Review - Dahua SD49225XA-HNR 2MP 25x Starlight + IR PTZ AI Camera with Deep IVS & SMD Plus

[Masejoer]

Digging through Dahua's web site for this camera does not show any limitation for PTZ cycles. I mean if I have a hard drive that is still working after 16 years, with that mechanical arm moving back and forth over the platters 24x7, then really, a properly designed PTZ should last many years as well. To have some hard coded artificial limit is ludicrous. Imagine the uproar if Tesla disabled your car's steering after it was out of warranty, either by range or years.

Not quite apples to apples, but I'd imagine this cycle count is from their own fears of grease migration. I doubt they have a long-life lubrication system. This is why I believe that manual servicing, if the user wishes to do so (may or may not be complcated to access the gears), should not be hindered by the ptz cycle counter.

Hard drives are lubricated a bit differently. Better to compare to grease fittings on an automobile. Even "sealed for life" bearings often have grease migration and break down enough to require replacement if we're talking over 100k miles. Often "life" means 100k miles max, and many fluids "sealed for life" should be replaced well before that time.

I've purchased a few auto-tracking ptz cameras, not knowing about this counter. It would be enough to where I believe a legal case in most USA jurisdictions would side with the consumer, even beyond "warranty" (this isn't currently a warranty claim issue) if the disablement of a key selling feature wasn't disclosed before sale. The difference with Tesla is that they have the money/resources to keep trying to push off a final ruling through drawn out legal battles, and then appeals processes, and it's a financial drain on the plaintiff. A lot try to win legal cases by attrition.

 

[Ryushin]

Not quite apples to apples, but I'd imagine this cycle count is from their own fears of a grease migration. This is why I believe that manual servicing, if the user wishes to do so (may or may not be complcated to access the gears), should not be hindered by the ptz cycle counter. Hard drives are lubricated a bit differently.

Better to think about grease fittings on an automobile. Even "sealed for life" bearings often have grease migration and break down enough to require replacement if we're talking over 100k mile. Often "life" means 100k miles max.

Very true. I have no problem servicing my camera for moving parts. But I do expect it to last the full warranty as well. I also don't expect an artificial limit to be imposed. The grease migration is a good example and perhaps they should pop up a warning that the camera needs servicing or it would loose it's warranty. Once opened and serviced, there should be a little "reset" button inside to tell it that it has been serviced and to continue working in a normal manner.

 

[Masejoer]

Very true. I have no problem servicing my camera for moving parts. But I do expect it to last the full warranty as well. I also don't expect an artificial limit to be imposed. The grease migration is a good example and perhaps they should pop up a warning that the camera needs servicing or it would loose it's warranty. Once opened and serviced, there should be a little "reset" button inside to tell it that it has been serviced and to continue working in a normal manner.

You say that like the repair mindset of the world is still pre 2000

Everything everywhere wants to be throwaway culture now days. More profit for the companies selling replacement product.

I'm pretty sure your warrant on that camera, if purchased from Andy/Empire Tech, is 365 days though. It did make it through its warranty period. The product disabling a key feature is a different matter altogether though.

Edit:
This link: Important:About making order for dahua From Empiretech Andy from 2017 claims they offered a 2-year warranty. If so, then you would still have a valid warranty claim. I see 1-year on other google search results though, so I don't know. The Aliexpress store says 1-year.

I also suggest using a credit card with free warranty extension when possible. I know many add another 1-year onto the end, and some add 2-years. They can make claims/refunds very easy once you're past the original manufacturer/seller warranty, including claims due to other legalities.

 

[Ryushin]

You say that like the repair mindset of the world is still pre 2000

Everything everywhere wants to be throwaway culture now days. More profit for the companies selling replacement product.

I "expect" to be able to repair most things, and I do. From repairing the transmissions in my cars, to servicing the house A/C unit, to soldering a power connector to a motherboard that has broken. And for those "advanced" jobs I can send something in for service.... but usually only if it's under warranty, otherwise I learn to fix it myself, unless the specialized tools outweigh the cost of fixing it myself.

