Hikvision IR Bullet Camera Shootout

By Ethan Ace, Published Jan 08, 2018, 12:06pm EST

Hikvision's widely used Value Plus line claims 30m/~98' IR illumination range, on multiple lens options ranging from wide angle (100°+) to telephoto (25°).

We bought and tested 4 Hikvision DS-2CD2025FWD-I bullet cameras against each other:

  • 2.8mm/108° AoV
  • 4mm/86.4° AoV
  • 6mm/52° AoV
  • 8mm/40° AoV

The image below from the IPVM Calculator shows the angle of view (and specified IR range) for each lens option:

Testing indoors and outdoors, we examined:

  • How does IR illumination pattern differ across models?
  • Which models, if any, offer more even coverage for their angle of view?
  • What advantages in details are there when using long lens options?
  • How does performance differ outdoors versus smaller, reflective areas indoors?

Test *******

** *** *****, **** **** option *** ****** ** illumination *******. *******, ***** should ****** ** ******* *** issues:

  • ***** ****** ****** ******: ****** ** ***** ***** lens ******* (*.***/***) **** notably ****** **** ***** in *** ** *** models ***** **** **** focused **.
  • *.*** ************:*** *.*** ***** *********** subjects ** ***** ****** outdoors, *** ** ***** in ***** ****** ******.
  • ** ******* ** *** IR *****:** **** ****** ********* recognizable ******* ******* ** the *******' *** ** range (***/~**').
  • ***/*** ****** **** ***** detection:*******, *** *** *** 8mm ****** ******** ********** better *********, **** *** subject ****** ** **** and ********* ** ***** instead ** * ****** blob.
  • *********** ******* ** ******* indoor *****:*******, *** ************ ** the *.*, *, *** 6mm ****** ******** **** more ******* **** ********, with **** ****** ***********, while *** *** *****'* pattern *** **** ********.

Test *****

** **** ***** ******, the ********* ******* *** used:

  • ******* **** ******* ** close ******** ** *** practical (******** *** ***** and ******** ***********) ** reduce ******* ** ********* ****** of ********* ** *** target, ******* ****** ** offset ********, ***.
  • ****** ** ************ **** tested *** ** * time ** ***** ************ between ******** ******. 

Differing ************ ********

******** *** **** **** options ** *** ********* 2025 ***** ***/~**' ** range, *** ******** ******** are ******* *********. ** illustrate ****, *** ********* below ***** *** ***** of **** ** *** widest **** ****** (*.***/***°), with **** ******'* *********** turned **:

*** ********** ***** **** these ****** **** ** side *** **********:

******* ** ***** ******, three *** ****** *** noticeable:

  • *.*** ************ *****/******:******* ** *** ************ pattern ** *** *.*** camera, ** ** ********** dimmer **** ******, **** objects ** *** ***** of *** ***** ** view, ** **** ** our ******* ** ~***' more ********* ** ******* compared ** *** ***** three *******' ************.
  • *** **** ******:*** *** ******'* ************ pattern ** ******* ********, very *** ** *** center ** *** **** field ** ****, ******* intended ** **** ******* match *** ***** ** view ** *** *** model.
  • ***/*** **** *******:*******, ************ ** *** 4mm *** *** ****** appears **** *******, **** in ********** *** *****, with **** ****** ***********, despite * **°+ ********** in ***** ** **** between *** *** *******.

2.8mm ************ ******

** *** *****, **** the *.*** ***** *********** subjects ** **** *****. For *******, ** ~**' distance, *** *******'* **** is ********* ***********, ********* features, ** ** *** bottom **** ** *** test *****.

** ********, ***** ******* properly ****** *** ******* and *****, ******* ***** illumination ***** **** ******* on ***** ******** ****** of ****, ***** ** the ********** *****:

Poor ******* ** *** ** *****

**** **** ******* ***** much ****** ****** ** view, ****** **** ******* do *** ******* *** usable ******* ** ******** at *** *******' *** IR ***** (***/~**'). *******, detection ** **** ****** in *** *** *** 8mm *******, **** *** subject *********** ** ***** instead ** ****** * few ****** ******.

Indoor/Small **** ************

** ******** ** *********** differences *******, **** ***** indoors ** * ***-**** conference **** (~**'***'), *** illumination ******* ** *** *.*, 4mm, *** *** ******* appears **** **** *******. Note **** *** *** appears ******* ** *** left *** ** *** close ***** ** *** chart/back ****, ** ** was ******* ** *** left ** *** *** model, *** ********* ******* is *******.

*** *** ******'* ************ pattern ** ******* ****** in *** ****** **** others, ** ** *** outside.

****** *** ******* *****, none ** *** ******* overexposed *** ***** ** close *****, ***** *****. PPF *********** ** **** range *** *****, **** text ********** ******** ** narrower ***** ******.

Firmware ******** ****

*** **** ******** *** used ** *** ****** in **** ****:

  • ********* **-**********-*:**.*.* ******

Comments (6)

Undisclosed #1

IPVMU Certified | 01/10/18 05:44pm

Are these crops?  The AOV seems pretty much the same.

Avatar

Ethan Ace

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed #1 | 01/10/18 08:50pm

Yes, as we explain above it, that's an image from the 2.8mm camera, showing how the illuminator of each of them varies. So it's easy to see it narrow.

But fair point, we should put in a full field of view from each camera for clarity. We'll mark all that up better.

Undisclosed #1

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Ethan Ace | 01/10/18 10:49pm

You’re right, you do say that, it’s clear now that I read it again.

btw, how much ambient light is present there?

do you think the beam angle would be easier to discern if it were darker?

Avatar

Ethan Ace

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed #1 | 01/12/18 03:06pm

That was outside, with the lights off, and about 0.05-0.1lx, depending on distance. The pattern might be more visible if it were darker, but it's pretty hard to find an outdoor scene that's much darker.

fox vision

In reply to Undisclosed #1 | 02/05/18 02:14pm

Those are the ones of IR, not the lens.

 

Chad Rohde

01/10/18 08:48pm

Are these crops? The AOV seems pretty much the same.

Since they didn't have pics of actual coverage differences between models, they wanted to make it easier to compare the other aspects I'm guessing. And use the IPVM calculator instead.

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,803 reports, 913 tests and is only available to members. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.

Already a member? Login here | Join now
Loading Related Reports