Which ethernet cable would be best ?

larryhagman said:
What a great post, thank you very, very much.
Click to expand...
Thank you & you're welcome!

larryhagman said:
I don't have any kind of tester, I could get a cheap one, but I will no doubt take 30 minutes to panic and fuss until I finally crimp :D.
Click to expand...
Simple pair testers are economical. I realize you're in the UK, so probably different tools available, but here's what I use: Klein Tools VDV LAN Scout Jr. Cable Tester

larryhagman said:
Some of my cables will run alongside 240v power cable. I know thats bad, so I would usually wrap in tin foil (seriously :D) but I wonder if I bought shielded cable if that would help, i cant run it any other way except right alongside power cable unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Don't go wrapping UTP in aluminium foil or running it in metallic conduit. That's a big no-no. That can actually degrade performance.

I honestly do not know if using STP instead of UTP alongside power lines will help. I've always avoided running network cabling alongside power wiring. So this is a networking design subject with which I'm woefully uninformed. Sorry.

When you write "alongside," you don't mean in existing conduit, I hope? I don't know what wiring code is where you are, but here in the U.S. that is strictly verboten.
 
Thanks. Interesting stuff re LPR (I had to look it up, terminology differences between US/UK)

Dramus - I do'nt know what UTP or STP is, but I am not using any conduit. My installation is nearly all outdoor in farm buildings and where the cables go through the air suspended on a taught wire between buildings, thats where I meant I can't really get them apart at all! No fire risks here, it never stops raining. :D - Ok that was a joke, but seriously, no fire risk. I am sure most of my stuff is verboten here, the UK being a WAY better "nanny state" than the land of the free :D. But I don't give a f particularly about nanny state rules, even though many of them are for good reasons (and not just to artificially rescusitate a failing industry, or entire economy, as plenty of these rules are!) Where they make sense, I follow them. Where they are a money spinner or control mechanism, I don't. As an installer you have no choice but to follow all such rules of course and I would too if I was installing on someone else's property. but this is a rough old farm with cables strung to get them where they're needed. I wonder if foil wrapping would help shield a wire hanging in the air, not inside any conduit.
 
UTP - Unshielded Twisted Pair

STP - Shielded Twisted Pair
 
  • Like
Reactions: larryhagman
larryhagman said:
Dramus - I do'nt know what UTP or STP is, ...
Click to expand...
Answered by @sebastiantombs

larryhagman said:
My installation is nearly all outdoor in farm buildings and where the cables go through the air suspended on a taught wire between buildings...
Click to expand...
<shudder> That is about the last way I'd choose to do what you're doing. If you do, you definitely want outdoor-rated STP, IMO. And, even then, I can almost guarantee a nearby lightening strike will result in a Very Bad Day :( (It's "taut," btw, unless your plan is to educate your cables ;).)

Personally, I'd look to renting a Ditch Witch (a trenching machine) and put it underground, in plastic conduit. Further: I'd run a single back-haul line to outbuildings and put a small PoE switch in the buildings, then run the cameras off that switch. It would be less expensive than running bundles all that distance, and less hassle to replace if your underground cable gets damaged.

Alternatively, and I know some here will howl in protest because "WiFi Bad": If I had a relatively clear line-of-sight I'd run a 5GHz wireless back-haul to the outbuildings, probably using Ubiquiti hardware designed for that purpose, then PoE switch(es) in the building(s).
 
WiFi as a connection method for remote buildings is a reasonable solution. Have a look at the Ubiquity Nano Loco system. It's quite robust and will support at least a half dozen cameras running 4MP or even more. The bad name WiFi has here is related to individual cameras using WiFi in an entire system. Bandwidth, under those conditions, gets eaten up and the cameras start dropping in and out of connection. A single, dedicated, WiFi link is a whole other case. Using one eliminates the overhead wire problems and dangers from near by, or direct, lightning strikes as well as any other transient pulses that happen sometime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dramus
Taut - hahahaha. what a mistake that was, now I have been taught :D

I get the advice, it's good. But it's not useful for this outfit here. Firstly, completely tarmacced everywhere, no way to make trenches without cutting, no room for moling etc. The NVR will be in the barn itself, so most cables will just run up the walls and through to the cameras, most will be mounted on the barn itself, hence why I have one good ethernet cable to the barn, and then the NVR in there.

WiFi - I get the reason for the suggestion, so no offence at all, but don't even go there :D. I am not sure I can even bear to tell the story about wifi here, let alone tackle it again. Short version.....

tried wifi. distances and reliability was insane. (i hate wifi anyway, we want to be wifi free completely for several reasons)
invested in the super duper (dog shit overpriced apple schmarketing, pretty box BS) by Ubiquiti - the Amplif HD system which boasts incredible stuff. WORSE than my $30 tplink wifi router from a garage sale. £300 STERLING. Never felt so robbed in my life. Support was abysmal, insulting and arroganct pieces of shit too. So you get my feeling towards that company, which by the way has grown out of a lot of experience with them, not just one gripe about this issue. So despite a good router positioned in house window, the mesh points in direct line of sight (through a double glazed window, poor Amplifi can't handle that apparently) around 30-50 feet max away from router, and the signal is dire. weak, slow, unreliable. 2.4 or 5, no difference, ones a bit faster and less stable, one slower and more stable but too slow to run two Nest cams (which were bought in a panic when we had a serious security risk and had to go away for a week leaving the place unattended - more money down the drain, jesus are they crap, and not just cos of the crap wifi!!).

So I am going all cable. We have wanted rid of wifi for a long time, and we don't need it for anytghing else now, so definitely wont try that again for CCTV. Cabling will do the job, but i will definitely go for shielding and may consider conduit if it can hang uip in the wind 20 feet above ground. Currently 70mph wind here (fairly standard for this time of year!) so I doubt conduit would be much fun, but could consider it! thanks


 
All I can say about Ubiquity is that I bought a Loco, set it up, had it running in about five minutes and it's been running every since. Lots of folks here use them, the Loco, as well as the higher priced, longer distance, models. Remember we're not talking about a "normal" WiFi access point type device. This is a dedicated link system that is, and can, only be used by the matching device. The Loco is supposed to be able to link distances well over a kilometer so for your application it wouldn't even break a sweat.
 
Good for you :). I have friends who use and love their gear too. my experience is mine and I am too old to start giving companies another chance when they screw with me and piss me off repeatedly, especially when charging double or more for similar gear that I can get from somewhere else, albeit without a hardon-inducing pretty package. They are the apple of networking world, and I am sick to the back teeth. For instance, ask for support, they say (in not so many words) "fuck off to the forum where our other addicted customers will support you for us, because they are such fanatics of our products" :)
Naah, not for me. Overpriced, over packaged, cocky uncaring support, and in my experience hardware that doesn't beat most other well known brands but is twice the price or often more.

Having said that, I have never heard of the Loco stuff, and I don't doubt it's good. But I don't want wifi, it will never compare to a cable :)
thanks again
 
larryhagman said:
...
invested in the super duper (dog shit overpriced apple schmarketing, pretty box BS) by Ubiquiti - the Amplif HD system which boasts incredible stuff. WORSE than my $30 tplink wifi router from a garage sale. £300 STERLING. Never felt so robbed in my life.
Click to expand...
Amplifi HD is a mesh system. A pair of Nanostations would be a dedicated point-to-point solution. That's not even apples and oranges, but more apples and... I dunno... lemons
lol.gif
(Personally, I am not a believer in mesh systems. As often as not they seems to induce as many problems as they solve.)

A pair of Ubiquiti Nanostations NSM5's on a relatively clear LOS should be as rock-solid as wire. And, properly configured, nearly as secure. They're not terribly expensive, either. $80 each here in the U.S.

One of these days I'm going to get a camera or two out on our shed in the back yard. And maybe put an AP in it--just for grins :) It's only about 100 ft. from the house, but there's no good way to run a cable out there. I may use a pair of those NSM5's to back-haul it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs and larryhagman
"(Personally, I am not a believer in mesh systems. As often as not they seems to induce as many problems as they solve.)" - Damn, why didn't we meet a year ago when I was £300 heavier. :D :D
 
larryhagman said:
"(Personally, I am not a believer in mesh systems. As often as not they seems to induce as many problems as they solve.)" - Damn, why didn't we meet a year ago when I was £300 heavier. :D :D
Click to expand...
Luck of the draw, I guess :)

Seriously: I understand being reluctant to deal with a company you feel has done you wrong. BTDT GTTS. In fact I switched from Ubiquiti APs for client connectivity to EnGenius because I had a bad experience with Ubiquiti's management software. But Ubiquiti Nanostations are a mature, proven technology. Don't take @sebastiantombs' and my word for it: Research it. It might save you a pile of grief.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larryhagman
I hear ya, and on the basis of the good folks in this forum, I certainly would consider them again, even if it my anus ache. :D
But wifi is OUT of the question. Permanently :).

