19 of 24 people found the following review helpful
Excellent system and extremely sharp and clear images - great support,
This review is from: LaView 16 Channel ProX Smart 960H Compact DVR with 8 x 1.3MP Security Cameras, 2TB HDD, Smart Search, LV-KDV2608W1-2TB (Electronics)
My Q-See system kept giving me white screens for some of my cameras and I needed something to tide me over until I was ready to buy an IP-based system. I was somewhat skeptical of the resolution claims for this system, but figured I couldn't go wrong for less than $500. Coming from a 500TVL Q-See system, I have to say that the LaView cameras blow the Q-See cameras out of the water - the images are stunningly crisp, well-balanced, and absolutely beautiful. They're so sharp, I can read the license plates of cars zooming to/away from my house. Night vision is unreal - extremely vivid and sharp, and again, blows the Q-See cameras away. Unfortunately, it does not have a PTZ connection, so that may dissuade some customers who need that option.
The one issue I have with LaView is their poor documentation, or lack of. The user manual is just a stapled booklet with 10 pieces of paper - the worst I've ever seen and the PDF-version on the CD is exactly the same thing. Good thing LaView has a terrific support team - they're on the west coast and are not available until 12PM ET, so I submitted a ticket in the morning and by 12:15 ET I received a call, which I of course, missed. Not to fear: Jesus (he's in the support videos on YouTube) emailed me and I called him and he resolved the issue I had in 2 minutes. He advised they're working on better manuals, so that should make everyone's lives a little easier.
For those of you who have never set up a surveillance system before, the toughest task you'll have is setting it up for remote viewing - the manual contains nothing for this. You'll have to go to LaView's YouTube site to watch Jesus walk you through the process. He makes it very simple to get you up and going within a few minutes.
Overall, I highly recommend this system - the quality is superb and the clarity is phenomenal both during the day and night. It has a small footprint so it doesn't take up much space and it's very quiet. It's a great value - even more so if you can catch it as a Lightning Deal.
UPDATE: 6/28/2014 - Unfortunately, people have posted some negative reviews for an otherwise excellent product - it appears they don't know all the settings available to make the images look outstanding. In large part, this is due to the poor manual LaView provided, which is a shame - they really dropped the ball in that regard.
There's a really important feature you must be aware of if you want to watch high quality live streaming. Bobby Hoggatt did a YouTube review complaining about the low quality remote viewing and I noticed he did not select this option: there's a setting next to each camera listed in the section titled "Embedded Net DVR" on the right side which allows you to switch between 'Sub Stream" (low quality) and "Main Stream" (high quality) - it's a small circle (or button) connecting to 2 other circles (buttons). The high quality viewing is extremely sharp and crystal clear, but it uses a lot of bandwidth, so if you've got a 16 camera system and you've got slow DSL service, you might have to stick with the lower quality setting.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-7 of 7 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Sep 12, 2014 8:24:51 AM PDT
I'd like to know how you are getting these "outstanding" images. These are 480p cameras. Not nearly close to anything "HD-like." Very compressed and lacking quite a bit of detail, in my opinion, no matter what setting i have it on.
In reply to an earlier post on Oct 3, 2014 9:51:40 AM PDT
480p? Are you sure you're talking about the right camera? These cameras have an effective pixel rate of 1280x960 - and provide an excellent image. If you're getting a lousy image, there may be either an issue with the cables/connectors or monitor. I originally had a Q-See system that came with the same type of super thin cables that LaView uses and continued to use them one I replaced systems, but I had to replace the cables with RG59 Siamese coax cable due to their disintegration from the elements - that thin cable doesn't survive for long in brutal northeast weather. I get excellent images on my laptop, VGA monitor, iPad, Galaxy S5, my father in-law's 10 year old desktop, etc. You may want to check your system if you're referring to these 1.3MP cameras.
In reply to an earlier post on Oct 3, 2014 10:00:56 AM PDT
The resolution of the system is 960 x 480. Making them 480p. 960 refers to the Horizontal image HEIGHT. 480, being the width. It's the highest resolution you can achieve on the analog signal. The cameras run on analog cable, carry and analog signal and provide an analog image of 960 x 480. Definity not the 1280 x 960 you are claiming. The image is good on smaller screens where pixel density is high/compressed to a smaller frame size. But they lose quality quickly when they scale to larger sizes.
Also, the DVR outputs to HD 1080p, but that's just it's signal ability over VGA or HDMI to a TV. Doesn't change resolution of the actual camera feeds.
In reply to an earlier post on Oct 4, 2014 7:38:51 AM PDT
Yes, the system is 960x480 - but the images provided by these cameras are so much better than the cameras in my old Q-See system. The system specs state they have an effective pixel rate of 1280x960 - I'm not making that up. Nor am I suggesting that the images will look great on monitors of any size, as everyone knows a small res image cannot be blown up and expected to look great - I simply stated the images look great on everything I've viewed them on. For the price point, these are very good systems - definitely nowhere near the quality of IP-based systems, but then again, not everyone has $5000 for those systems.
In reply to an earlier post on Oct 4, 2014 8:45:45 AM PDT
I assume you came from an older D1/CIF Q-See system with either 450 or 650 TVL cameras? Then yes, absolutely these should be an upgrade. 960H is the best you can get on analog, and the market is flooded with them at the moment. Older systems ran up to D1 resolution (720 x 480), sometimes even lower CIF ( 360 x 240- YUCK). While I agree it is a good price point for 960H, I still disagree with the statement that they have an "effective" pixel rate of 1280 x 960. It's misleading to other consumers who might come across this thread and think they will be getting a higher resolution than what is actually being processed by the DVR. Again, they looks OK on a smartphone screen, but are not crystal clear or good enough to easily read license plates unless they are a few feet from the camera and not moving.
By the way, IP based systems can be purchased for as low as $400 for a super low budget entry system and $800 for a good middle of the road one.
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 4, 2014 3:47:25 PM PST
Dr Abamieda says:
I think both of you are correct
The problem is the reference device
The DVR has a resolution of 960 x 480 ; while the cameras have a resolution of 1280 x 960 = 1.3MP
So, though the camera has a higher resolution the DVR can only process the lower resolution
The reviews on this product are so confusing you wonder if the reviewers are talking about the same product
Could it be a seller factor
I think Amazon should include the ''Seller'' on reviews
In reply to an earlier post on Jan 25, 2015 1:45:38 PM PST
D. Baxley says:
I second that -- it should be mandatory that any rep for a product identify themselves as such. This would work for both seller and buyer, as many of the questions and issues with a product could be answered right here with out long phone call holds. Good Idea Dr Abamieda -- Amazon, are you listening? Dealers and sellers can't you see the advantage?
‹ Previous 1 Next ›