Worlds First Review - Dahua DH-IPC-HDW5849H-ASE-LED / IPC-Color4K-T - 2.8mm Turret

[samplenhold]

Needing more of a 6mm FOV for my driveway. So was thinking of the Bullet 4k-X in 6mm. Will it have the same firmware issues discussed above with everyone having problems getting the settings and IVS to not revert back to defaults?

Any testing done on the 6mm?

 

[Wildcat_1]

Needing more of a 6mm FOV for my driveway. So was thinking of the Bullet 4k-X in 6mm. Will it have the same firmware issues discussed above with everyone having problems getting the settings and IVS to not revert back to defaults?

Any testing done on the 6mm?

No has not seen any issues at all. Will always state DO NOT USE EDGE though for any upgrades / configs and instead use IE where possible. Remember 4K-X uses 3.0 GUI and not 5.0 GUI that the 4K-T does. Will also update on the 4K-T testing I've been doing per my message above, shortly.

In terms of the 6mm, checkout my 6mm comparison video here:

Day Time


Night Time

 

[wittaj]

Needing more of a 6mm FOV for my driveway. So was thinking of the Bullet 4k-X in 6mm. Will it have the same firmware issues discussed above with everyone having problems getting the settings and IVS to not revert back to defaults?

Any testing done on the 6mm?

The bullet is the old firmware you are familiar with. And I haven't has any issues.

The turret is the new version GUI.

 

[Wildcat_1]

Thats very strange you see that @looney2ns as I'm not seeing that on the pre-production or production units. I'll grab a quick video (not full blown walk through yet) showing mine in action for reference

Replying to myself here with an update for all. I've completed thorough testing again across 3 different browsers Safari + Firefox (on Mac) + IE (on PC). I specifically went through each scenario people have reported, noted below for reference:

• Schedule not changing in Live View mode
• Settings not 'sticking' after being applied
• IVS rules being impacted (creation / adjustment)
• IVS rule resetting Exposure when clicking Apply
• Play back not working in browser for recorded clips from SD card

In each of these, I can state (and also show in this video) that they are not happening in my testing. The cameras are working correctly and as expected in each of these scenarios in my tests again today. I went back into each camera (the 3x 4K-T's I have) and tested. For reference, the camera that I recorded the footage against for the test in the video is a production (not beta, not pre-production) 2.8mm unit that Andy has been shipping out to all.

With the exception of the Mac based bugs for Safari and Firefox that I filed with Dahua when I first started testing these cams (applies to all 5.0 GUI cams on Mac), no issues are seen. Those bugs for reference are that Image Adjustment (for viewing parameter adjustments on Live Mode such as adjust contrast of the image for Live mode screen only) + on screen graphic functions such as E/PTZ creation (A180 cam) do not work with the embedded plugin and prompt you to download a Windows plugin ! This bug for Mac will stop IVS and E-PTZ graphics even being saved (you won’t even have an option to apply them as it will error out) BUT again this is ONLY for Safari & Firefox on Mac. This is NOT an issue for Firefox on PC as well as NOT an issue for IE as I show. So with that stated for continued reference, as you'll see on the video (11 mins but wanted to be complete), all the above scenarios tested fine.

Video being uploaded now and will update as soon as available thanks to the usual YouTube re-encode dance.

Almost forgot, didn’t show in this video as it was already 11 minutes in length BUT I did also test on Chrome on PC (v106.0.5249.119) as well as Firefox on PC (v102.3.0) and both of these are also working fine too in each of the 4 areas above. If people do want to see this as well, I can always capture more footage.

HTH show what I’m seeing across 1 x pre-production and 2 x production line 4K-T’s and critically that these issues are not present in this testing.

UPDATE - YouTube finally is ready in 1080p HD (make sure you manually select), still awaiting the YouTube 4K re-transcode (rant: wouldn't mind but the 4K file I upload already meets their standard requirements for encoding !, rant over)

Here is the video of the testing and the results

​

​

Additional Notes

• Timestamps added for each browser test + intro at start mentions versions used in the test
• At 07:47 of the video I mention setting night to 12:18:01 but my note I add shows 12:12:01, that was a Wildcat slip-up in the note, the actual time set as you can see on video is 12:18:01. You’ll also see the Windows Not Genuine popup when I have a fully licensed machine, gotta love Microsoft and one of many reasons why I moved to Mac
• Also while I show it on screen in the Safari on Mac test, I didn’t call out specifically (so doing it here) that exposure settings etc never changed when applying IVS rules. Just calling it out more clearly here so people saw that it wasn’t an issue in this test either.

 

[IAmWatchingYou!]

