Just an update... I did get the Reolink cameras working. Turned out to be a bonehead error on my part (trying to enter a password when it should have been blank). The fixed lens cameras are fine. The 4x optical zoom autofocus is a bit off and no way to manually correct it. It focuses and then goes a little past. More frustration as I expect perfection.
Trouble connecting 'some' Reolink cameras
- Thread starter dragoneggs
- Start date
J Sigmo
Known around here
- Feb 5, 2018
- 996
- 1,336
Actually, NTSC versus PAL is irrelevant if you're using the IP connection. But Andy may have them with NTSC firmware already installed, or you can probably download and install an NTSC version for most of these cameras. But again, I dont think you will ever notice any difference for our purposes.
J Sigmo
Known around here
- Feb 5, 2018
- 996
- 1,336
Play with at least one of the Reolinks for a while. And get at least one of the Dahua cameras we were looking at above for comparison. My Reolinks work fine in daylight, but they're noisy at night. The Dahua starlights, by comparison are pretty good even in low light.
You can temporarily mount some of them to test coverage and see how they all perform before doing permanent mounting.
I'm not sure what you can do about the faulty autofocus. It seems like they'd use some kind of contrast detection autofocus. And that seems like it would be totally forgiving of slight mechanical assembly errors. So it almost seems like it would be a firmware issue. But who knows!
Thanks J. I have a Dahua Starlight 2Mp on order. Will do a side by side. Assuming I see a big difference at night, I will likely add another Starlight to cover my entrance areas and stick with the cheapo Reolink for the less critical and less active areas.
fenderman
Staff member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 36,892
- 21,408
As explained the reolink will miss video if you are using motion detection. It won't miss it all the time but i can assure you with certainty that it will miss it the one time you need it. Why you would want to keep them is beyond me.
Don't worry, I am probably moving towards your recommendations. I still have some unboxed to return.
fenderman
Staff member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 36,892
- 21,408
I think I might have screwed up...
Dahua Technology2MP Starlight HD-CVI Outdoor Bullet Camera with 2.7-13.5mm Lens and Night Vision
or this...
https://www.amazon.com/EmpireTech-I...merchant-items&ie=UTF8&qid=1546491882&sr=1-15
The difference seems to WDR... anything else?
Dahua Technology2MP Starlight HD-CVI Outdoor Bullet Camera with 2.7-13.5mm Lens and Night Vision
or this...
https://www.amazon.com/EmpireTech-I...merchant-items&ie=UTF8&qid=1546491882&sr=1-15
The difference seems to WDR... anything else?
As an Amazon Associate IPCamTalk earns from qualifying purchases.
I'm assuming the one from B&H Photo is the same as this one...
https://www.amazon.com/EmpireTech-I...merchant-items&ie=UTF8&qid=1546492521&sr=1-46
I guess the question might be, what is the difference between the 5231 and the 4231 and is it worth $100 difference?
As an Amazon Associate IPCamTalk earns from qualifying purchases.
fenderman
Staff member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 36,892
- 21,408
CVI cameras are not IP and will not work for you
As an Amazon Associate IPCamTalk earns from qualifying purchases.
fenderman
Staff member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 36,892
- 21,408
no its cvi and wont work
As an Amazon Associate IPCamTalk earns from qualifying purchases.
Oops! Thank you!!! I think I figured it out on the 4231 vs 5231. Simply fixed vs. variable length lens. Sorry for the newbie crap here. Trying to digest a lot of info on cameras, computers, software, etc. and keep my day job!
just ordered both the fixed and variable 2Mp Starlights from Andy. Curious, though as to why the higher Mp Starlights aren't better. Please explain... are they worse in low light? Otherwise would be aiming for the 4Mp or 5Mp guys.
fenderman
Staff member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 36,892
- 21,408
mat200
IPCT Contributor
- Jan 17, 2017
- 15,555
- 26,212
Hi @dragoneggs
All of this has been documented in the Cliff Notes here. Furthermore, you can use the search function and search for "review" in the title and find members reviews of various cameras.
We've tried to make this easier for those new to security cameras by spending an untold amount of volunteer hours producing those cliff notes from the knowledge and experience shared by members.
Please do take the time to review the cliff notes as well as search threads here on ipct.
