Dear Wyze Cam v3 Floodlight users,
My name is Hongfei and I am a Product Manager at Wyze. We’re looking at data for Wyze Cam v3 Floodlight usage and would love your input!
This is a short survey that takes about 2 minutes to complete. The responses will only be used by Wyze and we won’t share them elsewhere.
Here is the link to the survey:
Thank you so much for taking the time to help us!
Please do not take away the back usb port!!
Did you take the survey?
Yes I took the survey but the questions in it are concerning .
Why is Wyze asking users about the back usb port and if they need or use it ?
And if we’d be interested in paying $5 less for a floodlight camera with no back usb port
To me it sounds like Wyze is trying to reduce what the floodlight offers and get rid of extra parts on the device.
This is a big NO!
The main reason I bought this floodlight camera accessory was because of the back usb port and the ability to power up an additional v3 cameras from the usb port.
Reducing it to only 1 camera is not what I want to see .
Having 2 cameras is why I got this floodlight
I have a very long driveway and needed 2 cameras to cover both my entrance and the end where I park my cars .
The wyze cam floodlight is the sole reason I even got into Wyze . This gave me the ability to get the wyze cam floodlight and pick up another v3 to cover 2 areas .
With the wyze cam floodlight at $100 plus the second v3 it came around $135 .
The only other brand that can cover what I needed was the eufy 2k pro floodlight cameras but that cost $300. $165 less than the eufy .
No other brands offer a back usb port to power an additional camera for more coverage let alone offer local storage
So please @WyzeJasonJ & @WyzeHongfei please do not start reducing stuff from already existing devices . A lot of companies are offering less and less , and if wyze starts rolling out next versions of their floodlight with no back usb port I and many other users will be very disappointed!
The back usb port must stay!!!
I agree with rulwiz, I think the back usb port should stay. I use it on one of my 2 floodlights, and intend on using it soon on the other.
Does it really cost $5 to have that added?
I must ask, and keep in mind that I’m not trying to give anything away as what I’m going to mention is strictly hypothetical and only in my mind. But if they were to release a flood light that had the ability to turn and pan similar to the pan camera now but with a flood light where it would eliminate the need for a second camera. Is that the type of thing that would work in your circumstance? There are so many variables, this is why I ask.
I can tell you that I know for sure that they wouldn’t put out a survey like this without great thought into things and this is where usage versus cost savings comes in for a company that works so hard to maintain a reasonable cost on products.
The only reason I mentioned something like a camera that can pan would be if they were ever going to look to eliminate the port, either 1.not enough people utilize it for something like a second camera. or 2. they were looking at some sort of option where a second camera wouldn’t be needed. And of course PTZ cameras are the things that popped to mind first but as I said even being a Maven I have no inside knowledge of anything like that in relation to a flood camera.
There are so many advances happening in technology it’s quite hard to say what the possibilities might be especially for a company like Wyze and I can tell you in speaking with @WyzeHongfei at length myself, he hunts tirelessly for every goody trick he can fit into a product that will benefit the end user.
No
Having only one sole camera will not work . I need two separate cameras covering 2 areas .
Using a pan cam on the floodlight would be nice but you would miss out on a lot of events bc the camera was tracking something and then another event happened in another corner thus the need to have 2 separate cameras recording 2 separate areas at the same time to not miss any events.
Reducing it to 1 camera would not be ideal for my scenario
Thank you for your input here. This is the reason we do this research survey, to learn how much value the extra USB port brings to our current floodlight users.
This is to gauge what the users want. We are trying to see if users are utilizing that port or if they would rather pay less for one without it. We honestly do not know how many people actually use it so the only way to find out is by doing a survey. The cost was mentioned to give the user an idea of what would be saved by removing it.
What if the camera has a super wide field of view? Will that be better than the two-camera configuration?
Exactly 
How big of a “super wide field of view” are we talking about ?!
Their will be a limitation to the FOV, having 2 cameras would be more ideal to be able to cover 2 areas at once.
This is how I use the cameras .
One is covering the entrance of my driveway
And the second v3 that’s being powered up by the back usb port is covering the area where I park my car
Reducing it to only 1 camera would not suffice . I need 2 separate cameras that cover 2 areas and also the v3’s allow for 24/7 recording with a micro sd card . Having only 1 camera with “ a super wide FOV” would be pointless bc you may still miss events
I’m just putting my input here bc I believe Wyze has the BEST floodlight camera on the market here and it’s a hidden gem!!
A 2600 lumen floodlight , v3 , and the back usb port to power an additional v3 for more coverage , and the v3’s allow you to record locally . All for $100 or $135 if you get the additional v3.
I bought the floodlight back in December of 2021 and the floodlight cameras is what originally got me into Wyze as I needed to replace my old dumb motion sensing floodlight that was giving out and wasn’t as bright and I was also getting into the camera thing and needed a floodlight camera combo to both replace my old floodlight and have cameras covering my driveway .
I have been disappointed in the floodlights performance since day one , the bug affecting the device when you opened the live view and the floodlights automatically turned on every time lastedfor around 4-5 months, the LED’s washing out faces and people , the pir sensors performance is dreadful , cars triggering on the floodlight even when set to turn on by pir sensor detection only, and so much more but I have stuck with it since day one bc I believe in Wyze and have expanded more into the ecosystem
But when I see the survey about offering a floodlight with no back usb port that concerned me
Yes I understand you all are just taking surveys and asking if users actually use the back usb port but to me that raises some flags and critiques .
As we all know more companies are going the minimalistic route and offering less and less for the same price as before .
The back usb port is very important to me and other users and I don’t wanna see future versions of the floodlight cameras be reduced to only 1 camera.
Maybe wyze could figure out how to add another stand for a 2nd v3 in leu of getting rid of the back usb port but it’s just my 2¢
Thanks for listening to us @WyzeHongfei
Have a good evening and Happy Thanksgiving 
Boom. You just knocked it out of park especially showing exactly what your setup is like. I definitely see your point now. Somehow in my ideas of what else could possibly be used in lieu of two cameras I didn’t really think of how wide views on cameras could possibly be these days.
I do see what you mean now. And your pictures paint a darn good picture of exactly how you use it. No doubt invaluable to everyone that reads this.
I just want to be upfront that the correct answer to this question is not available to me…so I just said to power another Wyze cam…
The correct answer is that I use a splitter to power another Wyze camera AND another Eufy camera. 
and there was no option to say “Both Wyze and another device too”
I have also considered doing the same thing in another locations and using the USB port to power a non-camera device. But again, it was not possible to clarify all of that, so I just said another Wyze cam, which is also accurate, but missing context.
If the above didn’t make it obvious I do LOVE having an extra USB port on the Floodlight. I definitely use it to the max for sure. It is worth the $5 to me, but I am sure a lot of people would prefer to have it $5 cheaper.
This is a great question. If a floodlight had something similar to a fish-eye lens that basically covered every direction well, maybe a USB port wouldn’t be needed for an extra camera for most people, since I’m sure most people use the USB port to have another camera cover recording in another direction. The main reason I could see it still being beneficial is for a situation like it is advertised for if you check out this picture, the secondary camera can look at things on the other side of the wall:
So even if the floodlight has a super wide field of view to cover a full 180 degrees or used a pan cam or something to see in every direction, it still can’t see anything around the corner like the extra USB port allows in the above picture. That is where another USB port is still really beneficial.
Also, I don’t want to dissuade you from including USB ports…but I believe in redundancy…Wyze is my absolute primary ecosystem hands down…but lets face it, sometimes there are some AWS outages outside of your control, or there could be a server issue, or whatever. I’m not complaining, that’s life, it happens. BUT I like to have a back-up system ready in the most important areas for those rare situations. So, in the rare instances where my Wyze cams are down due to Amazon’s fault, it is nice to have an Eufy cam, or another brand not using the same AWS servers to back you up when critically needed. That is what I use the USB Port for…redundancy and protection for the rare occasions it’s needed. That is why I appreciate having it, even IF the floodlight could see everything I need it to all on it’s own.
Don’t worry about this too much. There would be no point in disabling existing USB ports, so the floodlight(s) you have would continue working as you like them already. You’re totally safe from that with your existing device(s) buddy.
But I am on your side about future devices…I love having an extra USB port as I just said above. It’s worth the $5 to me, but I can understand trying to keep things as affordable as possible.
I’m not worried about “disabling existing back usb ports” but what caused me to get concerned was Wyze asking users if the back usb port on the floodlight was to any use for us…
So it made me question if future floodlight units would have the back usb port
Do you have a link for this splitter ?
I’m sure you could use it to power two wyze cameras ?
Unfortunately, not this time because for this one I used a splitter that I’ve had for a long time and don’t even remember where I got it from.
The problem to keep in mind is that a lot of splitters have a big plug, and the Floodlight USB needs a smaller plug to go inside of it, so a lot of them won’t work natively. What I ended up doing was plugging in a short micro-USB cable into the floodlight, then using a “Coupler” to connect from the micro-USB cord to give me a new female USB-A port that I could then plug the splitter into, then plugged both cameras into the splitter.
Also keep in mind that the USB port is only intended for a single camera, not 2, so it probably won’t be giving a ton of power, and might not be ideal for using a V3Pro with a splitter since the V3Pro needs more power.
Don’t judge my terrible wiring/mounting in this case I “Intend” to make it look more nicely and permanent eventually, and it’s always been protected from weather…but I do need to go out and finish it up like this weekend or something But here is an example of my backyard floodlight running 2 EXTRA cams in addition to the Floodlight:
I should mention that I DID try swapping out the V2 cam with a V3Pro, and the V3Pro did NOT get enough power with that setup (using a splitter and running 2 cams)…but it does work fine with an indoor eufy cam and an indoor V2 running off that single USB port.
just my two cents, if the floodlight did not have the second port, I would not have bought it even for $5 less. if it was $10 less, I might consider it lol
