Subscriber Discussion

Multisensor, 180, 270, 360 Degree Outside Cameras, Have You Used Them?

UE
Undisclosed End User #1
Jan 25, 2017

We’ve got a new project that requires outside camera coverage on a building with a lot of corners. Primary focus of the surveillance is of the building and parking area close to it.  Usually we’d use two ~90 degree FOV Cameras, one on each side of the corner.  I’ve seen some manufactures have specialty cameras that could be useful for this scenario, are they too good to be true?

The cameras are either fisheye lenses ones with 360 degrees FOV or camera’s with multiple sensors inside that can cover 180 degrees or more. Our idea is that we could replace the two camera per corner setup with one camera and have greater coverage too.  If you’ve ever used this type of camera before what has been your experiences?

  1. Is it actually cheaper in the end? (one specialty camera and mount versus two cameras and mounts, VMS licensing, etc)
  2. How was the quality of the daytime and nighttime footage?
  3. How was the compatibility with your VMS? (we’d most likely be using ExaqcVision)
  4. If you’ve tried them in the past and it didn’t work out, what were the issues that you experienced?

Any insights or experiences on this topic would be appreciated. Thanks.

(1)
U
Undisclosed #2
Jan 26, 2017

1.) The tipping point for us on the "cheaper" scale is usually going above two cameras. If I can accomplish exactly what I want and get the views I want with the proper pixel density with only two cameras, then I'll use two cameras. Once you need to add a third camera to get what you want, it makes more sense to go with a multi-sensor. I've had cases where I've ended up with an "extra" view, but for the same cost, there's minimal downside to it.

 

2.) Daytime is very good. We've used the Arecont 12MP and 20MP versions, with WDR and without depending on the scenario, and have no complaints. Night time video is definitely spotty, but light is a major consideration when quoting these and ours have exclusively gone into areas with really good lighting. I'm also testing the Avigilon 12MP cameras now and am very impressed, but also slightly discouraged with the lack of aiming options compared to the Arecont. The sensors/lenses themselves on the Avigilon cameras are massive and can't be arranged as closely together as on the Arecont, so there are less options overall for configuration. Not a huge deal, but definitely a consideration.

3.) I have installed the Arecont's on Genetec, Exacqvision, and Salient and all are working flawlessly with zero issues. Some here have reported issues with the Arecont multisensors on Avigilon -- I can't speak to that yet, but will be testing that this weekend.

I am anxious to try one of the Axis options that they released recently. I'm a fan of the 3-sensor options that they have, so I'm intrigued to see how they perform. It's Axis, so I'm sure they will be great, but until I get my hands on it I can't speak to it.

(1)
(2)
JH
John Honovich
Jan 26, 2017
IPVM

I'll let others talk about field deployments.

In terms of footage and compatibility, we have a number of test results, including:

We are also about to test the new Hikvision multi-imager and the Axis Q3708 model.

(4)
Avatar
Marco Sanchez
Jan 26, 2017

Don't forget about the Hanwha PNM-9020V :) No shame here....

SR
Samuel Rodgers
Jan 26, 2017

I've tried the Axis Q3708 and the P3707 on Genetec

P3707, the application was replacing two old fixed cameras on a light pole in basically a parking lot, so we got both old camera views covered and also additional views out of it. I liked the flexibility to independently move, tilt, and aim each sensor, and also has a pretty good range of FOV angles with manual zoom/focus. If you only needed about 180 degrees of coverage, you could actually move all 4 sensors towards one side, or leave them all in original places to cover 360 degrees.

Image quality is probably a shade below a mid-range Axis camera, say P3225.

Downside for me was the appearance, it's pretty big and sort of oddly shaped.

Q3708, pretty similar to the review of the Q3709 posted above except i believe it has better low light performance/lower resolution.

(1)
(3)
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #3
Jan 26, 2017

1. Save money in camera license and 3 network cables.
Lost quality, the cost of camera itself is expensive than 4 cameras
2. Not good. Even strong light from outdoor.
3. Genetec, Milestone, ExacqVision all good in multisensor.
4. The gap between sensor is crazy. Color tuning is crazy.

(3)
(1)
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #4
Jan 26, 2017

I can't tell is this a pros or cons list...or both?

(1)
(2)
Avatar
Mike Dotson
Jan 26, 2017
Formerly of Seneca • IPVMU Certified

Another thing that a Multisensor or Fisheye camera brings to the table is the potential of needing extra CPU horsepower (and memory)  to decode the images.