J Sigmo
Known around here
- Feb 5, 2018
- 996
- 1,336
I wasn't impressed with the motion detection in my Reolink cameras. The main problem I had was that I couldn't keep them from triggering endlessly from blowing snow, blowing dirt, etc.
But since setting up Blue Iris, I don't bother at all with the built-in motion detection in the Reolinks. The motion detection in Blue Iris is far more sophisticated and customizable.
I'm doing what @dragoneggs proposes. I use my existing Reolinks, but am slowly replacing them with better cameras as the time and motivation hits me.
You get a month, I believe, to return stuff to Amazon. I had all of mine longer than that before realizing that they weren't all that great. I hadn't even installed them by then.
While they may not be what I'd choose now, they have worked fine under BI for me so far, other than having fairly poor performance at night, and because they're all bullet types, having bad spiderweb issues. Fortunately, they're all mounted where I can reach them quite easily, so I can brush off the webs a few times a day.
I won't ever get bullet-style cameras again. The spiders spin their webs across the field of view, and because of the little "shades", the webs end up spaced out just far enough from the lens and the built-in IR illuminators that the camera can see them AND they are well illuminated by the IR LEDs.
Thus, they show up brightly in the images and breezes make them move constantly. As a result, the motion detection is triggered continuously.
The spiders won't usually spin a web across a solid surface...what would be the point? But from the shades down to the bottom edges of the camera enclosures is an attractive place for a web. The spiders may well see the IR light and instinctively build webs there because light usually attracts their prey.
If you never enable the built-in IR illuminators, the spiders might not build as many webs there, and even if they did, they wouldn't show up the way they do when illuminated by the LEDs in the camera.
So you might do better with bullet style cameras if you installed separate IR illuminators and disabled the built-in IR lights in the cameras.
Unfortunately, the Reolinks I have do not have an option to disable their internal illuminators and have them switch to Black and White mode (which moves the IR filter out of the way). So there's no way to use them with separate IR illuminators with their internal illuminators disabled.
I did open one up and traced out the front PC board, and there is a place you can make a foil cut to disable the built-in IR LEDs. I did this on that one, but that's something you shouldn't have to do.
Another thought I had was to just cut off the protruding shade so the spiders couldn't build their webs in that critical area. A few seconds on a band saw would make quick work of the shades! They're part of the Aluminum casting, but would cut off easily.
But that is why a lot of us recommend getting the eyeball/turret style cams. Their flat faces don't provide that convenient spider web location.
You still see snow, rain, blowing dust, flying insects, etc. very brightly when you use the built-in IR, though. So really, separate IR illuminators or plain white lighting mounted so it's not too close to the camera is far better than any built-in illuminators.
Having the light source right next to the camera lens is a recipe for seeing really exaggerated images of anything floating or flying near the cameras. I can't help but think people who have some experience with security cameras would love it if a manufacturer sold cameras that come with separate IR illuminators with a three or four foot cable coming out of the main camera body so you could easily mount the illuminator a few feet away from.the camera, but not need to install any separate wiring. Plus, the camera could control that illuminator just the way they usually control their internal LEDs. I'd buy cameras like that for sure!
It would be convenient to install, and so much better than built-in LEDs.
Anyhow, as my Reolinks die, give me problems, or I just have the time and want to spend the money for the upgrade, I'll replace them.
But since setting up Blue Iris, I don't bother at all with the built-in motion detection in the Reolinks. The motion detection in Blue Iris is far more sophisticated and customizable.
I'm doing what @dragoneggs proposes. I use my existing Reolinks, but am slowly replacing them with better cameras as the time and motivation hits me.
You get a month, I believe, to return stuff to Amazon. I had all of mine longer than that before realizing that they weren't all that great. I hadn't even installed them by then.
While they may not be what I'd choose now, they have worked fine under BI for me so far, other than having fairly poor performance at night, and because they're all bullet types, having bad spiderweb issues. Fortunately, they're all mounted where I can reach them quite easily, so I can brush off the webs a few times a day.
I won't ever get bullet-style cameras again. The spiders spin their webs across the field of view, and because of the little "shades", the webs end up spaced out just far enough from the lens and the built-in IR illuminators that the camera can see them AND they are well illuminated by the IR LEDs.
Thus, they show up brightly in the images and breezes make them move constantly. As a result, the motion detection is triggered continuously.
The spiders won't usually spin a web across a solid surface...what would be the point? But from the shades down to the bottom edges of the camera enclosures is an attractive place for a web. The spiders may well see the IR light and instinctively build webs there because light usually attracts their prey.