@Wildcat_1

Definitely update the firmware (using IE remember) to at least 9/22. This includes the fixes from late August that I worked with Dahua on. Now with that said, if you are truly seeing a focus issue (and its not something simple like you've selected sub-stream instead of main stream etc) then that points more towards HW. Let me know

I just applied the 9/22 firmware so I'll test that before trying to figure out an exchange on this camera, or whether to just get 5442s which seem to be vetted more. I guess I was trying to fool myself into thinking I didn't end up with one with a focus issue - I've been playing around with surveillance cameras for 20 year and focus issues are pretty obvious.

On a positive note, the AI human and vehicle detection is many levels above Amcrest. I'm not using IVS settings for now.
In a 4 hour window, on high, the Dahua had a false alarm from a tree moving. The Reolink (yes I said that word) had a false alarm on 60/100 for a tree moving. On medium, the Dahua missed a person walking by that the Reolink captured. I'm wondering how much better the AI detection would be if the focus were correct.

 

[Wildcat_1]

@Wildcat_1

I just applied the 9/22 firmware so I'll test that before trying to figure out an exchange on this camera, or whether to just get 5442s which seem to be vetted more. I guess I was trying to fool myself into thinking I didn't end up with one with a focus issue - I've been playing around with surveillance cameras for 20 year and focus issues are pretty obvious.

On a positive note, the AI human and vehicle detection is many levels above Amcrest. I'm not using IVS settings for now.
In a 4 hour window, on high, the Dahua had a false alarm from a tree moving. The Reolink (yes I said that word) had a false alarm on 60/100 for a tree moving. On medium, the Dahua missed a person walking by that the Reolink captured. I'm wondering how much better the AI detection would be if the focus were correct.

Yes if its a true HW issue for focus then you'll know it and Yes if the camera can focus correctly (not knowing how bad it is at the moment) then AI should/would be better. Either way, reach out via DM if I can assist

 

[wittaj]

@Wildcat_1

I just applied the 9/22 firmware so I'll test that before trying to figure out an exchange on this camera, or whether to just get 5442s which seem to be vetted more. I guess I was trying to fool myself into thinking I didn't end up with one with a focus issue - I've been playing around with surveillance cameras for 20 year and focus issues are pretty obvious.

On a positive note, the AI human and vehicle detection is many levels above Amcrest. I'm not using IVS settings for now.
In a 4 hour window, on high, the Dahua had a false alarm from a tree moving. The Reolink (yes I said that word) had a false alarm on 60/100 for a tree moving. On medium, the Dahua missed a person walking by that the Reolink captured. I'm wondering how much better the AI detection would be if the focus were correct.

And please post screenshots of the image. Also make sure you are indeed seeing mainstream and that the bitrate isn't too low. Those can make it look out of focus as well. And that there isn't a protective film LOL.

We have to state the obvious sometimes as we have troubleshot people before and it ended up being one of those three things that we just assumed the person would have checked first so it wasn't mentioned LOL.

 

[samplenhold]

In terms of the 6mm, checkout my 6mm comparison video here:

Thanks for the great videos.

 

[Wildcat_1]

And please post screenshots of the image. Also make sure you are indeed seeing mainstream and that the bitrate isn't too low. Those can make it look out of focus as well. And that there isn't a protective film LOL.

We have to state the obvious sometimes as we have troubleshot people before and it ended up being one of those three things that we just assumed the person would have checked first so it wasn't mentioned LOL.

Exactly which is why I mentioned check for sub stream above. As we've all said, sometimes we forget that the simple, obvious things can trip us all up

 

[Wildcat_1]

Thanks for the great videos.

Very welcome, thanks for the kind comment

 

[Wildcat_1]

Ok testing video and additional notes added above HERE

 

[IAmWatchingYou!]

And please post screenshots of the image. Also make sure you are indeed seeing mainstream and that the bitrate isn't too low. Those can make it look out of focus as well. And that there isn't a protective film LOL.

We have to state the obvious sometimes as we have troubleshot people before and it ended up being one of those three things that we just assumed the person would have checked first so it wasn't mentioned LOL.

So when I walked out of the office I took another look around. The branch that appeared as just a see-through blur on the Dahua but clear on the Reolink was actually on a different tree that was about 5' out. Taking a look at the close focus distance spec that was posted in the beginning of this thread, it says 13.8 ft. I feel if this is mounted in an entryway this wouldn't make sense? Either way, It doesn't seem right that the camera would be focusing right through objects 5' away.
I will post some pics and screenshots of the config / bit rates / and where the main stream is selected in the live view. The camera was default when I set it up, and the only things that were changed as far as image goes was the exposure and I set it to 12 FPS.

