Well that is good news. thanks
Testing HDCVI Over UTP
** *** **** *******'* *****, ******* ******* ***** *** **** *** **-****-**** technology ********* **** ***. ****** *** **** majority ** ******** ****** *********** *** coaxial ******, ***** * *** *** UTP *** ********* ******** ** ****** density *******. ** *** ******** **, can ***** *********** ******* ** ***** without*********?
*** ****** **: ** *****, **** limitations. ** **** ****, ** ******* an ***** *** ** * *** using ******* ******* ** *** ** show ***** ***********.
Connection *************
** **** ***** ** ******* ** HDCVI *** ** *** *** **** 1,000' ** *** ** ***** ******** ****** ***. ****** **** ********** ****** [**** ** ****** *********], a *** **** ***** (~$** *** ******) ***** **** *** **** *** video, ******* ** **** *** **** deployments. *** ****** ******* ***** **** instantaneously, ** *** *** **** **** using ****, *** *** ******** ******** similarly.
Image ******* **********
***** ******* ******* *** ******** ******** **** ***, some *********** *** ******* ********* **********.
*** @ *,***'
********* *,***' ** **** ******* *** same ****** ** *** ** *****, for *******, ** *** *** ****** smearing ** *** ***** ******* **** UTP, **** ** *** ***** *****. ***** Cat ** ** ********* *** ********, the ********* ******* ** *** ******* cable *** *** ******* **** **** is **** **** ***** ****. ***** spooled ***** ** * ***** *******, users **** ***** ********** ** ******* cables *** ********** ******* ******.
*** @ ***'
******** *** ****** ** ***', ***** effects *** ** ****** *******, **** video ******* *********** *** **** ** it *** **** **** (****** **** slightly ********* **********). ****** ******* **** this *** ** ******.
UTP ***** ***************
** **** ******** **** *********** ***** UTP, ***** **** ****** **** ******** using *** **** ******. *******, ** recommend ******* ***** ******* ** ***** first, ********** ** ***** *********** **** many ****-******** ***** **** *** ***** quantities ** ****** ** ***** *** effects ** ********* ** *****.
Hi Ethan, thank you for a very helpful test. Judging by the DVR shown in the video, it appears the test was conducted using a 720p camera. Would it be possible to repeat the test using a 1080p camera and DVR to try to stress the system as much as possible? Thank you.
Hi Ethan,
Do you think Cat 6 cable would make any difference to the results? Thank you.
Hi Luke, I have found that its best to use UTP if you change to shielded cable the signal does not go very far.
I dont think Cat & will help at all.
Hi Vidar, thank you for your information. I am surprised by your observations as Ethan's test above shows coaxial working better than UTP over longer distances. However perhaps you were using active rather than passive baluns?
I want to share my recent experience using a HDCVI camera with baluns. I have 2 analog cameras connected to baluns using unused pairs of the underground telephone cable between the main road and the house(please don't tell the ph company). The distance is approx 1/4 mile. Using standard passive baluns at each end, I can get a picture, but not very good. When I changed to active/powered baluns on the receive end, the picture is fairly good ,but obviously less than perfect( a little bit "grainy"). I purchased a couple of HDCVI cameras(1- 720p & 1- 1080p) and a 720p DVR(the 1080p was not available at the time I ordered it. Ironically it was available the day after I placed the order). Oh we'll, at least it is pretty inexpensive. I installed the 720p cam in place of one of the analog cams and was able to get a picture, but not a very good one. Playing with the 2 adjustments on the active receiver did not really help much. I removed the active receiver and replaced with a passive balun, it works! Keep in mind this is 1500' of CAT3 underground telephone cable. The picture quality of the HDCVI camera is significantly better than the analog camera. I am able to access the menu on the camera via the DVR. I might try a HDCVI PTZ next.
Hi, Luke Maslen: if the pair is shielded the problem with getting good signal is almost hopless.
Hi, Jo Nelson: Thank you for sharing this info.
There are different quality on the twisted pair baluns out there..
Sorry Vidar, didn't see your post til after I posted mine. Have you used a lot of Cat 7 cable? What's the main reason you are interested in it here? Because you already have it installed?
Not a lot of Cat 7 we use Cat 6 more and more now.
Only some few times we need to use twisted pair to transmitt composite.
But it can be a good solution,
nice to see here that Joe Nelson are testing on HDCVI.
...coaxial working better than UTP
Luke, I'm thinking Vidar's post is referring to STP as compared UTP, for three reasons,
- He never actually refers to coaxial
- Cat 7 cable is shielded TP
- The & symbol on most keyboards is Shift 7, explaining the typo
Why STP would underperform UTP beats me (How the foil floats?), but it apparently can happen. Here's the canonical discussion, but the brawl is located here... Although keep in mind these discussions are assuming ethernet, not HD-CVI, so not everything applies...
Does it make much difference if you use 2 pairs to make a connection versis 1 pair?
Does it have an affect when you have 4 cameras sharing a single 4 pair Cat5 or 6 cable versus one camera by itself on the cable?
Doubling up the pairs for a single camera is an interesting idea. I recently added a second HDCVI camera, so now there is 1 analog SD, 2 HDCVI, & 2 outdoor motion detectors (connected together). I really prefer to use motions for outdoor cameras as it is 99% reliable (false alarms are almost non existent). Each of these devices is using a pair of the underground telephone cable that is approx 1500' from the gate to the house. There is some additional CAT5E cable at each end to get from the ph cable to the camera locations (100+') & the DVR (100+'). I do have 1 unused pair on the ph cable. I might try doubling up one of the connections and see if it makes any difference.
Have anyone tried to send 12 vdc in the same utp with the video, I mean 1 pair video HD-CVI , 3 pairs 12 vdc with regulars in-expensive baluns, because some comapnies now claims they have HD-Baluns.
Is IPVM considering revisiting this test but with CVI 2.0?
How about with TVI?
We did a second TVI / UTP test here: Hikvision HDTVI Long Distance Problem Tested
We'll probably do new rounds of CVI, TVI and AHD testing next year (meaning in 3 - 6 months).
So you did. Thanks.
Does anyone know what makes a TVI balun different than a regular balun? Are they, in fact, the same? Can I reuse existing CAT5e and baluns?
Ari- For HD-TVI, we (Hikvision) require HD-TVI Baluns. These are designed for the higher frequency signals. Yes, standard baluns may work in some cases, but it is 100% not recommended.
I would assume the same is true for HD-CVI.
In North America, we have worked with Vigitron who has a full line of passive-passive, passive-active, active-active products. We will shortly have a certified spec distance for our TurboHD products with the Vigitron products.
Bob