Home Security Camera's recommend?

[Maverik]

Hi Folks, I'm looking for a security system for garage and property, maybe camera type stuff... does anyone have any recommendations at all google searching just pulls up all sorts of reviews which just so happen to be done by suppliers... was looking for something a bit more independent...?

Cheers

Mav

[ejparrott]

A good system is going to cost a good amount of money. CPC keeping offering systems with cameras and recorders, they're not expensive, but they won't be able to give you a picture perfect image of a burglers face should the need arise.

[Cynic-al]

It's a tricky one, it really comes down to what you want to do. We have a coax 16 camera system at work. I would say if you know the person you can identify them but if they were a stranger you would struggle to pick out unique features. If a car is driving along the road you can identify make model and colour but you can't pick out numberplate. However to make the jump to a camera that can is a huge jump in cost. You really need to come away from coax. Ive used some nice ip cameras but they were big bucks. Obviously the closer you can get the camera to the object the more detail you get but the easier it is for people to tamper and the more cameras you need to cover the area. If your using ir night cameras you need to be able to De spider them otherwise the webs blind you. We have a paint brush on a stick. We've put flood lights around some of the cameras as the night range just isn't good enough.

As for the controller most offer remote monitoring. Some you can pan tilt and zoom cameras but that's no use after the event. We also have an output on ours so it's wired to an electric gate so you can open it remotely.

Most of the work ours has had has been the police knocking on the door to see if cars came past. It also recorded a plane hitting a lamp post on the road which was random

Let me know how you get on, it's something I keep saying I'm going to do when I see the systems advertised at a few hundred quid but by the time I've specified it up its costing more than the stuff worth. Lol

[CwazyWabbit]

I purchased an old PTZ camera and housing that I point to wherever I've managed to park my car, it's an old coax system and the joystick/controllers cost more than the cameras do! However you can use a cheap rs485 converter from ebay and a bit of software called PTZ Controller that you run on a PC to move them around meaning you don't need the joystick

It has a 36x optical zoom which means I can park quite a way down the road and still get a close up view of the 110.

As for the DVR I have an old commercial DVR that can record from 16 cameras, I'm only running a few cameras and as it's currently set up I get over 2 weeks of 24/7 recording.

So far it's recorded one attempted theft of the 110, a raid by two minibus loads of police in riot gear, some kids who stole a load of tools from garden sheds, some bloke who received eye for an eye justice, and a few other burglars making their getaway.....

As you may have guessed I get the occasional request from the police to check if I've seen anything.

[pete3000]

Hikvision, sounds cheap nasty chinese, but wow for the price the quality of their 2 line stuff is impressive 3mp ip cameras and recorders for not much money.

no affiliation, apart from this is the third lot of their kit we have bought for work/home. outperforms the axis/panasonic kit we have hands down.

cameras etc from £104 each

http://www.cctvkits.co.uk/brands/hikvision/hikvision-ip-range.html

http://www.cctvkits.co.uk/hikvisionds7604nvr.html £150 (need to chuck a sata disk in of your choosing to record)

[Scotts90]

I bought a 4camera/1tb Dvr combo from eBay for my mum's house after she was plagued by brats throwing stones at windows, breaking planters etc. They're 1080p, waterproof and seem to do the job of deterring the miscreants. It's a hard wired setup, installed at such a height as ladders would be needed to tamper with the wiring or move the camera positions. The whole kit cost £250, I have it linked to my Mums WLAN so she can access all the cameras from her tablet or iPhone as the DVR is setup in the spare room. It has movement alert software which sends an alarm to the phone so ideal if she hears something during the night...all cameras can be accessed without leaving her bed!

We also have "cow cam" systems at the farm, these are similar cameras with no DVR, but have a 2.4gh transmitter built in which feeds to antenna on the shed roof, we then have an antenna/receiver in the farmhouse and out at the bungalow that the father in law stays in...this is full colour with sound. Both my brother and father in law have small pocket sized monitors that they can view when working about the farm to check on beasts that are calving. This is ideal as the amount of wiring required for a hardware system would be excessive...may be worthwhile if your garage is remote from the house.

I had looked at the Swann ones that Maplin sells too, they seem to get decent reviews.

[zardos]

A couple of years ago I tried a few camera setups out.
The Swann many other analog camera bundles you see around were all based on the same piece of Chinese built hardware and software, just in a different box with different branding on the software and all were useless.
The crashed a lot when asked to do more than one camera at full resolution and being analog the quality of the video was very bad.

So I would stay away from anything analog based including stuff claiming 1080p as it tended to be 1080p at 15 frames per second for 1 camera, adding a second camera would mean the frame rate would drop.

The sensor (CCD) is a digital device, having to turn the signal in to analogue for transmission and then back to digital for recording just lowers the quality of the picture and capabilities.

Therefore I went for IP CCTV system because you can get megapixel cameras that do the digital encoding on board and then send out a digital video stream (or record it in the camera itself).
This has a much clearer picture

The other point I found that applies to both types of system is that motion triggered recording was not very useful, you would always wanted to see a bit more of what happened before or after the event and all system seemed to have a limited pre event buffer and a limited event recording time.
I found it much better to set it to record 24x7 and then send single frame pictures of the motion event as these would give you an idea of what was happening and then you could go and get as much pre/post event video as you needed

Also for night time recording a separate Infra Red light source is better than the ones with LEDS around the camera lens (very difficult to not get LEDS around the lens but you can usually just turn them off).
The reason for this is 2 fold.
1) the LEDS around the lens tended to always bleed/reflect light in to camera, washing out the edges of the picture.
2) the LEDS would attract Insects to the lens at night, triggering motion events and then a spider will take up residence to capture the attracted insects, triggering more motion events day and night and the spider would attract birds during the day, triggering more motion events

I ended up with a decent IP CCTV camera from https://www.use-ip.co.uk/ and NAS to store everything on.

[zardos]

It has a 36x optical zoom which means I can park quite a way down the road and still get a close up view of the 110.

I hope you have registered yourself with ICO to comply with the Data protection Act, CCTV recording of public property was a bit of a gray area on if you need to register as an individual (See https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/cctv/%C2'> for old details ) BUT I believe there was a court case recent which clarified this, meaning you MUST register under the Data protection Act even if as an individual if your CCTV image covers any part of public property.

[V8 Freak]

Does public property cover a lamppost and a small stretch of tarmac??

Everything else around me is privately owned and my camera out front doesn't cover any buildings, windows, gardens etc.

Interested as this wasn't mentioned in any documentation provided with the cameras...

[David Sparkes]

Scotts90:

Are you using white light, or IR? Is it the same answer for both your Mums house and the Cow cams?

If IR, what sort of useful range do you get? Can you identify faces, or clothing?

Zardos:

You explain the value of not having the light source near the lens. The limitations, and work-around, of event triggering is also clearly explained. The inference is that you are using additional IR lighting (I'm taking the term 'LED' to be common to both a white light source and an IR source).

Same question, if IR, what sort of useful range do you get? Can you identify faces, or clothing? (People, not cows :-))

Regards.

[Scotts90]

The cameras at my mums have the IR LEDs around the lens and for what we need them for appear to be adequate. I have security floodlighting around her house so that triggers too so I find the Infra red part not entirely necessary, but watching at night without the floodlights on is fine. I'm not entirely sure on maximum range as I have them set up only to survey my mums property...not onto the public footpath out front, so at the 10-12m range (I think the data said 25m) they are clear enough for identifying anyone entering the grounds. It is more of a visual deterrent though, we erected a sign stating there was cctv operating within the ground and have had no issue since.

The cow cams are inside lit sheds, so have white light source but they also have IR fitted too.

[CwazyWabbit]

Does public property cover a lamppost and a small stretch of tarmac??

Everything else around me is privately owned and my camera out front doesn't cover any buildings, windows, gardens etc.

Interested as this wasn't mentioned in any documentation provided with the cameras...

It does Neil, the ICO have updated their guidance. https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/cctv/

Moe about the court case here https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/news-and-events/blogs/public-law-blog/watch-this-space-domestic-cctv-cameras-and-public-areas

[zardos]

Zardos:

You explain the value of not having the light source near the lens. The limitations, and work-around, of event triggering is also clearly explained. The inference is that you are using additional IR lighting (I'm taking the term 'LED' to be common to both a white light source and an IR source).

Same question, if IR, what sort of useful range do you get? Can you identify faces, or clothing? (People, not cows :-))

Regards.

Yes my additional light source is Infra Red, http://www.amazon.co.uk/DBPOWER-Infrared-Illuminator-Camera-Adapter/dp/B00AART2P2/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Not actually tried testing range as my camera is pointing quite sharply down and so is the light and not tested recognition capabilities.

But the IR flood light was a big improvement over the camera IR LEDs

[skauldy]

I know not much input but I'm running a tender at work and suppliers coming back with sexy avigilon systems. Wow what a camera system.

something that may help. I would definitely go IP for crispness over analogue. The difference is night and day in quality of picture

[skauldy]

One of the suppliers has a chart with the camera mpeg, distance and what the quality of picture you will get. I ask him for a copy of it. Will give you an idea

[zardos]

I was thinking about the change in the DPA interpretation because of the court case.

Would this now mean that anybody with a mobile phone or camera or one of these dashboard cameras would now be subject to DPA if taking pictures in a public place?

What makes these cameras different in their ability to record and store personal information to a CCTV camera?

[CwazyWabbit]

Probably the fact that cctv is not ad-hoc but will always catch someone in a certain area. Even a dashcam which is the closest thing to cctv is regularly moving around so doesn't guarantee to catch people in a certain place.

[Troll Hunter]

I'm surprised at some of the views above regarding distance detail, and probably facial recognition. A while ago this thread

http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=89394&hl=%2Bwindscreen+%2Bcameras

seemed to show that there were windscreen cams that the stored image could be zoomed to read reg plates at a considerable distance, and these weren't mega bucks. Do w/s cameras operate on a different technology, or were the ones demonstrated in the posts exceptions?

Mike

[skauldy]

We have 2mb IP camera on the entrance get. It is approx 5Mtrs away and 5 mtrs off the ground. It is a narrow vision one if you get me. When you pause the footage and if you selected the exact area size of the reg it pixelates like f**k and you cant read it. You have to zoom out and then it gets fun if someone has fitted the plate and put a screw through the 0 or on the 5.

[BogMonster]

I hope you have registered yourself with ICO to comply with the Data protection Act, CCTV recording of public property was a bit of a gray area on if you need to register as an individual (See for old details ) BUT I believe there was a court case recent which clarified this, meaning you MUST register under the Data protection Act even if as an individual if your CCTV image covers any part of public property.

To which my reply to anybody objecting would be that the objector could either kindly send police to monitor the area regularly and I would take the camera down, or **** off and mind their own business.

[Cynic-al]

Must admit I don't know the details of the law, I can't see how people could object to filming in a public place as I don't see how it's any different to just standing there watching. I appreciate thats rarely how the law works but my experience is the police and anyone else that's been subjected to a theft or accident are more than grateful of the footage.

[zardos]

I checked about dashboard cameras and most places say you would be excluded due to which is the same section for personal CCTV (so might not be excluded)

In the case which caused the change I think the person being filmed in a public place was a person committing a crime, so they were objecting and trying to get the video evidence made in admissible because the collection of the video did not comply with the DPA.

But what is a narrow or wide interpretation I have no idea? (Just some judge without a clue I think)

Given that ICO say "However, we recognise that individuals need time to adjust to these developments in the law. We do not propose to take action during the coming year against an individual for failing to register their use of domestic CCTV cameras following this judgement, except in exceptional cases. If the position changes we will update this guidance."
I think they are probably not really going to bother chasing an personal DPA infringements.

So say "**** off" might be OK, just don't rely on the video being admissible as evidence if you don't comply. (The police might be able to use it to help gather other evidence/target their other enquires though)

[Landrovergal]

I had a company come out and give me a quote for 3 HD infra red cameras with a 4tb recorder. It was around £1200.

I've priced round and can install my own system, exactly the same specs for around £800.

I would be going for PoE (power over Ethernet) cameras up a lampost at the bottom of the garden. Up a conduit and into the house.

The cameras will all be on the same post and will film the two entrancesand the farm yard. The DVR I will be buying will have 4 PoE ports in the event I want to add another camera.

I would seriously look at installing your own system, PoE makes it incredibly easy to install.

Lacey

[zardos]

Yes PoE is good, mine is PoE.

A lot of cheap non PoE cameras have short non changeable power and video leads which mean you have to put a waterproof junction box very close to the camera.

My camera actually came with a short power and Ethernet socket that entered the camera via a 2 cable moulded rubber bung, but it also came with a replacement rubber bung for just Ethernet.
This meant it was easy to replace with a single longer Ethernet cable that did not require any waterproof junction boxes.