This affects Server Side motion or Client viewing.

Pay attention to 'dewarping' or 'stitching' needs by whatever camera is selected and plan accordingly.

(1)
(1)
Avatar
Ross Vander Klok
Jan 26, 2017
IPVMU Certified

Don't most of these come with souped up horsepower on the internal chips to do all the dewarping and motion on the camera side?

(1)
Avatar
Mike Dotson
Jan 26, 2017
Formerly of Seneca • IPVMU Certified

Some do and some don't. 

Take the Pelco IMM12xxx or EVO models for instance.

Both of them do processing on the camera itself...but the Client and Server still had to have extra horsepower to handle them.

An ref from Pelco is their KB LL#18171.

Thus the reason I said to pay attention to what the cam manufacturer says.

(1)
Avatar
Claudio Almeida
Jan 26, 2017

Maybe it will be usefull to you an article I wrote about 2 years ago where I theoretically analyze fisheye cameras' performance, also comparing them with multisensor cameras. 

You can check the article here: http://www.cctvinstitute.com.br/fisheye-cameras.html

(2)
Avatar
John Bazyk
Jan 26, 2017
Command Corporation • IPVMU Certified

I like to use the Multi-Sensor Pano cameras from Digital Watchdog. We've had good luck with them, they're built well and work well. I wish they would boot up faster, and their interface was a little better, but it's not a deal breaker for me.

We use them mostly use multi imagers to cover large areas where we're just looking to view activity rather than detail. We will use better cameras at choke points in the parking lots and the panos for wide area coverage. We use some 360's and 180's in small spaces where mounting a camera on a wall or in the corner just wouldn't cover the room well enough. We have several in walking vaults on the ceilings and a few in the corners of hallways looking down both halls like you see mirrors in hospitals. We're not expecting ultra high resolution when we do this, it's more for observing activity rather than identification. Again, we place cameras at choke points to capture that detail better. We use Vivotek, DW and Hikvision for these type of cameras.

Is it cheaper? A little, the biggest reason our customers like them is they can see the entire area from one view with no breaks in the screen. You could install 3 cameras in the same location for less money, but you wouldn't get the same seamless experience.

Day/Night? The panos have IR illumination when they're in a parking lot you can see everything really well. I would like to see someone come out with a nice ultra low light multi-sensor that's in the same price range eventually.

VMS? We use spectrum, so they work well with it. We have used Arecont with very little luck and poor performance with several VMS's.

Past? A few years ago I had an Arecont rep in who sold me on their multi-sensor cameras. We put a few in and were extremely disappointed. This turned me off to panoramic cameras for a while. Then about 8 months ago we found these from DW and very happy.

(4)
DG
Donald Gordon
Jan 26, 2017
IPVMU Certified

We have fielded many 180 panoramic fisheye cameras using a single dewarped view done on camera successfully (Hikvision DS-2CD63C2F-IVS).  However the fisheye camera dewarped views still distort some of the image especially near the edges.  The size of the objects as they travel from the left/right edge of the camera view to the center of the camera view also change size (taller in the middle, smaller at the edges).  Our end users really like the extended field of view even with the distortion especially the coverage immediately below the camera.  The fisheye cameras are great for small patios and courtyards.  We usually mount them on the wall using a 45 degree mount for the best coverage.  We have reduced our installation and sustainment costs by replacing multiple cameras at a location, usually two to three, to a single camera.

We are now installing multi-imager cameras as well.  We use these cameras for larger areas such as parking lots and open fields since they have more pixels for the longer range.  The multi-imager camera doesn't suffer from the ill effects of the view dewarping and the camera stitching is done on camera.  We are deploying the Hikvision DS-2CD6986F camera with four, 2MP cameras in the camera body.  It provides a full 180 degree coverage and the entire camera assembly gimbals downwards to allow coverage underneath the camera.

We are also evaluating the new Hikvision 360 degree camera.  This camera is useful in spaces where there is 360 degree line of sight in large open spaces.

We do save money on installation cost and VMS licensing cost.  There is also a reduced sustainment cost since we are deploying fewer cameras.  Operators love them since there are fewer cameras to manage and fewer cameras to process during video export.

The quality of the multi-imager cameras is remarkable since they are using good quality 2MP cameras stitched together without some of the adverse effects you might see with a fisheye camera.

We use Milestone XProtect with the fisheye and multi-imager cameras and they work great as long as you use the manufacturer drivers.  We tried using the ONVIF driver for these cameras but they did not work very well.

So fare we are proceeding ahead with about 20% of our total camera count using fisheye and multi-imager panoramic cameras.

(2)
Avatar
Jon Dillabaugh
Jan 26, 2017
Pro Focus LLC

We have installed some 12MP fisheyes (360 degree) outside and found that light levels better be very good, due to the reduction in resolution that comes with a fisheye.

I have demo'd, but not sold, the new Hikvision multisensor camera and it far surpassed my expectations. It is a Darkfighter model with four 2MP sensors that can be used in a 180 degree AOV. You may not need added illumination. In my testing, the cameras had much better low light ability than my naked eye standing next to it outside at night. I didn't notice any motion blur or excessive gain either.

Here is a link to the product page.

As far as cost goes, I think you will find that if you are being fair about the abilities of the Hikvision multisensor camera, it is very reasonably priced. I am unsure how Exacq will support this camera, or if it would be a single license. But, I can say that the multisensor camera from Hikvision is a decent value if you compare it to their other Darkfighter domes.

If you compare two Value line (DS-2CD2xxx) cameras to the multisensor, then you will likely find the two cameras to cost less, but depending on labor and VMS license costs, this cost savings may be negated.

(1)
Avatar
Guilherme Barandas
Jan 30, 2017

In fact, they are execelentes, and cameras with this type of lens, go Vivotek.
Better WDR and better Dewarp, not to mention the durability of the camera outdoors.
Less installation, less cameras ... less license ...
Vivotek, without any doubt, follow options, (180)
CC 8370-HV (would use this model)
MS 8391-EV
MS 8392-EV

Or you can use the FishEye (360), fixed to the wall.
See the final V (external and anti vandal)
Ex: FE 8181V

Genetec, ISS, VAST * Vivotek * are good VMS options.

Avatar
Kevin Bennett
Jan 30, 2017

We are an end user and have many multi-sensor cameras in use.  We use both Avigilon and Arecont Vision and have various models of each recording to the Avigilon enterprise VMS. 

Our best overall experience has been with the newer Avigilon 9MP and 12MP HD models.  They have some shortcomings but have been more reliable in performance and connectivity.  Their shortcomings are largely the fact that the imager heads are very large - likely to accommodate the vari-focal lens.  The head size and the track system they are mounted to limits the flexibility of setting up views other than straight panoramic.  On the up side, they have vari-focal lenses.  Focus times are often slow when zooming.  The daytime image quality is very good.  Nighttime image quality is acceptable.

The Arecont multi-imager devices give decent daytime image quality and nighttime quality is marginal for our applications.  We have had a number of failures under warranty.  We use the 40MP, 20MP, and 12MP models and have one of the OMNI 20MP models.  I like the flexibility of the OMNI version - heads can be moved in an almost limitless number of configurations within the housing.  With the Avigilon VMS we have noted frequent instances where the camera had to be rebooted to clear a VMS connectivity error after losing network connectivity briefly.  Since the Areconts do not allow for a reboot through the browser interface (or through the VMS), this requires a manual reboot - flipping a breaker or toggling PoE on the switch in our application.  We have noted issues reported in this forum including stuck IR cut filters, though this has been limited to the 40MP version for us.  Avigilon ACC is finicky about which firmware versions will connect as well.  We are running older firmware versions in order to connect the Arecont devices to ACC 5 Enterprise.

The multi-imagers have replaced a number of PTZ devices that used pre-set tours.  We do not typically monitor our cameras in real time, so the PTZ functionality has not really been missed and we have gained more thorough coverage of the areas we are viewing.

We use multi-imager devices mainly in parking lots, parking garages, patios, and open indoor areas such as building atria and dining areas. 

(1)
(2)
AR
Alan Reed
Aug 15, 2019

Yes many for several years. Arecont are some of the worst. My experience with their tech support is the cameras lag and jitter. Their solution is to manually manipulate the key frame refresh rate.very techincal and hit or miss results I'm waiting to see if Costar is going to improve the quality and reliability of these products. Pelco IMM series are better but the video is a little soft like they' re not quite in focus. the price point is rather high for these cameras. wish there was another option. One sensor cameras have too much image saturation for (1) chip.

U
Undisclosed #5
Aug 16, 2019
IPVMU Certified

...the price point is rather high for these cameras. wish there was another option.

Repositionable Multi-Imager Camera Shootout - Avigilon, Axis, Dahua, Hanwha, Hikvision, Panasonic, Vivotek

New discussion

Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.

Newest discussions