be mistaken for HD CAMs - I think. That is not their prime purpose.
Therefore I like the idea to add more 'proper' cameras - when needed.
Having said that - a so called HD camera or the like should perform according to specs.
INT
Maybe, we are also fooled by the viewing angle?!
Because: when comparing the details of the objects there are less "pixels per arc minute".
The green frame underneath shows the viewing angle of the VTO2000A in the image of the VTO3221D-P2.
So there are only 1/4 of the pixels vs. full resolution. --> 0.5 MP vs. 1.3 MP
That means mathematically there is indeed more information in the green bush - nearly three times more.
I think, what you said is exactly right and sums everything up: "... it needs to be sufficient and not great ..."
btw: PPAM - "pixels per arc minute" could be a new measuring unit
Because: when comparing the details of the objects there are less "pixels per arc minute".
The green frame underneath shows the viewing angle of the VTO2000A in the image of the VTO3221D-P2.
So there are only 1/4 of the pixels vs. full resolution. --> 0.5 MP vs. 1.3 MP
That means mathematically there is indeed more information in the green bush - nearly three times more.
I think, what you said is exactly right and sums everything up: "... it needs to be sufficient and not great ..."
btw: PPAM - "pixels per arc minute" could be a new measuring unit
Hi Steff,
well - indeed. That could also contribute to that.
One other question - how do you power your devices?
Thanks,
INT
well - indeed. That could also contribute to that.
One other question - how do you power your devices?
Thanks,
INT
I power most of my devices over POE, and for the non POE ones (e.g. the SD29204T-GN-W) I use a POE splitter/adapter.
What you can also see in the comparision picture is the effect of the maximum camera tilt the VTO2000A is capable of.
The green frame is shifted to the right.
I did turn the camera module internally to the maximum left side. I would estimate the angle is 20° or less.
Both devices were align with the wall.
What you can also see in the comparision picture is the effect of the maximum camera tilt the VTO2000A is capable of.
The green frame is shifted to the right.
I did turn the camera module internally to the maximum left side. I would estimate the angle is 20° or less.
Both devices were align with the wall.
CCTVCam
Known around here
- Sep 25, 2017
- 2,825
- 3,696
Personally I'd either leave the door opener module off, or better still use it in addition to your current physical locks. That way you have even higher security. When you come home, you unlock your physical key locks 1st then the door opener. If you have guests coming eg for a BBQ and want to look flashy, then just leave it on door opener alone. It won't matter if you're in the garden to have a lower level of security....and if like many Europeans you have Euro locks as physical locks - get them changed for something secure such as a 3 star Diamond rated anti-snap / anti bump / anti drill solution such as Brisant Ultions or ABS Avocets.
If you want to know why, this is a standard Euro Lock as fitted to most PVC doors, even brand new ones:
My neighbour was recently burgled using this method - less than 10 secs to get in. BTW I'm not giving anything away here, there are multiple videos on Youtube showing exactly how to exploit this method from beginning to end. It's well known amongst thieves. It's now the number 1 method of entry in the UK and as the name suggest, Euro lock, these are pretty standard across Europe.
Ultions and Avocets prevent this method of entry.
I agree. Out of the 2 I'd choose the VTO2000A every time based on those pictures. Any deficit in night vision is easily alleviated by a good LED security light and sensor at night.
Last edited:
Thank CCTVcam for your input on the lock security. You are right before unscrewing the intercom and shorten there the right connectors the burglars will use brute force to get in.
Ok, the decision on picture quality is a personal preference.
But keep in mind that the devices also have also other pros and cons.
Also the bottleneck for the image quality in normal use is the intercom monitor which has usually a resolution of 800x480.
Ok, the decision on picture quality is a personal preference.
But keep in mind that the devices also have also other pros and cons.
Also the bottleneck for the image quality in normal use is the intercom monitor which has usually a resolution of 800x480.
@Steff
That's for sure but you might use other devices with higher resolutions as well - but heck it's a doorbell!
