BestMatch Camera Software Released
By John Honovich, Published Feb 09, 2015, 12:00am ESTOur new camera comparison algorithm, BestMatch, enables you to find the best camera for your needs at up to 70% lower price.
Watch this quick 2 minute video that shows how you will benefit from this:
Enter in any of 2,000+ cameras and IPVM will immediately return the best matches. Our algorithm compares cameras across dozens of criterias, analyzing which are most similar and which deliver the closest technical specifications at lower prices.
For examples, here are the BestMatches for the Axis M3024-LVE across 5 different manufacturers:
Each entry includes the price differential so you can see how much you can potentially save plus a link on the camera's name to review a more detailed comparison between the cameras.
For example, the first match to the Axis is a Hikvision camera, and here is a side by side comparison:
Indeed, IPVM enables you now to compare any number of cameras head to head.
For example, below we have entered in Axis, Avigilon, Hikvision, Pelco, Panasonic and Sony models:
Clicking 'compare selected cameras' returns a head to head comparison captured below:
Examples of BestMatches
Here are 4 examples of BestMatches to explore:
Try It Out
1 report cite this report:
Comments (16)
This is great work. I don't know of a single tool in the industries in which we are active (access control, commercial fire & intrusion, video, nurse call and door hardware) that examines competing manufacturer products on so many points and yields clear equivalencies. BestMatch alone is worth the cost of membership!
Hi John,
From what I understand, there are different image sensors in IP cameras, that can afect the price (too).
From IPVM test, there is any conclusion about differentiation in image quality, night image, bandwidth, etc?
There are different image sensors, though that's definitely not driving massive price differences.
For even lighting day time video, for the same resolution / pixel count, in our testing, differences are generally minor, regardless of manufacturer.
For high variation light scenes, i.e, WDR, there's definitely a difference, that's why we track which manufacturers support true WDR and then compare across comparable cameras.
For low light, there also can be significantly low light performance differences. One thing we do is track and compare which cameras have IR, which is the strongest differentiator of low light performance. That said, there are differences across non IR cameras. We do not factor in lux ratings, because our tests show they cannot be trusted.
There are variations in bandwidth but that occurs even across models in the same manufacturer line at the same resolution (i.e., Advanced Camera Bandwidth Test Results).
Overall, though higher priced manufacturers generally claim their cameras are better in all the intangibles, that is not what we have found in our testing.
So buyers should factor those in as well as support, but this tool gives a grounding that demonstrations what the actual specification differences are.
this is a great feature, thank you...
I agree with Mr. Sink. Worth the membership and great work John. Very interesting day indeed!
This is great tool, I will be using this all day long when building projects or finding equivalent product. It will be great to have the ability to export in PDF or other format the side by side comparison to share with my customers, and the PDF could be a way for IPVM to advertise their services.
Sebastien,
Thanks for the feedback. I briefly thought about this last week but didn't go any further.
I was thinking that PDF, CSV and XLS might be useful for exporting / downloading (depending on what one wants to do with them, e.g., XLS might be more useful for a 6 camera side by side compaison). Downloads, though, to note, are group member functions only (as they are for existing downloads).
I've posted this as an issue / item internally so we'll put in queue. I am not sure when or where it will land but it will be in the mix.
Thanks for raising this!
John
John, would it be possible to show which VMS each camera is compatible with or does that go to far? The user could select Milestone, Avigilon OnSSi etc. and it would let you know if the selected cameras would be able to work with your system and if IPVM has tested it with the VMS as well.
Keefe,
It's definitely something we seriously discussed. We actually have the functionality built-in but hid it. The reason being (1) it's hard to keep track of changes, (2) just because a VMS supports a camera, it does not mean / ensure it supports all aspects of the camera.
What we are considering is only doing it for the most commonly asked for VMSes (like the ones you mentioned). Still the other question is how do we track low level support (does it support video + PTZ control + i/o + x, etc.)?
I notice that it does not distiguish between remote zoom & focus lenses VS manual zoom/focus lenses. Our installation teams almost exclusively use remote focus/zoom cameras now due to extensive time savings getting the picture just right and the ability to slightly modify after install without going back to cameras.
IMO it is necessary to NOT offer up cameras that do not have remote zoom/focus when you are trying to compare with a camera that does have remote zoom/focus.
Also I think it would be good to distiguish warranty. Is it advance replacement? Do you have to send it to manufacturer and wait for return? Do you have to take it to distributor?
Thanks!
Thanks for the question.
Let me explain how BestMatch and CameraFinder differ.
CameraFinder is for getting exact matches. For example, if you only want to find bullet cameras with IR, that are at least 3MP and support autofocus, use the CameraFinder, because that will eliminate any camera that does not match every search criteria.
BestMatch is for getting the models that are overall closest. It's possible that a 'BestMatch' matches in most major respects but not in a few. This is because (1) most cameras don't have exact matches across every criteria and (2) we use weights to figure out which ones are more important (e.g., form factor is quite high because if someone is looking at a dome, we assume they don't want use to return a cube as a bestmatch).
So autofocus is weighted, but it is weighted comparatively lightly currently. What I will do is increase the weight for that to push the comparison engine to move up other auto focus cameras and down non auto focus.
On the warranty level, those are good questions. I started a new discussion on this here: What Is The Warranty Policies For Surveillance Manufacturers? so we can put together a list.
AutoFocus weight strengthening has been implemented.
What I realize now is that we don't track zoom in BestMatch. We are going to add that in as well. Zoom, as you know, is less common, but certain manufacturers, like Avigilon have it on a lot of their cameras.
I'll update once we add zoom in.
I really like the tool, but how did you compare prices? Some manufacturers have a tiered pricing model, and others just have flat costs? Comparisons could be different for different integrators?
We used online pricing as a proxy for street pricing. For those that do not have online pricing, we estimated based off MSRP and their discount structure.
In general, this gives a reasonable sense of price differences.
For integrators that are getting heavy / gold / platinum discounts from certain manufacturers, we expect they will be able to factor that in when they make their final decisions.
