Camera Calculator Version 1 Released

Author: John Honovich, Published on Aug 04, 2014

The new IPVM Camera Calculator is a game changer that enables you to truly see and understand what image quality and coverage you will get from various combinations of lenses and resolutions.

[UPDATE April 2015: Version 2 of the Camera Calculator now supports Google Maps.]

Take a look at what it does first:

We let you dynamically try out different camera and lens settings, instantly showing how the FoV changes in real scenes and what the impact on PPF / potential quality is.

Experiment with different settings - resolution, angles, distance, width, PPF, etc. Select different scenes, pan and tilt within them.

You can learn more in our 12 minute in-depth video.

Let us know what you think!

[UPDATE: Metric Support, Customer Image Added]

Metric support and uploading your own images as scenes to the calculator has been added.

Try It Out

Try Out the Camera Calculator Now.

1 report cite this report:

IPVM New Features and Improvements Directory on Feb 28, 2016
IPVM's development team continuously releases new features and site improvements. This document lists those items so you can see what has changed...

Comments (140)

Only IPVM PRO Members may comment. Login or Join.
Awesome! This tool is pretty sweet, makes it very straight-forward. Is it downloadable? What other tools are you guys considering? (Please pardon my ignorance, as I was very late to the tool webinar last week, appointment ran over...my loss and my apologies.)

We have a dedicated page for it here - IPVM Camera Calculator. It's all online based, no thick client.

We also have the Camera Finder, which we are now entering new cameras and will do an official promotion in September.

Finally, for the Calculator we plan a number of improvements, including selecting specific models and then having the calculator show what each model can do, given their focal lengths and max resolutions.

Nice, very nice. Keep up the good work !! :)

I'm trying Firefox and IE and the PTZ function in the scenes isn't working. Also tried reloading the pages.

Windows 8.1 Pro. Firefox 28 and IE 11.0.9600. I can look for an update for Adobe Elemennt.

Luis, we've confirmed this on our end. I am pretty sure it's a javascript issue that we can fix. It's a top priority for today. I'll update when fixed. Thanks for letting us know.

Thanks! In the meantime I've found it works in Chrome for anyone interested.

Still it is a great tool!

The panning issue with Internet Explorer has been fixed. If anyone sees additional browser-specific issues, let us know.

Thanks for the feedback!

This is cool....Great job :)

it looks great, thank you guys! is it possible to add the meters option for those of us not custom to use feet? Tks

Jorge, [UPDATED] metric support is now live.

12 MP.. ? Is that it? LOL.

Hey, 12MP does even really exist yet in production! :)

We could easily list higher resolutions, it's just adding a field. We choose not to list anything higher because they tend to be proprietary above that.

Hi John,

While I agree 12MP is not a requirement at this point and probably a little overkill, some manufacturers are planning to launch 12MP ONVIF cameras before the end of the year.

12MP is already in the calculator.

The company I work for has a non-proprietary ONVIF 14MP camera... Not complaining, John, just letting you know that there are cameras at higher resolutions than 12MP on the market currently.

I knew who your company was even though you were undisclosed.

Why? That's how rare 14MP cameras are :)

Again, we can add resolutions we want - 100MP? Sure. But I am trying to limit it to those that are broadly (or likely in the case of 4K/12MP) available.

This is very helpful John. Thank you for providing this tool.

Wow guys you are amazing, great work. If metric system also included that would be awesome.

Great, thanks for this! You should create a permanent link to this tool somewhere I think.

Ulrich, yes, we have a dedicated page - http://ipvm.com/calculator, we are going to add it to the home page later this week after we end this initial promotion.

Any chance of a version in metric?

[Yes, we metric support is now live.]

Missing scene for Warehouse with long and high shelfing with dim light conditions.

Manfred, we can always add in more scenes. The software is setup such that we take a 180 image and simply upload it. We'll consider a warehouse scene. If others have ideas for other scenes, we will consider them too.

