Trends ********
** *** **** * years, ********* ******'* ***** of *** ****** *********** deploy *** ******* **** ~4% ** **** ** ~8% ** ****.
Breakdown ****** ***********
***** ** ****, ~**% of *********** ****** ***** used **********, **** ****** dropped ******* ** ~**% in ****:
** *** ******** ****, many **** *********** *** using ********* *******. ** the ******** **** (** potential ********* ** ***'* view), * *** ** 3 *********** *** ***** not.
General ********
*** **** ****** ***** reason *** *********** ***** panoramics *** ** **** general, ***-******** ********:
- "******* ***** ********* ** a ***** ** **** lobby."
- "********** ***** *** ************ to *** ** ******** of *** ********* ** the ****."
- "******** ******* *** ***** indoor ****** ** ********* warehouses."
- "******** *** ** *** general **** ******** *** not *** **** ******."
- "**** **** * ***** overview *** **** ****** nice ** * *******."
- "**** **** ******** ** needed ** * ******** area."
- "***** **** ******* *** normally ******** *** ******* overview."
- "** **** **** *** general ***********."
- "** *** ********* ******* mostly *** ******* ******** of ***** **** ***** cameras ******** ** ******* details ** ********* *********."
- "*** *** *****-****** ******* are * ***** *** to ***** ***** *****."
- "**** *** ******* *** server ** ***** *********** overviews *******."
Intersection ************
**** ************, * ******* number ** *********** ****** about *** ******** ** using ********** ** *************, including ******** *** ********, where ******* ******* **** covering ******** ********** **** a ****** ****:
- "***** ***** ** **** for ********"
- "**** **** **** ******* in ***** ******** ** see ** *** **********."
- "*** ********* *** ******* several ***** *****, ********** in ******** ******* *** at *****-******** ** ********."
- "*** ** **** *** suitable *** ******* ********** only - ******* ** the *******, ***."
- "******* *************"
- "*** ******** ************* ** hallways ** *****"
- "**** **** **** **** in ******** ******* ******* it ****** *** ****** to ******* * **** arranged ***."
PTZ ************
**** *********** ***** *** benefits ** ********* **** with ********* *******:
- "*** ************ ***** ***'* offer ** **** ********* over * *****-****** (**** a ************) *** ***** they ****. ****, ******* that *** ** ** a *** * ****** ago *** *** ****** with * ***** ****** for ***** *******."
- "********* **** **** **** them."
- "***** *** ******* ***** PTZs ***** ** ********."
- "** **** ******* ********* multi-sensor ******* (*** *******) instead ** ***. ******* love ****** * ***** lenses ** ******* ** a ********** ****** *** with ***** *****."
- "** *** ******* **** people **** ** **** away **** *** ******* because **** ****** **** to ** ******** ** the ***** *********. ********** will ***** ****** ***** and ** ****** *** deployed ******* ******** ******** evidence *** ***** ************ w/o ****** ************."
Race ** *** ****** ******
*******, *** **** ** the ****** ** ****** an ******. ** ****, replacing ******** ******* *** * common ****** *** ***** panoramics. ***, ** ****, this *** ******* ** the ********* **** *******, making ******** ************ ******* less *********:
- "** * ******* **** I *** ***** *** in * ** * fixed ***** *** **** a **** ****** *******."
- "*** **** **** ***** at ***** ** ***** of *** *******. ****** to *** *** ** more ******* ** **** site."
- "****** **** **** * or * *******."
- "** ****** *************** *** more ******* (***** *** can ** *** ***** cost ***** ****) **** less ******* **** ********* view. * **** **** you *** **** **** for **** ****."
- "** **** *** ********** leaves * *** ** be ******* *** *** multi-imagers *** **** ***********."
- "*** **** ** ***** cameras ** ********* *** high ** ******* *** using ******** *** ** cameras *******."
- "**** ** ***********. ** 2-3 ******* *** ***** the **** **** *** less **** **** *** cost ** * *******/*********, it *****'* **** ***** to ******* ****."
************, *** **** ****** imager ***** ***** ******* can ********* ** ****** for $** - $*** and ********* ****** ******** to **** $*** - $1500 (***** *** ** that ***** *** *******, higher *** *** *****-*******), the **** ******* *** not ** ****** ** a *** ***** *** since ************ ****** ******* has ******* **** ******* than ********* *******.
No ******** ************
*** **** ****** ****** for ***** *** ***** panoramics ** *** *** that ********* *** *** demanding **:
- "** ******** ************."
- "*** ******* **** *** requested **."
- "****, *** ***** ** all."
- "*%. *** * ******* requirement."
- "**** ***** *** *** requirement."
**** ********* **** **** manufacturer ********* ***** **** increase ***** / *******.
*******
** ****** ********* ****** usage ** ******** ** grow. ** *** ***** hand, ** *** ********** as ****** ************* * niche, ** **** ***** can ** ******* ************* with * ****** ****** with * ********** ******** (say ** - ***° FoV) *** ** ******* of ********* / ******. In *** **** * years, ** ****** ********* usage ** ****** *** eventually ** ***** *** as * ********** ** the ****** ** ** - **% ***** ** all ******* *********** ***.
Comments (10)
John Honovich
Note: one thing we did not do was track the breakdown between fisheye and multi-imager cameras. We plan to add that in an upcoming survey.
Create New Topic
Shannon Davis
We have started installing the Axis four head P3707 quite a bit and work well on a corner of a building. Works fairly well but one issue is that these only have manual focus and are sometimes quite tricky to keep in focus after tightening the thumb screw. Other than that a good choice. We have also installed the fish eye cameras and they are good for a general view but not much else. Now some have higher megapixels which hopefully will be better.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Manufacturer #1
I agree with panoramic use planing out. They are not a panacea. They don't work for every single situation and even with prices coming down they are still twice or more the cost of a fixed decent fixed cam.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #2
I know the survey didn't break out panoramic fisheye versus single imagers so I feel this worth stating, lest anyone make this mistake:
There is a good case to replace PTZs with multi-imager cameras. I would avoid at all costs using panoramic fisheye, single-imager cameras to replace PTZs unless in relatively confined areas or areas where detail is irrelevant. The pixel density drop-off is severe, even with the 12MP units on the market. Light sensitivity is also pretty atrocious.
Create New Topic
Michael Miller
We have been selling alot of fisheyes recently as customers want complete coverage of rooms with no blind spots. Also schools love the fisheyes for hallway intersection coverage and they are more then happy with the resolution of the 12MP fisheye cameras.
Create New Topic
Marco Garza
great read...i have been steering away from PTZ cams for last 5 years. working with a number of law enforcement agencies over the years, I have seen the frustration when investigations are conducted and NOT to have PTZ camera actually looking at an occurrence.
Multi-imagers are better value in place of PTZ's. But cost is definitely a factor. On the other hand, what does it cost to have an installer run cabling, power, etc for multiple cameras, versus single camera?
of course the flipside and trade off is image quality.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed End User #3
Panoramic camera will be very popular in years to come as technology improve.
Create New Topic