If you use a FTP or NAS for recording, will it reduce your wifi performance, considering the data amount for stream HD video?
1716870
I am not sure that I fully understand your question. When FTP upload or direct writing to NAS devices are configured on the camera, the camera's wireless usage requirements will increase temporarily only after motion is detected by the camera. So, the camera will occasionally use a significant amount of the available wireless bandwidth for a few seconds. A typical 15 second video clip will typically be roughly 7MB to 8MB in size, suggesting that it might take one to ten seconds for that video clip to be transferred from the camera to a NAS, depending on the speed of the network, the distance between the camera and the router (or wireless access point), and the activity of other devices that are also on the same wireless network. If motion is rarely detected by the camera, it is likely that FTP upload or direct writing to NAS devices will not produce a noticeable impact on wireless performance. Continuously streaming the camera's video to a network video recorder (or a NAS running network video recorder software) will require a continuous 3.5 Mb/s to 6.5Mb/s of available wireless bandwidth per camera. If you have an 802.11n wireless network, with all connected wireless devices capable of 802.11n speeds (and within roughly 30 feet of a consumer grade wireless router), a continuous stream from a single camera probably will not produce a noticeable impact on wireless performance. However, when there are two or more cameras continuously streaming to a network video recorder, the continuous streaming becomes less of an option, requiring the switch to FTP upload or direct writing to NAS devices.
666795
For clarification for my understanding, can it record to another system, or record a file in memory then FTP transfer the file to a PC supporting FTP services?
1977210
No. It only will record to the internal hard drive and doesnt have any way to load a shared or network drive.
771710
It really good if you have a newer router; I transfer data back and forth almost daily from tablets, Mac Laptop and windows desktops. It really good even when transferring data as well as streaming video from the media server part.
142764
Thanks for your question. Yes, the camera will automatically delete the oldest files when the drive is full or when the maximum number of files is reached. 5000 files is the default, which allows for 1 month of continuous recording or years of motion detection recording if the area being monitored is not too busy. Any industry standard NAS drive such as Netgear ReadyNAS and various WD models should work, and we also support the Apple Time Capsule. Some customers have routers with a USB port which allows you connect a USB drive or even an SD card or MicroSD card with adapter, and the router will make it look like a NAS drive. However, we would not encourage that approach and would suggest to get a real NAS drive. A router's USB connection is typically too slow to be useful, unless the camera's frame rate and image size settings are reduced.
2165104
No. But technically, the disk station won't be handling the wireless interface, that'd be your router which would be the bottleneck. http://www.synology.com/en-us/products/spec/DS1513+ lists the 4 ports on the DS are gigabit with link aggregation/redundancy Wikipedia lists 802.11 AC max speed is .866 Gbit and N at .150 Gbit Supposedly, max bit rate for 1080p is at 12 Mbit So all in all, I don't see any issue with that if link redundancy was setup to allow for multiple access with their own dedicated lines. What's clear is that wireless in general will be your biggest set back as that cap is reached before the gigabit cap. On top of that, depending on signal loss, you may have much lower speeds but not as low as 12 MBits/s I think; perhaps a wireless repeater to remedy that?
771716
I am using a Seagate Barracuda 2TB HDD; the NAS is wired to a Gigabit router and Wifi network is Wireless N 150Mbps. I was getting 9-10 MB/s. I was sitting around 3 meters from AP. Infact connecting to the 100Mbps port of the switch gave me same speed.
1806495
I use the Qnap NAs that has the software for it. It also serves as my Media Center NAS so I can watch the camera video on my smart TVs as well.
1977209
You need to have a hard drive in the unit, but can catch the RTSP streams coming out of the cams or the unit itself to a NAS/network drive.
811609
Much of the streaming speed depends on the quality of your network. If you have flakey AP's or hubs(why Lord why?) or crap switches between the NAS and your destination then prayer is the only thing that can help. This NAS has a gigabit NIC so it's ready for anything. I have not used "Video Station" the Synology streaming app that is free from the Synology Package Store but it gets excellent reviews. Make sure you order quality hard drives like these RED WD's http://www.amazon.com/WD-Red-NAS-Hard-Drive/dp/B008JJLZ7G/ref=pd_sim_pc_2. Try to order the model with the + like the Diskstation 213+ or 413+. These models have more RAM and better processors. I've setup 3 of these in the last couple of months and I love them. I've used the Buffalo and the Iomega and others including the hybrid Windows Home Server - none can touch the Synology models for ease of setup and speed. Join the Synology message board and spend a few minutes researching setup. Watch some of the videos on your target use of the NAS so that when it comes you're not surprised. It does take some time to format and check the drives but after that it just sits there doing what you want it to do. Good Luck! Timmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
1977211
As others have mentioned, it won't record directly to a NAS, however, you can specify an FTP server to upload recordings to. So in my case, I have a machine in my network that I've configured an FTP server on. The NVR will upload the recordings to my local FTP, which in turn I have set to copy the recordings to a cloud service like Dropbox or OneDrive. Works great so far.
1743554
This is a "it depends". If you are using the new ac wireless standard and have a good signal it may offer noticeable speed improvement. As slower standards and/or signal quality degrades any improvement at the diskstation side will become unimportant. The real question is can you really get much 100Mbps real throughput with *your* wireless environment? Some may disagree but I find a wired connection to be the most dependable for high-throughput situations. There are too many variables to be more specific but I hope this answer will help at least a little.
1977208
As far as I know it will only record to internal hard drive. There was no set up I could use to record to my computer's harddrive through the Internet. I'm not familiar with the NAS.
1491528
Would this have to be dedicated to the cameras? Or will it act as a NAS for data also?
771711
Using FTP gets me a steady [2500 - 2800] KB/s. Having more than one active device connected to the wireless will obviously reduce the transfer rate. Overall it is great for streaming media from the NAS to your laptop, TV, smartphone etc...
2272533
I think it depends on the wiring in your home. In my case, in an apartment building built in the 1950's, throughput using the netgear adapters was disappointing. If I remember, file transfers averaged about 1 mB per second (Bytes, not bits). Using the same machines over an 802.11n connection, 5-8 megabytes per second was normal.
2284496
No, but it connects very easily over wired ethernet and with a NAS device, you want it to be connected to your network so you get the quickest response time. You probably wouldn't want to suffer the speed penalty that comes with a wireless connection.