Equally importantly, we are in in the middle of a feature where members can upload their own images for 'personal' scenes. Then they can pan / tilt / zoom / experiment with those.

A very nice tool indeed, any plans to make it metric ? or is there a hidden option ?

[Yes, metric support is now live.]

Very useful thanks IPVM.

It's pretty good done camera calculator. Thank you.

John, I am using the following IE version and the tool does not seem to respond at all. Any ideas?

WINDOWS IE VERSION - 8.0.7601.17514

Ciper - 256-bit

Joel

Joel, We are not supporting IE8 as it is more than 5 years old and there are many more recent version of IE, Firefox, Chrome, etc., that work well.

Joel,

I assume you're still using XP? Try Mozilla Firefox https://www.mozilla.org/firefox/. I think you'll be pleased.

One caveat: make certain you are downloading from mozilla.org's website. Other sources like CNET tend to bundle spyware and bloatware into their downloads.

Finally, something that will actually help us and our customers make the best selection. I know its early, but I tried it on my iphone with chrome and it works, a little. I would gladly pay a few a bucks for this as an app that I can use with pics that I've taken while onsite. Great jobs guys and thank you!

Jim,

We are considering an app version, but it could fairly expensive to develop. Selling it for $3 each won't justify the cost but perhaps we do that as a member only feature where one logs in to use it.

Thanks for asking for it. We will seriously consider.

I have several apps for business that I paid $9 or $10 for. I even have one that I pay $500 a year for....paying for this for iPad or other tablet would be well worth the money, especially if we can use the camera on the tablet to create the scene......

You guys are awesome and membership in IPVM is the best money I spend on any industry organization. Thanks.

Totally agree John. I once paid $150.00 for a limited capability lens finder tool at ADI (many years ago). I'd pay a lot for an app that I could use while on site to show the client what they'll see given the camera/lens I plan to provide. Maybe you should do one of your surveys to see how many members would buy it and at what price point to decide if it makes sense for you. By the way - thanks for this calculator, its awesome! :)

I feel the same John. It seems that AppStore users get used to $1 - $3 apps.

Our users ask us to make a mobile version of IP Video System Design Tool, but we cannot make it our higher priority because of low AppStore prices.

I've read about Httpwatch price experiment. Initally they put $99 price tag on their Pro mobile app. And got a feedback from many users like: "$100 for Pro is stupidly expensive...". So they lowered the app price to $9.99. The number of sales went up, but their revenue decreased. Then they increased the price to $19.99 and they got the same number of sales as with their old $99 price (!) but with the $19.99 (source).

Thanks for the tool!

A suggestion - it appears that the scene images are some fixed size and resolution. Would it be possible to to define a regular camera picture FOV or modifier such that it could be uploaded and used to determine the ideal security camera FOV to define and document FOVs for installations? The application is taking a regular camera or cell phone and hold it where the security camera will be installed and use that image as a basis for selecting the final FOV.

Just a thought :)

Mark, yes, we are already working on a user image upload feature that can be used as a scene. It should be ready by the end of this month (August).

This is not useful to me unless I can use the customers scene.

Kenneth Macphee, seriously? Then I just wouldn't use it if I were you.

Amazing!

Are you kidding? And what tool are you using now that IS useful? I haven't seen anything like this one out there yet.

Kenneth, Meghan,

Thanks for the feedback. We are definitely going to do uploading of one's own scenes / images so everyone will be happy!

This has been part of our plan from even before launch and its a top 3 priority. Expect it before the summer is over.

How did you deteremine the angle of view for each mm setting? I have not seen an accurate lens calculator to determine horizontal fov in quite some time that was not made specifically by the camera manufacturer. For instance, you state that with a 1/2.7" imager, a 2.8mm lens should give you a 93 degree angle of view. But Axis for example uses a 1/2.7" imager in the M3005-V with a 2.8mm lens and they state you will get 118 degree angle of view. This is just one example, but many other cameras and manufacturers have varying horizontal angles of view listed that are different from typical lens calculator figures.

