Appreciate the work you put into this demonstration, very useful indeed. I have a couple of the 4K-T cameras which are superb, looking to install another which is approximately 15-17 feet to target. From you samples it seems like the 3.6mm which I was considering has quite a narrow focus window, almost looks like beyond 15-20 feet is going out of focus. Where as the 2.8mm seems sharper to me for path which is closest and also the road, then properties behind also. The 6mm looks great on the silver car when turning but that I guess is around 35-38 feet range based on your street view map, the 6mm is not an option for shorter distances one would assume. I am now totally confused and tempted to go with 2.8mm since my focus range is between 15 and 20 feet max estimated. I am looking at the 4K-X models rather than the 4K-T for this particular location, so identical models to your test scenario.
So confused on firmware for IPC-COLOR4K-X ?
- Thread starter JesseSR
- Start date
Appreciate the work you put into this demonstration, very useful indeed. I have a couple of the 4K-T cameras which are superb, looking to install another which is approximately 15-17 feet to target. From you samples it seems like the 3.6mm which I was considering has quite a narrow focus window, almost looks like beyond 15-20 feet is going out of focus. Where as the 2.8mm seems sharper to me for path which is closest and also the road, then properties behind also. The 6mm looks great on the silver car when turning but that I guess is around 35-38 feet range based on your street view map, the 6mm is not an option for shorter distances one would assume. I am now totally confused and tempted to go with 2.8mm since my focus range is between 15 and 20 feet max estimated. I am looking at the 4K-X models rather than the 4K-T for this particular location, so identical models to your test scenario.
I think the 2.8mm is a wise choice. It lets in more light than the 3.6mm and 6mm. The sharpness of the 6mm at its focal point is probably better than any camera I own. There is something alluring about the 6mm--reminds me a lot of the Canon EF 135mm L lens for DSLR. Where I use the 6mm, I don't need ID up close, so that has never been an issue. I've never been much of a fan of the 3.6mm. The 2.8mm and 6mm just seem better. As you mention in your comment about the 3.6mm's focus window, every time I look at an image from that camera, it looks like a 2.8mm cropped but not quite as good. Matching the focal length for the particular application is incredibly important. If you do a search in the forum, Wildcat did some excellent reviews on the Color4K-X cameras. He seemed to like the 2.8mm more than the others, as I do also. I have a Color4K-T in addition to the three 4K-X cameras, but I always go back to the bullets. The newer interface on the 4K-T is nicer, but the 4K-X appears to provide better quality images from my experience. One note about the 4K-X cameras, be prepared for a lot of setup time. It is the most finicky camera I have used. Just one digit change in NR makes a huge difference in the final image. Also, it is a camera that I never used auto white balance on. The average manual balance is 16 (red) and 26 (blue) for a streetlight.
Excellent, a camera (DSLR) guy, this inspires confidence, my IP cams need to function in poor light just like my digital camera, at least with the IP cams this is a cheaper game to play! Primes for the big cameras look less appealing to the wallet. Anyway, seems like the 2.8mm is going to win then, much as the 3.6mm focal length is tempting, @Wildcat_1 videos seem to show the 2.8mm shining more in quality, focal range and light levels. I am interested to try the bullet series, setup time should be a breeze after the hours I've spent on the 54Pro this last week or two
In my two cases 3.6 is the only real choice.
One because of the confined area and the other because I want to get as much detail as possible at about 25-35ft so that little extra zoom helps.
Last edited:
That makes sense, tough call in the 16-20ft range for me I have to say, the 2.8 will be on the wide side but really low light is critical so that requirement should take priority. I am pretty taken with these 4K models, the low light capability combined with resolution is pretty compelling. Went to test the speaker last night on the 4K-T, well, you know how that ended
... I really need to look at the spec sheets closer. Regardless, image quality wins over all else for me and that is apparent by the bucket load. It is taking me a while to adjust to colour images at night, so used to IR for the last 10+ years, being able to ID color of clothing or vehicles though should be a big advantage.
That makes sense, tough call in the 16-20ft range for me I have to say, the 2.8 will be on the wide side but really low light is critical so that requirement should take priority. I am pretty taken with these 4K models, the low light capability combined with resolution is pretty compelling. Went to test the speaker last night on the 4K-T, well, you know how that ended
Lighting makes all the difference;. I think this is pretty decent focus for a surveillance camera. 5- 35+ ft
View attachment 192.168.1.110_ch1_20251028093140_20251028093227.mp4
No doubt about that, even marginally out of focus areas on these still produce great results! If the sharpest part of the image matched that truck on a 2MP or 4MP camera from a few years back, we would probably be very pleased. The sweet spot on this video is crazy sharp, even the properties in the background would match a 2MP camera at the same range as the cart! we are getting spoiled with these 4K's, that is the fact.
Every time I decide on one focal length, you post another video that changes my mind
guess I will end up with both, not much point prolonging the inevitable!