 

[Wildcat_1]

So when I walked out of the office I took another look around. The branch that appeared as just a see-through blur on the Dahua but clear on the Reolink was actually on a different tree that was about 5' out. Taking a look at the close focus distance spec that was posted in the beginning of this thread, it says 13.8 ft. I feel if this is mounted in an entryway this wouldn't make sense? Either way, It doesn't seem right that the camera would be focusing right through objects 5' away.
I will post some pics and screenshots of the config / bit rates / and where the main stream is selected in the live view. The camera was default when I set it up, and the only things that were changed were the IP and exposure.

For production units, 2.8mm is about 8ft Close Focus Distance and 3.6mm is about 16ft as I show in my video revisit today. Also a good video to compare your focus against

 

[IAmWatchingYou!]

For production units, 2.8mm is about 8ft Close Focus Distance and 3.6mm is about 16ft as I show in my video revisit today. Also a good video to compare your focus against

Thanks - your crisp images vs my blurry ones up close gives me hope that I can swap this camera out and mine was from a batch where the focus wasn't set properly at the factory, but I'll posts some pics tomorrow for validation. Now that the sun has set, i see the low light capability of this camera in color mode at night is SHOCKINGLY good! With this I definitely won't need the white lite LEDs with the outdoor lights on.

 

[garycrist]

Thanks for the manual and mine seems to work just fine.

 

[CCTVCam]

Yes, i talked with wildcat today it's time to forget IE,he told me IE always works and uses separate plug-in which allows to test properly for issues. Chrome is ok but I would say IE first then Firefox then Chrome/Safari. With cams that have sticky issues with firmware I always recommend IE.
Web 5.0 is trying to avoid IE and will better support famous browser.

This is the problem though Andy:

Internet Explorer 11 desktop app retirement FAQ

Get answers to common questions about the retirement of the IE11 desktop app for certain versions of Windows 10.

techcommunity.microsoft.com

 

[CCTVCam]

No has not seen any issues at all. Will always state DO NOT USE EDGE though for any upgrades / configs and instead use IE where possible. Remember 4K-X uses 3.0 GUI and not 5.0 GUI that the 4K-T does. Will also update on the 4K-T testing I've been doing per my message above, shortly.

In terms of the 6mm, checkout my 6mm comparison video here:

Day Time


Night Time

Still seeing some focusing issues on the T's compared to the X's.

Not seeing a real focus at all. At 32 feet, the close focus distance, it looks well out of focus when you look at wildcat. Niether his face, shirt or the writing look in focus. There's zero definition on his arms and his face without the mask would be a blur. I know Wildcat zoomed in but surely by not enough to degrade the picture by that much - surely at 4K, there should be easily enough pixels to do that without such a loss of definition. The camera also suffers from excessive contrast and maybe a lack of Dynamic Range.




On the face of it, 22 feet looks slightly better but then it's poor again by about 18 feet.

Personally, I still think there are real issues with the lenses / chip being use in the 4KT and can't undertsand why Dahua have changed them from the 4KX. The 4KX is perfect apart from the form factor. The 4KT seems to have numerous issues not seen on the 4KX with Focus and DOF, and zooming into the detail even a little seems impossible despite the supposed pixel count.

If space is the problem, use a bigger turret!

I really want to love a 4K turret camera but atm, I'm juts not seeing the performance when compared to the 4KX. Whoever at Dahau made the decision to change the chip / lenses away from those used in the 4KX needs calling into the bosses oriffice !

Personally, I think it needs trashing at this point and a redesign based on the 4KX components as Dahua don't seem to be able to get this to work satisfactorily.

 

[IAmWatchingYou!]

@Wildcat_1 & @CCTVCam
The top is the a screenshot from the 4KT, the bottom is a screenshot from the Reolink RLC-811A. Also notice the anti-aliasing effect on the fence around the edges of the image with the Dahua. The sign is 7 feet away from the cameras lenses measure with a tape measure. The two cameras are side by side with their front lined up next to each other. Note the Reolink has a a narrower 105 degree of view so the objects appear closer. A screenshot of the Dahua encode settings is below.

 

[wittaj]

@Wildcat_1 & @CCTVCam
The top is the a screenshot from the 4KT, the bottom is a screenshot from the Reolink RLC-811A. Also notice the anti-aliasing effect on the fence around the edges of the image with the Dahua. The sign is 7 feet away from the cameras lenses measure with a tape measure. The two cameras are side by side with their front lined up next to each other. Note the Reolink has a a narrower 105 degree of view so the objects appear closer. A screenshot of the Dahua encode settings is below.

View attachment 143158



View attachment 143160

View attachment 143162

First thing I see is the bitrate is too low.

Most of us will run 4K at H264 or H264H and 10240 bitrate to start and then adjust up or down until we do not see an improvement.

 

[EMPIRETECANDY]

h.264h can get the best pic.
Which lens of your 4KT? This 4KT focus distance is a little longer than normal cameras.