Mini-Review - 5842-Z4E-S3 AKA B58IR-Z4E S3 - Replacement to the 5842-Z4E (8MP on the 1/1.8" sensor)

[wittaj]

Given the improvements that Dahua has made with the 5442 S3 series and the incredible night performance improvements, time to see if putting 8MP on the same size sensor results in a degradation or improved performance, so compliments of @EMPIRETECANDY we have one to do a side-by-side comparison.

I previously did a mini-review of the 5442-Z4E-S3 here, so now it is time for the 5442-Z4E comparison between the new 4MP and 8MP versions.

Many of the specs remained the same. Similar to the 5442 series with the new chipset, the minimum illumination was the biggest change:

Minimum Illumination old 5842-Z4E:
0.002Lux/F1.5 ( Color,1/3s,30IRE)
0.020Lux/F1.5 ( Color,1/30s,30IRE)
0Lux/F1.5 (IR on) IR Distance Distance up to 200m (656ft)

Minimum Illumination new 5842-Z4E-S3:
0.0008 lux @ F1.6 (Color, 30 IRE)
0.0004 lux @ F1.6 (B/W, 30 IRE)
0 lux (Illuminator on)

And by comparison, the minimum Illumination 5442-Z4E-S3:
0.0007 lux @ F1.5 (Color, 30 IRE)
0.0004 lux @ F1.5 (B/W, 30 IRE)
0 lux (Illuminator on)

This new version can be purchased from @EMPIRETECANDY at his website or his Amazon page.

Similar to the B54IR-Z4E S3, it sports the new GUI and all the features we expect to see with that new GUI, with two exceptions.

The 8MP version sports the ePTZ, which is a cool option that was demonstrated on this YouTube video and is certainly a nice feature if you are using the camera as a standalone with an SD card or with a capable NVR (not all NVRs can process this feature and at the moment neither can Blue Iris).

Interesting enough, for audio triggers, this one is missing the ability to trigger based on a gun or explosion. Not sure why they would remove that feature compared to the 4MP version. Do keep in mind this option only works if you have an external mic. While the camera has an internal mic (that is really good), this function does not work with the built-in mic.

Speaking of audio, I wanted to start with this. For some reason, and folks like @tigerwillow1 will enjoy, is that this camera picks up animals with MD. I had the 4MP and 8MP version side-by-side seeing the same field of view and only the 8MP version triggered for a fox. But turn up the volume and you can hear the fox "foot steps" on the grass just before it enters the scene on the pavement.

Further, it is one of the best pictures I have got of wildlife, so the 8MP is certainly helping. This is at 75 feet away from the camera and I am shocked how well the image is and that you could hear the fox stepping along the grass.

View attachment fox.mp4










Now lets take a look at some side-by-side-by-side comparisons of the old 5442-Z4E versus the new 5442-Z4E-S3 and the new 5842-Z4E-S3, first in the daytime.

Here is the old 5442-Z4E. Decent picture but I purposely chose this time of day due to the lighting. I purposely chose not to run WDR, so I accepted there would be some minor issues at certain times of the day, but not deal killers.



Here is the new 5442-Z4E-S3. As I pointed out in the previous review of this camera, it appears like the camera is auto using some backlight condition in certain situations. While the image is crisper as you can tell by comparing the numbers, the image has a tad of the washout appearance that we get when running too high WDR or some other backlight. Not a deal killer, but it is more difficult to dial in for accurate color representation.




And then the 8MP 5842-Z4E-S3. Although it is running the same firmware as the 5442-Z4E, it seems to do a better job with color representation and doesn't have that washout appearance that the 4MP version has. Maybe the extra 4MP is helping when there is enough light?




As @Parley has documented in the other Z4E mini-review thread, there is a learning curve with these new S3 cameras, not only with the new GUI (that I am comfortable with now), but also the settings for these are completely different because it needs so much less light then the previous generation. What previously needed additional external infrared is probably not needed now with the S3 models.

However, and this goes with what we mention about chasing sensor size and not MP and that between two cameras on the same sensor size, the lower MP will do better at nighttime, this still holds true between the 8MP and 4MP version in certain circumstances.

The thing that impressed me the most about the 5442-Z4E-S3 was how fast I could run the shutter at night and get a usable image. I run it at 1/500 shutter and get an incredible image:



However, running the 8MP version at a 1/500 shutter, it struggles, not only with a static image, but with motion:



While that is probably an incredible image for a 1/500 shutter with the prior cameras we are used to, compared to the new 5442-Z4E-S3, it just is no match at a faster shutter speed. I would not use this camera for LPR. No matter what I tried, it always appeared to be slightly out of focus and dancing pixels at the faster speeds.

