BuckEye wireless- Up to 254 cameras can be assigned to one base
- Thread starter Tamarack
- Start date
Bill
Administrator
Actually it works great if you don’t live where you have cameras out. And it works better if where your cameras are, has the internet because you don’t need cell service. Not all at once, but over the last 10 years I’ve invested a ton into them.
I started playing with the cuddelink but haven’t perfected my game there yet. Not a fault of cudde, just haven’t had time to get the nuance down yet. My only complaint with Buckeyes is the price. After that, it’s like a diesel engine they just keep running.
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
These are not a good fit for folks just doing scouting, but they are the best fit for folks doing research or doing longitudinal trend monitoring for QDM decisions. Unlike most, they are very reliable. I've been running the old Orion series for about 10 years now. They run unattended 24/7/365 with solar panels. The upfront cost is high and RF transmission is not for the faint of heart depending on your environment, but the life cycle cost is actually lower than the few hundred dollar Chinese cams because of the lifespan difference.
I'm not using the cell base. Mine is all 900 mhz to a base in my trailer at the farm. I don't use them for real-time information. I simply copy the pics to my laptop when I'm at the farm as the farm has no internet connection.
Unlike the cuddielink system and most cell based systems, BEC can transmit full resolution pictures, not just thumbnails.
Thanks,
Jack
I'm not using the cell base. Mine is all 900 mhz to a base in my trailer at the farm. I don't use them for real-time information. I simply copy the pics to my laptop when I'm at the farm as the farm has no internet connection.
Unlike the cuddielink system and most cell based systems, BEC can transmit full resolution pictures, not just thumbnails.
Thanks,
Jack
Rit
5 year old buck +
If the FCC makes the decision to license out the 900 MHZ spectrum you could be in for some trouble. There is a company pushing them to do just that.
Can you do firmware updates remotely as well?
Seems they've been ahead of the game compared to most if not all other companies. Love my Cuddeback but it never made sense to me that they didn't have the ability to control things from an app or computer/phone right away.
Seems they've been ahead of the game compared to most if not all other companies. Love my Cuddeback but it never made sense to me that they didn't have the ability to control things from an app or computer/phone right away.
meyerske
5 year old buck +
Yes, you can do remote updates.
Bill
Administrator
Everything can be done remotely. Updates, reroute one camera to another, change pic size, # of pics per trigger, time laps, everything. The only hitch is if you loose signal to a camera remote anything is over. I run solar panels on all cams and it has literally been years since I’ve actually walked up to some of them.
my only bad experience is happening now. I use Splashtop Streamer to remotely access the system at the farm. There is a glitch with it and I can’t log in. PC is still running because I have access to my security system.
I’m sure the Buckeyes are doing their thing.
Here is one I pulled because it looked sad. In the same spot for years and got moldy. Cleaned it up, gave it new seals and put it back.
here is the interface. If I could reach my pc I’d give you some other screen shots with functions.
I guess that one has been out awhile
Thanks for the info. Jurassic Park? Must be home to a monster buck or swamp country or something lol
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
With my older Orion system, I still need to use an SD card for firmware updates and you also need to go to the camera to change routing. I told BEC that these were weaknesses. Sounds like they are fixed in the new X-series cams you guys are using. I only have one X-series cam for testing. The only weakness I've found is that the radio is not as strong and transmission distances are much shorter. I have a very challenging RF environment on a pine farm, so I have elevated towers with big antennas on my system. The big upside of the new X-series is the lower cost and the fact that they went to a 12-volt system which makes solar much easier.
Solar requires sun. How much depends on many factors. All of these cams still use old SLA batteries. These are subject to sulfation. Sulfation occurs when a battery is deprived of a full charge, it builds up and remains on battery plates. When too much sulfation occurs, it can impede the chemical to electrical conversion and greatly impact battery performance. It shortens the life-span significantly. If the charge level drops below the 70% level and stays there for long, I've found the lifespan of the battery shortens significantly.
You can think of the battery as a buffer. It need to be large enough to sustain the system during times when the amount of power consumed is less than the amount of power being fed into the system. So, ideally I would like a battery large enough to handle cloudy stormy days to match my weather without dropping below 70% charge.
The solar panel is the power source. The amount of power produced depends on the size and efficiency of the panel and the amount of sun it receives. So, a large efficient panel needs fewer hours of lower intensity sun to produce the same amount of energy as a smaller less efficient panel.
The camera is the power consumer. Most of the consumption is in RF transmission, and the second is the flash. The rest of the camera operation draws very litte power. So, the amount of power consumed is driven by the camera placement and programming. If you set them to take a burst of high resolution pictures and reset quickly in high traffic areas and/or make them routers for pictures from other cameras, they will consume a lot of power quickly. Your signal strength plays an important role too. When signal strength is weak, packets get dropped and need to be retransmitted.
Most of my camera are in small openings and placed where the panels get good sun. I have one camera that is in the hardwoods. It gets lost of traffic in the fall when there are acorns but light traffic most of the year. All of my cameras are set on the highest resolution so I can zoom in and identify individual bucks. Because I use them primarily for longitudinal population trend monitoring, every camera is set with the same 5 minute delay between pics. I had to change the battery too frequently for this camera. I eventually hinged some trees. Because of the situation, I could only get a few hours of morning sun when it is low intensity. I ended up using a 30 amp hour external battery and a large 60 watt solar panel and an PMW controller. This was enough to balance the power flow for that camera. In the winter when there are no leave on the trees, it is overkill, but in the summer, the panel is large enough that the morning sun is enough to keep the battery easily topped of for the limited number of pics I get from the camera. During the fall, when the picture load increases it is enough to keep it going until the leaves fall. I have a 9 db antenna on it to keep the signal levels up.
I have similar setups on my major routing cameras. The are in open areas that get full sun, but they route pictures from many other cameras.
I doubt this will happen. There are many many commercial devices that use this spectrum because it is unlicensed.
THanks,
Jack
Solar requires sun. How much depends on many factors. All of these cams still use old SLA batteries. These are subject to sulfation. Sulfation occurs when a battery is deprived of a full charge, it builds up and remains on battery plates. When too much sulfation occurs, it can impede the chemical to electrical conversion and greatly impact battery performance. It shortens the life-span significantly. If the charge level drops below the 70% level and stays there for long, I've found the lifespan of the battery shortens significantly.
You can think of the battery as a buffer. It need to be large enough to sustain the system during times when the amount of power consumed is less than the amount of power being fed into the system. So, ideally I would like a battery large enough to handle cloudy stormy days to match my weather without dropping below 70% charge.
The solar panel is the power source. The amount of power produced depends on the size and efficiency of the panel and the amount of sun it receives. So, a large efficient panel needs fewer hours of lower intensity sun to produce the same amount of energy as a smaller less efficient panel.
The camera is the power consumer. Most of the consumption is in RF transmission, and the second is the flash. The rest of the camera operation draws very litte power. So, the amount of power consumed is driven by the camera placement and programming. If you set them to take a burst of high resolution pictures and reset quickly in high traffic areas and/or make them routers for pictures from other cameras, they will consume a lot of power quickly. Your signal strength plays an important role too. When signal strength is weak, packets get dropped and need to be retransmitted.
Most of my camera are in small openings and placed where the panels get good sun. I have one camera that is in the hardwoods. It gets lost of traffic in the fall when there are acorns but light traffic most of the year. All of my cameras are set on the highest resolution so I can zoom in and identify individual bucks. Because I use them primarily for longitudinal population trend monitoring, every camera is set with the same 5 minute delay between pics. I had to change the battery too frequently for this camera. I eventually hinged some trees. Because of the situation, I could only get a few hours of morning sun when it is low intensity. I ended up using a 30 amp hour external battery and a large 60 watt solar panel and an PMW controller. This was enough to balance the power flow for that camera. In the winter when there are no leave on the trees, it is overkill, but in the summer, the panel is large enough that the morning sun is enough to keep the battery easily topped of for the limited number of pics I get from the camera. During the fall, when the picture load increases it is enough to keep it going until the leaves fall. I have a 9 db antenna on it to keep the signal levels up.