Undisclosed E, very good point about FoV calculation. There does not seem to be any universal formula that covers all manufacturer implementations. I believe some manufacturers do not use the full sensor area, others may have slightly different sensor dimensions, etc.

What are we going to do to solve this is to add a camera selection field. It will display a list of camera models, allowing the user to select the camera they are interested in. For example, if one selects the M3005, we will look up in our database the specific AoV specified by Axis and then display that. The added benefit of this is that you can see immediately what each camera can cover based on their AoV and resolution limitations.

I have justed spent 10 minutes with this but it looks like an OUTSTANDING tool. I understand it is offered free at this point. Are you planning to keep it available as a free tool? If so, as a web-based tool, will you allow it to be linked on a member's website (of course, fully credited to IPVM)?

The plan is for the core tool (what you see right now) to remain free and for premium, member only features to be added to it. For example, upcoming PRO member features will include:

  • Uploading one's own scenes
  • Selecting specific camera models
  • Saving results

It is a web-based tool and we are considering letting others embed it but we have not decided on that yet.

great tools, are you going to lunch one with the metric as unit system?

We are adding a metric toggle shortly [UPDATE: it's now live]. Please no one ask this again. We get this is a priority from the previous 5 comments and have moved this up to the top of queue :)

great stuff, how about doing it in metrics

That's what, 5 or 6 people already who asked and got a response about metric? Can we implement a European filter on discussions?

Pretty nice, John. Good work.

Suggestion ... provide the ability to use our own image file.

Very nice tool and clean implementation. Maybe I'm missing something, but shouldn't "Horizontal FOV" be labeled "Width of Object" or "Width of Scene" and shouldn't "Angle of View" be labeled "Horizontal FOV"?

One other minor note. There are plenty of 5MP cameras with 2560 x 1920 resolution, but I don't recall seeing any cameras with 2560 x 2048 resolution, as listed in the Camera Resolution dropdown.

Vance, I checked 5 manufacturer's 5MP offerings and 4 of them were 2592 x 1944. So we will change it to that, though it will not make a big difference.

That looks great! Good work IPVM team! I look forward to the various improvements/changes others have already asked about.

John,

Many thanks for adding the "Lens Selector" function. That is exactly what I was looking for.

"The Lindgren Lens Selector" as we call it internally...

Glad you like it!

LOL. At my age, fame and infamy are both appealing...

Excelent tool. Is there any possibility to make a possibility to use it in meters as well ?

It will help a lot .

Sergio,

Are you pulling my leg, my man? :)

As we have answered 5 times above, yes, we are adding metric as an option. It's literally being worked right now and it should be live tomorrow.

Thanks for your interest!

Give these guys an inch and they'll take a meter!

Metre, Rukmini.

Welcome to 'Merica, where we don't use meters but we insist on spelling the word wrong anyway.

That was so bad, but it was hilarious.

This IPVM Camera Calculator is cool and anig help, but I do not understand something. I thought that if everything else on the calculator remained constant (same Distance to Object, Focal Length, Horizontal FOV, Resolution, etc...) and all I changed was the sensor size, say going from a 1/2.7" sensor to a smaller 1/4" sensor, then I would have thought that the smaller 1/4" sensor would have resulted in a lower PPF, but I am seeing just the opposite occur, the smaller sensor is showing a higher PPF (again keeping all the other variables in the calculator constant). Can someone explain this to me, or is this an error?

Hi Larry,

Good question! This is an indirect effect.

The smaller the sensor, the narrower the AoV /HFoV. Alternatively put, the bigger the sensor, the wider the AoV / HFoV. That's the direct relationship.

If you have a narrower HFoV, everything else equal, the PPF will be greater at the same distance from the camera.