I think they have optimized and tweaked every ounce of potential out of the sensor and firmware and gets incredible results from the 4MP but struggles at the additional pixels for the same amount of light on the same size sensor for the 8MP.

So then I decided to try to figure out how much could the 8MP be pushed before degradation would occur.

I found that if your use case needs a shutter that is 1/150 or slower, you can probably benefit from the additional MP. That fox example was a perfect example.



Here is an example of a runner with a 1/120 shutter. You can see I still have some work to do as he is washed out a bit, but it is an image at 65 feet with 8MP at 1/120 shutter that we would have been hard pressed to acquire with older 8MP cameras.




So like every camera, it comes down to the use case.

When in doubt, I would still opt for the lower MP on the same size sensor, but improvements to sensors and firmware is starting to close that gap on the higher end cameras.

Personally, I would not use the B5814-Z4E-S3 for anything needing faster than say a 1/150 shutter if you are only going to use the built-in infrared. So I would not use it for LPR purposes.

But if your primary objective and goal is to capture items that a 1/120 shutter can capture, it is a great improvement. The additional MP can aid with some digital zoom as I was playing with zooming out and capturing parked car plates as an example.

The fact that MD caught a fox is an added bonus!

 

[wittaj]

Here is the nighttime color comparison between the 4MP and 8MP version.

My lighting are just 4 of the standard outside house lights (3 bulbs each) with these light bulbs in them.

The 4MP at 1/60 shutter



The 8MP at 1/60 shutter




The 4MP at 1/120 shutter:



The 8MP at 1/120 shutter:




The 4MP at 1/250 shutter:



The 8MP at 1/250 shutter:




So like everything, depends on your use case. For people and wildlife, a 1/60 shutter in color is probably ok.

If you need faster shutters, then your best bet is going to be infrared.

 

[wittaj]

Reserved #2

 

[Parley]

Thank you for the review. I assume you are going to do a nighttime color comparison.

 

[wittaj]

Thank you for the review. I assume you are going to do a nighttime color comparison.

I can certainly try that. When I did the review of the 4MP old versus new, I could run the new Z4E-S3 at 1/300 shutter in color before it started whacking out (compared to 1/125 on the prior model).

With the 8MP, 1/250 shutter had too much of that wave going thru it and lots of choppy noise that it was sending off the MD all night so I didn't go any further. I will try a 1/120 color or at what speed before that wave pattern is too much.

 

[Parley]

I can certainly try that. When I did the review of the 4MP old versus new, I could run the new Z4E-S3 at 1/300 shutter in color before it started whacking out (compared to 1/125 on the prior model).

With the 8MP, 1/250 shutter had too much of that wave going thru it and lots of choppy noise that it was sending off the MD all night so I didn't go any further. I will try a 1/120 color or at what speed before that wave pattern is too much.

Excellent. Changing the shutter speed will show the limits and the possible uses of the camera. I like your approach.

 

[tigerwillow1]

this camera picks up animals with MD.

Do you mean smart motion detection, dumb motion detection, or IVS? Have they perhaps allowed the Object Filter to be really turned off? On one hand I'm excited to hear this, on the other hand I fear what my wife will do to me if I buy another camera anytime soon.

 

[wittaj]

Do you mean smart motion detection, dumb motion detection, or IVS? Have they perhaps allowed the Object Filter to be really turned off? On one hand I'm excited to hear this, on the other hand I fear what my wife will do to me if I buy another camera anytime soon.

You were the first person I thought of when I saw that fox!

Because of the zoom I am using, I am using just plain dumb motion detection as the IVS wouldn't trigger for a car.

Sadly the Object Filter is still the same and cannot really be turned off for IVS rules. When I turned it off and had zoomed out, the IVS was still only triggering for people and cars.

But like I said, not sure what the difference is since the 8MP and the 4MP use the same firmware, but the 8MP triggers for animals and the 4MP didn't for the same field of view. The only thing I can think of is the ePTZ maybe allows for the firmware to trigger for more things (although probably not intentional)?

 

[wittaj]

Thank you for the review. I assume you are going to do a nighttime color comparison.

Updated Post #2 with the night color testing.

 

[EMPIRETECANDY]

Thanks @wittaj this 4K camera mainly for poeple who want high resolution day and night, can be great for long range watching.
Daytime pic the 4k sure better than the 4mp one.
this 4K camera can do bit well now at low light place, but compare to 4MP at very low light place, the 4mp is the winner.

 

[alekk]

Updated Post #2 with the night color testing.

GREAT examples showing the difference - well done!
Ditto what you (and @EMPIRETECANDY ) said about how they are for different use cases.

Gotta say I'm surprised to see that, because while the 8MP camera has smaller size pixels, the overall sensor size is the same (yes?) so assuming all those pics were taken with the same field of view, one would think when you downsample the 8MP, that they would be close in quality. But even though the lux specs are almost identical, the 4MP crushes the 8MP in low light.

One wonders what a 2MP camera (with same specs) would show. Would love to see Dahua come out with a "light-sucker" (vari-focal 2MP, F1.0, and 1/1.2" (good) sensor) that would be a killer product IMHO! ;-)

 

[tigerwillow1]

I've come to be very skeptical of the lux specs. They have looked very bogus in a couple of side-by-side tests I did. The 2MP cams with the 1/2.8 sensor, the 4MP with 1/1.8 sensor, and the 8MP with 1/1.2 sensor all have the same pixel size, yet the 4MP cams crush the 2MP cams in low light, and I think* the 8MP cams crush the 4MP cams. I'm chalking it up to technology improvements as the sensors get newer. The * is because I haven't done a squeaky clean comparison between 4MP 1/1.8 and 8MP 1/1.2 cameras.

 

[wittaj]

GREAT examples showing the difference - well done!
Ditto what you (and @EMPIRETECANDY ) said about how they are for different use cases.

Gotta say I'm surprised to see that, because while the 8MP camera has smaller size pixels, the overall sensor size is the same (yes?) so assuming all those pics were taken with the same field of view, one would think when you downsample the 8MP, that they would be close in quality. But even though the lux specs are almost identical, the 4MP crushes the 8MP in low light.

One wonders what a 2MP camera (with same specs) would show. Would love to see Dahua come out with a "light-sucker" (vari-focal 2MP, F1.0, and 1/1.2" (good) sensor) that would be a killer product IMHO! ;-)

Downrezing a camera does not work - It is still using the 8 million pixels - the camera doesn't change the "pixel resolution screen" on the camera when you go from 8MP to 4MP. The sensor still needs 2 times the light going from 8MP to 4MP, so the native 4MP camera will result in a better image at night than downrezing an 8MP. The firmware will make some algorithm attempt at downrezing it, but it could be a complete crap image or a somewhat usable image, but if there is a concern that the 8MP isn't performing or wouldn't perform well at night, then it is better to go with the 4MP.

In most instances, you want to get a camera that will perform at your location for the worse situation, which for most of us is at night when it is dark and there is little to no light. If a camera performs at night, it is easier to tweak settings to make it work during the day than it is the other way around.

My 2MP cameras outperform my neighbors 4K (8MP) cameras at night....why....because they are both on the same size sensor.

When we had a thief come thru here and get into a lot of cars, the police couldn't use one video or photo from anyone's system but mine. Not even my other neighbors $1,300 8MP system provided useful info other than what time it happened - the cams just didn't cut it at night.

My neighbor tried the "I will just downrez the 8MP to 2MP" and the image was a soft dark mess.

His system wasn't even a year old and after that event has started replacing with cameras purchased from Andy based on my recommendation and seeing my results. He is still shocked a 2MP camera performs better than his 4k cameras and he cannot figure out why downrezing from 8MP to 2MP doesn't work properly... It is all about the amount of light needed and getting the right camera for the right location and downrezing doesn't change the physics of the camera.

 

[wittaj]

I've come to be very skeptical of the lux specs. They have looked very bogus in a couple of side-by-side tests I did. The 2MP cams with the 1/2.8 sensor, the 4MP with 1/1.8 sensor, and the 8MP with 1/1.2 sensor all have the same pixel size, yet the 4MP cams crush the 2MP cams in low light, and I think* the 8MP cams crush the 4MP cams. I'm chalking it up to technology improvements as the sensors get newer. The * is because I haven't done a squeaky clean comparison between 4MP 1/1.8 and 8MP 1/1.2 cameras.

Regarding minimum illumination (LUX rating), many do not pay attention to the minimum illumination specs...because those are under ideal situations with so many factors not known.

Almost every camera will say 0 LUX with infrared or white LED on, and we all know how poorly Reolinks perform at night in low light yet that is their spec....or even two different good cameras. Take for example the 5442 4MP2.8mm fixed lens camera will beat the socks off the 5241 2MP 2.8mm fixed lens or a Reolink and they both say 0 Lux with IR on.

