01304 827609 info@use-ip.co.uk Find us
  • Hi Guest, Please subscribe to our YouTube channel for fresh new videos each week.

Dedicated WiFi network for cams

Messages
3
Likes
0
Points
1
Thread starter #1
Good evening boys and girls.
I'm new here and hoping I can offer as much as I can take from the hub!
I simply wondered if anyone had any real world experience of running a large number of IP cameras on a dedicated WiFi network, thus eliminating data cable runs.
I DO mean on domestic frequencies and not commercial waves.
I feel as though the networking speed is available but I wonder if in the real world it all falls over.
Thanks in advance. Andy
 

Phil

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
1,577
Likes
121
Points
63
#2
Hi Andy,
We don't really come across this often.
For one thing, there are very few professional grade wireless cameras available.
e.g. HikVision offer the odd mini-dome with a wireless option, and their cube cameras (indoors only).
When people do take those cameras and use them with a wireless connection we see remarkably few problems i.e. the wireless seems to work well.
You also need to bear in mind that even wireless cameras still need a power connection.
So, by far the most popular solution is to use power over ethernet - the network cable provides the camera with power and a data connection.

We don't offer any wireless NVRs.
The NVR would need a network cable connection to your network/router.

BTW - I was surprised to see in this recent Blog Post from Google on their mesh wi-fi that they:
"saw an average of 18 connected devices on each Google Wifi network, globally"
Google Wifi's Network Check now tests multiple device connections
 
Messages
3
Likes
0
Points
1
Thread starter #3
Thanks for the reply Phil.
My usual M.O. is poe and nothing else. No reason not to go down that route normally for me. But I have a job in a nursing home and quite honestly, running cat 5's everywhere from a central point fills me with dread! Of course the cameras still need local power as would the mesh/extenders but localised installation would be far easier.
I've installed a few hik cams on WiFi and they've been great but 16-20 of them on one network, different story. I'd need 100Mbps solid from the network and who knows. Do I want to be the Canary? Not sure.....
thanks for your help. Much appreciated and if I go for it, I'll let you know how i got on!
 
Messages
120
Likes
24
Points
18
#4
I think it’s a bad idea. The reason is that Wi-fi is a contention-based protocol and that doesn’t mix well with video that is real time.

I expect you’d get away with a few cameras and a low frame/bitrate. You then add another and the wheels really fall off. The only mitigation would be numerous access points in an attempt to have fewer cameras per channel.

I’d use Ethernet over power before Wi-fi.
 
Messages
3
Likes
0
Points
1
Thread starter #5
Hi magic and thanks for your input.
I completely agree with what your saying and I guess now that you've made that point, what I'm specifically referring to, is tri-band mesh networking whereby there's a 5ghz backchannel
To my mind, it's opened up WiFi considerably but I wonder how much onboard buffering any decent WiFi cams have, if any, should the bandwidth be too crowded to receive or for any other reason.
I'm thinking about splurging on a dozen or so Linksys velop ac6600's and seeing how far they can be pushed. If it falls down I could send them back and revert to the ever faithful Poe route!
 
Messages
120
Likes
24
Points
18
#6
Mesh networking just seems like Wi-fi plus marketing to me. Aside from APs talking to each other using dedicated channels it’s the same contended protocol as before.

Having enough APs to get the client concentration down to two or three cameras will sure help, as said previously.

I’d reiterate that Ethernet over power is likely to be more stable and still easier than PoE.