A lot of copper is now abandoned in and between builidings? Longer ranges?
I think it would be funny if people said, (2009 - 2012) "Hey I am going to install UTP so it's easier when I upgrade to HD IP cameras."
Our analog infrastructure is now about 50% coax and 50% UTP, using 25-pair backbones and one UTP pair for each camera (we still use 18/2 for power). We actually started using single-pair UTP for analog cameras in 2003. Upgrading the UTP infrastructure for IP wasn't even considered. We were more interested in cable density. One 25-pair UTP takes up a heck of a lot less cable tray space than 25 lengths of RG59.
In fact, for some areas that are out of reach of our IP infrastructure, we will be using Vigitron Vi2401A MaxiiCopper EoC devices on coax and with their Vi0030 adapters to transport IP and PoE over a single pair.
We would seriously consider using analog HD technologies if they were compatible with our VMS. The key impediment for analog HD (and HD-SDI, for that matter) is the lack of ONVIF-compliant encoders that we could use to interface non-IP HD cameras with our VMS. If they become available, we will at least test their compatibility with our system. At that point, analog HD cameras will likely follow the same 50/50 mix for signal transport.
The practical reason:
With plain old analog cameras a lot of the cabling and labor cost could be eliminated by utilizing baluns in large facilities by wiring the system up as a POTS would be. 25/50/100 pair UTP could carry a lot of video from closet to closet and fan out from there. The other options were limited:
1. Make use of amplifiers and decrease the SNR
2. Use RG-11 which is hefty, nearly 1/2" thick. Imagine having 50 RG-11 cables for the backbone... 50 pair cat3 is only 3/4" thick.
By putting active baluns on both ends cable could run well over a mile on one pair for minimal cost. On some of the premium products it is possible to put PTZ control on another pair, power on the others. I know that seems pointless in an age where POE is nigh omnipresent...
I am curious to see if it is possible to get more than 800 or so feet with active baluns.
The real reason:
It is new tech so we are going to do everything we can to break the new shiny toy.
Nelly Security | 10/24/14 01:55am
If I understand the gist of your question "If your using cat5, why not just use IP cameras then?"
Good question, the way I see it:
#2) Less complex
But main reason is price. Analog HD is way cheaper than IP.
So why not just use coax then? Well because cat5 is easier to run and pull out of a box.
This is not my opinion by the way, just some feedback from my customers. But there is some truth to it. I have to totally agree that Cat5 is much easier to run, but if it were me, i would probably run coax because it seems to have less issues with analog/cvi/sdi/tvi/AHD stuff
Pro Focus LLC | 10/24/14 03:01am
Yes, we had one client so far that needed a reasonably priced system and CVI fit his budget. IP would have cost much more. We have been installing CAT5e instead of COAX for quite some time now. Customers already will have wiring in place to transition to IP in the future. Installing COAX today just doesn't make sense, to us anyways.
We were not really impressed with the quality of the non-Dahua CVI 720p domes. They looked OK estetically, but the video images were sub-par when compared to a similar style IP cam. We are thinking it may be due to the non-Dahua camera being inferior to the real Dahua cams.