"Luck of the draw, I guess" - hahahahahaha. yeah, got it. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs
larryhagman said:
You know, the old "aircraft grade aluminium" ...
Click to expand...
Actually, "aircraft grade aluminium" is a real thing, though what it means is somewhat variable. It just means a class of aluminium alloys suitable to use in demanding applications--such as aircraft :) Then there's "tool plate," some of which I recently purchased for a particular application where I wanted absolute flatness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs
Larry, again this is NOT WiFI we're talking about. It's a dedicated radio link similar to what TV and radio stations use between a studio location and the actual transmitter site. It's point to point and will provide about 400MbPS of throughput. Maybe not as much as a cable, but we're talking about cameras here and you will probably never come close to overloading it.

I'm a stubborn old codger, too, 71 today as a matter of fact. I've been burned with WiFi crap as well, but the Nano Station Loco is a horse of another color. I hate WiFi, even though this craptop (which I also hate) is connected by WiFi right now. I don't know what they go for on your side of the pond, but if you add up the cable costs and time spent stringing overhead wires it's one hell of a lot easier to do and just plug and play to expand for more cameras.

I have an open shed that I originally bought the Loco for. That shed has all my expensive "yard toys" in it so I like to keep an eye on it. I've added a second camera now looking at the where we park our vehicles. One is a 2MP and the other is a 4MP. They hardly even tickle the bandwidth utilization and, as I said, it's been running for over six months from summer heat to well below freezing, through rain, sleet, freezing rain and snow without one single glitch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larryhagman and Dramus
ah, I didn't realise it's not wifi, but it's wireless. I get it. I am sure it's awesome, and happy birthday by the way. :)
I really REALLY want to avoid a debate on this, but the truth is I am firmly of the opinion that wireless transmissions/radiation is a minor MINOR health hazard, and I have spent many years involved with the subject to not be following some hype BS, there is SOME merit to the argument, more than some in fact. I don't think it affects everyone, in fact I don't think it affects most people. But I do think one day perhaps long into the future, we will look back and see that this explosion of no-ionising radiation (DECT phones and WIFi antennas in particular) will have had some costs, perhaps serious, perhaps not. But either way, we decided some years ago to get rid of cell towers,DECT etc, and we are happier for it, and I think healthier, certainly sleeping better and massive reduction in headaches. Does it prove anything? No. 100% No. but do I "believe" there is some health impact of such things, yes I do, and I believe many studies back it up. But others contradict that. A bit like the climate hocus pocus, you choose which study to read and to believe. I tend to avoid anything govt funded or marxist funded, as both have a track record of lying morning, noon and night. Again, that's just my approach, and for this reason (as well as security) I avoid wifi, but I would avoid radios as much as poss too. Having said that, I have walkie talkies (I CAN NOT run cables through the woods for when I am shooting rabbits :D ) and am not a paranoid nut who runs away from a transistor radio. I just want to minimise it, and would prefer cables.

I told you I had plenty of tin foil ;)
 
Decided this is best bang for buck - External Outdoor Cat5E FULL COPPER Network Ethernet Cable FTP/UTP Reel Lot Cat5 | eBay

I was tempted by Cat6 but I think thats just like chasing megapixels. I can't see me needing more than 100mbps, my ISP speed is only 150 anyway.

PS I should have mentioned, regarding the running alongside 220vAC cable, the cables are only next to each other for around 10 feet, if that makes any difference. for entire rest of installation there are no power lines near ethernet lines. maybe I dont even need shielded, if i get a problem I could just get one shielded cable for that camera that runs along that power line/wire
 
As an eBay Associate IPCamTalk earns from qualifying purchases.
You need shielded to protect from static charges, AKA lightning. Ground one end, and one end ONLY, of each cable or you'll just be creating a nice antenna to grab any RF that's in the air and interfere with you ethernet communications.

10 feet next to any, live, power line is 20 feet too much shielded or otherwise! We just had a big fire, locally, that was caused by a rain gutter being pulled loose by the wind, contacting an overhead AC power line going to some flood lights and causing just enough of a short to get things burning without tripping the breaker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom