Thoughts after upgrading from 3MP turret to 4MP dome

[klasipca]

I have a bunch of 2.8mm 3MP Hikvision cameras and just received my first English versions of 4MP domes. I've used 3MP turret as my garage cam and just finished replacing with one of the domes. My initial thoughts are favorable, but overall not a huge leap forward after almost 2 years using 3MP cameras. I might stick with 3MP a bit longer until next iterations of sensors.

1. Image quality day time: I don't see any improvement at all besides the extra resolution. More detail, but noise grain is still there, also if you go above 60 in noise reduction there is bad image ghosting which something I did not notice in my 3MP cameras as much
2. Wifi: Most folks probably don't use that, but I do in some cams and it's a bummer because for some reason on a new dome it's limited to only 54 Mbps link while all other 3MP I have have 150 Mbps link. Bottom line it's unusable unless frame rate is reduced and close enough the router
3. Night time. The only noticeable improvement here with less noise and more detail in the night time image, but still only good for close objects. IRs are rated at 30 meters on both, but dome outperforms turret with it's higher sensitivity sensor.
4. Mounting. After struggling to mount the dome I am favoring turret because I couldn't mount dome on the exterior wall at a angle without needing to buy additional accessories.
5. FOV: someone mentioned that 4MP has larger field of view vs 3MP, but I did not notice that.

Nothing else that was out of the ordinary

 

[gwminor48]

Thanks for that, a lot of us are curious about experiences with the 4MP's, turrets, and domes.

 

[whoslooking]

Any of the white balance issues others are reporting (flashing).??

 

[klasipca]

I do not have any flashing. Does it happen under certain conditions?

 

[LittleBrother]

After reviewing some pics in the long Hikvision 4 MP thread I soon realized I had no yearning for them at all. If buying new and the price is okay, sure--they are better--but spending time/money on upgrading from the 3 to 4 isn't compelling to me. As you said, the differences are not substantial. The 3 MP are just so good at their price.

 

[NVR]

Can a single camera produce images that would require more then 54mbps? Thats a lot of bandwidth.

 

[klasipca]

The further you are from the router the less bandwidth you get. Btw, the specs are listing 150 Mbps, so I am not sure if it's firmware bug or spec issue.

 

[aster1x]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-definition_television

Can a single camera produce images that would require more then 54mbps? Thats a lot of bandwidth.

Currently there are no commercial cameras at a reasonable cost (shall we say cheaper than 10.000$ ??) that can produce a video stream of 54Mbps. Technically it is possible to produce a sensor of 15Mpixels but the stream bandwidth (and video quality) would be limited to approximately 10Mbps. Remember that the maximum video stream bandwidth of the blu ray movies is 50Mbps and that is considered today as High Definition.

The next step up in quality is the Ultra HD Blu Ray that will be able to handle streams of 4K resolution (quievalent to 8Mpixels), up to 60 frames per second (from the today standard of 24fps), the blu ray media will store up to 100GBytes (from today of 50GBytes) and 128Mbps decoding AV stream (from todays 50Mbps AV stream of the blu ray medium).

So you see the high video quality of Blu ray medium will never be streamed as it is financially no feasible. When the fiber optics based connectivity will be become ubiquitous, then we may be demand for AV streams of say 50 Mbps.

Further reading on the standars comparison and spcifications can be found in the links at the beginnng of my post.

 

[tradertim]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-definition_television



Currently there are no commercial cameras at a reasonable cost (shall we say cheaper than 10.000$ ??) that can produce a video stream of 54Mbps. Technically it is possible to produce a sensor of 15Mpixels but the stream bandwidth (and video quality) would be limited to approximately 10Mbps. Remember that the maximum video stream bandwidth of the blu ray movies is 50Mbps and that is considered today as High Definition.

The next step up in quality is the Ultra HD Blu Ray that will be able to handle streams of 4K resolution (quievalent to 8Mpixels), up to 60 frames per second (from the today standard of 24fps), the blu ray media will store up to 100GBytes (from today of 50GBytes) and 128Mbps decoding AV stream (from todays 50Mbps AV stream of the blu ray medium).

So you see the high video quality of Blu ray medium will never be streamed as it is financially no feasible. When the fiber optics based connectivity will be become ubiquitous, then we may be demand for AV streams of say 50 Mbps.

Further reading on the standars comparison and spcifications can be found in the links at the beginnng of my post.

Guys you dont get that 54mbps or 150mbps throughput its theoretical.

Distance away from the router, timber, concrete walls, neighbors using the same wifi channels all affect the useable throughput. Oh microwaves , and other rf interference.

The reason why wifi connectivity is the last resort.

Things you can do to help.

1. Use the andriod wifi analyser to check your signal strength in the position. Before mounting. Also check your neighbors channels and move away from them so you have a channel to yourself.
2. Buy a more expensive router like a netgear not all routers are equal.
3. If theres power near by consider using homeplug ethernet over power line back to the router.
4. Limit the number of wifi devices concurrent.

 

[goessensj]

Thank you for you insight in the 4MP cameras.

Can you explain the following more please:
3. Night time. The only noticeable improvement here with less noise and more detail in the night time image, but still only good for close objects. IRs are rated at 30 meters on both, but dome outperforms turret with it's higher sensitivity sensor.

Why is the dome outperforming the turrets? I would expect the opposite?
Or do you mean 4MP dome outperforms 3MP turret?