Hopefully Andy can have a firmware fix regarding this. If that is taken care of, then is there a source for parts and a service manual for these cameras?

Edit: Good idea about the Visa credit card. Yea, it was purchased through Amazon using a Visa card.

 

[Masejoer]

I "expect" to be able to repair most things, and I do. From repairing the transmissions in my cars, to servicing the house A/C unit, to soldering a power connector to a motherboard that has broken. And for those "advanced" jobs I can send something in for service.... but usually only if it's under warranty, otherwise I learn to fix it myself, unless the specialized tools outweigh the cost of fixing it myself.

Hopefully Andy can have a firmware fix regarding this. If that is taken care of, then is there a source for parts and a service manual for these cameras?

I understand - I choose more serviceable products myself, even if certain things require board work or microsoldering (rather than socketed or breakout boards). I imagine we'll see more of a swing the other direction over the next couple decades, but I'll be quite old by the time we potentially see repairability make a noticeable comeback.

I won't buy a Tesla, for example, and over time also removing other makes from my pool of potential vehicle purchases. Same thing about technology, or even kitchen appliances today...

Yes, I'm looking forward to input from Andy. I haven't even yet installed one of the PTZ cameras I purchased from them.

 

[sebastiantombs]

On the subject of PTZ life. If a PTZ is constantly panning/tilting and even zooming the number of cycles gets really high, really fast. For example if the camera is moved, automatically, every 15 seconds that results in over 6,000 operations every day. The mechanics of a PTZ are fairly involved so the stress, over that kind of use cycle, can get pretty high pretty quickly. The cameras we buy are not commercial/industrial at all, especially at the prices we pay. So this is another good reason not to use a PTZ on patrol as a primary camera. Use spotters and have them move the PTZ only when required. Alternately, shell out $5-10K, or more, for a commercial industrial rated PTZ camera.

 

[Masejoer]

On the subject of PTZ life. If a PTZ is constantly panning/tilting and even zooming the number of cycles gets really high, really fast. For example if the camera is moved, automatically, every 15 seconds that results in over 6,000 operations every day. The mechanics of a PTZ are fairly involved so the stress, over that kind of use cycle, can get pretty high pretty quickly. The cameras we buy are not commercial/industrial at all, especially at the prices we pay. So this is another good reason not to use a PTZ on patrol as a primary camera. Use spotters and have them move the PTZ only when required. Alternately, shell out $5-10K, or more, for a commercial industrial rated PTZ camera.

Sure, but the products as I see them being sold today would not be in accordance to laws here. If they simply showed a counter and claimed up front it's only good for X number of cycles, then I'd be on the manufacturer's side. Then we can choose to buy a different product, or use it differently.

They are still selling something that should be serviceable if it is inadequately designed for the capabilities it is sold as having. Some people, if they had known, would simply choose to not purchase the product, and this is what the law protects.

As mentioned, people on here are likely understanding as to why Dahua may have this limit set in the firmware, and we'd be willing to service the unit to extend its life, if not for the software-lockout. I'm annoyed myself in finding this out today - the lockout isn't disclosed by Dahua, or Andy. I have my cams setup for auto-tracking, but not scanning. Tracking will also use up more cycles than my old dumb ptz that just used presets and spotter cams, which was optically similar. I only purchased the auto-tracking products for their built in tracking as an improvement over my previous setup. A purchase that would not have been made if I had known my cameras may stop working in 2-3 years. A clear cut case of one of the few consumer protections we have left being enforced here, and I will follow this matter to see how it is handled by Dahua and/or Empire Tech.

 

[sebastiantombs]

I would say that a rule of thumb and by design that surveillance cameras are not designed for use maintenance. Given the speed that things change in the video surveillance market it makes no sense to do so because it only adds to product cost. Generally, cameras are obsolete long before they die, other than an overused PTZ.

I do think the software lockout is kind of dumb and just a ploy to get people to buy a replacement. On the other hand expecting it to last "forever" isn't reasonable either and the average consumer isn't going to take the camera down, take it apart and rebuild it or even perform simple maintenance.

