Dahua WizColor 5x59-PRO and SmartLight 5x59-IL new series

alekk said:
Looking forward to a AS versus ZE shootout.

Would love to see a no-IR, no-LED (i.e. color only) comparison in very low light using manual settings - curious what the F/1.0 lens of the AS can do.
Click to expand...
Wait...is the AS f1.0? Andy lists it as f1.2 same as the ZE...just checked Dahua site and of course you are correct :wow: damn, I almost added one to my order but instead got ZE's, that is annoying. Ah well, live and learn, always double check the specs! guess I will add one to my next order and hope they don't show up the ZE too much in low light. I was so close to ordering one, not even funny :facepalm:

The f1.0 aperture should in theory help quite a bit:

ZE
0.0006 [email protected] (Color, 30 IRE)
0.0003 [email protected] (B/W, 30 IRE)

AS
0.0004 [email protected](Color, 30IRE)
0.0003 [email protected] (B/W, 30IRE)

Odd how the B/W lux is the same for both, colour a reasonable boost on the AS. Well isn't that just a pain, ironically at least one of the locations I don't even need varifocal :lol:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: alekk
I can’t say about this new camera with all the secret hi-tek AI hocus pocus but traditionally fixed lens cameras of the same series have always had a lower FStop and min illumination spec and resulting better light pick up than VF cams.

Something I hadn’t noticed was that the VF has much better close focus distance specs
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clark Griswald and alekk
The AS also has a fixed Iris ... so no depth-of-field adjustment, whereas the ZE has a P-Iris that you have some control over.

Although shouldn't be that big of deal for the AS since it's a wide-angle lens (2.8/3.6mm ... and recall that there were focus complaints about the 6mm lens on the previous fixed-focal) and the focus point isn't "close" ... so assuming set correctly, most everything at the target distance should be in "reasonable" focus.

I debated getting one to compare to the ZE and 5442-S3 ... but don't think I would use it long-term.
But if someone in the Denver/Boulder area has one they'll loan me for a week or two, I'd be happy to do a low-light shootout per this thread.

F1.0 versus F/1.2 isn't that much different, but the ZE closes down as you zoom in ... be nice if Dahua published aperture versus focal length (zoom #) specs.
Having said that, the simplicity of a fixed focal lens (versus variable) should mean (all else equal) a bit more light from just from that.

LOL it's going to have a super-fast shutter speed at F/1.0 (no gain) in broad daylight.

P.S. Yea, @CamCrazy, the specs don't make sense. Why would the color performance be better but not the B&W?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bigredfish
alekk said:
The AS also has a fixed Iris ... so no depth-of-field adjustment, whereas the ZE has a P-Iris that you have some control over.

Although shouldn't be that big of deal for the AS since it's a wide-angle lens (2.8/3.6mm ... and recall that there were focus complaints about the 6mm lens on the previous fixed-focal) and the focus point isn't "close" ... so assuming set correctly, most everything at the target distance should be in "reasonable" focus.

I debated getting one to compare to the ZE and 5442-S3 ... but don't think I would use it long-term.
But if someone in the Denver area has one they'll loan me for a week or two, I'd be happy to do a low-light shootout per this thread.
F1.0 versus F/1.2 isn't that much different, but the ZE closes down as you zoom in ... be nice if Dahua published aperture versus focal length (zoom #) specs.
Having said that, the simplicity of a fixed focal lens (versus variable) should mean (all else equal) a bit more light just from that.

LOL it's going to have a super-fast shutter speed at F/1.0 (no gain) in broad daylight.

P.S. Yea, @CamCrazy, the specs don't make sense. Why would the color performance be better but not the B&W.
Click to expand...
Yes, fair comment on those point, f1.0 vs 1.2 isn't end of the world but as a camera guy we always want the faster aperture, also in the camera world away from cctv I will take a prime lens all day long. I did have another theory that with the fixed focal length, if there is variation in the factory calibration so to speak, there is not much you can do about it. With a varifocal, for the most part this is overcome by the nature of the design, just a theory. I do like the spot focusing on the varifocals also, not that this is much use when set at 2.7mm.

