Reliable CCTV System which can be viewed on a mobile, cost less than £1,000, reasonable night vision 24 April 2022 at 5:43PM in Techie Stuff 25 replies 670 views

cymruchris

Reolink is a proprietary brand a bit like an LG TV - if something goes wrong on your LG TV - you can only get the spare part - if it's available from LG - and if it's not available - you bin the whole TV. From my understanding Reolink Network Video Recorders only work with Reolink cameras. If a hard drive goes - you need a new Reolink Network video recorder, and if a camera goes down - you can only use Reolink replacements. You get the picture. They seem to have a reputation for being reasonable systems for the budget DIY market - likely better than the 'no-brand' stuff you can buy on Amazon. Probably will get decent day time images - might not get so decent night time images.

If you look at a Hilook (Hikvision's budget range) or Hikvision NVR for example, and the hard drive goes, you can just put another hard drive in from Seagate or Western Digital. You also aren't restricted to Hikvision cameras - and if any camera ever goes bang - you don't have to buy the same one again.

Hikvision and other manufacturers also produce a wider range of cameras to suit different purposes.

But if you just want some general viewpoints around the property - nice wide views - the Reolink will likely deliver that.

If you're DIY'ing - then maybe the Reolink is the best DIY option - but it might not be the best overall option. As always, you get what you pay for. 

If your area has reasonable street lighting that's on all night - then most modern cameras don't require a supplemental light. (but it does depend on the camera and the amount of light you have available). 

Jo4

Thank you very much for your detailed response.

I reside in the countryside so there is no street lighting.  The camera I referred to is on sale on Amazon for £249.99 so I thought it would have been reasonable quality, doesn’t seem like it now though?!?! Friend showed images theirs recorded and I thought they were reasonable quality but our system is that old that anything would be an improvement!

bengalknights

Annke cameras are also very good and can use 3rd party equipment (they are a hikvision rebrand)

cymruchris

bengalknights said:

Annke cameras are also very good and can use 3rd party equipment (they are a hikvision rebrand)

Yes - I’ve used a few of these and have been pretty decent for the budget end of real cameras. 

cymruchris

Jo4 said:

Thank you very much for your detailed response.

I reside in the countryside so there is no street lighting.  The camera I referred to is on sale on Amazon for £249.99 so I thought it would have been reasonable quality, doesn’t seem like it now though?!?! Friend showed images theirs recorded and I thought they were reasonable quality but our system is that old that anything would be an improvement!

Also - don’t fall for ‘the more megapixels a camera is - the better it is’ - you’ll often see 8mp cameras being advertised when the network video recorder doesn’t have a hope In h*ll of maximising that kind of image across 8 or 16 cameras. 

Aim for 2-4MP cameras so that a decent network video recorder can maximise their potential. 

And with no lighting - I would either fit independent supplemental lighting - dusk to dawn sensors - or use a camera with a good infra red range. Many budget cameras have a range of less than 10 meters - better cameras have infra red ranges of 30m or more. Cameras with lights on are a gimmick when looking at a street scene. They can be useful in a small confined space where someone gets very close - such as a front door - but otherwise as useless as a chocolate teapot in Dubai. Some people are of the view that having a camera light come on can be a deterrent - but i’m not convinced on that. 

Chickereeeee

I recommend having a separate IR illuminator. Because a) you get better coverage than those built into the camera (around the lens) and b) they eliminate back scatter from spider webs over the lens, and (mostly) from rain drops etc. In addition, as the illuminator uses invisible IR light, it will not annoy your neighbours. They do have a dim red glow, which potential thieves know to look out for (I assume), and thus acts as a deterent.

Incidently, many cameras, e.g the Reolink ones, can have local memory chips inserted, meaning - if the cameras are out of reach - in many cases no network video recorder is required.

Jo4

cymruchris said:

Jo4 said:

Thank you very much for your detailed response.

I reside in the countryside so there is no street lighting.  The camera I referred to is on sale on Amazon for £249.99 so I thought it would have been reasonable quality, doesn’t seem like it now though?!?! Friend showed images theirs recorded and I thought they were reasonable quality but our system is that old that anything would be an improvement!

Also - don’t fall for ‘the more megapixels a camera is - the better it is’ - you’ll often see 8mp cameras being advertised when the network video recorder doesn’t have a hope In h*ll of maximising that kind of image across 8 or 16 cameras. 

Aim for 2-4MP cameras so that a decent network video recorder can maximise their potential. 

And with no lighting - I would either fit independent supplemental lighting - dusk to dawn sensors - or use a camera with a good infra red range. Many budget cameras have a range of less than 10 meters - better cameras have infra red ranges of 30m or more. Cameras with lights on are a gimmick when looking at a street scene. They can be useful in a small confined space where someone gets very close - such as a front door - but otherwise as useless as a chocolate teapot in Dubai. Some people are of the view that having a camera light come on can be a deterrent - but i’m not convinced on that. 

We have dusk to dawn bulbs on most outside lights and the ones that aren’t are motion activated. 

Jo4

Chickereeeee said:

I recommend having a separate IR illuminator. Because a) you get better coverage than those built into the camera (around the lens) and b) they eliminate back scatter from spider webs over the lens, and (mostly) from rain drops etc. In addition, as the illuminator uses invisible IR light, it will not annoy your neighbours. They do have a dim red glow, which potential thieves know to look out for (I assume), and thus acts as a deterent.

Incidently, many cameras, e.g the Reolink ones, can have local memory chips inserted, meaning - if the cameras are out of reach - in many cases no network video recorder is required.

The nearest neighbour is over 100 feet away from our house so hopefully the cameras won’t annoy them. The neighbours are on about getting CCTV too because the thief stole from outside their property too but the neighbours stolen property was not recovered.

You have to insert a memory card into the camera I mentioned. It would just be the rest of the CCTV system which would require a recorder.

Jo4

Reolink has a camera which has 180 degrees so I am getting more tempted by it. Less cameras needed, less wiring, less damage or work to do to get them installed. 

cymruchris

Jo4 said:

Reolink has a camera which has 180 degrees so I am getting more tempted by it. Less cameras needed, less wiring, less damage or work to do to get them installed. 

You see more - but you also see less. Yes - you'll see a big picture with half a street in it - but zoom in for any detail, and you'll be disappointed. Especially with night time images. Better to go for a longer focal length that captures less square footage - have more cameras - and get more detail. But at the end of the day - any camera is better than no camera (Mostly)