If you never enable the built-in IR illuminators, the spiders might not build as many webs there, and even if they did, they wouldn't show up the way they do when illuminated by the LEDs in the camera.
So you might do better with bullet style cameras if you installed separate IR illuminators and disabled the built-in IR lights in the cameras.
Unfortunately, the Reolinks I have do not have an option to disable their internal illuminators and have them switch to Black and White mode (which moves the IR filter out of the way). So there's no way to use them with separate IR illuminators with their internal illuminators disabled.
I did open one up and traced out the front PC board, and there is a place you can make a foil cut to disable the built-in IR LEDs. I did this on that one, but that's something you shouldn't have to do.
Another thought I had was to just cut off the protruding shade so the spiders couldn't build their webs in that critical area. A few seconds on a band saw would make quick work of the shades! They're part of the Aluminum casting, but would cut off easily.
But that is why a lot of us recommend getting the eyeball/turret style cams. Their flat faces don't provide that convenient spider web location.
You still see snow, rain, blowing dust, flying insects, etc. very brightly when you use the built-in IR, though. So really, separate IR illuminators or plain white lighting mounted so it's not too close to the camera is far better than any built-in illuminators.
Having the light source right next to the camera lens is a recipe for seeing really exaggerated images of anything floating or flying near the cameras. I can't help but think people who have some experience with security cameras would love it if a manufacturer sold cameras that come with separate IR illuminators with a three or four foot cable coming out of the main camera body so you could easily mount the illuminator a few feet away from.the camera, but not need to install any separate wiring. Plus, the camera could control that illuminator just the way they usually control their internal LEDs. I'd buy cameras like that for sure!
It would be convenient to install, and so much better than built-in LEDs.
Anyhow, as my Reolinks die, give me problems, or I just have the time and want to spend the money for the upgrade, I'll replace them.
Thanks J and mat! I appreciate everyone's replies. I am reading through the cliff notes again, and in some cases again and again. Lots of great info but it takes time to absorb. It really helps to reread after you are experiencing issues. I understand the spiderweb thing. With my old Lorex bullet system I didn't get lots of spiders across the lens for some reason... not that we don't have spiders around here.
I have been going with bullets again with my new DIY set up and maybe I will be kicking myself but for some reason I like the bullets. I suppose I should buy a turret and the optional mounting bracket and get over my 'issue'.
I have been going with bullets again with my new DIY set up and maybe I will be kicking myself but for some reason I like the bullets. I suppose I should buy a turret and the optional mounting bracket and get over my 'issue'.
J Sigmo
Known around here
- Feb 5, 2018
- 996
- 1,336
Did you get bullet or turret style for the Dahuas you ordered recently?
The advantage, for me, of the bullet style was for mounting up under the soffits of my house. The bases of the bullets simply mount up against the soffit, covering the hole I drill for the cable and connectors. There is a small indentation in the base that lets you run a cable out if the base won't be mounted over the cable hole, but I just plugged those with a small blob of silicone sealant, and I have a weather and wasp-proof seal.
With the turret style cameras, there would be no seal, and with the wind we get, lots of air would blow in along with wind-driven sand and dirt. Plus, we have European paper wasps here, and they find any small openings and build their nests in sheltered areas.
I've had them build nests inside of auto taillights, using small openings meant to allow water to weep out, in barbecue grills, all kinds of electrical boxes and motion lights, etc. I do NOT need them building their nests in my attic spaces!
There is a special electrical box made by Dahua just for these turret cams that solves my soffit mounting situation. I believe it is their 122 box but I'll look it up.
That box can mount up against the soffit and make a good seal there. Then, the camera pedestal mounts to the box "lid" (which ends up under the box in this orientation). Then, there is a rubber plug, with a split in it that seals the camera cable to the "lid" for a bug and weather proof seal.
I made a post to a thread a while back showing how those boxes work. They do just what I need for soffit mounting the turret cams.
I will edit this post to add a link to that post.
OK, here is the post I made showing how the PGS-122 boxes work for soffit mounting the turret cams;
Dahua 5231 owners - PFA130-E or PFA137
The advantage, for me, of the bullet style was for mounting up under the soffits of my house. The bases of the bullets simply mount up against the soffit, covering the hole I drill for the cable and connectors. There is a small indentation in the base that lets you run a cable out if the base won't be mounted over the cable hole, but I just plugged those with a small blob of silicone sealant, and I have a weather and wasp-proof seal.