 

[Ryushin]

On the subject of PTZ life. If a PTZ is constantly panning/tilting and even zooming the number of cycles gets really high, really fast. For example if the camera is moved, automatically, every 15 seconds that results in over 6,000 operations every day. The mechanics of a PTZ are fairly involved so the stress, over that kind of use cycle, can get pretty high pretty quickly. The cameras we buy are not commercial/industrial at all, especially at the prices we pay. So this is another good reason not to use a PTZ on patrol as a primary camera. Use spotters and have them move the PTZ only when required. Alternately, shell out $5-10K, or more, for a commercial industrial rated PTZ camera.

If there was selling feature/bullet point that mentioned a finite PTZ movement life I would have designed my system differently, probably setting up spotters as suggested or possible not doing it at all as it was going to get cost prohibitive. If this gets resolved, I'll have to factor in another eight T5442T-ZE spotters along with running all the wiring. Uggggg.

 

[Masejoer]

I would say that a rule of thumb and by design that surveillance cameras are not designed for use maintenance. Given the speed that things change in the video surveillance market it makes no sense to do so because it only adds to product cost. Generally, cameras are obsolete long before they die, other than an overused PTZ.

I do think the software lockout is kind of dumb and just a ploy to get people to buy a replacement. On the other hand expecting it to last "forever" isn't reasonable either and the average consumer isn't going to take the camera down, take it apart and rebuild it or even perform simple maintenance.

Yes, but what we think may happen, or how different product tiers are marketed, is not how the legalities work (for my area, and warranties purchased and valid in this jurisdiction). Again, if they disclosed that they'd software-lock the camera, then that's fine. People are purchasing a product, expecting a function, without any limits if they aren't disclosed. If it breaks down, fine - that's the warranty coverage. If they want to provide a 1 year warranty on a consumer product, and a 10 year on a 20x more costly commercial product, that's also fine.

There is no case I can see here to defend the manufacturer. They need to get their act together, but often don't want to due to the loss of sales, if they state the product will stop working after <condition>. This is exactly what the (local) laws prohibit. I just heard a lawyer again discussing this exact thing yesterday with another product, and an active class action lawsuit. It's a common lawsuit for higher-value items, and common class action for lower-value goods. We (society) shouldn't need to resort to either one, but it's what happens when companies do things like this, and today a LOT do. Hence the many similar legal cases.

I'm not a lawyer, and would never want to be, but my background-audio "audio books" are listening to legal talks and discussions. Some people put on videos or music, I listen to legal talk I find it all fascinating. I'm just stating what I believe Dahua is doing wrong, and that the consumer is in the right here based on precedent. I don't have anything more to add.

PS: Hopefully we get a remedy from Empire Tech. If someone is learning about this now and they wish to dispute/return the product for a full refund, they may want to contact the merchant next, often Amazon or Aliexpress, and document everything. After that, contact the payment bank or credit card. Statute of limitations would likely limit this action to around 6-years from date-of-purchase in most USA States, but earlier the better. Lastly, in small claims court fees are generally under $50 to file, if the bank or cc won't assist in the matter. Provide all prior evidence and correspondence, and it will help your case go quickly. Many times if you file in small claims, and lose, you will have difficulty bringing any followup lawsuit, so it would end there. Just figured I'd provide my opinion on the correct course of action, in appropriate order, to getting a remedy for this situation if a person wished to do so.

 

[sebastiantombs]

If all else fails, sue for what you want. Somehow I don't think that would actually work out in the end either. The costs of a suit are too high. If you won the cost of these cameras would go through the roof and they'd probably be re-engineered making them bigger heavier and even more expensive. I again say that your expectation is just not reasonable. If you drove your car in first or second gear, on the highway at 70MPH, and the motor blew out would you blame the manufacturer for not telling you that would happen?