I will see how the testing pans out then maybe pick one up to try in my darker areas without floodlight assistance. Think I might have got carried away picking up three of the ZE's but there we go :rofl:
 
Last edited:
CamCrazy said:
Yes, fair comment on those point, f1.0 vs 1.2 isn't end of the world but as a camera guy we always want the faster aperture, also in the camera world away from cctv I will take a prime lens all day long.
Click to expand...

YEP!

I'm never sure about the Min. Illumination Specs (someone in the CCTV can explain how IRE is supposed to provide a common baseline for comparison), but since ideally(!) Dahua used the same testing methodology, I believe that 0.0006->0.0004 is more than you would expect from just going from F/1.2->F/1.0 ... but as mentioned, the prime lens probably helps a bit. Could also be rounding in the numbers - i.e. 0.00056->0.00044.

I defer to the CCTV folks, but I'm assuming(?) that if it was 0.00060->0.00030, that would be a full stop ... which basically means that all else equal (including sensor size/technology), you can run TWICE the shutter speed and get the same image brightness.

Nobody is going to complain being able to go from 1/30s to 1/60s !

Regardless of all that technical goobly-gook, I look forward to actual field comparisons which will show the reality ... where the "rubber meets the road" ... aka "the light meets the camera" ;-)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chokolinho
alekk said:
YEP!

I'm never sure about the Min. Illumination Specs (someone in the CCTV can explain how IRE is supposed to provide a common baseline for comparison), but since ideally(!) Dahua used the same testing methodology, I believe that 0.0006->0.0004 is more than you would expect from just going from F/1.2->F/1.0 ... but as mentioned, the prime lens probably helps a bit. Could also be rounding in the numbers - i.e. 0.00056->0.00044.

I defer to the CCTV folks, but I'm assuming(?) that if it was 0.00060->0.00030, that would be a full stop ... which basically means that all else equal (including sensor size/technology), you can run TWICE the shutter speed and get the same image brightness.

Nobody is going to complain being able to go from 1/30s to 1/60s !

Regardless of all that technical goobly-gook, I look forward to actual field comparisons which will show the reality.
Click to expand...
That'll do, I'm already feeling bad enough about not grabbing a fixed focal length :rofl: :lol: - but yes in theory it should pull in quite a bit more light. Real world tests will tell the story, I suspect the gains will be less than we estimate, a fixed aperture varifocal is not something to be sniffed at, in the camera world this would be considered quite a nice lens still.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Parley and alekk
alekk said:
LOL @CamCrazy that you can "take one for the team" and order an AS to compare for us ... ;-)

Based on what I can gather from your background, it sounds like you would do excellent shoot-out!
Click to expand...

Yes, I will be that guy!! 54Pro AS will be incoming at some point along with a bullet version, I have 2MP starlight PTZ's, 2MP starlight bullets and turrets, 4MP 5442 original in turret and bullet, with 54Pro and 5442 S3 incoming next week. Reasonable line up for me to give feedback, I also take no prisoners, freeze frame image quality is king, both day and night :thumb:

As you have gathered I have a deep history of cameras both digital and cctv, seriously analytical thought process and a day job with similar requirements! Expect any reviews or feedback to be based on these foundations :lol: - I hate my brain sometimes :wtf:
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Parley, bigredfish and alekk
You are the man for the mission @CamCrazy - the 5442-S3, 54PRO-ZE, and 54PRO-AS are going to get wrung through the ("light") wringer! ;-)

BTW, I think(?) are on the same page when you quipped "freeze frame image quality is king" ... since (as others smarter than me will point), CCTV's need to capture motion and is the real/final test ... but the basic/raw capability needs to be there and I think that can be more objectively assessed ... so yea, looking forward to your low-light image shootout to show us the differences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Parley
alekk said:
You are the man for the mission @CamCrazy - the 5442-S3, 54PRO-ZE, and 54PRO-AS are going to get wrung through the ("light") wringer! ;-)

BTW, I think(?) are on the same page when you quipped "freeze frame image quality is king" ... since (as others smarter than me will point), CCTV's need to capture motion and is the real/final test ... but the basic/raw capability needs to be there and I think that can be more objectively assessed ... so yea, looking forward to your low-light image shootout to show us the differences.
Click to expand...

