Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

Though it seems world has moved on and no need for wired camera any-more
.... ARLO, NEST, BLINK, RING etc

For those that know welcome your advice.

Needs ...
HD Colour (by day) camera
LED illumination for night vision
Recording - with at least 15 days storage
Ideally motion activated - with adjustable zones
2-way voice only needed on one camera
Remote monitoring & alarm to a phone app

Welcome advice on anyone who has installed such a system ...
Don't really need WiFi
Really want mains powered cameras (or remote DC supply) - changing
Batteries on high up cameras is not what I want to do.

Can you for example mix other cameras with Arlo system .... could use 2
high up cameras connected using the existing cable .... and WiFi (with
remote power for other 3.

On Monday, 1 April 2019 12:24:03 UTC+1, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.
On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)

That's a shame.

If you'd used Cat5 or better you'd have been able to use IP cameras with power over ethernet, or analogue with baluns. Alarm cable probably rules out any IP cameras.

Have a look at Network Webcams who despite the name do proper IP CCTV. The Nest/Hive/etc and similar stuff has very limited or no adjustment for zoom or focus and is sometimes linked to a subscription model (or may be in the future) where if they stop supporting it or you stop paying for their cloud your cameras stop working/recording.

Owain

On 01/04/2019 12:23, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.


Though it seems world has moved on and no need for wired camera any-more
... ARLO, NEST, BLINK, RINGÂ* etc

Oh no, wired every time.


For those that know welcome your advice.

Needs ...
HD Colour (by day) camera
LED illumination for night vision
No, use a decent low light capable camera and install dawn to dusk
visible lighting. Deterrent value exceeds CCTV value. Have a look on
https://www.donvalley.tv/cctv
The picture with the grey car is lit only by 10W LEDs, one of which is
near the ramp and the other is near the car. The vans in the distance
are lit by a 10W LED that's a long way from the vans. The camera is not
set to frame store. If you do that you can record in what to the eye is
near total darkness.

Recording - with at least 15 days storage
Ideally motion activated - with adjustable zones
No, just record everything. But have a high frame rate. 25 or 30 fps.
Anything less can miss things, surprisingly.

Bill

Bill Wright Wrote in message:
On 01/04/2019 12:23, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.


Though it seems world has moved on and no need for wired camera any-more
... ARLO, NEST, BLINK, RING etc

Oh no, wired every time.


For those that know welcome your advice.

Needs ...
HD Colour (by day) camera
LED illumination for night vision
No, use a decent low light capable camera and install dawn to dusk
visible lighting. Deterrent value exceeds CCTV value. Have a look on
https://www.donvalley.tv/cctv
The picture with the grey car is lit only by 10W LEDs, one of which is
near the ramp and the other is near the car. The vans in the distance
are lit by a 10W LED that's a long way from the vans. The camera is not
set to frame store. If you do that you can record in what to the eye is
near total darkness.

Recording - with at least 15 days storage
Ideally motion activated - with adjustable zones
No, just record everything. But have a high frame rate. 25 or 30 fps.
Anything less can miss things, surprisingly.

Bill


Is there any 25/30fps video of the grey car lit with the 10w LEDs
but with something moving? Like a person?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

what cameras ... tried a few companies they all pushing POE as way to cable.
The CT100 & 8-core is in ... cant change it


On 01/04/2019 14:56, Bill Wright wrote:
On 01/04/2019 12:23, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.


Though it seems world has moved on and no need for wired camera
any-more ... ARLO, NEST, BLINK, RINGÂ* etc

Oh no, wired every time.


For those that know welcome your advice.

Needs ...
HD Colour (by day) camera
LED illumination for night vision
No, use a decent low light capable camera and install dawn to dusk
visible lighting. Deterrent value exceeds CCTV value. Have a look on
https://www.donvalley.tv/cctv
The picture with the grey car is lit only by 10W LEDs, one of which is
near the ramp and the other is near the car. The vans in the distance
are lit by a 10W LED that's a long way from the vans. The camera is not
set to frame store. If you do that you can record in what to the eye is
near total darkness.

Recording - with at least 15 days storage
Ideally motion activated - with adjustable zones
No, just record everything. But have a high frame rate. 25 or 30 fps.
Anything less can miss things, surprisingly.

Bill

On 01/04/2019 18:41, rick wrote:
what cameras ... tried a few companies they all pushing POE as way to
cable.
The CT100 & 8-core is in ... cant change it

We use Nite devils
http://www.nitedevil.com/

Bill

Bill Wright wrote:
On 01/04/2019 18:41, rick wrote:
what cameras ... tried a few companies they all pushing POE as way to
cable.
The CT100 & 8-core is in ... cant change it

We use Nite devils
http://www.nitedevil.com/

Bill


They are great, I use one of the little ones in the pond because it is very
easy to make fully submersible .
Tadpoles ,Newts etc are as savage to each other as sharks when viewed
close up.

GH

"rick" wrote in message
...
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8 core
alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

Though it seems world has moved on and no need for wired camera any-more
... ARLO, NEST, BLINK, RING etc

There are still some advantages with a wired system,
particularly more choice at the higher resolutions
which you may prefer if you want to be able to
read number plates at greater distances.

While many may not need to be able to read
number plates, some do, most obviously with
blocks of flats that see arseholes show up with
lots of rubbish to use the block's rubbish system.

For those that know welcome your advice.

Needs ...
HD Colour (by day) camera
LED illumination for night vision
Recording - with at least 15 days storage
Ideally motion activated - with adjustable zones

I think that needs to be more than ideally.
Otherwise you can spend a long time going
thru the footage to find when something
undesirable happened.

2-way voice only needed on one camera
Remote monitoring & alarm to a phone app

Welcome advice on anyone who has installed such a system ...

Dont bother with arlo. While the activity trigger works fine
inside the house, it doesnt work with the camera inside
looking out thru a window for some reason. Not at all clear
why. Maybe it uses a PIR sensor and not the video image.
You cant really specify activity areas in the image and there
is no line crossing capability either. And it isnt obvious from
the sales bull**** that 24/7 logging isnt free and isnt cheap.

Don't really need WiFi
Really want mains powered cameras (or remote DC supply) - changing
Batteries on high up cameras is not what I want to do.

Another consideration is theft of the cameras, they arent
that cheap and it would be better if they are harder to steal.

Can you for example mix other cameras with Arlo system .... could use 2
high up cameras connected using the existing cable .... and WiFi (with
remote power for other 3.

No, you have a separate system for those two types of cameras.

The main brands to look at are Hikvision and Ubiquity.

I havent got around to getting something better than the arlo system yet.

On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 20:22:32 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

On 01/04/2019 18:41, rick wrote:
what cameras ... tried a few companies they all pushing POE as way to
cable.
The CT100 & 8-core is in ... cant change it

We use Nite devils
http://www.nitedevil.com/

I like the idea of natural low light abilities, possibly enhanced with
traditional PIR Led flood lamps?

Which ones in particular or what would you recommend for yer typical
back garden with the camera under the soffit?

Cheers, T i m

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 01/04/2019 12:23, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8 core
alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.


Though it seems world has moved on and no need for wired camera any-more
... ARLO, NEST, BLINK, RING etc

Oh no, wired every time.


For those that know welcome your advice.

Needs ...
HD Colour (by day) camera
LED illumination for night vision
No, use a decent low light capable camera and install dawn to dusk visible
lighting. Deterrent value exceeds CCTV value. Have a look on
https://www.donvalley.tv/cctv
The picture with the grey car is lit only by 10W LEDs, one of which is
near the ramp and the other is near the car. The vans in the distance are
lit by a 10W LED that's a long way from the vans. The camera is not set to
frame store. If you do that you can record in what to the eye is near
total darkness.

Trouble is you can't read the van number plates.

Recording - with at least 15 days storage
Ideally motion activated - with adjustable zones

No, just record everything.

Trouble with that approach is that that you have
to watch hours of tape to find what you want.

But have a high frame rate. 25 or 30 fps. Anything less can miss things,
surprisingly.

On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 09:28:39 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH more of the senile asshole's ****

Darn, and this thread was without your ****, so far! tsk

--
Sqwertz to Rot Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 14:56:04 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 &
8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

That's a curious statement Bill. Baseband video implies only SD
resolution, which is pretty crappy by todays standards at nominally
720x576.

My old (approx 5 years) and cheap (£100 ish) IP camera can do
2048x1536 @ 20fps. Wouldn't be surprised to find 4k (3840x2160) IP
cameras in the same price range these days.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 10:12:00 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

Trouble is

Trouble is that you are a clinically insane, auto-contradicting senile
asshole from Oz!

--
Bill Wright addressing senile Ozzie cretin Rot Speed:
"Well you make up a lot of stuff and it's total ******** most of it."
MID:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 01/04/2019 18:41, rick wrote:
what cameras ... tried a few companies they all pushing POE as way to
cable.
The CT100 & 8-core is in ... cant change it

We use Nite devils
http://www.nitedevil.com/

Do any of them allow you to read the number plates of most of the cars in
view ?

Pretty ****ed site, no way to read the manuals before buying and
it isnt even obvious how you get the full details on each camera.

On 02/04/2019 00:45, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 14:56:04 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 &
8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

That's a curious statement Bill. Baseband video implies only SD
resolution, which is pretty crappy by todays standards at nominally
720x576.

Of course it doesn't. TVI is baseband analogue.

Bill

On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 10:56:35 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Do any of them allow you to read the number plates of most of the cars in
view ?

Obviously nobody gives a **** about what you say or ask, senile Rot, even in
this thread! LOL

--
Bill Wright addressing senile Ozzie cretin Rot Speed:
"Well you make up a lot of stuff and it's total ******** most of it."
MID:

On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 04:15:55 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

That's a curious statement Bill. Baseband video implies only SD
resolution, which is pretty crappy by todays standards at
nominally
720x576.

Of course it doesn't. TVI is baseband analogue.

My "new thing for today", thanks Bill. B-)

However from a quick google TVI maxes out at HD (1920x1080), which is
better than SD but it's still less than my old my old IP camera.

It will run over that coax, assuming that the coax isn't too long,
giving too much loss at the high frequency end resulting in soft
images. Probably not an issue for a domestic instalation.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 04:15:55 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

That's a curious statement Bill. Baseband video implies only SD
resolution, which is pretty crappy by todays standards at
nominally
720x576.

Of course it doesn't. TVI is baseband analogue.

My "new thing for today", thanks Bill. B-)

However from a quick google TVI maxes out at HD (1920x1080), which is
better than SD but it's still less than my old my old IP camera.

Better than French 819 line then.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

On 02/04/2019 00:45, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 14:56:04 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 &
8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

That's a curious statement Bill. Baseband video implies only SD
resolution, which is pretty crappy by todays standards at nominally
720x576.

My old (approx 5 years) and cheap (£100 ish) IP camera can do
2048x1536 @ 20fps. Wouldn't be surprised to find 4k (3840x2160) IP
cameras in the same price range these days.

I have cctv ip cameras, 3 hikvisions and 1 merit lilin, and they all
take pictures and record to my NAS server.

"RobH" wrote in message
...
On 02/04/2019 00:45, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 14:56:04 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 &
8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

That's a curious statement Bill. Baseband video implies only SD
resolution, which is pretty crappy by todays standards at nominally
720x576.

My old (approx 5 years) and cheap (£100 ish) IP camera can do
2048x1536 @ 20fps. Wouldn't be surprised to find 4k (3840x2160) IP
cameras in the same price range these days.

I have cctv ip cameras, 3 hikvisions and 1 merit lilin, and they all take
pictures and record to my NAS server.

How do you find them in practice ? Can you read car number plates ?

On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 06:52:15 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


How do you find them in practice ? Can you read car number plates ?

Go troll in an Australian ng, you obnoxious trolling senile Ozzie pest!

--
FredXX to Rot Speed:
"You are still an idiot and an embarrassment to your country. No wonder
we shippe the likes of you out of the British Isles. Perhaps stupidity
and criminality is inherited after all?"
Message-ID:

On 02/04/2019 18:20, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 04:15:55 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

That's a curious statement Bill. Baseband video implies only SD
resolution, which is pretty crappy by todays standards at
nominally
720x576.

Of course it doesn't. TVI is baseband analogue.

My "new thing for today", thanks Bill. B-)

However from a quick google TVI maxes out at HD (1920x1080), which is
better than SD but it's still less than my old my old IP camera.

It will run over that coax, assuming that the coax isn't too long,
giving too much loss at the high frequency end resulting in soft
images. Probably not an issue for a domestic instalation.

It only goes up to about 10MHz so losses are minimal. It's easy to
compensate for HF losses with a slope filter.

Bill

In article , Bill Wright
scribeth thus
On 01/04/2019 12:23, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

Can you say why that is Bill?...




Though it seems world has moved on and no need for wired camera any-more
... ARLO, NEST, BLINK, RING* etc

Oh no, wired every time.


For those that know welcome your advice.

Needs ...
HD Colour (by day) camera
LED illumination for night vision
No, use a decent low light capable camera and install dawn to dusk
visible lighting. Deterrent value exceeds CCTV value. Have a look on
https://www.donvalley.tv/cctv
The picture with the grey car is lit only by 10W LEDs, one of which is
near the ramp and the other is near the car. The vans in the distance
are lit by a 10W LED that's a long way from the vans. The camera is not
set to frame store. If you do that you can record in what to the eye is
near total darkness.

Recording - with at least 15 days storage
Ideally motion activated - with adjustable zones
No, just record everything. But have a high frame rate. 25 or 30 fps.
Anything less can miss things, surprisingly.

Bill

--
Tony Sayer


Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

On 1 Apr 2019 19:40:18 GMT, Marland
wrote:

Bill Wright wrote:
On 01/04/2019 18:41, rick wrote:
what cameras ... tried a few companies they all pushing POE as way to
cable.
The CT100 & 8-core is in ... cant change it

We use Nite devils
http://www.nitedevil.com/


They are great, I use one of the little ones in the pond because it is very
easy to make fully submersible .
Tadpoles ,Newts etc are as savage to each other as sharks when viewed
close up.

;-)

Have you tried others OOI and were they not as good (lightwise) in
those conditions or were they not used for other reasons?

Cheers, T i m

On 03/04/2019 13:14, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
scribeth thus
On 01/04/2019 12:23, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

Can you say why that is Bill?...

We find it to be more 'solid' and less prone to interference.

Bill

If it's wireless IP then yes there would be potential for lack of robustness and interference.

But if it was wired ethernet IP those problems go away surely?

T i m wrote:
On 1 Apr 2019 19:40:18 GMT, Marland
wrote:

Bill Wright wrote:


We use Nite devils
http://www.nitedevil.com/


They are great, I use one of the little ones in the pond because it is very
easy to make fully submersible .
Tadpoles ,Newts etc are as savage to each other as sharks when viewed
close up.

;-)

Have you tried others OOI and were they not as good (lightwise) in
those conditions or were they not used for other reasons?

Cheers, T i m

Ignoring some experiments waterproofing an old Microsoft webcam with one of
those liquid tape products with limited success the first attempt approx 8
years ago using a commercial camera was one of these which were widely
available for years from various suppliers with resolutions increasing as
time went on.
https://images.app.goo.gl/ZxZ7xkwYvw6pVTiW9

It turned out to be pretty useless for what I wanted it for which was to
watch the wildlife in the wildlife pond as the slightest murk reflected the
light back from the built in LEDs so nothing could really be seen beyond.

So I took a punt on one of these from the nite devil range,
https://images.app.goo.gl/3CYwSh7Fan5isujf

They come with different lens sizes so one for close up detail can be
chosen over one that has a wider field of view as even with powerful
illumination the water of a wildlife pond is rarely so clear that some
light isnt reflected back and hides things so you are not going to be
looking too far.And the beauty of these nitedevils is that they dont need
a lot of light to give an image and dont come with LEDs attached, a light
source from elsewhere where it is illuminating the target area rather then
than from the camera where it just reflects back is far better but not
really needed in normal daylight the nitedevil workimg well on ambient
light penetrating to the 15€� depth it was supported at .
The manufacture claims they are waterproof, that isnt quite true out of
the box.
What is waterproof is the camera and the short length of cable to the
connectors in the attached mounting bracket . The connections to
external cables then have to be made waterproof after connecting if the
whole assembly is being submersed, I did ours by potting them in resin.
When I purchased ours it was about 540 line and that gave a reasonable
image on the TV screen but I see now they are 700.
Ours did eventually fail but that was after three years of submersion and I
suspect was the cable failing rather than the camera.

I will replace it but the supplier hinted they may introduce a HD version
soon so will wait to see if they do.


GH

On 3 Apr 2019 16:48:39 GMT
Marland wrote:

It turned out to be pretty useless for what I wanted it for which was
to watch the wildlife in the wildlife pond as the slightest murk
reflected the light back from the built in LEDs so nothing could
really be seen beyond.

Did you try adding a polarising filter?

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 03/04/2019 13:14, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
scribeth thus
On 01/04/2019 12:23, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

Can you say why that is Bill?...

We find it to be more 'solid'

Yes.

and less prone to interference.

That can't fly given that ip is digital.

On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 05:18:08 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Yes.

and less prone to interference.

That can't fly given that ip is digital.

LOL STILL no feedback for you in this thread, even though you keep trying
and trying, senile Rot? Maybe you need an another new nym yet? LMAO!

--
Bill Wright to Rot Speed:
"That confirms my opinion that you are a despicable little ****."
MID:

Rob Morley wrote:
On 3 Apr 2019 16:48:39 GMT
Marland wrote:

It turned out to be pretty useless for what I wanted it for which was
to watch the wildlife in the wildlife pond as the slightest murk
reflected the light back from the built in LEDs so nothing could
really be seen beyond.

Did you try adding a polarising filter?



No,
but even if I had thought of it the units dont really lend themselves to
having one fitted which would mean gluing one the front.
But thanks for the suggestion , I have a cheap and cheerful camera aimed
for angling use which has a small submersible camera with some leds whose
cable links to a base unit containing a battery and its own WiFi
transmitter which I could experiment with.

GH

On 3 Apr 2019 16:48:39 GMT, Marland
wrote:

snip

Ignoring some experiments waterproofing an old Microsoft webcam with one of
those liquid tape products with limited success the first attempt approx 8
years ago using a commercial camera was one of these which were widely
available for years from various suppliers with resolutions increasing as
time went on.
https://images.app.goo.gl/ZxZ7xkwYvw6pVTiW9

Not seen those before.

It turned out to be pretty useless for what I wanted it for which was to
watch the wildlife in the wildlife pond as the slightest murk reflected the
light back from the built in LEDs so nothing could really be seen beyond.

So I took a punt on one of these from the nite devil range,
https://images.app.goo.gl/3CYwSh7Fan5isujf

(404 error) ;-(

They come with different lens sizes so one for close up detail can be
chosen over one that has a wider field of view as even with powerful
illumination the water of a wildlife pond is rarely so clear that some
light isn’t reflected back and hides things so you are not going to be
looking too far.

Makes sense (like headlights in fog).

And the beauty of these nitedevils is that they don’t need
a lot of light to give an image and don’t come with LEDs attached,

I've found built in IR LEDs are a pain when using a camera with them
when filming though a window etc (reflections all over the place).

a light
source from elsewhere where it is illuminating the target area rather then
than from the camera where it just reflects back is far better but not
really needed in normal daylight the nitedevil workimg well on ambient
light penetrating to the 15” depth it was supported at .

Sweet.

The manufacture claims they are waterproof, that isn’t quite true out of
the box.

Ok. ;-(

What is waterproof is the camera and the short length of cable to the
connectors in the attached mounting bracket . The connections to
external cables then have to be made waterproof after connecting if the
whole assembly is being submersed, I did ours by potting them in resin.

Neat.

When I purchased ours it was about 540 line and that gave a reasonable
image on the TV screen but I see now they are 700.

A small NVR I have displays 700L on the screen when no input is
attached so I was guessing that was the maximum resolution that box
could support?

Ours did eventually fail but that was after three years of submersion and I
suspect was the cable failing rather than the camera.

Not bad under those conditions agreed.

I will replace it but the supplier hinted they may introduce a HD version
soon so will wait to see if they do.

Did you have to clean the lens very often in that application?

Cheers, T i m

T i m wrote:
On 3 Apr 2019 16:48:39 GMT, Marland

So I took a punt on one of these from the nite devil range,
https://images.app.goo.gl/3CYwSh7Fan5isujf

(404 error) ;-(

Try this one
http://www.nitedevil.com/nitedevil-advancevision.html

They come with different lens sizes so one for close up detail can be
chosen over one that has a wider field of view as even with powerful
illumination the water of a wildlife pond is rarely so clear that some



Did you have to clean the lens very often in that application?


About once a week in the months from Jan to October,
not difficult as although it lived about 15 inches below the surface a
home made bracket attacked to a
bridge over the pond allowed that to be adjusted or the camera brought to
the surface.
Often obscured by a pond snail deciding to hang about on it though.

In the spirit of DIY the bracket was fashioned from bits of a plastic seat
that goes across a bath to support
an invalid/old person . The bridge is about 3 €œabove the surface and
fashioned from some small RSJs supporting the deck made from cast Iron
grids of the kind used used above heating pipes in churches and
old style greenhouses. Pond plants to an extent are allowed to grow up
through them so you get a walking on water effect.

GH

In article , Rod Speed
scribeth thus


"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 03/04/2019 13:14, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
scribeth thus
On 01/04/2019 12:23, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

Can you say why that is Bill?...

We find it to be more 'solid'

Yes.

and less prone to interference.

That can't fly given that ip is digital.


Yes it can it is sure digital but there are distance limitations on CAT5
cables.

Other than that it is a very robust system being balanced line...

--
Tony Sayer


Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Rod Speed
scribeth thus


"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 03/04/2019 13:14, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
scribeth thus
On 01/04/2019 12:23, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

Can you say why that is Bill?...

We find it to be more 'solid'

Yes.

and less prone to interference.

That can't fly given that ip is digital.

Yes it can it is sure digital but there are
distance limitations on CAT5 cables.

That’s not interference tho.

Other than that it is a very robust system being balanced line...

And that’s what makes it immune to interference.

On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 11:57:12 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH more senile troll****

....and much better air in here again!

--
about senile Rot Speed:
"This is like having a conversation with someone with brain damage."
MID:

On 04/04/2019 21:38, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Rod Speed
scribeth thus


"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 03/04/2019 13:14, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
scribeth thus
On 01/04/2019 12:23, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

Can you say why that is Bill?...

We find it to be more 'solid'

Yes.

and less prone to interference.

That can't fly given that ip is digital.


Yes it can it is sure digital but there are distance limitations on CAT5
cables.

But IP cameras will work over 10,000s of miles.
Without any loses.

It doesn't even need to be cat5.


Other than that it is a very robust system being balanced line...

On 05/04/2019 14:24, dennis@home wrote:
On 04/04/2019 21:38, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Rod Speed
scribeth thus


"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
On 03/04/2019 13:14, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
scribeth thus
On 01/04/2019 12:23, rick wrote:
Want to put a CCTV system on the house.

On advice of a company that supplied such thing I have run CT100 & 8
core alarm cable (DC supply & switching)
to 4 high points and there are IP66 boxes fixed in readiness.

That's all right. Coax and baseband video is better than IP.

Can you say why that is Bill?...

We find it to be more 'solid'

Yes.

and less prone to interference.

That can't fly given that ip is digital.


Yes it can it is sure digital but there are distance limitations on CAT5
cables.

But IP cameras will work over 10,000s of miles.
Without any loses.

But not without repeaters.

It doesn't even need to be cat5.

Cat5 will give you 100M. That's big enough for my garden.

Andy

On 05/04/2019 01:57, Rod Speed wrote:

Other than that it is a very robust system being balanced line...

And that’s what makes it immune to interference.

It doesn't seem to be completely immune.

Bill

On 05/04/2019 21:29, Vir Campestris wrote:

Cat5 will give you 100M. That's big enough for my garden.

Andy

It must be dreadful having so little space.

Bill