IR illumination has increased in popularity, with built in IR becoming a common feature in low-cost models. But when low light needs exceed the relatively short ranges of these cameras (usually 100' or less), users have historically been left with few options aside from high-priced external illuminators. And for those cameras without IR, even for short range, the cost of those illuminators can now be more than the camera itself.
However, a new crop of low-cost illuminators has hit the market, claiming wide illumination angles and long ranges (400'+) at rock bottom prices, under $100 as well as short-range models for under $20.
We bought 5 of these IR illuminators from Amazon for a total cost of under $200, shown below:
We put them to the test and see how the performed in these categories:
Range: Did illumination reach specified ranges or fall short?
Angle: Did illuminators suffer from bright center hotspots or evenly cover the field of view?
Features: How do these illuminators compare to pro models in featureset?
Camera Performance: How did these illuminators work with different Arecont, Axis, Hikvision and Sony cameras?
Though you're using newer cameras for this test, right? Presumably the latest gen cameras have better low-light performance which would make an illuminator appear to work (slightly?) better.
Maybe you should create a set of "reference" cameras if you're going to test illuminators regularly.
While I am sure there is some benefit to IR illuminators of 2015 IP cameras having greater light sensitivity than 2015, the IR models we tested in 2010 were bad all around, including extreme hotspotting. Here's a video from the 2010 test;
A really good camera without light still struggles to match up against cameras that have their own source of light (e.g., IR illuminators) in very dark conditions
In the Darkfighter test, we show the difference between that and IR.
We have been using the IR130 as a company for about 8 months now. No real issues found other than what has been stated in the article. Its inexpensive and works great.
Most people do not realize that IR assisted imaging requires a HDR camera. Those 200-300 foot illuminators cause near field blowout at short distances.
Most people do not realize that IR assisted imaging requires a HDR camera. Those 200-300 foot illuminators cause near field blowout at short distances.
Did you read the report or just immediately post that? We covered the overexposure aspect in the report.
I disagree with HDR cameras. In our testing, HDR is not enough to handle blowout. What you generally need is smart IR that detects objects in the near field and turns down the IR power.
Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny
Create New Topic
Read this IPVM report for free.
This article is part of IPVM's 7,014 reports, 933 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.
Comments (10)
Undisclosed #1
Though you're using newer cameras for this test, right? Presumably the latest gen cameras have better low-light performance which would make an illuminator appear to work (slightly?) better.
Maybe you should create a set of "reference" cameras if you're going to test illuminators regularly.
Either way, interesting tests and results.
Create New Topic
John Grocke
How does this compare to "Lightfinder" or "Darkfighter" cameras without illumination?
Create New Topic
Paul Crouch
Who manufactures these illuminators?
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #2
We have been using the IR130 as a company for about 8 months now. No real issues found other than what has been stated in the article. Its inexpensive and works great.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Manufacturer #3
Most people do not realize that IR assisted imaging requires a HDR camera. Those 200-300 foot illuminators cause near field blowout at short distances.
Create New Topic