Not sure I will get them running side by side for testing but you can be certain of my testing methodology and strict standards! The AS will come later, was so close to getting one on this order...anyway! the 54Pro ZE and S3 will be tested to infinity and beyond no doubt about it, I am working with zero ambient initially, some cameras have 4000-6000 lumen flood assistance, luckily the new ones coming will be placed in locations with no flood lights, so it will be easy to compare them relatively speaking.

All of my cameras without question get setup with fast shutter speeds and gain set as low as possible, I am always looking for sharp stills, ISO/gain low as can be. You can generally take my feedback and recommendations to the bank, my brain only has one way to operate :rofl:
 
  • Like
Reactions: alekk and flynreelow
Did not check image quality from Tinman. Just satisfyed by tripwire working so good.
But to see how this thread evolved is great. From random LED triggers to a full masterclass on exposure and light management :)
The factory reset clearly fixed the Smart Illu issue, and now it’s all about tuning the exposure triangle.
Shutter around 4–6 ms, gain under 50, and NR kept low seem to be the sweet spot.
The AS lens should have a small edge in low light, but both versions can perform really well once properly dialed in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alekk and flynreelow
So for something totally different, here's a comparison of the AUDIO of the 5442-S3 versus the T54PRO-ZE ... but I don't think there is much to conclude from it.

Per the picture below, the two cameras are right next to each other ... HOWEVER, I'm guessing that since the 5442-S3 is higher (and closer to the roof), it may be picking up some echo that amplifies the sound, as the level was higher. So it may not be a good comparison for AUDIO ... but it's all I got, so I'll share some results.

As I got back from a walk this evening, some nearby cars were pulling out and driving by ... so after that, I walked down the driveway talking in a semi-normal voice, continued on the sidewalk (as if I was walking by) and then back up the driveway. The total length is 2:40 and you'll hear me starting talking at 1:23. The 'hood is fairly quiet, so you can hear the crickets as background noise.

Both cameras have identical audio settings (Input:Mic - Encoding:AAC - SamplingRate:64000 - NoiseFilter:OFF - MicrophoneVolume:100) and I slurped the video into Audacity and saved it as an MP3. Because the volume levels were low, I then amplified both of them10db (allowing clipping since there was very little of it - FYI that the T54PRO-ZE was at +9.1db with the 5442-S3 at +7.4db) and provide those also. The attachments are named appropriately and in order, it's the 5442-SE original, T54PRO-ZE original, 5442-S3 plus 10db, T54PRO-ZE plus 10db.

Based on a causal listen, I could not tell much of a difference ... except the 5442-S3 was a bit louder (quite clear in the waveform when you pull them into Audacity and the clipping numbers suggest 1.7db) but that may be because it's closer to the roof.

2025_10_04_5442-S3_T54PRO-ZE.jpg
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Clark Griswald, Tinman and CamCrazy
alekk said:
So for something totally different, here's a comparison of the AUDIO of the 5442-S3 versus the T54PRO-ZE ... but I don't think there is much to conclude from it.

Per the picture below, the two cameras are right next to each other ... HOWEVER, I'm guessing that since the 5442-S3 is higher (and closer to the roof), it may be picking up some echo that amplifies the sound, as the level was higher. So it may not be a good comparison for AUDIO ... but it's all I got, so I'll share some results.

As I got back from a walk this evening, some nearby cars were pulling out and driving by ... so after that, I walked down the driveway talking in a semi-normal voice, continued on the sidewalk (as if I was walking by) and then back up the driveway. The total length is 2:40 and you'll hear me starting talking at 1:23. The 'hood is fairly quiet, so you can hear the crickets as background noise.

Both cameras have identical audio settings (Input:Mic - Encoding:AAC - SamplingRate:64000 - NoiseFilter:OFF - MicrophoneVolume:100) and I slurped the video into Audacity and saved it as an MP3. Because the volume levels were low, I then amplified both of them10db (allowing clipping since there was very little of it - FYI that the T54PRO-ZE was at +9.1db with the 5442-S3 at +7.4db) and provide those also. The attachments are named appropriately and in order, it's the 5442-SE original, T54PRO-ZE original, 5442-S3 plus 10db, T54PRO-ZE plus 10db.

Based on a causal listen, I could not tell much of a difference ... except the 5442-S3 was a bit louder (quite clear in the waveform when you pull them into Audacity and the clipping numbers suggest 1.7db) but that may be because it's closer to the roof.

View attachment 229679
Click to expand...

The S3 certainly is louder, I would also say clearer, the 54Pro almost sounds more like it has the noise filter on still, kind of muffled/muted to higher or mid range frequencies. I forget which is the best quality now, PCM rings a bell on a couple of mine, it was odd because I remember one of mine was better with AAC and the other with PCM!! could be a firmware thing, or possibly just slight version variant between cameras. Might be worth trying another format like PCM if available.
 
CCTVCam said:
As above, I found that with my 4kt's. Close to the cameras 8ms would deliver a blurred person on fast walking. Further out, ok. That's why I run 4ms with re-inforcement lighting as the area it's protecting is close to the camera. Although 4ms is just about decent if dark, I rely instead on 4ms to be just light enough to allow the camera to trigger using IVS after which the re-inforcement lighting delivers the best available picture once the motion sensor kicks in.
Click to expand...

This is interesting to me, the 4kt in @jmcu excellent videos looks fantastic quality, I guess it would make sense that 8MP sensor will require more light. I have some of the 54Pro cameras arriving and my guess is these will fair better with the onboard only lighting than the 4kt, would that be a fair assumption?

Regardless the sensor on that 4kt looks superb, path detail and general exposure, I guess the downside is lack of IR if that is an issue for some. It almost looks too good to be true! :clap:
 
The 4K-T and X (bullet) have an obvious focus range. Its different on the bullet vs the turret but its there.

Many overlook the Close Focus Distance spec.
That said, I find the spec is exaggerated on my 3.6mm models. There is an obvious softness inside of say 6-10 feet but it certainly isn't almost 20ft as spec shown

4K-X bullet
Close Focus Distance 2.8 mm: 5 m (16.40 ft)
3.6 mm: 6 m (19.68 ft)
6 mm: 13.2 m (43.37 ft)


4K-T turret
Close Focus Distance 2.8 mm: 5 m (16.40 ft)
3.6 mm: 6 m (19.68 ft)
 
  • Like
Reactions: CamCrazy
bigredfish said:
The 4K-T and X (bullet) have an obvious focus range. Its different on the bullet vs the turret but its there.

Many overlook the Close Focus Distance spec.
That said, I find the spec is exaggerated on my 3.6mm models. There is an obvious softness inside of say 6-10 feet but it certainly isn't almost 20ft as spec shown

4K-X bullet
Close Focus Distance 2.8 mm: 5 m (16.40 ft)
3.6 mm: 6 m (19.68 ft)
6 mm: 13.2 m (43.37 ft)


4K-T turret
Close Focus Distance 2.8 mm: 5 m (16.40 ft)
3.6 mm: 6 m (19.68 ft)
Click to expand...

This is an interesting consideration, not something I have paid enough attention to it would seem, I can see this also plays into the 54Pro series which I know had been mentioned prior to this regarding close focus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom