Comments on: Lorex LW2101 Ultra Digital Wireless Camera with Digital Pan / Tilt / Zoom 450 Feet Range

By: P. Schell

P. Schell — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 00:40:13 +0000

OK for the day, but not what I expected. Should for the money, night vision devices own up to the word “Night Vision”. Night vision is not literally present. I went to Costco and bought a real drive is connected: Q-sea. I have some advice on EHV if interested. Do not waste your money on Lorex.
Rating: 2 / 5

By: MCE Test Tech

MCE Test Tech — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 22:49:59 +0000

I am very optimistic, and I wanted a system of wireless security without the hassle of drilling holes in my house. The digital wireless technology seems promising, because the demand does not interfere with existing 2nd 4GHz devices not true. The picture quality is not great on my device and waste of any color and the picture is clean / dry, but if the receiver is plugged into my 802nd 11g wireless is very slow. My access point will work even when I surf the Internet, however, is considerably slower, and I mean really slow. I have confirmed, by example, were a “ping” the router, and almost all the answers lost packages or not react at all. If I unplug the camera / receiver then the problem disappears, so there is certainly a question of interference here. Other than that, the camera operates perfectly and I would recommend this product if you do not fear the Internet via wireless and the camera is running at the same time. I really can not on features of night-vision commentary, because I have a porch light next to the camera so the image is well lit. I think this camera is ideal if you do not have a wireless device, such as providing an wireless router for you on the Internet. I have the camera mounted about 30 meters from the receiver and is outside of my house in a thick plaster / walls.
Rating: 3 / 5

By: David Radovanovic

David Radovanovic — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 21:04:44 +0000

It is easy to configure and at intervals around the object’s image quality is adequate, but I needed more of a central variables (interchangeable lenses) the type of camera. But I commend him and the company that I bought.
Rating: 4 / 5

By: Gary G.

Gary G. — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 20:24:51 +0000

I had high expectations of this new technology, but was quickly disappointed. . . not with the concept, but with poor quality control during manufacturing. I bought a LW2101, because their demands for a greater distance between camera and receiver. This assertion is because the system FHSS (Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum) uses technology that is higher than the common analogue video systems, wireless audio market. Higher in the absence of interference, the freedom of eavsdropping, and a larger scattering power.
I bought my first system, and it worked perfectly, good color and with a transmitting range over the entire length of my house, a distance of about 105 feet. But at night, visibility 25 meters under an infra-red light had been removed more than 15 meters and used the light sensitivity of the camera less than a few analog wireless video systems. The next morning, the dates appear “” The images in black and white instead of color. Further analysis revealed that there is no green light after day, pictures, even if the other colors, red, blue seemed to be present but not intense enough to know the general appearance in black and overcome. I returned the unit and exchanged it for another LW2101. He had the same problem of the color during the day right out of the box, but not the second unit with a receiver of the camera when they are separated by just 10 meters from the second floor to floor above to communicate.
At least the system worked at any distance inside the house, on the same floor or the palm up. “Br /> The concept of FHSS is good and seems to work well in theory. The problem with the 2 pieces I’ve tried seems to be a poor quality control and testing of the units at the plant before they are sent for sale. I going back the second unit, and I will wait for some company comes with a FHSS system, which has better quality control.
Some additional design errors that would change if I w. in charge: < /> It is a green LED and a red LED on the front of the camera near the lens. Well, one can easily see the IR LED lights, night, green and red display stand in the darkness, making the concealment system. The “should avoid bad guy” to only the area in green and red are visible to avoid him, that seen through the camera. The red and green light should be on the back of the camera, but concentrated. I would the sensitivity of the lens and increase the power of infrared illumination and the system works the night at a greater distance. Moreover, the evidence of “water” in the camera is useful for outdoor usability. A company representative told me over the phone that the device is not waterproof and should be in a sealed enclosure if it is exposed to the weather.
Rating: 1 / 5

By: D. Berry

D. Berry — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 18:36:06 +0000

I have a kennel 150 ‘away from my house. I hoped that the device is in operation even if the building could cement blocks. It would not. I have tried the machine out of the building and it still does not get in touch. Returned. Tried the “First Alert” unit is equipped with a monitor under the image and even works inside the building.
Rating: 1 / 5