Cellular cam

[Biggun4214]

I'm looking to buy cellular cameras with an internal antenna and have bear boxes available. Any advice would be helpful.

 

[TheLBLman]

THIS Year's internal antenna model from Browning might be a good bet.
Their first entry (last couple years) with internal antennas required good cell service to operate reliably if at all (plus, they ate batteries). Do not buy anything from Browning with the word Ridgeline in the name!

Ironically, the prior Browning cams (like the original Pro Scout) were some of the best performers available in poor service areas.

The new Browning internal antenna cell cam appears to have the bugs worked out, plus, you should be able to drill a small hole in your bear boxes to run an auxiliary antenna (meaning these cams should work better than any cam without an auxiliary antenna (typically placed several feet higher than the cam).

I've not personally tested these new Browning cell cams yet, but can give you my personal feedback in a few months.

Here's what I'm talking about that may be good for your purposes:

Browning DEFENDER VISION PRO
SKU BTC-VP-ATT

Browning Defender Vision Pro (Cellular)

This epic Browning Defender Vision trail camera comes with a 2-year warranty from Trailcampro! Order this high quality camera for a wildlife adventure today.

www.trailcampro.com

This cam only requires 8 AA batteries, and should last over a year, as an operating cell cam on a set of 8 lithiums (projected with 15 daytime & 15 nighttime uploads every 24 hrs). That's taking over 10,000 photos (half at night) and still working for over a year!
Phenomenal battery life for a cell cam.

 

[TheLBLman]

Note: The above referenced
Browning DEFENDER VISION PRO
SKU BTC-VP-ATT
is a "red glow" type flash, not a true "black" flash.

However, since the Browning cams allow for a low intensity flash option ("economy" flash)
this flash then becomes either invisible or not visible enough to spook deer right in front of it.

The advantage of red glow (most trail cams are red glow) is mainly longer battery life & longer flash range (if not set to "economy" mode) over "black" flash. The advantage of "black" flash is it is totally invisible, which at very close distances, such as a cam set right beside a scrape, can be very helpful.

My "workaround" when red flash is used over a scrape is to try to set the cam just a few feet farther from the scrape, and always set the flash to "economy" mode. A little greater distance from cam to animal may be of more value now than whether the flash is red or black.

If you're using your cams in video mode, go with black flash only if your target animal is a deer or bear within 30 feet. Of course, flash type is only a potential issue at night, never during daytime.
If your cam is for security purposes, I favor black flash simply because humans can't see it, while they might notice a little red speck appear in the darkness.

 

[Biggun4214]

Thanks

 

[BSK]

I would hate to try and send videos by cell unless I had an exceptional signal.

 

[TheLBLman]

I would hate to try and send videos by cell unless I had an exceptional signal.

I generally won't do video mode on cell cams even with an exceptional signal.

For me, with a cell cam, if video mode might make more sense than still pics,
I just set the cam to do still pics at something like 4 pics per triggering event,
and then only have the "down time" at say 5 seconds between events.

If even closer to full video is needed,
I go 7 pics per event, 1 second between events.

The main advantage of doing this instead of video is higher resolution images
and longer battery life. Another advantage is a shorter duration between events, as
when in video mode, the duration (down time) between events can become minutes rather than seconds (of missed footage or pics) simply because video takes so much longer to "save" on the sd card (as well as to upload).

About the only disadvantage of near video speed still pics is a lack of sound.
Sometimes this is a big disadvantage, often it isn't.

When I think sound and video is very important, I typically run a non-cell video cam
along with (like beside) that cell cam set to still pics.

 

[BSK]

The main advantage of doing this instead of video is higher resolution images
and longer battery life.

Absolutely true, especially battery life. And although still images are higher resolution, I find that in video mode I can see a buck's antlers more clearly as he turns his head or moves around, even at lower resolution than the images. Don't know how the mind's eye does that, but a buck in motion is easier for me to identify.

Another advantage is a shorter duration between events, as
when in video mode, the duration (down time) between events can become minutes rather than seconds (of missed footage or pics) simply because video takes so much longer to "save" on the sd card (as well as to upload).

Guess it depends upon the camera. I've recorded 20 second videos (100 MB file) with only a 5 second delay, and that's exactly what I get between videos - 5 seconds of "off time." But then I'm also using monstrous capacity, high write-rate cards (128 GB, 120 m/s).

 

[TheLBLman]

Guess it depends upon the camera.

I take it your cams are not cell cams?
If you upload that same resolution video with a cell cam,
it takes time.

 

[BSK]

I take it your cams are not cell cams?
If you upload that same resolution video with a cell cam,
it takes time.

That's interesting. Didn't know that. Another reason not to go cellular! ...unless I was using a cam as a scouting tool - different story. All my cams are "data collectors."

 

[TheLBLman]

You can program many cell cams to upload in very low resolution video, with the ability to later "request" higher resolution be uploaded. For me, just simpler to do multiple still pics with short duration between events rather than video with cell cams.

Only if the desire for sound is a big issue will I use video on the cell cams. It's easy to just remotely toggle back & forth from stills to video with the Brownings & Ridgetecs (and I'm sure many more). This is something you cannot do with your typical trail cams.

 

[BSK]

Only if the desire for sound is a big issue will I use video on the cell cams. It's easy to just remotely toggle back & forth from stills to video with the Brownings & Ridgetecs (and I'm sure many more). This is something you cannot do with your typical trail cams.

Some non-cell cams will take a still image and then record video directly afterwards. However, I find I can identify bucks easier on video than still images, especially at night when motion blur can be a problem on stills. No motion blur on night video. Because I'm downloading my data almost weekly, I've gone to all video on my census data collection (non-baited; baited would be a different story).

 

[TheLBLman]

Some non-cell cams will take a still image and then record video directly afterwards.

Yes, very true.
But I've found when on that setting (still pic followed by video clip) it really slows down the capture time for both the still & the video, then increased the duration time between triggering events, thus causing you to potentially miss events that might have been captured by simply using either still pic mode or video mode (but not both simultaneously).

As example, when in this "dual" mode, the cam might be triggered by a deer just walking by.
The time between the triggering and the pic (or video) might be say 1/2 second. But if set in dual mode, it might be 1 second. You might think a fraction of a second shouldn't matter much, but it really can be the difference in getting the target image or completely missing it.

Using the dual mode, what I often see is rear half a deer on the still pic, and no deer at all on the video that kicks in right behind the still pic. Of course, sometimes it works perfectly too.

 

[BSK]

Yes, very true.
But I've found when on that setting (still pic followed by video clip) it really slows down the capture time for both the still & the video, then increased the duration time between triggering events, thus causing you to potentially miss events that might have been captured by simply using either still pic mode or video mode (but not both simultaneously).

As example, when in this "dual" mode, the cam might be triggered by a deer just walking by.
The time between the triggering and the pic (or video) might be say 1/2 second. But if set in dual mode, it might be 1 second. You might think a fraction of a second shouldn't matter much, but it really can be the difference in getting the target image or completely missing it.

Using the dual mode, what I often see is rear half a deer on the still pic, and no deer at all on the video that kicks in right behind the still pic. Of course, sometimes it works perfectly too.

Very interesting. I've never used the setting, so some real-world experience is helpful.

 

[TheLBLman]

Very interesting . . . . .

When you set your cams, you have choices for the duration of "down" time (the cam will not work at all) BETWEEN "triggering" events. In many applications, a common down time used is 1 minute.
If a deer walks in front of your cam, it "triggers", takes a pic (or multiple pics). But then, the cam is "set" to not work at all for 1 minute. Something else walks by 30 seconds later, you miss that pic.

Now, here's where it gets more interesting in the real world:

The "set" down time is not the total time your cam will not work.
You must add the particular cam's "Trigger Speed" & "Recovery Speed" to whatever "down time" you "set".

Muddying the waters are the terms "trigger speed" and "recovery time".
They can be one of the same, separate, and/or overlap each other.
Then, if a cam is triggered multiple time in a short amount of time,
recovery time can become much longer.

The "cheaper" cams tend to have longer "trigger speeds" and longer "recovery times".

 

[TheLBLman]

For example, in Trail Cam Pro's testing . . . . . .

the Tactacam Reveal X Pro had a Trigger Speed of 0.42 seconds (still pics);
then a "Recovery Time" of 28 seconds.
This adds on to the "down time" between triggering events setting (you set).

The Browning Defender Vision Pro had a Trigger Speed of 0.11 seconds (still pics).
then a "Recovery Time" of also 0.11 seconds.
However, that "Recovery Time" will "get behind" (take longer) if the duration between triggering events is set to say 1 second instead of 1 minute. According to TrailCamPro, it appears it would take at least quite a few successive 1-second triggering events before the recovery time slowed.

But set that same Browning Defender Vision Pro to "video mode"
and the trigger speed goes from 0.11 to 0.74 seconds.
This is the time between something "triggering" the cam,
and the cam actually beginning to record video footage.

These longer times for both trigger speed & recovery time become reasons I tend to favor still pics over video.

That said, some cams are designed from the get-go to do better when in video mode.
The (non-cellular) Browning Spec Ops Elite HP5 is just such a cam.
It is rated with a Trigger Speed of 0.38 seconds (video mode)
with a video mode Recovery Time of only 0.8 seconds!
Total triggering & recovery time of 0.46 seconds (video mode).

But that same Browning HP5 still performs much quicker when in still pic mode.
In still pic mode, it's Trigger Speed is only 0.2 seconds,
and it's still pic Recovery Time was 0.9 seconds.
Total triggering & recovery time of 0.11 seconds (still pic mode).

 

[BSK]

I've never had any problems with video recovery time because I've been using the top-of-the-line non-cellular Brownings (Dark Ops HD Pro, HP4 and HP5). My delay between videos is usually 10 seconds. Plenty of time for recovery.

 

[TheLBLman]

BSK, the particular HP4 & HP5 cams you're using were specifically designed more for video than still pics. That's why they do better with video than most other trail cams. It's also a big help that you're using very high-speed sd cards compared to most users who just use whatever is cheapest, i.e. slow-speed cards.

 

[BSK]

BSK, the particular HP4 & HP5 cams you're using were specifically designed more for video than still pics. That's why they do better with video than most other trail cams. It's also a big help that you're using very high-speed sd cards compared to most users who just use whatever is cheapest, i.e. slow-speed cards.

I completely agree. In fact, although the video is "only" 1920x1080, I think the resolution on the video is better than the 24 MB still images.

On a baited census, I would use still images, because of the high number of triggers at a bait site, as well as the incredibly lengthy process of reviewing videos versus still images. But for an unbaited census, video all the way.

 

[deerhunter10]

I would hate to try and send videos by cell unless I had an exceptional signal.

My tactacams did good sending them with medium to low signals. They only send when they "check" in but do pretty good. I have heard some brands that stuggle a little more. I do have to manually ask for a video on them though. Send a picture and I choose to send the video or not.