Looking to Replace my PTZ camera with a newer model

Parley

Known around here
Dec 19, 2015
6,719
20,639
Cypress, California
My Dahua SD5A425XA PTZ is starting to pale compared to my other cameras. So, I am looking for an upgrade. I do not want a huge PTZ in the front of my house. I was looking at the Dahua PTZ's and nothing really jumped out at me. However, I ran across this Hikvision 8MP PTZ with a 1/1.8" sensor and what jumped out at me was the 0.0005 Lux rating. That is very good for an 8MP on a 1/1.8" sensor. Normally I would just move right along. It is the same as the 4MP version in the same camera. I checked a few sources to see if that is true and they all had the same numbers. I would be interested in your input. Here is a link to the Hikvision PTZ.

 
I don’t know anything about that PTZ but I know that having compared cameras in the past there’s not been a direct relationship between HiK and Dahua with respect to their min illumination numbers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Parley
Many do not pay attention to the minimum illumination specs...because those are under ideal situations with so many factors not known.

Almost every camera will say 0 LUX with infrared or white LED on, and we all know how poorly Reolinks perform at night in low light yet that is their spec....or even two different good cameras. Take for example the 5442 4MP2.8mm fixed lens camera will beat the socks off the 5241 2MP 2.8mm fixed lens or a Reolink and they both say 0 Lux with IR on.

Heck darn near every camera will say 0 LUX with IR on....

Once upon a time manufacturers would at least say at what shutter speed that rating was based on. Most would say a 1/3 shutter. That is way to slow for anything. You need to run minimum 1/60 shutter to start to minimize blur.

But now they don't even provide that, so in most cases it is a wide open iris, slowest shutter the camera allows, and gain and brightness cranked to 100 so that they can get the lowest illumination number possible.

But nobody would run the camera in that configuration.

Some of the older cameras would give these kind of specs so you knew how the camera was setup to come up with the minimum illumination.

0.002Lux/F1.5 ( Color,1/3s,30IRE)
0.020Lux/F1.5 ( Color,1/30s,30IRE)
0Lux/F1.5 (IR on)

So of course, the faster the shutter, the more light that is needed, and thus the LUX needed is more. It would be nice if they still provided it in this manner.

To minimize blur with motion, you need to run a shutter at at least 1/60 shutter - once you start doing that, the LUX specs are out the window.

But as more competition came out, manufacturers started playing games and tweaking the settings for getting the lowest lux possible, but that came at a cost of a configuration nobody would use. So they wouldn't say how the camera was configured to capture that minimum illumination rating.

They play these marketing games to make it look like the camera is better than it is for someone that is just chasing minimum illumination numbers. Kind of like how we rarely get the miles per gallon a car is rated for.

It is a tool, but I would prefer to see the reviews here with settings provided and make an educated guess as to if my light is more or less than the reviewer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Parley
I agree. That is normally why I would not give the time of day to a 4k camera on a 1/1.8" sensor. B&H Photo had this used camera on sale at a little over 1/2 price and that is why I took a peek at the specs and saw the Lux numbers.
 
Last edited:
Its different because this one has a much larger lens/aperture than normal and probably why the optical zoom is only at 12x because that lens is eating up the space. Looks interesting though at least
 
  • Like
Reactions: Parley
Its different because this one has a much larger lens/aperture than normal and probably why the optical zoom is only at 12x because that lens is eating up the space. Looks interesting though at least

I was wondering if that might be the case. The 12X would be just fine where I would be putting it. Hmmmm. Thank you for your input.
 
I was wondering if that might be the case. The 12X would be just fine where I would be putting it. Hmmmm. Thank you for your input.
If the stock photo is real it does appear quite a large lens compared to my tandemvu in the same body. The blacked out part of the glass lens is much smaller on this one compared to mine. These bodies a bit larger than the SD5 too
 
  • Like
Reactions: Parley