Executive *******
**** ******* ********* *** better *** ***** *********** than **** *** ************ 1/3" ** */*" *** light *******. *******, ** darkness, *** **** ********* ************* ******* details **** *** ****.
***** ******* *** ***** performance ** *** *** factor, *** **** ***-***** ** * better ****** **** *** Axis *****.
*******, ** *** ***** has ******** ***** **** lighting, *** **** ***** has ******* ********** ********* ******** increases ** ******* ** longer ****** ** **** as ***** ******, **** lower ******** ** **** scenes (******* * ~**** increase ** **********).
************, *** ***** ****** some **** ****** ************ to ** *** ** board, **** ******* **** *********,******* ************, ***., *** ******** on *** **** *****.
*** ******* ******** ** both ******* ** ****** to ** *****, ** both ******* *** ~** more ********* **** ************ high-end *******, **** *** price ******* ********* * combination ** ****** ********** and ******** *** ***** performance **** ** *** available ** ***** ************ cameras.
*******
*** **** ***** ** priced ********** ***** **** the ***** ** **** lens *******, *** ********* on ****** *** *********/*** F-stop *******. **** ***** pricing ****** ********* ** which **** ** ****, from ~$*,*** *** *** the ****/**.* ***** ******* ~$7,200 *** *** **-*****/**.* lens. *** ***-***** ***** for ***** $*,*** *** ******, plus ** ********** $*,***-*,*** depending ** **** ******.
******** ********
**** *** **** ***** and **** *** *** much larger **** ******* *** cameras. *** ***** ** slightly ********, *** ****** than *** *****, ****** it ********** ****** *******. Note **** **** **** and **** ********* ****** outdoor ******** *** ***** cameras, ** ******* *** camera ******** *** *** fit *** ****** *** lens ** **** * large ****** ***** ****** to *** *** ****** field ** ****.
*** **** ***** ** the ***** ******** ******* connects *** ********, *****, SD ****, *****, ***. The **** ******* ******** is ** *** (***** form ****** *********) **** which *** ** **** for ***** ***********.
Sony ****** ******
*** ***** **** * larger **** ****** **** the ****' ***-*, ********** for ** ***** **** of *** ****** *** light ***********. *** *** are ***** ***** **** by ****.
20MP **. **
*** **** ***** ******* at *********/****, **. ** in *** *****. **** results ** ~*,*** ********** pixels ************, ** **** as * ****** *:* aspect ***** ***** *** better *** **** ****** than *** ***** **:* ratio. **** **** *** Q1659 ** **** ******* of ****, ** ** the *****.
Full ***** *********** *******
** ****** ******* *********** in ** ******* ******* lot/field *****, ***** *****:
** ** ******* ******* test *****, *** ***** provided image ******* ******* ** the ***** ** * ~60' ***** ** ****, shown *****. *** ***** was ******** **** *****, with **** ********/***** *********, but ******* ******* *** practically *** ****, ******* a ~** *** ********* in *** *****.
** ****** ******** (~***'/~***' HFOV), *** ***** ******** a ******** ******** ** details ******** ** *** VB770, **** *** ******* slightly *******, *** **** legible ** **** *, vs. **** * ****** totally ******* **** ** the *****.
Daytime **** *******: **** *********
****** ** * **** intersection **** *****, *** Q1659 ******** ********** ******** in ******* *********. *** example, ******* ****** **** clearly ******* ** **** in *** ****** ** the ************ ** *** Q1659, *** ***** ** the *****. ** **** longer ***** (~***'), * banner ** ******* ******* in *** *****, **** truer ******, *** ****** be **** ** *** VB770, ***** ******* ********** desaturated.
*ony ****** *** ***** ***********
** *** *****, *** SNC-VB770 *** **** ******** in ********* ****** **** the **** *****. *** example, ** ***** **** no ******** ******** (~*.** lux), *** ***-***** ******** rought ******* ** *** subject ** **** ** 3 ******* ***** ** the **** *****, ***** the ***** ******** **** detection, ** *******.
*******, ** ~**', *** SNC-VB770 ******** ********* ** the ******* ***** *** he ****** **** ******* noise/background ** *** *****.
Both ******* ****** **** ******* ***** *** *****
***** *** ***** ******** worse ** *** ***** than *** **** *****, not **** ** ** superior ** ******* ***** low ***** ******, **** using */*" *******. *** example, *** ***** ***** show ******** **** **** tests ** *** **** Q1659 *** **** ***** against */*" *** */*" super *** ***** ******.
******** *** ******* ******* in **** *** **** and **** ****** **** rough ******* ** *** VB770, but ** ******* ** detection ** *** ******** super *** ***** *****.
Axis ****** ************
*** ***** ** ******* of ******* **** **** camera ************ (****) ** board, **** ********* ************************ *********. *** ***** **** also ** ********** **** the **** ***** ***** (Fence *****, ****** *****, etc.) **** ******** ** updated ** *.**+ ** the **** *** ******. The ***-***** ******** ****'* DEPA ******** ********* (*** *** ****) *** ***** ************ cannot ** *****.
Bandwidth **********
******* ** *** ********* of *********, *** *****'* bitrates **** ***** ** all ****** ****** ********* still than *** ***-*****, ******* its **** ****** ***** count. **** **** ******-***** **** *** *** a **** *** **************, *** ******* **** target/max ********, **** ** user ******* ** ***********. This **** **** * target ******* ** ** Mb/s *** *** ** 32 **/* ***** ** recommendations **** ****.
VMS/Multistreaming *******
*****-********* *** ****** **** Avigilon ******* ******, *****, Genetec ******** ******, *** Milestone ********.
*** ***** ********* ** least *** ******* ** most ***** ****** (*** but ********), *** ** many ** * *.*** streams ** ******* (***** below) *** *********. *** VB770 ******** ** ** five *******, *** *** support ******, **** ***** and ********* ****** *** five, *** ******* *** Avigilon **** *********** *** main ******. ********* ** a ******* ** ** FPS ** *** ** stream. ******* *** ** further **** **** ********* in ****.
*** **** ******* ** specifics ** *****-****** *******, see *** ********** ***** of *** **** ***** *** **** *****.
Test **********
*** ****** **** *** images ** **** ****** were:
- **** *****:***** **** **.**
- **** *****:***** **** **.*
******* *** **** ********* with ********* ******, ** well, *** ****** ** not ****** **** ******:
- **** *****:***** ** **-*****, **.**
- **** *****:***** ** **-*****, **
*** ********* ******** ******** were **** ** **** test:
- **** *****: *.**.*.*
- **** ***-*****:*.*.*
Comments (23)
Michael Miller
Any reason that the Avigilon 4K PRO camera wasn't included in this test? It's significantly cheaper than either option and delivers similar performance.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Manufacturer #1
8 MP vs 20 MP.....why? One has almost 50% more horizontal pixels than the other. OF COURSE one image looks incredibly better than the other. Like what you see here? Head over to Motor Trend to see their comparison between the Honda Accord Sport and the Porsche 911.
What about the lenses? They're different models, yeah? Can we get some more info on them to determine if we should care about the low light image comparisons? If the F-stops are completely different, then they too are pretty meaningless apples to coconuts comparisons.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed #2
When testing in low light, what shutter speed is used? If you mentioned this in previous tests, sorry for the repeat question.
Create New Topic
Ethan Ace
In low light, 1/30s (33ms) shutter is used. It's generally always used, unless otherwise specified.
The lenses used for the bulk of testing were:
So the same F-stop was used.
We did some testing with 70-200mm varifocal models to verify things weren't simply due to the fixed lens choices (note that images using these do not appear in the report).
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Manufacturer #3
Its an interesting comparison, but why did you test the Sony at 4K rather than the 12MP resolution vs the 20MP of the Axis ? That really scues the distance results.
It would seem reasonable to test at the same resolution 4K and then at max resolution perhaps.
Similarly if you are testing 20MP cameras, it may be more reasonable to compare the Axis Q1659 to the Sony VM772R 20MP camera.
Also both Sony cameras support 5 streams, not just 2 as was stated in the report.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed #4
Situation reversed when looking at physical sensor size:
Less pixels and bigger sensor make bigger pixels.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed #5
Soon as the lights went out I was like WTF.
Should show a night comparison for all the day comparison photos, such as the intersection. This would give another perspective of those comparisons provided. Just a thought.
I mean, if you want to make it look like you captured bigfoot at night then definitely use the Axis camera LOL.
Add, what ISO ranges were used in the night comparisons?
Create New Topic
james cordell
Have you tested the Arecont 10MP camera or the Avigilon 7K (30mp) camera. We tested both of the cameras at work location with good results. 3 10mp or 2 7K to cover parking lot, with decent details at night, since there is lighting for the parking lot.
V/r
Kelly
Create New Topic
Jordi Ibero
09/13/17 02:02pm
All these cameras have the same issue. The stream. No VMS capable to display more than 2 or 3 units at the same time.
Speaking about performance, only Avigilon is the ONLY chance above the 4K. IMHO sure.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #7
Have been really impressed with the Avigilon H4A line of cameras and would love to have you compare Avigilon (Made In Canada) solution to the Axis and Sony.
Any chance of that?
Create New Topic
james cordell
My limited understanding of some VMS, the # of camera you display is linked to # of CPU/ you to push the monitors. I planned a project with 78 imagers, a combination of multi imagers and single image all IP, and required 4 additional CPU's to drive all the displays.
Maybe I am lost in the weeks.
V/r
Kelly
Create New Topic
Chris Chambers
I know this is a year and a half ago now, but I would suggest using the Sony, if it is still the only full frame 35 mm sensor out there in a security camera, as a low light reference in all tests. The 0.05 lux scene in particular shows the absurdity of some of the 0.00n lux claims for much smaller sensors, for one.
I would also note that given full frame DSLR prices, it seems to me somebody ought to be offering APS-C at around $2,000 with no lens, and full frame 35 mm at around $4,000 or a bit less with no lens. I guess the issue is even lower volume potential on full frame security cameras than photographer cameras.
Create New Topic