Thanks to all for explaining the "unexpected" (at least to me) change in PPF. I had not noticed that the H-FOV had narrowed as well with a smaller sensor. The higher PPF makes sense now.

Great Tool!

1) Would be awesome if we could upload an actual picture and use the picture for selection.

2) Is there any way to make the tool full screen?

Brandon,

1) Yes, we are working on uploading actual pictures for use as a scene. It's a top 3 priority (right below the metric feature :)

2) Full screen is a very good idea. We had not considered this, but we will now.

I beleive this will be the best comment in this string.........

Read the comments before you comment!

rant concluded.

Cool!!!
Next step is to support meters ...

Hi John,

I do agree, great tool, best I've seen yet. I did not notice if I can save and/or print the results. Just use a "screen shot"?

Thanks

Steven, we are going to add in save functionality. Expect that in the next month. We are also considering a print functionality that "pretty prints" it with all the specs laid out.

For now, a screen shot would work. That's what I am doing for now :)

Some of us still use CIF. Would be great to add this in to the mix.

Hi Ben,

Regarding the request to include CIF resolution as well as others request for higher resolutions, our plan is to create 2 groups in the dropdown - up top will be the "Most Commonly Used Resolutions" - things like 720p, 1080p, 3MP, etc. and underneath it will be "Other Resolutions" which will include CIF, SVGA, 4MP, 14MP, etc.

This way we can add in less common ones but still make it easier to find the ones most people use most of the time.

Dear John,

Will this be available as an iOS app? Take our photo and use the program.....?

Ian,

We are actively working on uploading one's own photo as a scene. However, uploading from a phone may not be very useful as iPhone HFoVs are only ~54°, which is fairly telephoto for most surveillance cameras. I suspect the best overall experience will be using a wide angle camera and then pan / tilt / zoom in on that image in our tool.

We do not have a timetable for an iOS app. The focus right now is a web client.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when uploading your own photo, would that not invalidate the PPF estimate? Not saying it still wouldn't be useful for estimating angles and such, but when you designed the calculator based on the example scenes, you knew what pixel settings those pictures were taken at and the amount of pixels used so you could adjust the calculater's formulas, right?

If someone uploaded their own picture, I would think they would have to be able to input what megapixel value the picture is and what horizontal and vertical angle the lens was if they wanted something close to a PPF estimate.

To get PPF estimates, regardless of what picture you upload, you have to input the resolution of the camera and the HFoV width that you desire. Whether it's a 1MP or 10MP camera, you can have 100ppf. The issue is always how far away from the camera and at what FoV width. As such, that is why one enters them.

As for the PPF estimate images, they are valid estimates, so long as you correctly input your projected resolution and HFoV, regardless of the picture / scene one uploads.

Thanks, that's what I thought.

This tool is great, thanks! One minor suggestion: for low HFoV values (below 10), showing at least 1 decimal place could be very useful. I know this scenario is not too common, but at short distances (specially in metric mode) the HFoV can get very low, so the difference between i.e. 3 and 3.5 meters matters. I can set distances with decimal places, but the same for the calculated value of HFoV would be very useful...

Undisclosed I, now you know the value of using feet! ;)

We'll add 1 decimal place support for both distance to object and horizontal FoV.

Thanks for the feedback.

Metric support is now live. You can toggle between feet and metres anytime now - dropdown on the top right hand side of the calculator.

We'll also be adding 2 minor enhancements to it later this week:

  • Adjust the scale of the graph to max out at 30 meter to be similar to the imperial one where we go to 100 feet
  • Add a cookie that remembers if you select meters and keeps that set when you return to the calculator.

Also, notice that the calculator is now listed in the main navigation up top on every page for easier access.

An option to export a sample to give to customers as an example image would be great! I think it can help make the customers expectations more realistic... when they want to go with cheaper/lower res cameras, showing the difference in PPF can be a great tool!

Another value to the export would be to have a permanent record of the installed scene, approved by customer on sign off. This can help as documentation should customer insist 2 wks later that they thought the camera would give them a different view resulting in them wanting a free service call & sometimes substantial work i.e. relocating camera 10ft etc. For the integrator, having the signed off sample could diffuse any disagreement with customer re: paying for the relocation.

Jesse, Meghan,

Good feedback. Smart logic.

I agree that exporting will be valuable.

What format do you want an export in? A downloadable image? A downloadable PDF? Does it come with some commentary or notes or title, like "MegaCorp's Building 12 Front Door Camera."

Once we implement the save features, we can easily do printing, exporting, etc. I am just trying to understand what you are looking for specifically.

I typically use my cell phone for pictures on a site walk and those are in .jpg. It would be great if we can add a title/text as you mentioned. It doesn't have to be a whole lot as I normally attach these with a more detailed proposal document and just reference them. A date/time field would be good too for use as a site walk sign off record. Thanks John.

Any format works really... just something I can put into an email or document to clearly show the customer the difference in quality they should expect. I am just thinking of certain instances when the customer may need to value engineer, most of the time when I show them rough examples of the image difference they will go back and fight for money in the budget to ensure good quality.

awesome tool! Great work developing it and making it available!!

It seems if you set the sensor size and focal length which should fix the viewing angle regardless of resolution, changing the resolution setting is showing different viewing angles which would be confusing to users of this calculator. When changing the resolution the image shoulld become more or less clear while the viewing angle should remain the same for this comparison.

"When changing the resolution the image should become more or less clear while the viewing angle should remain the same for this comparison."

Yes, I agree. And that's what happens. Video:

John & Team, this is a tremendous tool and represents what sets your work apart from all others. A paid app would not only bring tremendous flexibility for site surveys but frankly, paying $10, $20 or far more for an app this valuable wouldn't cause an eye blink. Outstanding product, the industry is in your debt!

Update: We now remember user preference for metric vs imperial, via cookie. Specifically, if you switch to metric and return on the same PC, it will keep it set to metric.

Also, we had a good idea from Ben Molloy to display the distances for key points on the scenes (for example the far corner on the intersection is 80' away). We are going to implement that and are looking to enhance that with something even more sophisticated / powerful (but I'll keep that a suprise for now :).

Finally, our plan is to release the much desired feature to upload one's own images / scenes end of next wek.

Two new enhancements to the calculator:

  • By request, we now support one decimal place precision (e.g., 1.4 meters), something that's especially useful with the use of meters, as they are longer than feet.
  • The graph now adjusts to 30.5 meters max displayed distance, maintaining the same scale as feet / imperial.

With those changes plus Friday's cookie to remember metric preference, I think we are all set on metric usage.

Now we are working on uploading own's own images and saving calculations (which will enable exporting, packaging them into projects, etc.).

The Metric option is not just useful for the rest of the world; it can also be handy for us Imperialists. Obsessing over the view-a-face at 3000M problem, it was convenient to be able to enter the distance to target in meters and the switch back to imperial to get PPF. Nice!

p.s. As for the 3000M problem itself, even though the focal length has been limited to a modest 500mm, it is interesting to note that you can still get a decent face shot 3000M away just by choosing your other parameters wisely:

Now I just need to run out and get one of those 12MP cams with 1/4" sensors and half a meter of glass... :)

Amazing calculator!

May I know where in calculator can I input mounting height variable.

Thanks.

Christopher,

The calculator does not include mounting height. However, we are considering it for a future enhancement and it has been requested by others.

In terms of priority, it would be later as we already have a number of immediate upgrade features in queue (e.g., adding one's own scenes, saving calculations, selecting specific camera models).

I presume the main thing that people want is to understand the impact / limitation of downtilt, e.g., if the camera is angled 30° down, how much does that obscure individuals / restrict the FoV.

If anyone has anything else to add on mounting angle / camera tilt, please add.