The pix quality good also be a result of compression artifacts.. or some motion of the camera - when the pix was taken etc.
Are these images photos or extracted from a movie clip?
As for mifare reader - do you use it?
Are you aware what kind of chips are needed?
Thanks,
INT
The pics were taken via snapshot function in iDMSS. I tried to set the bitrate to 2000 or higher and also to the highest resolution over my NVR - but these parameters seems to keep changing automatically anyhow.
I tried the MIFARE reader some weeks ago - just to test it. It works fine. One of my credit cards was working directly with it. I issued the card via the web interface of the VTO. Also some cheap MIFARE key fobs from ebay did work well.
The card reader still works fine. But I don’t have it in use, due to the relay being integrated in the device itself. Of course, bridging the relay is more a theoretical security hole, and also there is a sabotage switch in the VTO that can be integrated to cut off the relay from the door opener. But mainly I didn’t had the need to use it - I rely on my bidirectionally coded remote control to operate the door lock.
I tried the MIFARE reader some weeks ago - just to test it. It works fine. One of my credit cards was working directly with it. I issued the card via the web interface of the VTO. Also some cheap MIFARE key fobs from ebay did work well.
The card reader still works fine. But I don’t have it in use, due to the relay being integrated in the device itself. Of course, bridging the relay is more a theoretical security hole, and also there is a sabotage switch in the VTO that can be integrated to cut off the relay from the door opener. But mainly I didn’t had the need to use it - I rely on my bidirectionally coded remote control to operate the door lock.
Hi @Steff
Ok. I might try then some cheap MIFARE chips as well. And good to know that cards etc. can be issued with the VTO, so no other hardware required really.
That the replay is in the VTO could be defect in design really. But I wonder if the sabotage switch also disables the relay in a sense that it can be triggered etc.
I doubt it...
INT
Ok. I might try then some cheap MIFARE chips as well. And good to know that cards etc. can be issued with the VTO, so no other hardware required really.
That the replay is in the VTO could be defect in design really. But I wonder if the sabotage switch also disables the relay in a sense that it can be triggered etc.
I doubt it...
INT
@int ,
Yes, I'm still happy. The setup has most of the features I want/need.
The user interface on the VTH feels a bit dated and is a little bit confusing/complicated. The VTO browser accessibility is the usual pain ...
Unfortunately there is no access on the VTH1560CS via browser, changing the settings is only possible via the device itself.
There are still some little quirks, e.g. the VTO2000A requires that user and password are the same phrase and are not too long - othervise it can not be entered in the VTH.
The main feature of the VTO3211D-P2 I need is the notification via iDMSS, this works very reliably.
All in all it's sufficient and I would buy it again.
Yes, I'm still happy. The setup has most of the features I want/need.
The user interface on the VTH feels a bit dated and is a little bit confusing/complicated. The VTO browser accessibility is the usual pain ...
Unfortunately there is no access on the VTH1560CS via browser, changing the settings is only possible via the device itself.
There are still some little quirks, e.g. the VTO2000A requires that user and password are the same phrase and are not too long - othervise it can not be entered in the VTH.
The main feature of the VTO3211D-P2 I need is the notification via iDMSS, this works very reliably.
All in all it's sufficient and I would buy it again.
Hi @Steff ,
thanks for sharing your opinion here. I hope eventually I'll be happy with it like you!
Thanks,
INT
Crazykiller
Getting comfortable
Hey @Steff,
What did you do to get push notifications working? I have no problems with push notifications from my NVR, but the VTO3211 does not send anything
Crazykiller
Getting comfortable
That’s bad. Thought would be possible with the VTO itself, maybe depending on the user/pass you are using in iDMSS which is linked to the corresponding button.
Hi @Steff,
I have still nada of it - I hope I'll get the stuff in the upcoming weeks. I just tried to connect you and @Crazykiller - who did not get to work.
But now we understand the reason. The notification seems to be triggered by the VTH - not the VTO.
Mhmhmmm...
So the VTO3211 is not meant to be standalone really,
Thanks,
INT
Last edited: