TB-Project Company, Panasonic's distributor in the video surveillance equipment segment, presents a new series of high-performance Full HD domes i-PRO cameras SmartHD, cost effective, industry leading dynamic range 133dB, minimum sensitivity of 0.07 lux in color mode and intelligent motion detectors (i-VMD).
TD "Leader-SB" presents a new IP video recorder Praxis VDR-6216IP.
The Amicom brand has added a new IP video camera Beward BD3590Z30, which is designed for obtaining close-ups with increased detail. Hardware 3x WDR performs high-quality processing of scenes with illumination differences of more than 50 thousand times. High frame rate of 50 fps provides clear images of fast moving objects.
"TB Project Company", distributor trademark TVhelp, a domestic developer and manufacturer of video surveillance equipment, presents a model range of Standart series street cameras with a resolution of 3 MP.
TB-Project Company, distributor of the TVhelp brand, announces the start of sales of IP video surveillance equipment.
TD "Leader-SB" announces the availability of new professional IP video cameras for street surveillance PROvision PVF-IR305IPC and PV-IR305IPC.
TB Project Company, an official partner of Samsung, announces the start of sales of a new 3-megapixel cylindrical IP camera SNO-7084RP, which generates a video stream with a maximum resolution of 2048x1536. The new product supports transmission of three-megapixel video at a speed of 30 fps and Full HD video at a frame rate of 60 fps.
TD "Leader-SB" announces the availability of new IP video cameras eVidence Apix - Bullet / E2 36 and Apix - Dome / M3 LED AF 309 with resolution 2 MP And 3 MP, respectively. At the same time, in resolution Full HD both video cameras broadcast video in real time. The new items are equipped with infrared illumination with a range of up to 25 meters.
The 7th International All-over-IP Forum 2014 traditionally brought together well-known world brands and bright technology premieres, eminent industry experts and promising business newcomers under one roof.
At this event, connections are established and contracts are concluded, new technologies are presented and the vector of development for the near future is determined.
The line of equipment for network video surveillance presented at the TB Project Company, the official dealer of Samsung, was replenished with the new cased SNB-7004P without a lens, built on the basis 3 MP sensor, which has a set of intelligent video analytics functions in its functionality.
Vivotek has released three brand new 3 megapixel WDR Pro network cameras, two of them are fixed dome IP cameras, FD8173-H and FD8373-EHV, and one bullet camera - IB8373-EH.
Leader-SB is pleased to present to your attention the new IP video camera Etrovision N70Q-B. The new product is built on a modern 3 Megapixel CMOS matrix (resolution 2048x1536).
Arecont Vision has made several significant improvements to its popular all-in-one MegaDome 2 series of megapixel day/night cameras equipped with Stellar(Spatio Temporal Low Light Architecture), used in low light conditions, offline memory option up to 32 GB using SDHC cards; function Corridorview, allowing you to rotate the image 90 degrees to better review in halls and corridors; as well as advanced image scaling capabilities across multiple resolutions to better match system throughput and storage requirements.
TH "Leader-SB" announces the availability of a new IP video camera J2000IP-mPWV6013-Ir3-PDN with a high resolution of 3 MP. The new product is distinguished by vandal-proof all-weather design and high sensitivity to light along with a high range of IR illumination.
TD "Leader-SB" presents a new IP video camera Berger BNC-3112ZWR, which has the latest matrix, excellent sensitivity, and also supports remote power and is compatible with the ONVIF standard.
Samsung is expanding its lineup with new video surveillance solutions that deliver high performance.
"TB Project Company" - the official distributor of the Panasonic brand, presents an overview of the new products in the line of video surveillance systems - IP dome cameras: WV-SF539E and WV-SF538E. These models are intended for indoor installation (temperature environment up to -10°C), support Full HD stream, have a rich set of functions, take power from PoE, and in addition are easily combined with various devices external nature, including mobile phones.
TD "Leader-SB" announces the arrival of a new product from HikVision - a compact 3-megapixel IP video camera DS-2CD2032-I. This revolutionary model has high resolution 2048x1536 pixels and allows surveillance both indoors and outdoors, in absolute darkness, thanks to infrared illumination with a range of 30 meters
The TB Project company has begun supplying new IP cameras of the EverFocus brand - models EHN3160, EHN3260 and EHN3340. All of them are made in dome housings, equipped with IR illumination and varifocal optics, and also support broadcasting HD streams in real time. The protection class of all three models meets IP66 requirements, and the temperature range ranges from -40°C to +55°C.
EverFocus has released compact network fixed dome cameras designed for installation even in railway transport.
The MegaBall series of spherical cameras is available in several variations, differing in configuration, which allows for flexibility in organizing the surveillance system and maximally meeting customer requirements.
At the Essen show, Grundig recently showcased its expanded range of network, analogue and HD-SDI video surveillance products, including 22- and 24-inch LED monitors with 16:9 format.
Samsung has introduced a new series of 3-megapixel network cameras. The updated 7002 Professional Series models not only offer high definition, but also include many innovative features and functions. The new items have already arrived at the warehouse of the brand's distributor - the TB Project company.
Brickcom has released a 3MP night vision dome network camera in its MD-300N IP camera series.
The Smartec OPTi range of IP cameras were all distinguished by high functionality and image quality. Two new dome products from this series - STC-IPM3578A and STC-IPM3597A - presented by the brand's premier partner, AVALON, are long-awaited new products, and they are not inferior to their brothers - real-time recording, three-stream transmission, 2D DNR, WDR functions , PoE and much more.
Everfocus presents its latest developments products, including the new NevioHD series 1.3, 2.0 and 3.0 megapixel cameras.
The next expansion of the Samsung IP camera line did not take long to arrive. TB-Project Company is pleased to present three new products with a resolution of 3 megapixels: a fixed dome SND-7011P, a body-mounted SNB-7001P with a C/CS mount, and a dome SND-7061P with an 8.5 mm zoom lens.
TPG COMCOM announces the start of sales of a new line of professional high-resolution IP cameras - NeoVizusIP. The lineup NeoVizusIP is available in 6 models of various designs (case, street and dome) with a resolution of 2 MP and 3 MP, as well as a universal thermal housing NVH-5120HB with support for PoE power supply.
Arecont Vision has launched a new line of IP video surveillance equipment with wide dynamic range WDR. New products are aimed at creating a clear and detailed picture in conditions of extreme lighting, in other words, when there are very dark and very light areas in the frame at the same time. The line of WDR IP cameras is represented by two models: Full HD video camera AV2116 and AV3116 with a resolution of 3 MP, having variations with automatic adjustment aperture and Day/Night mode.
Lilin has launched a new revolutionary line of Imegapro HD IP cameras that feature sense up+ technology, which successfully combats the key disadvantages of most other HD IP cameras, namely the low lower sensitivity threshold and blur of moving objects.
The TB Project company presents an overview of four new products - professional high-speed PTZ IP cameras of the Hikvision brand from the DS-2DF1-5xx and DS-2DF1-7xx lines, equipped with a highly sensitive sensor with high resolution (from 1.3 to 3 MP). The new products are of the “Day/Night” type, and representatives of the DS-2DF1-7xx, among other things, are equipped with an IR illuminator for 80 meters.
Lagging behind the company at the initial stage Sony Ericsson In introducing phones with a strong photographic component, Nokia has been very active in catching up the gap. In 2005, the company's products could not boast of innovation in this area, which created a certain niche for competitors. In 2006, we are seeing practical parity, and a number of Nokia developments are already taking the company ahead in the “arms race.” The flagship of phones with a photographic component is the Nokia N73 model, and not the one announced simultaneously with it Nokia phone N93. Why exactly the model with the junior index has become the flagship, you will find out after reading this review. Let me make a reservation that we will start with an unusual structure of the material, namely, we will talk about the camera and only then move on to other aspects of the phone.
It is no secret that Sony Ericsson, due to its small market share at the time of its appearance, was forced to become a revolutionary and move the market from a dead point. The camera on the phone was perceived solely as an unnecessary add-on that has no practical value and will not have it in the foreseeable future. A number of conservative users even declared themselves modern-day Luddites and advocated a complete abolition of the use of cameras. The strongest argument was the better quality of existing digital cameras, unnecessary overpayment for a function, and the quality of implementation, which was not very good. Having successful experience in the Japanese market, where hybrid devices are popular and widespread, Sony Ericsson gave impetus to the development of the market, today we see the consequences of this step. I'm afraid to cause another wrath from fans of this or that company, but it was Sony Ericsson who first used dual mode in Europe, that is, taking photographs in a horizontal position, placing function keys on the sides and repeating the interface of digital devices. That is, he suggested that users not relearn, but use existing experience. At first this made me smile, given the quality of the cameras, but today this is the approach most manufacturers use.
Nokia was no exception and adopted the best of Sony Ericsson's experience. I’ll make a special curtsey to the die-hard fans: learning from a competitor and borrowing successful ideas is normal, if the company ignores them, then this is where the problems begin. Borrowing does not mean direct copying and creation of one hundred percent similar products using its own element base; this is not the Nokia way, unlike one of the companies that is now losing the market at a catastrophic speed.
What conclusions were made by Nokia based on the experience of both its own and other people’s sales and products?
- A dual camera-phone interface is in demand (rather, a horizontal arrangement of the device is in demand, but this is not so important);
- Users like the lens to be covered with something so that dirt does not get on it and it does not get scratched;
- Photos should look high quality both on the phone screen and on the PC;
- The shooting mechanism should be automatic (pointed, photographed), but “advanced” users require separate settings for various parameters;
- The final device does not have to be gigantic.
The S60 platform was taken as the basis for creating photographic solutions; it allows you to quickly create complex products, integrate various camera modules, while maintaining identical settings and a unified interface. It is impossible to assume that Nokia has approached the realization of users' aspirations without creativity - the company has very creatively implemented a number of solutions in the Nokia N73.
Firstly, here for the first time a dual mode was used to such an extent, that is, on the one hand, it is a phone, on the other, a camera. Among S60-based smartphones, there are no analogues to this device in terms of camera control ideology. The previous photographic flagship Nokia N90 had a different form factor and, as a result, did not have many control keys, the practical value for consumers was low, and there was no relevant experience that came from using other devices. Everything is different here. On right side There is a paired key that performs both the role of zoom in camera mode and the role of volume control. To the right side is the shutter key, it protrudes, and a little to the left is the gallery access button. The location of the gallery key and the shutter button is not optimal - your finger automatically rests on the gallery button when you try to use it when shooting. Sony Ericsson products take this point into account; the shutter key is located exactly where the gallery button is in the Nokia N73. Considering that the location of the keys, their layout and principle of operation came from Sony Ericsson devices, there was no need to philosophize, but it was only necessary to repeat existing developments. Try to take the device with one hand and see where your finger lies and how you feel more comfortable. I think the conclusion that these two keys need to be swapped comes naturally.
The keys have a luminous blue border, this is a nice addition that allows you to work comfortably with them even in complete darkness.
The camera is located on the back surface, it is covered with a sliding shutter, which prevents the lens from getting dirty. The shutter is active; opening it automatically turns on the camera. The disadvantages of the S60 platform include some “heaviness” and low operating speed. The time from moving the curtain to the moment from which you can start shooting is about 4 seconds, about the same time is spent on focusing and shooting. In the best case, it turns out that one shot takes about 7-8 seconds. IN regular phones this time is about 4-5 seconds.
Specifications The cameras are interesting: 3.2 megapixel matrix (CMOS) using a mechanical shutter (speed from 1/1000 s to 2 s). The focal length of the lens is 5.6 mm, the lens is Tessar from Carl Zeiss. There is autofocus, and the stated focusing distance is from 10 centimeters to infinity. There is no optical zoom in the camera, while there is digital zoom (x20).
At first glance, the camera lens and technologies used seem to be equal to those used in the Nokia N93. In fact, the Nokia N73 model is much more interesting, since it brings together both the technological aspects of the cameras and big job on image processing taking into account consumer perception.
Nokia has been using a very interesting algorithm for processing the resulting images for several years: the image is analyzed and the main color zones are identified in it. Then, for the brightest colors, the phone brightens the picture and increases saturation. This is similar to the Saturation filter in graphic editor. An example of such work is a photograph depicting a bright yellow Mazda car. In the case of Nokia N73, we see that the color is not very natural, the car comes off from other objects on the street, and looks neon. It feels like the car is made in a children's coloring book, the color doesn't match the world around it.
 |
 |
 |
 |
In the photo of the church, you should pay attention to the sand; for the Nokia N73 it has an unreal yellowish tint with shadows. In Nokia N93 this effect is observed, but to a lesser extent.
 |
 |
 |
 |
For bright, colorful urban flowers, the result was predictable - we have spot shading of the flowers, which makes them look very sharp, highlighted against the background. For some reason, autofocus did not work for this photo in the Nokia N93, although everything was fine on the screen. An analogy from life can be the colored contact lenses that girls use. The color turns out bright, but its unnaturalness in some cases catches the eye, it is too clearly visible, and so it is here.
 |
 |
 |
 |
Another example would be a photograph of a memorial plaque; it is golden in color; the other colors in the sulfur photograph do not stand out. As the main, brightest color of the composition, it is drawn out in the Nokia photo; in the case of Sony Ericsson K800i, Samsung D900, the board looks more realistic, but not so catchy. What is more important for the average consumer? In my opinion, the brightness and catchiness of the picture, albeit sometimes to the detriment of its realism. There are not so many severe failures, as in the case of a car; in all other situations, realism or approximation to it is preserved.
 |
 |
 |
 |
Possible disadvantages of Nokia's approach include the difficulty of working with photographs in a graphics editor (the same Saturation filters) - the colors change too dramatically. At the same time, images from other cameras are processed better; here is an example of a photo from the K800i with changed Saturation values. It was made in 20 seconds, didn’t play much with colors, just the task was to raise the perception of the picture, make it bright (the yellow channel was raised to emphasize the corresponding flowers).
|
 |
It’s interesting that in Nokia N73, the developers for the first time brought the color change mode to the general public and made it available in the settings. If you look at the section color settings image, then the last item after all the effects is Vivid. Life colors or, more precisely, the color matching algorithm described above is still the same Saturation filter, but with larger values. That is, if you photograph, for example, grass, it begins to look bright green, a kind of carpet. It's funny that the icon for this mode shows a larger number of colors, when in fact the number of colors is reduced and the shades disappear. A possible analogy with various settings on European and Japanese televisions, in the latter, grass and nature look too bright, sometimes unnatural. Some may like it, others may not. This is purely a matter of taste.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Considering that today all manufacturers process the resulting images, and this process is isolated from users, it is not yet possible to obtain the most realistic photos on phones. Thus, the Sony Ericsson K800i uses a noise reduction system that makes pictures smooth, but small details are lost; images at maximum zoom look a little blurry (there was no such photo processing on the K750i). No manufacturer produces the image in the form in which the sensor captures it; photo post-editing includes filters that could be applied on a computer with exactly the same or better results. An alternative, as in digital point-and-shoots in the form RAW format, is absent (in point-and-shoot cameras and JPEG is not processed so much), this is a minus of all modern solutions in phones.
The optimal option in the future seems to be the possibility of obtaining the most “real” photos, which, if desired (for example, the default setting) will be processed by the phone. You can create different sets of settings (similar to what we have now for scenes). This is the correct approach when the user has a choice. At the moment, each manufacturer decides for us what is best for us. IN digital photography companies have already weaned themselves from this bad habit.
As subtotal we can say that photographs from the Nokia N73 may lose fine details due to the colors being pulled out. Errors in perception are possible in some cases and only that gives us approximate parity with photographs from the Sony Ericsson K800i. The same applies to the Nokia N93, but here the advantage of the Nokia N73 is obvious due to not only the image processing algorithm, but better focusing and the presence of a larger focusing area. Here are comparative photos with Nokia N73, Nokia N93, Sony Ericsson K800i, Samsung D900. In most cases, we see leadership from either Nokia or Sony Ericsson products.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
To check how ordinary people, who are consumers of such products, perceive photographs from them, prints, we conducted a small study. 10 photographs were printed from each of the devices (you saw them above). It was proposed to arrange each photograph in descending order of quality (comparison of 4 photographs of the same type). You can see the results of comparing prints in the table (printing on an HP 8153 printer with the best photo paper and maximum quality). Let's make a reservation that 22 people took part in the survey, as a result - the percentage is calculated between all answers and is calculated from the total. We also rounded the percentages for better understanding.
Best image quality (first place) |
Good quality(second place) |
Average quality (third place) |
|
Sony Ericsson K800i |
|||
The result is indicative and demonstrates what consumers prefer a bright picture than its duller counterpart, but with natural color reproduction. At the same time, such a strange position of Samsung in comparison is due not so much to the actual quality of the images (it is comparable between all cameras), but to the not always good elaboration of background details, a close approximation of the image in a number of cases (it was commented in such a way that fewer details fit in the image) . I think the result obtained is very eloquent and contradicts the generally accepted opinion among professional journalists (for the most part, at least) about the superiority of Sony cameras Ericsson K800i. The consumer votes for a colorful picture.
We carried out a similar comparison for pictures on a PC, here the picture was approximately the same. To simplify the task, we also carried out paired comparisons, when it was proposed to evaluate not all 4 images, but only two. In a pair of Nokia N73 and Nokia N93, the Nokia N73 won in 85 percent of cases. An excellent indicator that is not so obvious to many. In a pair of Sony Ericsson K800i and Nokia N73, the choice of photos from Sony Ericsson was in 40 percent of cases. This figure is clearly higher than what we obtained when comparing prints. But even here the product from Sony Ericsson was unable to achieve a clear advantage.
The Nokia product uses a diode flash, which is clearly inferior to the xenon flash in terms of power, in any case, from this many conclude that the Sony Ericsson K800i is superior at night. Here it is necessary to make a reservation that the xenon flash in the K800i is low-power; installing a full-fledged flash, at least at the level of digital point-and-shoot cameras, is impossible with current batteries. As a result, the effective flash range is up to 2 meters, which is too short for landscape photography, but quite sufficient for taking portraits or pictures of nearby objects. In this aspect, the flash from Sony Ericsson outperforms all competitors.
But the use of an electronic shutter does not allow you to take pictures with a long shutter speed and not have the frame blurred, as from strong hand shaking. Using the mechanical shutter on the Nokia N73 gives better views at night (they are clearer in most cases). As an intermediate solution, you can use the Twilight Landscape mode in Sony Ericsson, but the pictures are still not as clear. Let me make a reservation that now we are not talking about using a flash.
The diode that acts as the flash in the N73 is low power, and its use by the company itself is described as effective at a distance of about one meter. At the same time, this is not a pulsed, but a constant light source. When shooting at distances from one to three meters, it is quite effective and gives better results in terms of photo quality than a xenon flash (the best result in image perception). Due to the long burning of the flash, its power and effect are comparable to xenon. This is a controversial finding, but we tested it in a variety of situations.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
When shooting moving objects at short distances in dimly lit rooms, the xenon flash is a winner. We tried to photograph the fan from one meter, in the photo from the K800i the blades are visible, due to the impulse they are well illuminated, while on the N73 the blades are blurred.
 |
 |
Shooting moving objects with sufficient lighting and low speed is better by default for the Nokia N73, this is due to the use of a mechanical shutter. When using a mechanical shutter, information from the matrix is not read sequentially, but from all points at once. This statement can be easily verified using the example of a fan. It is enough to place it on a window with bright lighting and try to photograph the blades without using a flash. In the case of an electronic shutter, we will see that the blades in one part are lubricated, this is due to the sequential reading of the camera matrix. For Nokia N73 this effect is not observed.
 |
 |
I will make a reservation that for the average person it is quite difficult to come up with everyday photography in which the advantage of a mechanical shutter will constantly manifest itself. Moving cars on both devices will look approximately the same. Rather, the difference will appear in photographs of cyclists riding on a sunny day (whether the wheel spokes are visible or not).
The macro mode on the Nokia N73 is implemented well, with a number of reservations. First, it must be activated by the user, in automatic mode The camera does not focus at distances from 6 to 30 centimeters. The manufacturer says it works from 10 centimeters, but it also works from 6 centimeters. Focusing seems problematic when there is a monochromatic object in the field, for example, a bright flower. In this mode, macro does not work very well (slightly worse than in Sony Ericsson K800i).
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
There are not many improvements in the interface area, so when you activate the camera you see icons for the main events (type of selected memory, image resolution, options), on the right there is a vertical row of icons. You can switch between icons using the joystick.
The first thing that catches your eye is the focus area, the frame displayed on the screen. In the Nokia N93, however, as in the Sony Ericsson K800i, focusing occurs at the central point; here the frame is much larger and occupies a significant part of the frame. Empirically, we found out that focusing occurs at 4 points inside this zone. Problems begin if there is a solid-colored object in the focusing area at a distance of up to 10 centimeters, then the camera focuses on the background. In this case, we recommend switching to macro mode, it saves the situation. We can definitely say that for landscape photography, ordinary family photographs, this focusing area is much better, it allows you to achieve better results. This is another setting made according to user requests, for those pictures that are likely to be the main ones for the phone.
The camera settings are as follows, you can choose one of 4 resolutions:
- Print 3M – Large
- Print 2M – Large
- Print/e-mail 0.8M – Small
- Multimedia message 0.3M
The manufacturer does not provide the actual resolutions of the images, but we will do it for him. The resolutions are respectively: 2048x1536, 1600x1200, 1024x768, 640x480 pixels. The average image size is 1 MB, 600-700 KB, 250-300 KB and 75-100 KB. You cannot set the quality of saving images.
 |
 |
 |
 |
The device uses digital zoom, its maximum value is x20. There is a difference between “normal” and “extended” zoom. In the second case, the maximum value is reached, but the artifacts become clearly visible. When using regular digital zoom, artifacts are not as noticeable. Considering that such an approximation can be done in any graphics editor, it is not worth using it when shooting.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Shooting modes include one mode, which can be customized by the user to suit his preferences, automatic, as well as macro. Other options include portrait photography, landscape, sports, night, and night portrait.
The flash can be set to auto, just on, off, or with red-eye reduction. The timer for taking pictures of yourself can be set to 2, 10 and 20 seconds. The device supports shooting a series of pictures (three at a time), which can be useful when working with fast-moving objects. The feature is designed to be similar to Sony Ericsson's BestPic, but offers less flexibility.
Exposure compensation – this function interesting for some specific conditions and can help get better pictures. The scale ranges from -2 to +2 in 0.5 increments.
|
 |
 |
 |
White balance – automatic, sunny, cloudy, Incandescent, Fluorescent. The effects you can use are Sepia, Black&White, Negative, Vivid (the latter is described in detail above).
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The race for megapixels from digital photography has gradually moved into IP video surveillance. Our clients are increasingly asking for cameras of 3, 4, 5 megapixels and even higher. Most of them are absolutely sure that the higher the resolution, the more megapixels the camera has, the better it will show, the higher the detail of the frame will be. Manufacturers, to please consumers, produce high-resolution cameras; 12 MP IP cameras, in the now fashionable 4K format, are already being sold with all their might.
We decided to figure it out - does the video quality of IP cameras really increase with increasing megapixels? Is it worth overpaying for high-resolution cameras, NVR processing power, high throughput networks and for the terabytes of disk space required for such high resolution. We selected several cameras from stock with different resolutions - from 1 to 5 megapixels. We also ordered several expensive 5 - 8 MP IP cameras from manufacturers for this test. This is who came to us for testing.
We gave preference to outdoor IP cameras with a fixed lens, because... they do not need to be adjusted, and errors in the tedious adjustment of varifocal lenses will not affect the quality of the video image. True, we did not find 5-megapixel cameras with a fixed lens and tested 5MP varifocal cameras. We installed all the cameras in the same place and pointed them at the opposite wall, where we have several homemade “test tables” hanging.
Let's see what we got. All frame shots were taken through web interface cameras using the IE browser and the ability to save a still image built into each camera. In the table below we have placed a reduced frame to a resolution of 640x480 (or 640 by 360 if the camera has a widescreen matrix with an aspect ratio of 16:9), as well as a crop (cut out of the frame) with a resolution of 200x360 pixels. It shows the quality of the “drawing” more clearly. small parts images - in particular the letters on the Sivtsev table (a table for testing eyesight).
To view a full-size frame from an IP camera, click on its small copy in the table.
|
1 MP IP camera: Space Technology ST-120 IP Home, resolution 1280x720, 1/4 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
1 MP IP camera: Polyvision PN-IP1-B3.6 v.2.1.4, resolution 1280x720, 1/4 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
1.3 MP IP camera: MATRIXtech, resolution 1280x960, 1/3 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
2 MP IP camera: Space Technology ST-181 IP Home, resolution 1920x1080, 1/3 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
2 MP IP camera: MATRIXtech MT-CW1080IP20, resolution 1920x1080, 1/2.8 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
3 Megapixel resolution. IP camera: Dahua IPC-HFW-1300S-0360B, resolution 2048x1536, 1/3 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
4 Megapixel resolution. IP camera: Dahua IPC-HFW-4421EP-0360B, resolution 2560x1440, 1/3 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
5 Megapixel resolution. |
|
|
5 MP |
|
>What we noticed when comparing these frames:
- Cameras have different aspect ratios. IP cameras with a resolution of 1, 2, 4 megapixels have a widescreen frame with a 16:9 ratio. And cameras with a resolution of 1.3, 3 and 5 megapixels are 4:3. Those. the latter have a greater vertical viewing angle. This is very important for those cameras that will “look” at an object from top to bottom. For such cameras, there will be fewer dead spots under the camera both near and far. It is interesting to note that a 3MP camera compared to a 4MP camera not only has a larger vertical viewing angle, but also a resolution: 1536 versus 1440 pixels.
- Cameras have different viewing angles, and it depends not only on the lens, but also on the size of the matrix. Budget IP cameras with a 1/4 matrix and a standard 3.6mm lens have a horizontal viewing angle of no more than 60°. But the 5MP IPEYE camera with a 1/2.5 matrix has a wide viewing angle both vertically and horizontally (more than 110°). It’s true that the lens at its shortest focus has a distance of 2.8mm.
- Well, the most important thing we wanted to pay close attention to is the resolution. If you look closely at all the frames, you will notice that, undoubtedly, as the resolution (megapixels) increases, the detail increases. But NOT PROPORTIONAL! Not huge. A 4MP camera does not improve the image by 2 times compared to a 2MP camera. Detail increases slightly. In any case, not a single camera could “cope” with the second line from the bottom of Sivtsev’s table. And already the 6th bottom line (the right letters “B K Y”) is confidently “read” by both cameras with a resolution of 4 and 2 MP.
Of course, here we need to make allowances for different viewing angles. After all, as the viewing angle increases, we seem to move away from the scene being filmed and the detail deteriorates. This is especially true for the 5-megapixel IPEYE camera - the viewing angle provided by this combination of matrix and lens is too wide. And if you make the angle on it the same as that of 2MP cameras (about 90°), then the letters of this table will be read more confidently.
It’s interesting that another 5MP IP camera with the same declared parameters (2.8-11 lens, 1/2.5 matrix) has a slightly narrower viewing angle at the shortest focal length than the IPEYE-3802VP. Detail is approximately at the same level, the picture is somewhat noisier in dark areas of the frame, although the cost of the BEWARD camera is several times higher. But it has a motorized lens and you can control the viewing angle while sitting in front of the computer. A picture with a maximum focus of 11 mm will then look like this:
Maybe someone needs this, considering that every time you change the focus of the lens, you need to either manually or by pressing the “autofocus” button to adjust the sharpness of the image. And this takes from 5 to 20 seconds. But here you can confidently read the second line from the bottom of the vision test table.
Subsequently, we tested a pair of 2-megapixel IP cameras with a 2.8 - 12mm varifocal lens, because... There is an opinion that they show better than “fixes”. Here's what we got:
|
2 MP IP camera: MATRIXtech MT-CW1080IP40, resolution 1920x1080, matrix 1/2.8, lens 2.8 - 12 mm |
|
|
2 MP IP camera: Hikvision DS-2CD2622FWD-I, resolution 1920x1080, 1/3 matrix, 2.8-12 mm lens |
|
As you can see, the result is not much different from the previous one. The detail is almost the same as that of 2MP IP cameras with a fixed lens. Even the expensive 2 megapixel (!) Hikvision camera (the retail price of which as of February 2016 was 21,990 rubles) with a viewing angle of 50 degrees set at the factory (and to change it, you had to open the camera, which we absolutely did not want) The readability of Sivtsev’s table was no higher than 5th line from the bottom.
Perhaps varifocal lenses have greater photosensitivity and IP cameras with them can “see” better in the dark, but this is the topic of a completely different test and another article, which we may turn to later. But varifocal lenses have virtually no effect on resolution. Moreover, the slightest inaccuracy in focusing settings can lead to disastrous results, and all megapixels will be useless. And anyone who has ever set up a varifocal lens on an IP camera will agree with me that this is oh so difficult, given the delay with which the signal from the camera arrives at the monitor.
|
5 MP |
|
This is the first camera with a 1/1.8 sensor size that we got our hands on. In addition, this camera is capable of delivering a stream at a speed of 25 fps with a 5-megapixel resolution (2592x1920 px). Others cannot do this yet. The maximum they are capable of is 12-15 fps at maximum resolution. The wide viewing angle of this camera is immediately noticeable. With a focus of 3.6 mm, it is wider than 5MP cameras with a 1/2.5 matrix with a focus of 2.8 mm. The resolution of the camera from BSP Security is at the level of other 5-megapixel cameras, even a little clearer. At least the contrast of the picture is higher. However, the situation is slightly overshadowed by blurring of the left side of the frame. Perhaps we were unlucky and came across a camera with a slight distortion of the matrix.
And finally, 4K IP cameras with 8MP resolution arrived at our warehouse. This is a hemisphere with a fixed lens DAHUA DH-IPC-HDW-4830EMP-AS. Here's a shot from that camera:
|
8 MP IP camera: DAHUA DH-IPC-HDW-4830EMP-AS, resolution 3840*2160, 1/2.5 matrix, 4 mm lens |
|
To open the frame in full resolution, click in your browser right click mouse on the picture and select the "open image" menu item.
We didn't stop our test with office pictures; we also wanted to look at real footage of a street scene. To do this, we pointed our camera lenses at the nearest parking lot, visible from our window. We did this deliberately in rather difficult light conditions - early twilight. This is what we got.
|
1 MP IP camera: Space Technology ST-120 IP Home, resolution 1280x720, 1/4 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
1 MP IP camera: Polyvision PN-IP1-B3.6 v.2.1.4, resolution 1280x720, 1/4 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
1.3 MP IP camera: MATRIXtech MT-CW960IP20, resolution 1280x960, 1/3 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
2 MP IP camera: Space Technology ST-181 IP Home, resolution 1920x1080, 1/3 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
2 MP IP camera: MATRIXtech MT-CW1080IP20, resolution 1920x1080, 1/2.8 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
3 MP IP camera: Dahua IPC-HFW-1300S-0360B, resolution 2048x1536, 1/3 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
4 MP IP camera: Dahua IPC-HFW-4421EP-0360B, resolution 2560x1440, 1/3 matrix, 3.6 mm lens |
|
|
5 MP IP camera: resolution 2592x1920, matrix 1/2.5, lens 2.8 - 12 mm |
|
Perhaps we chose a part of the day that was still too bright (17.10 - 18.00 in February), but all the cameras did an excellent job with such lighting. True, the 1.3 MP camera MT-CW960IP20 had a slightly darker picture than others, which is quite strange, because... the 1/3 matrix should have better light sensitivity compared to the 1/4 matrix.
As for the detail of the picture, the situation is similar to the results of testing in the office. Although it increases with increasing megapixels, it is not significant. Both 4 and 2 megapixel cameras were able to read Renault's license plate number. True last ones A little worse.
IP cameras with a resolution of 1.3, 4 and 5 megapixels with their wide viewing angles even “saw” the license plate of our van in which we carry all these IP cameras)). And the 5 MP camera even saw a car standing to the left of the van. The viewing angle is amazing!
In March, we received two more 5-megapixel IP cameras BEWARD and BSP Security for testing. Let's compare how they show on the street.
|
5 MP IP camera: resolution 2592x1944, matrix 1/2.5, zoom lens 2.8 - 11 mm |
 |
|
5 MP IP camera: BSP Security, resolution 2592*1920, matrix 1/1.8, lens 3.6 - 11 mm |
 |
The cameras were tested at the same time (18.00 in mid-March). It is interesting to note that despite the fact that the camera from BSP Security has a wider angle, it has slightly better detail. State The license plate on the blue Ford can almost be read, which is not the case in the BEWARD camera footage. The matrix size has an effect - 1/1.8 versus 1/2.5.
What conclusion can we draw?
- The treacherous pursuit of megapixels is practically useless and only plays into the hands of manufacturers (well, let’s be honest - we, the sellers of these IP cameras, recorders and hard drives) they make more profit.
- In the vast majority of cases, 1- and 2-megapixel IP cameras are sufficient. And if you need better detail of distant objects, then this problem should be solved not by mindlessly increasing megapixels, but by reducing the viewing angle using a varifocal lens. With this we will “bring the picture closer” to ourselves and will be able to see everything we need. And an increase in the number of video cameras. This solution may be a little more expensive, but it will definitely solve your problem. And perhaps the price of a pair of 2-megapixel cameras with a viewing angle of 50° (for example, “fixes” with a 6mm lens) will be less than the price of one 5- or even 4-megapixel with a viewing angle of 100°. But they will give us much more information about the observed territory.
- It should be taken into account that increasing the number of pixels without increasing the physical size of the matrix only worsens the sensitivity of the video camera, because The pixel area becomes smaller and less light reaches its surface.
- Real high-quality lenses with optics that allow you to get all the advantages of multi-megapixel matrices cost at least $1000. What can you expect from a 12-megapixel camera worth 20,000 rubles?
- Well, the last thing to remember is that as the “megapixel” increases, you will additionally overpay for the processing power of the devices being recorded, storage devices (HDD), network bandwidth and traffic when viewing via the Internet.
P.S. We will continue to test IP cameras that come into our hands in this way. Several test samples have already been requested from various suppliers with resolutions ranging from 5 to 12 megapixels. Therefore, periodically visit this page to receive new information about the megapixel race in IP video surveillance.
P.P.S. If any of the manufacturers or suppliers would like to test their cameras on our “test bench” - welcome, contact us by e-mail: kb063_sobaka_yandex.ru
Traditionally, we have not remained aloof from new products and present to your attention the results of a comparison of IP video cameras: 2MP (widespread) and relatively new 4MP cameras, which have not yet firmly taken a place in their niche. The experiment involved two cameras, one robot and banknotes of various denominations.
Camera characteristics:
Camera No. 1
Permission: 1920x1080 (2MP), 25 fps, h.264
Matrix: 1/2.8 SONY EXMOR sensor
Sensitivity: 0.05 Lux (day) / 0.005 Lux (night) / 0 Lux
Lens: f=3.6 mm, horizontal viewing angle 77
Camera No. 2
Resolution: 2592*1520 (4MP), 15 fps, h.265/h.264/MJPEG codecs
Matrix: 1/3" 4mega CMOS OV4689 (USA)
Sensitivity: 0.01 Lux
Lens: f=3.6 mm, horizontal viewing angle 75
The promotional robot Bastik was at a distance of 7m from the stand with cameras. We present to your attention screenshots (to get the original resolution, click on the image):
Camera 2MP
Camera 4MP
The naked eye can see that the image quality differs significantly, namely by a factor of 2. For greater clarity, below are screenshots from the monitor screen with a resolution of 1600x900. The original image was opened in a graphics editor to scale:
50%
Camera 2MP
Camera 4MP
100%
Camera 2MP
Camera 4MP
Camera 2MP
Camera 4MP
Also, I would like to separately mention the H.265 codec. It allows you to almost double the compression ratio of digital video data compared to H.264. Thus, the size of the archive from a 4MP camera at maximum settings is slightly larger than the archive from a 2MP camera. With the same data density settings, H.265 can significantly improve image quality (almost 2 times).
Ask for 2MP and 4MP video cameras in the Bastion wholesale and retail network.
Views: 11592
© 2015 site
It is noteworthy that even a slight increase in linear resolution is accompanied by a significant increase in the number of megapixels. This is similar to calculating area. To double the number of megapixels, it is enough to increase the linear resolution by 41%, and doubling the linear resolution leads to a fourfold increase in the number of megapixels. It is for this insidious property that megapixels are so dearly loved by marketers, since it allows them to present very moderate progress as something revolutionary.
In fact, a twofold increase in the number of megapixels is not a revolution at all, it is just the minimum after which the increase in detail becomes noticeable for most people, and only if the detail was limited solely by the number of pixels, and not at all by lens aberrations or misses focusing, camera vibration and poor editing. Moreover, the contribution of the matrix resolution to the overall sharpness of the image rapidly decreases as the number of megapixels increases. Up to 10 megapixels, this contribution is very significant, from 10 to 20 megapixels it is no longer so significant, and with a resolution above 20 megapixels, the quality of the optics and the skill of the photographer unconditionally come to the fore.
Is excess megapixels harmful?
In general - no, it is not harmful. I just consider it necessary to emphasize that there is not much benefit from it. In my opinion, the only truly negative effect associated with an increase in resolution is a proportional increase in the volume of files, which rapidly fills memory cards, devours disk space and slows down the computer during post-processing.
It may be objected that cameras with higher resolutions are also noisier at high ISO values. This is true, but only when comparing images pixel-by-pixel, i.e. at 100% magnification. With an equal scale, the noise level will be approximately the same (other things being equal, of course). For example, if a picture taken with a 36-megapixel camera is reduced to 16 megapixels in Photoshop, then in terms of noise level it will practically not differ from a similar picture originally taken with a 16-megapixel camera. In this case, the reduced image may even look somewhat sharper, since reducing the image (decimation) to a certain extent neutralizes the loss of sharpness that is inevitable with Bayer interpolation.
Thus, high resolution actually allows the camera sensor to collect more information about the scene being photographed and potentially provide better detail in the photo. Another question is, will you be able to take advantage of this potential, or will it only translate into extra gigabytes occupying your hard drive?
To understand what number of megapixels will be necessary and sufficient for you, you just need to remember what end use you find for your photos? Do you view them on a computer monitor or perhaps using a digital projector? Do you print your pictures, and if so, what is the maximum print size? Do you share your pictures online? Do you subject your pictures to any processing, or are you content with what comes out of the camera?
Viewing photos on a computer monitor
The most common screen resolution among visitors to my site is 1920x1080 (Full HD), which roughly corresponds to two megapixels. For laptops, the most popular resolution is 1366x768 (WXGA), i.e. one megapixel. Rare visitors use monitors with a resolution of 2560×1440 (WQXGA), which is less than four megapixels. There are so few iMacs with Retina displays that they can be ignored.
The conclusion, it seems to me, is obvious: to view photos on the monitor personal computer in most cases, 2-4 MP is enough. And this is if the picture is expanded to full screen, and not huddled in a small window.
Projectors
Mass models of modern digital projectors have a resolution of 1920x1080 (Full HD) or even less, which means trying to demonstrate to the public anything more than a couple of megapixels with their help is pointless. Projectors with a resolution of 4096x2160 (4K) are simply not affordable for most photographers, but even less than nine megapixels is not that much by modern standards.
Printing photos
The resolution of a print, regardless of its size, is usually measured in dots per inch (dpi). For example, when printing at 300 dpi, there will be 300 dots per linear inch (2.54 cm), which corresponds to 118 dots per linear centimeter.
A resolution of less than 150 dpi is considered low, from 150 to 300 dpi is acceptable, and from 300 dpi and more is high. High resolution means that the individual points that make up the image are virtually indistinguishable to the naked eye. Typically, moderate-sized prints (up to A3 inclusive) are made with a resolution of exactly 300 dpi. For larger prints it is acceptable to use a lower resolution.
Much depends on the distance from which you are going to view the photo. Small cards are viewed closely and their resolution should be as high as possible. Large canvases are hung on the wall and admired while standing at some distance, and therefore even a relatively low resolution will not hurt the eye. This also applies to photo wallpapers. Huge billboards that people look at from tens of meters away can be printed at 32 dpi and they will still look good.
The table below shows how many megapixels are required to take and then print photographs at both 150 and 300 dpi resolution at various print sizes.
When was the last time you printed your photos on A3? Let me remind you that the most popular print size among amateur photographers is A6, i.e. 10×15 cm.
Internet
The Internet doesn't like big photos. Firstly, large photos take a long time to load, and secondly, most people are simply not interested in looking at the microscopic details of other people's photos. The only exception is specialized photographic forums. As for social networks, then your multi-megapixel images will in any case be reduced when uploaded to the server, regardless of your consent, and the quality of decimation will not be the highest.
If you send photos to relatives and friends via e-mail, then it is necessary to reduce them at least for reasons of basic decency. Who wants to wait for huge files with flowers and kittens to download?
In a word, here, too, literally a couple of megapixels will be enough for you.
Of course, all this applies exclusively to amateur photography and does not apply to photographs intended for commercial use. It all depends on the specific situation. If the customer demands 20 megapixels at all costs – so what? – we’ll send him exactly 20 megapixels, but whether he really needs them is no longer our concern.
Image processing
When editing photographs in Adobe Photoshop or another graphics editor, some excess resolution is not only tolerable, but also highly desirable. Firstly, many SIM cards need cropping, i.e. in trimming edges, and it’s good when you have the opportunity not to save pixels. Secondly, competent image reduction - The best way hide or at least minimize image defects such as noise, chromatic aberrations, moderate movement, interpolation artifacts, etc. In other words, a photo taken at high resolution and then downsized almost always looks better than one originally taken at low resolution.
However, it should be noted that the resolution of modern cameras is so high that there is almost always a supply of megapixels that can be sacrificed when editing.
Conclusion
You and I have talked for too long about something that shouldn’t be talked about at all. Let us finally sum up the results.
To satisfy the needs of the vast majority of amateur photographers, ten megapixels will be enough, although even this number seems somewhat excessive. It's rare that an enthusiast will be able to fully realize the potential of twenty megapixels, but such people usually know what they want. Those photographers who may objectively need higher resolution, and who know how to handle it, are unlikely to read this article.
Considering the fact that the resolution of more or less serious cameras today averages about two dozen megapixels and continues to grow, I consider further discussions on this topic simply unnecessary. The number of megapixels is no longer a parameter that you should seriously pay attention to when choosing a camera.
Thank you for your attention!
Vasily A.
Post scriptum
If you found the article useful and informative, you can kindly support the project by making a contribution to its development. If you didn’t like the article, but you have thoughts on how to make it better, your criticism will be accepted with no less gratitude.
Please remember that this article is subject to copyright. Reprinting and quoting are permissible provided there is a valid link to the source, and the text used must not be distorted or modified in any way.
Loading...
