*******
*** **** *****-* ******* huge improvements ** *** *****, WDR, *** ********* *********** over *** *****-* ** our *****, ** **** as ************ ************ (**** freely ******* ****** ***** ***** ****), *** ** * lower ***** **** *** previous *****.
*** ***** *** *** performance **** **** **** of more ********* ***** *** *****/*** models **** ** *** Samsung ***-****. *******, *** cost ********** ** ****** (such ** *********'* **** tested ****) ***** ***** superior *** ***** ****** (at ~* *** *** below).
China **********
** *** **** ****, this ** * **** good ****** ******** ** what ** ********* ** 2016 ** *** ***** $200 ***** *****, **** strong *** ***** *** a ***-** ******, ***** WDR, *** **** *** bandwidth.
** *** ******** ****, Chinese ************* *** *** selling*** *******, **** ********** IR, ** *** **** price ***** ** **** new **** ****.
*** ***** *** **** to ***** **** * premium ******* *****, **** new **** **********'* ************* improved *********** **** ********** be ********** *** ****** further **********. *******, *** relative ***** ******* ** still ***** *****, ** most *** **** ******* switched ** ******* ************* will ****** *** ** motivated ** ****** ****.
*******
*** *****-* ***** *** ~$*** *** ******, ******* ** ** slightly ***** **** *** previous **** *****, ********-*(~$*** ******).
*******, **** ** ************* more ********* **** **** low **** ** *******, such ** ************ **-*******-**** ***** ********* [**** no ****** *********] (**** ~$140 ******). ************, ***-** indoor *****, **** ** the ********* **-******** ********* ***-********* *** ****, **** ~$100 ******.
Physical ********
***** *** *** *** ******** changes ** *** *****-* compared ** ***** *** models:
** ***** ****
**** *******, *** ***** whip ***** ** *** M3004/3005 *** **** ******** with ** ******** ****. Our ******* ***** * * ** * ********** for ** *****.

******* **** **********
**** ***** *** ***** models **** ******* ** 54° ****, ********* **** they ** **** ******* in **** *****, ** the ****** ***** ****** not **** "**" *** enough ** ******* **** hallways ** ***** ***** (******* ** *** ******** M30 ********). *** *** *****/**/** do *** **** **** limitation, **** *** ****** able ** **** ** further, **** **********.

******** *****
** **** ** ***** and ***** ******** ******** of *** *** *** vs. *** ** **** video:
Huge *** ***** *********** ********
*** ***** *********** ** the ***** ** ******* improved **** *** **** generation *****, ***** *****. The ***** ******** ** usable ***** ** *** scene, *********** **** *****. The ***** ******** ******* of *** ******* *** his ************.

******** ** ****** ** this *****, *** *****'* performance *** **** **** of **** ********* ***** low ***** *******, **** as *** ******* ***-****. However, *** *** **** integrated ** ********* **** produces ****** ******* ** the ******* *** *****.

Better *** ***********
** ****** *** *********** against ** **** ********* door *** *** **** area ****** **, **** here:
*** ***** *** *** of *** **** ********** ** this *****, *** **** improved ******** ** *** M3004, **** ******* ******* of *** *******, *****, and **********. **** **** *** Hikvision ****-* (*** * true *** ******) *** better ** *** **** areas ****** *** ****, but ****** *** *** subject *** ****** ****** in *** ****** ***** of *** *****.

Full ***** ***** *******
*******, ** ****** **** light ***** ******* ******* others ** **** ******** test *****:

*** ***** ******** ****** detail **** *** *****-* in **** *****, **** more **** ******** *** less ***** ** *** subject's ****.

Bandwidth **********
*** *****-*'* ******** **** the ****** ** *** cameras ****** ** *** scenes ****** *** *****, where *** ********** ** Hikvision **** *** ******. Note **** **** ** the ***** ******* ** this **** **** ***** CODECs, **** *** *****-*. The ********* **** **** not ******* ***** *.***+ smart *****, ****** *****, higher ********** ****** **.

*************
*** ****** ************* ** nearly identical ** **** *******. However, ***** ******* ******* true *** (****** ***** "wide ******* *****" ** the *** *********) ** well ** *********, *** found ** **** ******.
*** ******** ******* ** a ****** ******** *** on/off, **** *****. ***** camera ******** ******* **** remained *********** *********.
*** **** ******* ** Zipstream *************, *** *** **** ********* ****.
Test **********
*** ******* **** ****** using ******* ******** ****** otherwise *********, **** *** following ******* ** *** cameras:
- *.***, ** ***, ~** quantization *** ****
- */*** ******* ******* *****
*** ********* ******** ******** were **** *** **** test:
- **** *****-*: *.**.*
- **** *****-*: *.**.*.*
- ********* **-*******-*: **.*.* ***** ******
- ******* ***-****: *.*********
Comments (8)
Jon Dillabaugh
06/10/16 02:03pm
While I appreciate coverage of new products, you guys do a pretty great job, I wish you had focused on a more realistic resolution model. I get that you wanted to show the most cost effective Axis camera, but I don't know many people installing 720p these days.
On another note, I sometimes wonder why it seems that you guys don't seem to test current products that are more likely to be used head to head. For instance, the Axis new 1080p M3045 vs the Hik DS-2CD2722FWD-IZS. This would be more of a realistic, apples to apples test.
Better yet, the M3046 vs the DS-2CD2742FWD-IZS, both being 4MP. That is the resolution that we have been installing the most.
I know these aren't always exactly the same price, and as an integrator, that's OK. If the more expensive units had much better performance, I would choose the better camera. The hard part is, IPVM seems to test apples vs oranges from my perspective. You are testing Axis' cheapest model vs Hik's cheapest. It would be much more valuable if you did more apples to apples. The depth of your testing matched with the better opponents would be amazing.
Thanks for all you guys do!
Create New Topic
Gert Molkens
"but I don't know many people installing 720p these days"
Well, now you know at least one :-)
I wouldn't know why not, it all depends on the intended use for the camera. If 720p gives enough detail then why bother to throw more pixels, at it? More pixels mean more bandwith, more storage etc etc.
On top of that, in my experience WDR will be much better with 720p models hen higher resolution ones and it will be better in low light conditions.
I'm not saying 720 is better than others, just that it still has its place. Probably not for all camera's in a project but likely for a couple of them anyway
Create New Topic