 

[Masejoer]

If all else fails, sue for what you want. Somehow I don't think that would actually work out in the end either. The costs of a suit are too high. If you won the cost of these cameras would go through the roof and they'd probably be re-engineered making them bigger heavier and even more expensive. I again say that your expectation is just not reasonable. If you drove your car in first or second gear, on the highway at 70MPH, and the motor blew out would you blame the manufacturer for not telling you that would happen?

No, you can/should get your item cost returned. You will almost never get anything for your time (jurisdiction rules), nor legal costs, or anything beyond the value of the product unless there is injury or other financial loss that can be blamed on the product itself causing the loss. Failing to catch details of a burglar wouldn't compensate for the items stolen - the camera did not cause the loss. Even the product catching fire and damaging your home is an uphill battle that rarely goes anywhere, although the product caused the loss.

One should have a good chance of getting the cost of the product awarded. Any fees (small claims filing fee) should be out of pocket, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were cases where somehow someone got that small sum paid also.

 

[sebastiantombs]

Good luck collecting a small claim filed in a County Court from a foreign corporation.

 

[wittaj]

Well we all know the manuals could use some work and it would be nice if the Life Statistics included the cycle count and limit, but the manual does mention lifespan:

I have my cams setup for auto-tracking, but not scanning. Tracking will also use up more cycles than my old dumb ptz that just used presets and spotter cams, which was optically similar.

I don't think that is the case. I believe a cycle is a sequence of motion until it stops, and then another cycle starts. So I do not believe it will use more cycles than your dumb PTZ using the spotter cam method.

If there was selling feature/bullet point that mentioned a finite PTZ movement life I would have designed my system differently, probably setting up spotters as suggested or possible not doing it at all as it was going to get cost prohibitive. If this gets resolved, I'll have to factor in another eight T5442T-ZE spotters along with running all the wiring. Uggggg.

No need to by eight 5442-ZE cameras as spotters. Before I got this autotrack camera, I ran a poor mans autotracking. I had one overview camera (a cheap $40 at that) and cloned it 7 times in BI and then set up a preset in the PTZ to correspond to an area delineated in one of the clone cameras. It worked surprisingly well.

Not that it makes it right and wouldn't help anyone that didn't do research first, but there are several threads and posts in this forum discussing this:

New Dahua PTZ will stop working after X amount of movements

I warn You about new Dahua PTZ cams. For me: DH-SD49425XB-HNR The camera will stop Tour operation or autoPan after X amount of movement cycles. It will then go into Disabled mode and only manual movement will work. On the screen i see "Camera locked" and Tour Disabled. Few days before it showed...

ipcamtalk.com

Dahua PTZ vs motor lifespan

Hello guys, I’ve just installed my Dahua PTZ and going through the available options: scan, tour etc. My question: is it a good idea to have a continuous scan or tour (with stops in between) running all day and night? I'm worried about the camera motor packing up :) thanks

ipcamtalk.com

Question about PTZ Cameras

I've been looking at the various Dahua PTZ Cameras.. What a wide price range to pick from. But I have a question about them I'm hoping someone can answer.. Not so technical in nature. What are these camera's designed to do? I mean, the PTZ is controlled by motors yes? How long will these motors...

ipcamtalk.com

SD5A432Xa-HNR longevity warning !!! in display ?????

Hello friends ! I need your help or advice. I have had a dahuaSD5A432Xa-HNR for 2 months - new. Suddenly the camera showed longevity warning and went into a resting position. The POE power supply shows red led so too much current or another error. After swapping was the same reaction of the...

ipcamtalk.com

PTZ Locked status - tour disabled

Hello, I have a problem with DH-SD22404T-GN. After half a year of constant tour (2 presets, 15 seconds wait), camera locked PTZ options after reaching 95% of rotation times (idk what the numbers are, it's not written anywhere). I saw a few topics about it, but none of them had a solution. I...

ipcamtalk.com

Even if you went the route of going thru an authorized Dahua dealer, I do not believe it would cover this past one year as the standard warranty clearly states it doesn't cover moving parts as they are only covered for one year:

1. Standard Warranty Periods and All-Star Warranty Periods do not apply to moving parts, belts, motors, fans, wiper blades, or removable flash memory in any Product. The applicable warranty period for these items is one (1) year.

https://us.dahuasecurity.com/support/warranty-rma/

 

[Masejoer]

Good luck collecting a small claim filed in a County Court from a foreign corporation.

The jurisdiction matters, and through some purchasing routes, you are correct. Others, not so much. If the merchant and payment institution didn't work out, I'd have no problem with the small claims for purchases made on certain platforms; I wouldn't bother with Ali, but could be wrong there. I'd first read up on $500-5k claims that people post online, and how things went for them. There are plenty of people who have posted online about their outcomes when they've filed small claims cases against such sellers. With all the variables in each situation though, I would never claim "this will get you a result", but rather, "this can get you a result". Even clear-cut million or billion-dollar lawsuit verdicts don't appear to always align with the laws as they are written, with some odd interpretations.

 

[Masejoer]

Well we all know the manuals could use some work and it would be nice if the Life Statistics included the cycle count and limit, but the manual does mention lifespan:

Even if you went the route of going thru an authorized Dahua dealer, I do not believe it would cover this past one year as the standard warranty clearly states it doesn't cover moving parts as they are only covered for one year:

Even the manual doesn't say there that the function would stop working, and laws don't work on assumptions. Just stating something (ptz will stop functioning) in the manual would likely be borderline acceptable, but probably a win-able case by the manufacturer. You're correct about "warranty", but the mechanical breakdown is different from a software-lock. These are two different issues - warranty vs misrepresentation. I think they should just remove that soft-lock, then everything is hunky dory and they would be doing nothing wrong. Let it mechanically break, or have some option to accept that the camera is beyond its expected mechanical lifetime, that the user can bypass. At that point, all the warranty terms are still valid.

For cycles - tracking would continue to send new PTZ actions to the camera to track a person or vehicle,. rather than just switch to a different preset, and have it be static. I bet if I could see the values (ssh?), I'd see hundreds of events for one action/tracking, versus one (or three) command for a spotter-cam/ptz-preset movement.

Anyway, awaiting input from Andy.

 

[Ryushin]

I really don't want to warranty the cams as they are working really well for me. I really just want the artificial PTZ limit removed and the ability to repair the camera.

 

[Masejoer]

I really don't want to warranty the cams as they are working really well for me. I really just want the artificial PTZ limit removed and the ability to repair the camera.

Same - I do like my cameras, and I expect more longevity since I don't scan, but this was just a shock to hear about.

I'm also not trying to throw legal-this or that too much into here - just stating why I believe Dahua needs to do right by the consumer (and law) here. From what interactions I've had and seen from Andy, I wouldn't be surprised if they reach out to Dahua to ask about getting a modified firmware due to this situation. I'd be looking for both SD49425XB and SD5A425XA (with the ptz-crash-fix version of latter's firmware).

 

[fresnoboy]

I didn't have a longevity warning on my unit, but it stopped sending video at 11:47AM, and it doesn't even sync for POE on the switch. I inspected the wiring, and don't see any damage, nor does moving it to another port on the switch doesn't result a power up either.

It looks like it just died, which is a bother. Are hardware problems with this unit common/ It wasn't doing any patroling, and the climate here in the SF Bay area is very mild.

 

[wittaj]

I didn't have a longevity warning on my unit, but it stopped sending video at 11:47AM, and it doesn't even sync for POE on the switch. I inspected the wiring, and don't see any damage, nor does moving it to another port on the switch doesn't result a power up either.

It looks like it just died, which is a bother. Are hardware problems with this unit common/ It wasn't doing any patroling, and the climate here in the SF Bay area is very mild.

I think it is uncommon, but any electrical device is subject to whack out at any time. It could have been a power surge, but more than likely it is probably a failing power supply or corrosion you cannot see. Did you use dielectric grease on the connections and waterproof it more than the "waterproofing" contraption it comes with?

Did you try a different power supply? Or the 12VDC power option?