If You Thought Megapixel Cameras Were More Expensive, Think Again
Take an updated look at the price of networking in the 21st century
- By Scott Schafer
- Dec 01, 2012
There is a misconception in the security
industry that megapixel cameras are more
expensive than conventional cameras. Don’t
believe it.
Megapixel cameras provide
superior performance
and imaging
capabilities versus
analog and standard-definition IP
cameras. Megapixel cameras also
are field-proven to deliver the
most cost-effective video surveillance
solutions. To understand
real value, it’s important to focus
not on the price of a single camera
but on the overall system cost.
Analog and standard-definition
IP cameras may be lowerpriced
than megapixel cameras—
on a per-camera basis—but these
cameras are far more expensive if you
evaluate system-wide costs. The truth
is that analog and standard IP cameras
provide a weak value proposition and a
poor return on investment (ROI).
Purchasing Results,
Not Cameras
When customers buy cameras, what they are
really purchasing is the ability to view video
that effectively achieves the goals of the application.
They need video that provides facial identification,
recognizes license plates and captures numbers
off of shipping crates and/or images of activity in retail
stores, bank branches, company or government facilities,
border checkpoints, airports or ports. They
are purchasing the capabilities, or the functionality,
the cameras can provide. When you consider
the price of analog or VGA cameras
compared to their functionality, the picture
changes dramatically. Megapixel cameras
provide much more value for the price—
bang for the buck, that is—than lowerresolution
cameras.
Megapixel cameras do a better job of
capturing more information than standard-resolution cameras,
and that superior performance translates into ROI in
multiple ways. If you consider the concept of pixels-per-meter
(that a certain number of pixels are required to depict
one meter of a scene for a specific application),
it’s clear that more pixels equate to an
ability to view larger areas. For example,
where 10 standard-resolution cameras
might have previously been required to
cover a parking lot, the same application
can now be served using three
or four strategically positioned
3-megapixel cameras or even a
single megapixel panoramic camera,
depending on the application
requirements.
Resolution per Dollar
A real value of megapixel cameras
is the ability to provide more resolution
per dollar than analog or VGA
cameras. Using estimated pricing and
numbers of pixels as a quantitative
measure of resolution, it’s easy to demonstrate
that megapixel cameras provide
more resolution for the money.
The grid on page S18 illustrates the real
cost-effectiveness of various camera resolutions.
VGA or standard-definition cameras
provide about 300,000 pixels per camera.
Megapixel cameras provide 1.3 million to 10
million pixels per camera, or more.
The grid clearly shows that the most cost-effective
solutions are multi-megapixel cameras. The VGA
camera provides only 1,536 pixels per dollar. Compare
that to 1080p cameras at 15,714 pixels/dollar and 10MP
cameras at 15,385 pixels/dollar.
Understanding resolution-per-dollar makes
it simple to evaluate which camera is—or what
number of cameras are—appropriate for a
given application. Based on pixels per meter,
you know how many pixels you need to view
a certain area. Resolution-per-dollar makes it
clear which camera (or group of cameras) can
provide that needed number of pixels most
cost-effectively.
System Cost vs. Camera Cost
When crunching the numbers on a new system installation, it is
helpful to have a broad view of overall system costs. The complete
cost of the system is obviously a better measure than the
price of a single component. The price of a single component
is not a good reason to dismiss a new technology as too expensive
without considering how the extra expense will be offset by
added functionality and other system cost savings. In the case of
megapixel cameras, beyond the lower resolution-per-dollar cost
analysis, other factors include a decrease in installation costs
by using fewer cameras, the elimination of mechanical pan-tiltzoom
devices and a reduction in operations staff. Using fewer
cameras to cover large areas also translates into cost savings
related to infrastructure, such as cables, mounts and housings,
which makes it easy to realize an ROI.
So, now you know. Analog and standard-definition VGA
IP cameras provide the worst value and therefore are the most
expensive cameras you can buy. Next time, go for the best image
quality and best price by choosing megapixel cameras. They
deliver the best ROI.
This article originally appeared in the December 2012 issue of Security Today.