I think mounting height would be a pretty good thing to have, along with an estimated area in front of the camera that would be the "blind spot". Some people forget to take that into account.

What do you mean by "blind spot"? Do you mean the region so close to the camera lens that it will be out-of-focus?

The blind spot is the area between the camera and the point where the bottom of the FOV hits the ground. It's not always an issue, as people's faces, for example, aren't at ground level, they're 5-6' above, on average. But in some cameras, tilting it up will leave you with area below the camera you can't see. Especially when using longer focal lengths.

So it's mainly a psychological effect where people mistakenly feel that the camera 'sees' everything from the ground up from the point of the camera on forward?

Though the blind spot(s) are actually not anywhere inside of the VFOV, but run alongside of it (which is dependent on VAOV and the tilt angle?), is that right?

And are there similar blind spots just outside the HFOV, 'created' there is a wall on the left (or right)?

The area immediately underneath and in front of the camera that it doesn't see, depending on the tilt angle. That's where mount height and tilt angle would come into play.

Great tool will be using it often to improve our viewing scenes and camera placements. Will be watching out for improvements.

Idea: Downloadable version with a scene capture button (instead of uploading a image) to use with a computer and then adjusting the camera features to suit?.

All good things take time, and what you have done so far is great keep up the good work. Thanks Heaps.

John P, by downloadable version, do you mean a thick client? Like a Windows app? We don't plan to do that as it will take a lot of work and I am not sure how much more use it will get beyond the web version.

What do you mean by scene capture button instead of uploading an image?

Maybe I'm watching too much CSI but...how cool would it be to snap a shot with your iPhone, Droid or tablet & have an IPVM app that would grab that shot & you could apply the calculator to it on the spot. Adjustments can be made right then with client so the final proposal will be exactly what they wanted at the site survey! But no pressure John & Team - it's already pretty awesome :)

Meghan,

We need to have a mobile app first ;)

However, that is in the plans for year end. Once we do that we can add a feature to take / use an image from the phone.

The only limitation will be that phones HFoV are typically in the ~55° range, which is narrower than what is most commonly used in surveillance cameras.

Hmmmm... I think there's enough "genius" at IPVM to figure out a way around that problem :) Is there a mathmatical equation that can be applied to make it fit other HFoV's. I'm thinking like the architectural drawings scale i.e. 1" = 8ft etc.

Minor technical precision bug in calculator. I think that there is a tiny rounding error, maybe in the AOV or an intermediate value, that manifests like so:

Starting with the calculator's default values,

2mm FL and 1920 pixel width = 8ppf

Then triple the focal length while reducing the horizontal pixels to one-third

6mm FL and 640 pixel width = 9ppf

IMHO, these should be equal, or am I missing something?

The IPVM calc would be a great mobile app!

This tool is really cool and awsome. I found it very easy to use and quite streight forward. I whish I would have had such a sweet tool for use in designing locations and recommending the camera type to make the most on our investment.

John,

Do we have the rights to frame set this into our corporate website for client self help?

Brandon,

No, not at this time. We are considering allowing others to embed the calculator in their sites.

A number of improvements have been added:

  • There's a new parking lot scene that is just better, deeper, more lanes / cars.
  • The scenes are now higher resolution so when you zoom in the image quality is sharper / cleaner.
  • You can now upload your own image. We are doing some optimizations tomorrow but it fundamentally works and its an option on the right hand side of the scene selector. Try it out. Let us know.

Love this tool. Just tried to upload my own image and all I get is a black screen inthe viewing window. I have three images in the calculator and same results. Did i miss a step?

Jim,

You entered "1" in the HFoV / AoV input so it set the image to 1° which is extremely tiny.

This is the way a user tells our system what the size / scale of the image is.

See here:

I've cleared the 3 images you loaded previously.

Please re-try to upload and input the correct AoV/HFoV. It will work.

Btw, we are changing the AoV/HFoV control to a slider over the weekend.

John

License Plate / Vehicle Entrance scene added.

This was our top requested scene. Here's what it looks like:

Just pick 'Vehicle Entrance' from the bottom of the 'General Scenes' list.

This may sound like a dumb question, but does anyone know the easiest way to determine what the horizontal angle of view is when a photo is taken with a handheld digital camera? I know it depends on the lens, zoom, etc... Is there any way to determine it after the fact? I have some photos that would be great to use for this tool, but I don't know what the angle of view was when the photo was taken.

Also does anyone know of a good free exif reader program?

Thanks,

Larry

Do you know the exact camera model? (For the sensor size...)

Do you know the distance to a center subject and its corresponding width?

I can get the camera model (Fujifilm Finepix S4200 -14 MegaPixels Wide 24mm)to find out it's sensor size (1/2.3 - inch CCD), but would not know the distance to the center of the subject or the scene width. If I knew that I could do some simple geometry or trigonometry to get the angle.

Larry

Larry, the camera calculator will tell you the AoV, given the known lens length and sensor size.

With 24mm and 1/2.3" sensor, AoV is ~15°. That's quite telephoto. You can certainly upload that, you'll just be constrained to zooming / tilting / panning within that 15 degrees.

The focal length on the camera ranges from f=4.3mm - 103.2mm. The 24X would be at the max zoomed in which as you say is a narrow field of view ~15° but I am not doing images like that.

Thanks.

Larry, I was answering based on your earlier input of 24mm (above).

If the focal length, for example, is at its widest (4.3mm), the AoV is ~74°

You can calculate this inside the top pane of the calculator.

Agreed. I was answering assuming you did not know the actual focal length (zoom) used. Without knowing focal length OR distance/widths yields multiple answers.

This is a GREAT tool, thank you.

However, I have a question.

I am looking at an Axis spec sheet for the M3005-V camera. It states 1/2.7" imager, 2.8 mm lens and 118 degree FOV.

When I enter the same in the calculator, it states those imager and lens selections should provide a 93 degree FOV.

Can you please explain the apparent discrepancy?

Thank you.

J, good eye.

There are a number of lenses, typically short ones, where the 'theoretical' calculations are not in line with the actual manufacturer specs.

Sometimes it is because of how the lens is designed, others is because how much of the sensor is being used.

The solution we have is to add actual camera models to the Calculator. This way, if you know you are using the M3005, you can select that and the calculator will know its specified AoV and then lock that in. It's actually being released next week!

Thanks for the clarification on angle of view. It helps.

Larry

I may be reading this wrong, but what does the 4000 horizontal pixel part indicate? Isn't it more like 5000? I think the recommendation is sound though.

I noticed it craps out around 70' I think, it stays at 3840 for the next 10' and then stays at 4000 pixels forever. 1000' distance gives 4000 pixels but 27 cameras at 2 MP.

The issue with the 'what camera resolution do I need?' is fixed. We correct the wrong variable being displayed in that response string.

Nice fix.

Related: The ancillary mode calculators are Imperialistic only.

Shouldn't the B's on some of these new Axis models be V's?

I would have to concur. Very sweet John.

in the lobby I chose a camera with 1.3 MP resolution to have a satisfying PPF of 45.7; the lens is wide angle (3.4 mm) to have a wide angle of view (70 degree); the distance to object (lobby doors) is 20 ft to have a suitable width of scene (28 ft) and a suitable PPF.

Related Reports

Testing DMP XTLPlus / Virtual Keypad Vs Alarm.com & Honeywell on Dec 13, 2017
DMP has a strong presence in commercial intrusion alarms, but not in residential. However, the company's XTLPLus wireless combo panel and Virtual...
The Race To The Bottom Is Over on Nov 28, 2017
The race to the bottom in video surveillance is over. After 3 years of aggressive price cuts and heavy sales and marketing expenditures, the...
Dahua 4K IR PTZ Tested on Aug 21, 2017
4K has made its way to IR PTZs. In this report, we examine the Dahua 6AE830VNI, a 4K PTZ with 30x optical zoom, 200m (~650') integrated IR, and...
Vulnerability Directory For Access Control Cards on Aug 14, 2017
Knowing which access credentials are insecure can be unclear, especially because most look and feel the same. Even the most insecure 125 kHz types...
IP Camera Specification / RFP Guide 2017 on Aug 14, 2017
RFPs are hard. Do them 'right' and it takes a lot of knowledge and time. Do them 'wrong' and you can be (a) unwittingly locked into a specific...
Technician Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Guide on May 12, 2017
Technicians encounter multiple hazards when running wires and installing security devices. Wearing personal protective equipment, or PPE, helps...
Varifocal Vs Fixed Lens Statistics 2017 on May 04, 2017
Varifocal camera lenses provide more flexibility at installation time, but come at a higher cost. Fixed lens cameras reduce hardware costs, but can...
Hack Your Access Control With This $30 HID 125kHz Card Copier on May 01, 2017
You might have heard the stories or seen the YouTube videos of random people hacking electronic access control systems. The tools that claim to do...
Dahua Backdoor Uncovered on Mar 06, 2017
A major cyber security vulnerability across many Dahua products has been discovered by an independent researcher, reported on IPVM, verified by...
20 Manufacturer Favorability Ranked on Feb 28, 2017
20 security industry organizations' favorability was ranked based on direct feedback from over 100 integrators. In-depth comments revealed insights...

Most Recent Industry Reports

Why 3VR Failed on Feb 16, 2018
3VR destroyed transformed ~$65 million in VC funding into a $6.9 million exit. The reason they failed is simple. They bet on analytics. They...
"Fear Mongering": Hikvision USA Cybersecurity Director Dismisses Chinese Government Ownership Concerns on Feb 16, 2018
The facts are: The Chinese government created Hikvision and is Hikvision's controlling shareholder. Hikvision's Chairman, a Communist Party...
16:9 vs 4:3 Video Aspect Ratio Statistics on Feb 16, 2018
What aspect ratio do security integrators prefer? The 'standard' 4:3 or the 'wide' 16:9 one? 100+ integrators told us what they preferred, with...
Mercury Releases New Series 3 Redboard Access Panels on Feb 15, 2018
Mercury Security has their first major product release post-HID buyout, and things literally look different. The Series 3 SIO boards now are red...
Last Chance February 2018 Camera Course on Feb 15, 2018
This is the last chance to get into the Winter camera course, starts next Tuesday. Register now. IPVM provides the best education, live online...
Hikvision DeepInMind Tested Terribly on Feb 15, 2018
While Hikvision is heavily marketing deep learning and 'AI' as their next big thing, new IPVM test results of their DeepInMind NVR shows their deep...
Genetec CEO: You Cannot Buy Trust on Feb 14, 2018
Genetec's CEO, Pierre Racz, delivered a direct message at their channel partner conference: Racz has become a focal point in the industry debate...
Assa's Lowest Power Draw Maglock: Securitron M680E Examined on Feb 14, 2018
Securitron produces some of the most extreme maglocks on the market, including massively strong maglocks and even ones with integrated CCTV cams...
Hanwha Wisenet X 5MP Camera Tested (XNV-8080R) on Feb 13, 2018
Wisenet X is Hanwha's high-end camera line. We tested their Wisenet X 1080p camera last year. Now Hanwha is offering 5MP cameras listing super low...
Top Problems For Integrator Project Management on Feb 13, 2018
Security projects routinely encounter issues that jeopardize deadlines, create confusion, and shrink profits. Unfortunately, there are common...

The world's leading video surveillance information source, IPVM provides the best reporting, testing and training for 10,000+ members globally. Dedicated to independent and objective information, we uniquely refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship and consulting from manufacturers.

About | FAQ | Contact