OG Why go back?

Cameras
1

“Back to the basics, with a huge leap forward”? Or is it really more like going backward instead of forward? Why introduce yet another camera that doesn’t include native support for RTSP / ONVIF ? And for anyone who can get past that (which I can’t), why make it look less attractive than the V3? Why not just add a V3 Telephoto? And then the next obvious question has to be, why not a V3 Pro Telephoto?

Maybe it’s no good asking questions that will never be answered by Wyze, but they seem almost BENT on perpetuating mediocrity. I don’t think they can imagine a place for themselves in the professional camera market. And yet, they seem to have most of the pieces that they need to make it happen.

They already have starlight sensors and decent noise reduction, which together, produce pretty nice-looking images. They have a small form-factor that no “professional” camera can currently match. Most of what is missing can be expressed by the acronyms POE, RTSP, ONVIF, and WDR.

Great POE is way easier to implement than great Wi-Fi. They have already accomplished RTSP / ONVIF, even if the method was less than ideal. True hardware WDR might be more challenging, but I’ve seen some otherwise terrible cameras with better (software) WDR than Wyze, so if that’s all they can manage, then so be it. Speaking for myself, the selling price doesn’t need to be under $50 - I’m willing to pay more to get more.

I’m willing to pay more to get a built-in web server for local authentication and management. I don’t think the actual hardware cost needs to be significantly different, but the selling price needs to be high enough for Wyze to justify selling them without also selling cloud services. Of course, they can still sell cloud services too, if they want to. After all, there are a great many POE and Wi-Fi security cameras out there that bundle awful mobile apps with cameras that don’t actually have any need of those apps. Wyze could easily beat the competition in that regard, while also filling a void in the professional camera market! Wyze would be the only company offering compact POE cameras that work properly with NVRs and/or Blue Iris.

And for the love of Mike, give it a name that is more unique than “V3 Pro”, which is so different from the V3 that it would have made a LOT more sense to call it “V4”!

Wyze could own that market!

5 Likes
2

You make some good points. You should work for Wyze, at least as consultant.

3 Likes
3

A lot of your questions I cannot answer. I will say that one of the goals was to reduce the cost and get a $20 camera again to do that you cant add those things and remain at that price point.

You do make many great points though.

2 Likes
4

It would be amazing to say the least to get some basic camera functionality outside the app. I’ve been with Wyze since the v2 launched, went through the great API cut off for home assistant, and dealt with more than a couple issues over time with the product. The 1 thing we’ve been asking for that is low hanging fruit is RTSP. Seriously I’d be willing to pay for camplus if it provided it. Since it always seemed to be “coming” for years I have given up. And no beta’s don’t count especially when you pull them completely without anything to replace them.

1 Like
5

Low cost cameras = greater market penetration, especially when sold at mass market locations like HD.
More customers then drive subscription services like Cam Plus.
Subscription services are the actual revenue generation method – not the hardware.

2 Likes
6

And as I said. Would be willing to pay for CamPlus on top of it to allow that feature and it literally costs them nothing on the hosting side to do it.

7

You know, I think that could be a lot of fun!

8

That’s not a terrible idea, but personally, I would rather just buy a thing and then have the thing, as opposed to paying for the thing for the rest of all time. 'Kind of like owning a solar power system instead of renting one. One could argue that it makes little difference, but I enjoy owning things that please me.

Exactly.

1 Like
9

You speak the truth, but subscription-based business models are not the only ones that can work well, as evidenced by every pro-level security camera in existence today.

And the fact remains that if Wyze can bring a pro-level small form-factor camera to market, they will have zero competition. Who in their right mind wouldn’t want to be the only seller in any such market?

2 Likes
10

I’ve had Wyze cams for a few years now, I got a couple back when person detection was promised to be onboard for free, then that firmware had to be scrapped for license reasons I think and it was moved to the cloud. Then it transitioned to no longer free but pay what you think it is worth. I still choose to pay $0 for it on the cameras that it was an advertised feature for. Not because I can’t afford it, but because I expect to get what I was told I was getting when I paid for it. It doesn’t work like it was supposed to, but it sometimes does it’s job.

I was burned by trusting and supporting Wyze, and I was burned by supporting Arlo also. I won’t buy anymore cameras that rely completely on cloud services…paid or unpaid.

It seems a little disingenuous to talk about the $20 camera when really its $20+monthly fee. Sure it can sit there and record locally, but that really isn’t the point of any security camera. If that were the point then it wouldn’t have WiFi or cloud services. It’s really just a gimmick to get people invested, then spring the subscription. If it is really about the hardware, just open it up so 3rd parties can write their own firmware.

I had high hopes, but at this point when my cameras die I won’t be buying from Wyze again until they support RTSP / ONVIF. I’ve stopped recommending them to family and friends for the same reasons. Instead I’ll pay many times more for a camera with similar specs that will support local use.

The only way to push back on this subscription model many are moving toward is by not supporting it, and letting the company know why you are no longer supporting them.

2 Likes
11

OTOH – Why not support who you love? Sure, if Wyze is WRONGING you in comparison to EVERYONE ELSE, then we should flush them down the toilet and be rid of them. But are they seriously that bad?

12

Actually yes, they are that bad.

13

So what do you see as as bad as everyone else in comparison?

1 Like
14

I would be interested in hearing what you believe is Bad about the devices.

I have most of the cameras with the exception of the original V1 and the WCO V1, which I gave to my son and am using the WCO V2. All of which have and do function well. If I have any issues, I provide what is needed and asked for to Wyze. This aids in helping get any issues corrected.

If you could provide a Matrix of potential issues or concerns, that you are asking, so that the most of us can understand what you consider as Bad would help out a lot. It would also benefit as to provide this information based on Device.

Just looking for some substance to your statement.

I know this may take some time, but if you are willing to provide it would help out immensely.

Thanks, as always we welcome your feedback.

4 Likes
15

Well, sure, it’s just a modern-day version of the old bait and switch routine. And there are so many companies succumbing to this business model that it’s not hard to imagine why Wyze would want a piece of it. I’m just saying that the same reason that Wyze wants it applies to all of us who don’t want it. Some people lease cars, and maybe that’s fine for them, but I’d rather own my car. Some people live in rental properties, but I own my home. Some people even rent tools, but I enjoy owning my own tools.

It might be nuts for Wyze to abandon subscriptions, because there is obviously a group of people who prefer that model, but at the same time, it seems just as nutty to ignore the market segment that prefers to own.

Which may not seem to relate to RTSP / ONVIF compatibility, but it is exactly because of the fact that Wyze is trying to paint the cameras as being so affordable that they can’t afford to do anything that threatens their subscription business model. The world is full of people who never ask the question, …“and then?” You get the camera for $50…and then? Oh, well, and then you pay $2 per month in order to be able to actually use it. How long do these cameras last? I have other brands and models that are still going strong after 10 years. If a $50 Wyze camera can last that long, it would then be a $290 camera.

I’m not asking Wyze to give up any profit - I’m just asking them to take their average annual subscription income, multiply it by the average number of years that their camera last and then sell the camera outright for that same amount. AND THEN they can include all-important features like RTSP / ONVIF, as well as local authentication and management, without endangering their profit model.

And they’d get a rapid infusion of cash as opposed to having to play the long game, which would have its own set of advantages for them.

1 Like
16

I think adding this motorized zoom to v3 pro is more attractive

Screenshot_20230118-104844
Screenshot_20230118-104844800×1280 88.5 KB

17

Suddenly our Wyze Cam was $30 plus shipping, and even though it had all these new features it just never felt the same.

We went back to the drawing board with a bold new goal. Build another disruptive Wyze Cam for $20.

image
 

Dancing with the one what brung 'em. :wink:

2 Likes
18

No RTSP
No ONVIF
No POE
No local authentication
No Local management interface
No WDR
No sub-stream
A genuinely awful microphone
Inadequate control over supplemental illumination
No control of framerate, compression, or bitrate
No control of hundreds(?) of other settings that are ubiquitous on any pro-level security camera.

As long as one is happy with how they work for one, I guess it doesn’t matter how much one is missing. After all, we can’t know what we don’t know.

I’m not going to create a matrix for Wyze, because it would be a pretty big job, the result of which would most likely be ignored by Wyze. I listed some of the most important issues above, but for anyone who has never spent any time with a pro-level camera, the importance probably wouldn’t be obvious. But in my experience, these are the things that make all the difference. If a security camera fails to record an event because of a power glitch, then in that crucial moment, it is useless. And maybe we’re supposed to assume that bad-actors are to stupid to kill the power, but I find that to be a bold assumption. Cameras that are powered by POE can very easily be provided with back-up power from a central location, so that would never happen. One could buy a UPS for every USB brick, for every individual camera, but man, what mess that would be.

Or perhaps worse yet, the camera captures an event, but the footage is not good enough to tell exactly what happened or to identify the perpetrator. In my experience, this happens a lot with my Wyze V3. It captures some nice-looking video under ideal conditions, but without true WDR (or any WDR at all?), any kind, the subjects are often either lost in shadows or blown out in bright areas. Often both in the same frame! This reduces the value of the camera to more of a novelty than a security asset.

It’s good enough to tell that there’s a car in the driveway, but depending on the conditions, quite often it’s not good enough to identify the color of the car, let alone the license plate number. It might reveal that a human-like object passed through the camera’s field of view, but not good enough to make out clothing colors and certainly not good enough to identify a face. My V3 has such a slow shutter speed at might that people walking by leave comet trails. Unless they happen to stop, there’s no hope of identifying them.

Of course one could configure the camera to automatically switch to IR illumination, but the management interface offers no way to control the illumination threshold, so the illuminator is typically on when it doesn’t need to be on (or off when it needs to be on).

Along with that, the light source is not well controlled, so it throws so much light on the surfaces upon which one might mount the camera that everything else in the FOV is severely under-lit. If one manages to find a way to mount the camera so that the IR illuminator doesn’t essentially disable the camera, then it looks great if the subject happens to be in the sweet spot…not too bright, not too dark, but just right. But if the subject is too close, it is totally blown out. If it’s too far, then it’s under-lit. If it was possible to tweak the illumination, then one might choose the that sweet spot to some extent, but no such adjustment is available in the management interface. It’s better in daylight, but then the lack of WDR kicks in.

And I realize that all of this may make it seem that I’m a Wyze “hater”, but I really would like to be a fan. The small form-factor is unique and compelling. And if it had nothing added other than real RTSP / ONVIF, that alone would be a massive improvement for anyone like me. Adding POE would take it up a big notch, making outdoor installations safer, and simpler, while also avoiding the inevitable Wi-Fi glitches. Even if the images were no better than the V3, it would still have value for things as simple as determining whether there’s a vehicle in the driveway. I haven’t seen the V3 Pro yet, but if the sensor is better than the original V3 in ways other than raw resolution, then that would provide even more usefulness.

To be honest, my knee-jerk reaction to the V3 Pro was that I wanted to get one immediately! But when I discovered that the RTSP firmware that I’m using in my V3 had been removed instead of improved, I cancelled my order. The lack of RTSP is a deal breaker for me. And to be clear, I want RTSP that is supported by Wyze, not some cobbled up non-specific third-party nonsense.

3 Likes
19

You are spot on the money my friend!

20

Of your list, the first 7 were never advertised as a feature, or even a “coming soon”. You you bought an inexpensive camera that does not need your requirements and then bitch that it does not include those features.
As for your last three, it’s not a pro level camera (nor does it have the price tag of one), so those are not to be expected.
That leaves the microphone. That one I will agree is not all that good, but for all practical purposes, I never use it, so not an issue for me.
Now with that said, are the Wyze cameras perfect? Hardly. But are they good for the price paid? Mostly yes.

In other words, don’t buy a Volkswagon bug and expect Ferrari performance and handling.

2 Likes