Heck darn near every camera will say 0 LUX with IR on....

Once upon a time manufacturers would at least say at what shutter speed that rating was based on. Most would say a 1/3 shutter. That is way to slow for anything. You need to run minimum 1/60 shutter to start to minimize blur.

But now they don't even provide that, so in most cases it is a wide open iris, slowest shutter the camera allows, and gain and brightness cranked to 100 so that they can get the lowest illumination number possible.

But nobody would run the camera in that configuration.

Some of the older cameras would give these kind of specs so you knew how the camera was setup to come up with the minimum illumination.

0.002Lux/F1.5 ( Color,1/3s,30IRE)
0.020Lux/F1.5 ( Color,1/30s,30IRE)
0Lux/F1.5 (IR on)

So of course, the faster the shutter, the more light that is needed, and thus the LUX needed is more. It would be nice if they still provided it in this manner.

To minimize blur with motion, you need to run a shutter at at least 1/60 shutter - once you start doing that, the LUX specs are out the window.

But as more competition came out, manufacturers started playing games and tweaking the settings for getting the lowest lux possible, but that came at a cost of a configuration nobody would use. So they wouldn't say how the camera was configured to capture that minimum illumination rating.

They play these marketing games to make it look like the camera is better than it is for someone that is just chasing minimum illumination numbers. Kind of like how we rarely get the miles per gallon a car is rated for.

It is a tool, but I would prefer to see the reviews here with settings provided and make an educated guess as to if my light is more or less than the reviewer.

The same here with these two cameras. On paper the LUX ratings are basically the same, yet performance in real life testing is very different.

If I run both of these on auto settings, then yeah the static image will look about the same brightness and the 8MP will provide better detail and digital zoom, but motion would be a hot mess for both of them. It isn't until you start adjusting cameras to minimize blur that you find out how they really perform with little light.

 

[wittaj]

I mention in the post above about how the LUX ratings are developed and why most of us don't put a lot of stock in them, so I wanted to show what each camera looks like with auto/default settings at night to demonstrate how bright the static image can look, but it would result in total motion blur. But it is at these auto settings that the LUX ratings are developed, and some manufacturers may even tweak it more to give the best numbers.

4MP with outside lights on



8MP with outside lights on


The field of view is off just a tad, but look how much nicer the 8MP looks compared to the 4MP. Look at the leaves and grass around the sign post as an example to the differences.


4MP with outside lights off and just some holiday string lights on



8MP with outside lights off and just some holiday string lights on


Here is where you start to see the 4MP perform better than the 8MP in the lower light conditions in color.

But most of use would not run these cameras on auto/default setting unless it was strictly as an overview camera and we didn't care about motion blur.

This shows why most of us don't put much value in the LUX ratings. They are a tool, but not the definitive and it is best to see examples like folks here post where we speed up the shutters to get clean captures and then you decide how similar the amount of lighting they have compares to your field of view.

As a reference, here is what motion looks like on auto/default settings, which also shows that even a great camera on default settings will produce poor images and is why we stress to dial the settings in to your field of view and light and goals of the camera:

 

[bigredfish]

Good stuff on the Review @wittaj , thanks.

 

[wittaj]

Do you mean smart motion detection, dumb motion detection, or IVS? Have they perhaps allowed the Object Filter to be really turned off? On one hand I'm excited to hear this, on the other hand I fear what my wife will do to me if I buy another camera anytime soon.

Just for you another animal capture that this one got that the 4MP version didn't with plain ole Motion Detection. And up in the corner of the image as well. Go figure LOL

 

[tigerwillow1]

My problem isn't that dumb motion detection doesn't catch animals. It's that during the day it triggers on every moving shadow, drop of rain, or flake of snow. At night every insect that flies through triggers it. What I want to see gets buried in the noise. Instead of the NVR timeline being mostly green, it becomes mostly yellow. I've not had any success trying to tune sensitivity or threshold. There's no substitute for dumb IVS!

 

[bigredfish]

I have dumb MD along with IVS running at night on the back porch and near the front door. Works pretty good unless I get a bug orgy.
Both locations are under roof and recessed so not usually a problem.

The second clip took me a bit to figure out. MD missed it but sound detection picked it up. Take that back, MD DID get it

View attachment Home_ch4_20231213011254_20231213011313.mp4
















View attachment Home_ch4_20231113022548_20231113022600.mp4

 

[samplenhold]

Works pretty good unless I get a bug orgy.

Bug Orgy - IPCAMTALK Technical Term.