 

[klasipca]

Basically I was referring to the cams I have 4mp dome > 3 mp turret > 3 mp mini dome in night time performance. The new 4mp turret with 0.01 should perform the same.

 

[bp2008]

Guys you dont get that 54mbps or 150mbps throughput its theoretical.

Distance away from the router, timber, concrete walls, neighbors using the same wifi channels all affect the useable throughput. Oh microwaves , and other rf interference.

The reason why wifi connectivity is the last resort.

Things you can do to help.

1. Use the andriod wifi analyser to check your signal strength in the position. Before mounting. Also check your neighbors channels and move away from them so you have a channel to yourself.
2. Buy a more expensive router like a netgear not all routers are equal.
3. If theres power near by consider using homeplug ethernet over power line back to the router.
4. Limit the number of wifi devices concurrent.

You are quite right. To make things worse, a cam with a slower connection must spend more time transmitting, and only one device can be transmitting at a time. This is why so many people destroy the performance of their entire WiFi network with just one or two cams that have a poor signal. The poor signal cams force the network into low speed mode and transmit for a huge amount of time, so there isn't enough time left for the rest of the devices to do what they want.

Also to add to your point #1, channel selection can be fairly complicated. No WiFi network uses only one channel! They actually use many neighboring channels besides the one you set in the configuration. The best and simplest advice is to only use channels 1, 6, or 11, no matter what your intuition tells you. Even if you see networks already on channels 1, 6, and 11, do not choose one of the in-between channels. If you choose for example channel 9, you will get interference from both channels 6 and 11. And you will interfere with both of them. You would still be better off using channel 1, 6, or 11, even though there is already a network on each of those. If you are very lucky, everyone around you is accidentally also following this rule.

Also, do not let your router use 40 MHz channel width unless you have no neighbors. This causes your router to use 2/3 of the available radio spectrum, dramatically increasing your chances of being interfered with and of interfering with others. Furthermore, most spectrum analyzer apps will show a 40 MHz network as a 20 MHz network, so you might not even see the problem! Have a look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WLAN_channels#2.4.C2.A0GHz_.28802.11b.2Fg.2Fn.29

 

[goessensj]

You are quite right. To make things worse, a cam with a slower connection must spend more time transmitting, and only one device can be transmitting at a time. This is why so many people destroy the performance of their entire WiFi network with just one or two cams that have a poor signal. The poor signal cams force the network into low speed mode and transmit for a huge amount of time, so there isn't enough time left for the rest of the devices to do what they want.

Also to add to your point #1, channel selection can be fairly complicated. No WiFi network uses only one channel! They actually use many neighboring channels besides the one you set in the configuration. The best and simplest advice is to only use channels 1, 6, or 11, no matter what your intuition tells you. Even if you see networks already on channels 1, 6, and 11, do not choose one of the in-between channels. If you choose for example channel 9, you will get interference from both channels 6 and 11. And you will interfere with both of them. You would still be better off using channel 1, 6, or 11, even though there is already a network on each of those. If you are very lucky, everyone around you is accidentally also following this rule.

Also, do not let your router use 40 MHz channel width unless you have no neighbors. This causes your router to use 2/3 of the available radio spectrum, dramatically increasing your chances of being interfered with and of interfering with others. Furthermore, most spectrum analyzer apps will show a 40 MHz network as a 20 MHz network, so you might not even see the problem! Have a look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WLAN_channels#2.4.C2.A0GHz_.28802.11b.2Fg.2Fn.29

IMG

Also, invest in a dual band router and move your 5Ghz capable devices to the 5Ghz band.
Interesting software is inSSIDer for laptops and Wifi Analyzer for Android (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.farproc.wifi.analyzer&hl=nl)

 

[klasipca]

I use Netgear r8000. It's a triple band router. 2.4Ghz band reserved just for wireless IP Cams. (Currently 5 running) and everything else is broken down between other two bands. The best router overall I've ever owned to handle heavy wireless traffic.

 

[aaronwt]

Setup multiple APs. That is required for a properly setup WiFi network. I can stream continuously from my nine 3MP Hikvision and three 1MP HooToo cameras all day with zero issues over WiFi. Whether wired or wireless(2.4Ghz and 5Ghz) the performance is identical. But I also have four Access Points. To make sure my dozens of wireless devices always have excellent signal strength, no congestion or saturation issues. And no interference issues.

 

[NVR]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-definition_television



Currently there are no commercial cameras at a reasonable cost (shall we say cheaper than 10.000$ ??) that can produce a video stream of 54Mbps. Technically it is possible to produce a sensor of 15Mpixels but the stream bandwidth (and video quality) would be limited to approximately 10Mbps. Remember that the maximum video stream bandwidth of the blu ray movies is 50Mbps and that is considered today as High Definition.

The next step up in quality is the Ultra HD Blu Ray that will be able to handle streams of 4K resolution (quievalent to 8Mpixels), up to 60 frames per second (from the today standard of 24fps), the blu ray media will store up to 100GBytes (from today of 50GBytes) and 128Mbps decoding AV stream (from todays 50Mbps AV stream of the blu ray medium).

So you see the high video quality of Blu ray medium will never be streamed as it is financially no feasible. When the fiber optics based connectivity will be become ubiquitous, then we may be demand for AV streams of say 50 Mbps.

Further reading on the standars comparison and spcifications can be found in the links at the beginnng of my post.

Hey Aster, I was referring to a single 4mp camera, since thats what the OP has and was dissatisfied with the 54Mbps limitation.