I have similar setups on my major routing cameras. The are in open areas that get full sun, but they route pictures from many other cameras.
I doubt this will happen. There are many many commercial devices that use this spectrum because it is unlicensed.
THanks,
Jack
Bill
Administrator
Lots of old cow bones.. I think it was the cow grave yard many years ago..
Do you guys never get a camera stolen? I had four reconyx stolen off private property - in one night. That hurt! I have also had two reconyx flooded - have yet to find a camera that can live through that. It also made me re-evaluate my whole camera system. No more expensive camera's for me. I switched to Brownings - usually pay around $110 - $120. Had one out of two dozen go down in past five years - besides a couple more that were flooded - and a couple shot and or stolen. Using a lot of less expensive cameras has really been an eye opener. Kudos to you guys who are in a position to use the latest and greatest.
Rit
5 year old buck +
All of theseI doubt this will happen. There are many many commercial devices that use this spectrum because it is unlicensed.
THanks,
Jack[/QUOTE]
I am not saying it will happen I am just saying don’t be surprised if it does happen. Companies pay hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars for the exclusive rights to spectrums. Less than a 1/3 of the 900 MHz spectrum is unlicensed for now. It takes one quick vote at the FCC to change all that. With the ever increasing demand for spectrum nothing is safe.
I have knocked on countless doors to deliver a letter informing the occupants they must turn off whatever is causing interference in a particular band. Both residential and businesses alike. Most of the time they have no clue. It can be AWS, PCS, WCS, and sometimes narrowband 700. My company owns an enormous amount of spectrum from 700 all the way thru 2300 and they don’t take kindly to interference. It can be repeaters, any kind of transmitters, old cable tuners, and even ovens from bake shops. Sometimes whatever is causing the issue has been plugged in 20 years but a change to licensing allowed us to turn up a carrier in that band and that’s how the device is found.
THanks,
Jack[/QUOTE]
I am not saying it will happen I am just saying don’t be surprised if it does happen. Companies pay hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars for the exclusive rights to spectrums. Less than a 1/3 of the 900 MHz spectrum is unlicensed for now. It takes one quick vote at the FCC to change all that. With the ever increasing demand for spectrum nothing is safe.
I have knocked on countless doors to deliver a letter informing the occupants they must turn off whatever is causing interference in a particular band. Both residential and businesses alike. Most of the time they have no clue. It can be AWS, PCS, WCS, and sometimes narrowband 700. My company owns an enormous amount of spectrum from 700 all the way thru 2300 and they don’t take kindly to interference. It can be repeaters, any kind of transmitters, old cable tuners, and even ovens from bake shops. Sometimes whatever is causing the issue has been plugged in 20 years but a change to licensing allowed us to turn up a carrier in that band and that’s how the device is found.
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
I am not saying it will happen I am just saying don’t be surprised if it does happen. Companies pay hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars for the exclusive rights to spectrums. Less than a 1/3 of the 900 MHz spectrum is unlicensed for now. It takes one quick vote at the FCC to change all that. With the ever increasing demand for spectrum nothing is safe.
I have knocked on countless doors to deliver a letter informing the occupants they must turn off whatever is causing interference in a particular band. Both residential and businesses alike. Most of the time they have no clue. It can be AWS, PCS, WCS, and sometimes narrowband 700. My company owns an enormous amount of spectrum from 700 all the way thru 2300 and they don’t take kindly to interference. It can be repeaters, any kind of transmitters, old cable tuners, and even ovens from bake shops. Sometimes whatever is causing the issue has been plugged in 20 years but a change to licensing allowed us to turn up a carrier in that band and that’s how the device is found.[/QUOTE]
For every company fighting to license spectrum there are more fighting to keep it unlicensed because it would kill there products. I doubt these frequencies will ever be licensed.
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
I had lots of cheap Chinese cams stolen in the early days. It took us a good 5+ years of constant vigilance, reporting, and prosecution to get our trespass issues under control. When I first got these cams, I used high security boxes, cement pillars with rebar, and motorcycle chains to secure them. That is no longer necessary now that we made our stand.
Unlike the cheap cams that are easily reset to factory settings including password, these require very expensive equipment to change the password. My cams are individually serialized and a thief would need to send them back to the factory who would contact me and I would contact law enforcement. That is not to say they could not be vandalized but thieves could break into a barn and steal an ATV as well.
Again, I would not recommend these for folks casually scouting on public land. Keep in mind that for private land attempting to do QDM, trespass has much larger consequences like poaching or larger equipment theft if not addressed. While someone could steal them, they are taking a pretty big risk and can't really benefit from the theft.
Thanks,
Jack
I have had people shoot some of my cameras on private property - especially the ones cabled or in boxes - it isnt so much they want the camera - its they dont want you to have it.
When I went to using many more not so expensive cameras - two or three on a two acre food plot - it was a real eye opener to see how many bucks I was missing compared to running fewer, more expensive cameras.
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
If you have trespass issues and folks are willing to do that, you've got bigger risks than camera threats. We started in that situation. Our property was owned by a timber company. They leased the hunting rights to folks living far away that were only there on weekends. Many local folks treated it like their birthright. We had folks break into our barn and steel stuff, tear down fences, poach young bucks and hang the carcass on our fence, and more. We spent a lot of time with the game warden and sheriff's office. We reported every trespass. We issued trespass notices (which result in judges treating trespass much more seriously), and we prosecuted everyone we could. The word got out that we were not a soft target. We had no chance at QDM if poaching continued as a problem.
As for more cheap cams revealing more bucks, I have not found that to be the case, in fact, the opposite. I did some side by side testing in the early days and it was amazing how many more pictures the quality cameras got that low end cams missed and how many more false triggers the low end cams had. In addition, I found there was a real flash avoidance problem for mature bucks without true black flash unless you use bait (which we don't).
Other issues include noise from mechanical lens filters and human scent from regular maintenance/sd card visits.
Every place is different and your camera placement may have something to do with it. Folks focused on scouting typically place cams on travel routes and large fields. With travel routes, more cams do get more bucks because, at least in my area, they use different trails and meander a lot. On large fields, a deer can be feeding in a different part of the field than the camera is in and come and go undetected. For my QDM data collection, I found dual lens (no sound), and black flash on small killing plots (1/3 acre or smaller) work pretty well. Most bucks in the area will hit these smaller fields at night. I do have a few cams on large fields and in the woods, but I don't count on them for survey data.
Thanks,
Jack
i rarely get a blank picture. What I found with using a lot of less expensive cameras - I didnt feel bad at all about putting a camera of little traveled trails. It might be that not much is using that trail. It might be that the biggest buck on the place is the only one using the trail. When I was using the reconyx - I didnt want to “waste” a camera in an area where I thought I was possibly going to get few or no pictures. Also, a lot of my food plots are two acres or more. It is amazing how many different buck pictures you will get using three cameras instead of one camera. My deer dont seemed to be too alarmed by the various flashes - as long as I am not using video.
Many of the less expensive cameras have great detection ranges, good flash range, and excellent picture quality. I live on my land, so I dont need a system that transmits pictures (except for hog control), and I am not one that tries to stay out of the hunting area - in fact, I use my land 365 days a year from coon hunting with a dog to catching frogs and crawfish. I dont see my system lacking in any dimension for doing my QDM evaluation.