With the turret style cameras, there would be no seal, and with the wind we get, lots of air would blow in along with wind-driven sand and dirt. Plus, we have European paper wasps here, and they find any small openings and build their nests in sheltered areas.
I've had them build nests inside of auto taillights, using small openings meant to allow water to weep out, in barbecue grills, all kinds of electrical boxes and motion lights, etc. I do NOT need them building their nests in my attic spaces!
There is a special electrical box made by Dahua just for these turret cams that solves my soffit mounting situation. I believe it is their 122 box but I'll look it up.
That box can mount up against the soffit and make a good seal there. Then, the camera pedestal mounts to the box "lid" (which ends up under the box in this orientation). Then, there is a rubber plug, with a split in it that seals the camera cable to the "lid" for a bug and weather proof seal.
I made a post to a thread a while back showing how those boxes work. They do just what I need for soffit mounting the turret cams.
I will edit this post to add a link to that post.
OK, here is the post I made showing how the PGS-122 boxes work for soffit mounting the turret cams;
Dahua 5231 owners - PFA130-E or PFA137
Last edited:
I went with the bullets. On my old Lorex bullets I did get some filling of the small indented screw holes on the face of the camera (paper wasp?) but it never affected anything. Maybe that is what limited a spiderweb problem? 
So, now I will have a mix of Dahua 2MP Starlight and 5Mp Reolink both fixed and zoom versions. I should be able to get a good read on visibility vs. dollars. I am already getting some kind of very short duration video 'smear' occasionally on the lower quarter of a couple of cameras. I don't know if that is settings, camera quality, or what?
So, now I will have a mix of Dahua 2MP Starlight and 5Mp Reolink both fixed and zoom versions. I should be able to get a good read on visibility vs. dollars. I am already getting some kind of very short duration video 'smear' occasionally on the lower quarter of a couple of cameras. I don't know if that is settings, camera quality, or what?
J Sigmo
Known around here
- Feb 5, 2018
- 996
- 1,336
It could be a lot of things.
The thing is: To get clear stills with no motion blur, you need a fairly fast shutter speed. But that limits how much light can reach the sensor. So the higher sensitivity sensors help with that.
I wrote a long post about all of those tradeoffs a while back. I will try to find it.
But the thing is, in general, larger individual photodetectors can gather more light, and, because they're larger, they also can have higher dynamic range because their capacitors can hold more electrons. The so-called "full well" value is greater.
These individual photosensors are so tightly packed onto the sensor ICs, that you are actually dealing with sizes so small that they can hold only a small number of electrons.
This is why for a given sensor IC size, the more "megapixels", the tinier the individual photo sensors must be. And the tinier the photosensor, the worse its light gathering capability, and the lower its full-well capacity.
So higher pixel counts can, if the optics can handle it, give better resolution. But you do trade off light sensitivity and dynamic range for this higher resolution.
That's why it is often better to use more good 2megapixel cameras than cover the area with fewer higher megapixel cameras.
There is a very old saying in photography:
"There is no free lunch".
Here it is:
I got robbed, now I'm buying cameras so I can watch them do it again
The thing is: To get clear stills with no motion blur, you need a fairly fast shutter speed. But that limits how much light can reach the sensor. So the higher sensitivity sensors help with that.
I wrote a long post about all of those tradeoffs a while back. I will try to find it.
But the thing is, in general, larger individual photodetectors can gather more light, and, because they're larger, they also can have higher dynamic range because their capacitors can hold more electrons. The so-called "full well" value is greater.
These individual photosensors are so tightly packed onto the sensor ICs, that you are actually dealing with sizes so small that they can hold only a small number of electrons.
This is why for a given sensor IC size, the more "megapixels", the tinier the individual photo sensors must be. And the tinier the photosensor, the worse its light gathering capability, and the lower its full-well capacity.
So higher pixel counts can, if the optics can handle it, give better resolution. But you do trade off light sensitivity and dynamic range for this higher resolution.
That's why it is often better to use more good 2megapixel cameras than cover the area with fewer higher megapixel cameras.
There is a very old saying in photography:
"There is no free lunch".
Here it is:
I got robbed, now I'm buying cameras so I can watch them do it again
Last edited: