BuckEye wireless- Up to 254 cameras can be assigned to one base

[yoderjac]

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.

I agree, the cheap Chinese cameras have great picture quality. Many have slow trigger times and use short distance wide PIRs. I get detections at 50+yards with the Orions.

The issue with flashes is not alarming deer. It is age and sex bias in the data. You don't know what you don't know. When I first started, I found some strong age and sex bias in the data when compared to the biologist analysis of the general area. It took a while to figure out that it was flash avoidance. It wasn't until I switched to blackflash that the bias disappeared. If the data you are getting is sufficient for your QDM analysis, why change? My big issue with the low-end stuff was the lack of reliability. I was spending a huge amount of time dealing with camera issues and with cameras died during survey periods, I would get holes in the data that made analysis much less effective. Since I've been using the Orions, camera issues are rare. Batteries die after a couple years. Lexan covers scratch and dull with weather over the years, occasional squirrel chews a cable, tree grows over a solar panel. Things like that. Very infrequent. I don't have time to swap SD cards and I love the system that runs 24/7/365 for years with very minor disruption.

My only use of video is for educational purposes, and I no longer use game cams for that. I carry a cam when I hunt and if I need video of a particular situation for classes, I just film it then.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[Tamarack]

Curious to know if those getting cams stolen/destroyed have property next to public land or ?? Neighbors must be jerks or they're letting idiots on their property if it's private all around.

 

[yoderjac]

Curious to know if those getting cams stolen/destroyed have property next to public land or ?? Neighbors must be jerks or they're letting idiots on their property if it's private all around.

In my area, the large adjoining landowners were great folks but they were afraid of the bullies. Once we stood up and started prosecuting the criminals, they developed a backbone and did the same. Our land does not adjoin any public land, but it does have a major pipeline going through it. Lots of folks are under the false impression that right-of-ways are somehow "public". Part of our early problem was ATV riders. Most of our problem came from folks that had no land and got used to treating the timber company land as their own before we bought it. The timber company did post the land but as long as no one cut the trees, they did no enforcement.

Many folks I've talked to in my state had the same issue when they purchased land. They all told me it would take 5 years to deal with the trespass and they were right.

 

[SwampCat]

Curious to know if those getting cams stolen/destroyed have property next to public land or ?? Neighbors must be jerks or they're letting idiots on their property if it's private all around.

property next to public land

 

[Tamarack]

property next to public land

I don't know if you saw this..some examples to get back at 'em: https://habitat-talk.com/index.php?threads/reconyx-cellular.12069/#post-223560

Nevermind..I see you're in that thread

 

[SwampCat]

I agree, the cheap Chinese cameras have great picture quality. Many have slow trigger times and use short distance wide PIRs. I get detections at 50+yards with the Orions.

The issue with flashes is not alarming deer. It is age and sex bias in the data. You don't know what you don't know. When I first started, I found some strong age and sex bias in the data when compared to the biologist analysis of the general area. It took a while to figure out that it was flash avoidance. It wasn't until I switched to blackflash that the bias disappeared. If the data you are getting is sufficient for your QDM analysis, why change? My big issue with the low-end stuff was the lack of reliability. I was spending a huge amount of time dealing with camera issues and with cameras died during survey periods, I would get holes in the data that made analysis much less effective. Since I've been using the Orions, camera issues are rare. Batteries die after a couple years. Lexan covers scratch and dull with weather over the years, occasional squirrel chews a cable, tree grows over a solar panel. Things like that. Very infrequent. I don't have time to swap SD cards and I love the system that runs 24/7/365 for years with very minor disruption.

My only use of video is for educational purposes, and I no longer use game cams for that. I carry a cam when I hunt and if I need video of a particular situation for classes, I just film it then.

Thanks,

Jack

I think quality of some chinese cameras has really improved. I have probabaly 15 various Browning trail cams that have been in the woods five years or more and still running. I have had a couple flooded, a couple shot, a couple stolen, one destroyed by a bear, and one eaten by a hog. I have had one malfunction - I pulled the battery pack with the camera still on and it never worked again.

My cameras would not average detection out to 150 ft - probably 80 - 100 ft on average. I am not sure, even with 18 megapixel photos, I would be able to definitively tell enough about a buck at 150 ft, with my cameras, to use the information.

One negative to using a lot of cameras - only once since I quit the expensive camera business and went to less expensive - but more cameras five years ago - have we seen a buck that we did not have on camera. That was a several times a year experience when using fewer cameras. Now, when you dont have a quality buck on camera - you dont have the anticipation of a buck just showing up that you didnt know was around.

I use both “low glow” and black flash cameras and have have not been able to prove avoidance when taking pictures - but there definitely is when taking video. Black flash are also less likely to be stolen or vandalized. I have done a number of trials on bait piles and in food plots and can not discern any avoidance by deer between low glow and black flash. Deer will notice a low glow camera - especially in multi shot modes - but I have not been able to document them preferring a bait pile or one side of a food plot that only has a black flash camera.

But, my deer may be a little more tolerating, also. My deer are used to a lot of human activity - me. Where some folks feel like they are going to run their deer off if they walk through their property to pull a camera card - I consider it a travesty if I dont ride over my whole property in my SxS everyday.

To be honest, for hunting purposes - I would like a system where I could access photos without pulling cards - not because I am afraid of running deer off my property, but for making hunting decisions with up to date information. I have never felt like my current system is lacking for QDM. A lot of my property has no cell service and I have considered trying the cuddelink system - but it seems labor intensive - and I dont need anymore labor intensive habits than I already have. I dont begrudge anyone who uses the latest, greatest, most expensive system out there. I also dont want folks to think they have to have the latest, greatest, most expensive system out there to gather all the pertinent QDM data they will ever need.

 

[yoderjac]

I think quality of some chinese cameras has really improved. I have probabaly 15 various Browning trail cams that have been in the woods five years or more and still running. I have had a couple flooded, a couple shot, a couple stolen, one destroyed by a bear, and one eaten by a hog. I have had one malfunction - I pulled the battery pack with the camera still on and it never worked again.

My cameras would not average detection out to 150 ft - probably 80 - 100 ft on average. I am not sure, even with 18 megapixel photos, I would be able to definitively tell enough about a buck at 150 ft, with my cameras, to use the information.

One negative to using a lot of cameras - only once since I quit the expensive camera business and went to less expensive - but more cameras five years ago - have we seen a buck that we did not have on camera. That was a several times a year experience when using fewer cameras. Now, when you dont have a quality buck on camera - you dont have the anticipation of a buck just showing up that you didnt know was around.

I use both “low glow” and black flash cameras and have have not been able to prove avoidance when taking pictures - but there definitely is when taking video. Black flash are also less likely to be stolen or vandalized. I have done a number of trials on bait piles and in food plots and can not discern any avoidance by deer between low glow and black flash. Deer will notice a low glow camera - especially in multi shot modes - but I have not been able to document them preferring a bait pile or one side of a food plot that only has a black flash camera.

But, my deer may be a little more tolerating, also. My deer are used to a lot of human activity - me. Where some folks feel like they are going to run their deer off if they walk through their property to pull a camera card - I consider it a travesty if I dont ride over my whole property in my SxS everyday.

To be honest, for hunting purposes - I would like a system where I could access photos without pulling cards - not because I am afraid of running deer off my property, but for making hunting decisions with up to date information. I have never felt like my current system is lacking for QDM. A lot of my property has no cell service and I have considered trying the cuddelink system - but it seems labor intensive - and I dont need anymore labor intensive habits than I already have. I dont begrudge anyone who uses the latest, greatest, most expensive system out there. I also dont want folks to think they have to have the latest, greatest, most expensive system out there to gather all the pertinent QDM data they will ever need. : emoji_thumbsup:

I have not dealt with the Chinese cams for years, but it would not surprise me at all to see significant improvements in reliability and QC over time along with commensurate increase in price. That is their typical business MO. They buy into a market at the low end with pricing that is so low, others can't compete and many will suffer the poor reliability and short lifespan. Then, as others are forced out of the market and their market share grows, they improve their reliability and QC and can raise their prices. So, your observation of improving quality does not surprise me.

I love to see additional competitors in the market. I was hoping that CuddieLink would help, but watching those threads, the lower cost appears to result in lower performance and reliability. While they are not a fit for QDM data collection because they don't transmit full resolution images, they seem to me to be a great fit for a small property with a good RF environment for a scouting application.

As for QDM data collections, one can certainly use inexpensive cams if you are willing to compromise on a few things. In fact, the gold standard for survey data is the MSU protocol. It has been vetted more than any other. The problem is that it requires point source bait which is problematic these days. Bait will overcome flash avoidance. It only requires a few weeks of survey time.

The only way to prove flash avoidance is with data analysis. Here is how I did it. I used red blob and black flash cameras and swapped the locations over time. When I did survey data pulls and compared red blob to true black flash, there was a very statistically significant difference in both mature bucks and sex ratios between the two. Flash avoidance is not spooking deer. It is simply the fact that mature bucks (in general as a class) are more cautious than younger deer. They avoid triggering the camera and keep other deer between them and that odd visual effect they are not quite sure of. Mature females can be very cautious, but they have fawns to deal with. So, the result is many more triggers by young and female deer. When doing detailed analysis on pictures using Photoshop to clean them up, it was not uncommon to see mature bucks on the very fringe of the flash. In a macro analysis used to establish sex and age distribution, these would be classified as non-positive IDs and excluded where pictures of the young deer that triggered the cam would be positive IDs and included.

Keep in mind that not all black flash is created equal. Most inexpensive cameras ramp up LEDs slowly and then take a picture and then ramp them down. They also leave the shutter open longer to compensate for a poor image sensor. Better designs have good timing between the black flash and shutter. Most folks think wavelength is the only factor involved, but both intensity and duration of the flash matter when it comes to flash avoidance.

The best analogy I can think of is a peripheral vision Field of View test that you get at the ophthalmologist office. You stare at a dot and press a button when you see dots flash in your peripheral vision. The size, brightness (intensity), and duration of those dots all vary and all impact your ability to detect the flash and push the button.

One more point to consider. Camera data is only a fraction of the data I collect for QDM decision making. It is a significant source but not the only one. We also log observations on every hunt as well and collection harvest and biological sample data for aging.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[SwampCat]

I have not dealt with the Chinese cams for years, but it would not surprise me at all to see significant improvements in reliability and QC over time along with commensurate increase in price. That is their typical business MO. They buy into a market at the low end with pricing that is so low, others can't compete and many will suffer the poor reliability and short lifespan. Then, as others are forced out of the market and their market share grows, they improve their reliability and QC and can raise their prices. So, your observation of improving quality does not surprise me.

I love to see additional competitors in the market. I was hoping that CuddieLink would help, but watching those threads, the lower cost appears to result in lower performance and reliability. While they are not a fit for QDM data collection because they don't transmit full resolution images, they seem to me to be a great fit for a small property with a good RF environment for a scouting application.

As for QDM data collections, one can certainly use inexpensive cams if you are willing to compromise on a few things. In fact, the gold standard for survey data is the MSU protocol. It has been vetted more than any other. The problem is that it requires point source bait which is problematic these days. Bait will overcome flash avoidance. It only requires a few weeks of survey time.

The only way to prove flash avoidance is with data analysis. Here is how I did it. I used red blob and black flash cameras and swapped the locations over time. When I did survey data pulls and compared red blob to true black flash, there was a very statistically significant difference in both mature bucks and sex ratios between the two. Flash avoidance is not spooking deer. It is simply the fact that mature bucks (in general as a class) are more cautious than younger deer. They avoid triggering the camera and keep other deer between them and that odd visual effect they are not quite sure of. Mature females can be very cautious, but they have fawns to deal with. So, the result is many more triggers by young and female deer. When doing detailed analysis on pictures using Photoshop to clean them up, it was not uncommon to see mature bucks on the very fringe of the flash. In a macro analysis used to establish sex and age distribution, these would be classified as non-positive IDs and excluded where pictures of the young deer that triggered the cam would be positive IDs and included.

Keep in mind that not all black flash is created equal. Most inexpensive cameras ramp up LEDs slowly and then take a picture and then ramp them down. They also leave the shutter open longer to compensate for a poor image sensor. Better designs have good timing between the black flash and shutter. Most folks think wavelength is the only factor involved, but both intensity and duration of the flash matter when it comes to flash avoidance.

The best analogy I can think of is a peripheral vision Field of View test that you get at the ophthalmologist office. You stare at a dot and press a button when you see dots flash in your peripheral vision. The size, brightness (intensity), and duration of those dots all vary and all impact your ability to detect the flash and push the button.

One more point to consider. Camera data is only a fraction of the data I collect for QDM decision making. It is a significant source but not the only one. We also log observations on every hunt as well and collection harvest and biological sample data for aging.

Thanks,

Jack

that is exactly what I did to test the differences between red flash and black flash cameras - and detected no difference in avoidance between the two on food plots, or baits. I dont use white flash anymore - but I would have liked to test them, also. I used to get a lot of pictures of the same buck feeding in a food plot - sometimes with four or five pictures of it in a 20 minute period with a white flash. I much prefer the white flash night time pictures - but just assumed they would scare the deer. I am not sure they bother deer as bad as one might think. They do scare the heck out of the hogs - but everything scares hogs worse than it does deer.

 

[yoderjac]

that is exactly what I did to test the differences between red flash and black flash cameras - and detected no difference in avoidance between the two on food plots, or baits. I dont use white flash anymore - but I would have liked to test them, also. I used to get a lot of pictures of the same buck feeding in a food plot - sometimes with four or five pictures of it in a 20 minute period with a white flash. I much prefer the white flash night time pictures - but just assumed they would scare the deer. I am not sure they bother deer as bad as one might think. They do scare the heck out of the hogs - but everything scares hogs worse than it does deer.

I see the same thing anecdotally. Deer have unique personalities. There are some mature bucks that will tolerate red blob just fine and completely ignore it. That is not true of mature bucks as a class compared to young deer as a class. It shows up in data analysis. It certainly could be that in particular areas deer behavior is more or less sensitive to intrusion. I was a founding member of an archery group that deals with over populations in the suburbs. Deer adapt well to man. They learn our behavior patterns and as long as we are operating within the norm, they ignore us. Flood lights, and sprinklers on motion lights won't stop deer in the burbs from eating the azaleas. So, I'm not discounting your experience at all, but flash avoidance is clearly and demonstrably an issue in my area and I'm less than a mile from the nearest small town, adjoin a railroad and 2-lane highway.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[SwampCat]

I see the same thing anecdotally. Deer have unique personalities. There are some mature bucks that will tolerate red blob just fine and completely ignore it. That is not true of mature bucks as a class compared to young deer as a class. It shows up in data analysis. It certainly could be that in particular areas deer behavior is more or less sensitive to intrusion. I was a founding member of an archery group that deals with over populations in the suburbs. Deer adapt well to man. They learn our behavior patterns and as long as we are operating within the norm, they ignore us. Flood lights, and sprinklers on motion lights won't stop deer in the burbs from eating the azaleas. So, I'm not discounting your experience at all, but flash avoidance is clearly and demonstrably an issue in my area and I'm less than a mile from the nearest small town, adjoin a railroad and 2-lane highway.

Thanks,

Jack

I live in cattle country. Most of my neighbors have cattle and ride their SxS’s over their whole place almost everyday, looking for new calves, downed fences, waterer’s working, checking hog traps, etc. Our deer would probably go into convulsions if they didnt see somebody everyday riding around through the woods. My business partner has a farm that he visits one or two weekends a month - except for deer season - when he is there a lot. His deer go underground come deer season - I think they immediately notice the increased human activity.

 

[Tamarack]

Here's an example where they ignored the white flash- the video cam is black flash. Bottom two are white video..the last one seems to have jumped from the light but who knows. My favorite will always be white flash/led..but have plenty of the other.

 

[Tamarack]

Btw...the China vs USA thing reminded me of this company: https://intelligentsurveillancecorp.com
Looks like they at least make their own cases etc..assembled here.. But $1499.99? If I had crazy money I'd actully like to support such companies- I'd get 200 Buckeye's too.

 

[yoderjac]

One more factor in a deer's response to flash is the camera position. They seem to respond more to the point source than the light. So, when the camera is positioned high, angled downward, deer usually don't see the flash source as it is out of their typical vision path. Instead they see the light created by the flash reflected off the ground and trees and other objects. This is the same thing deer see with lightning. The avoidance I've documented is cameras placed at deer level where they see the source of the light.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[SwampCat]

One more factor in a deer's response to flash is the camera position. They seem to respond more to the point source than the light. So, when the camera is positioned high, angled downward, deer usually don't see the flash source as it is out of their typical vision path. Instead they see the light created by the flash reflected off the ground and trees and other objects. This is the same thing deer see with lightning. The avoidance I've documented is cameras placed at deer level where they see the source of the light.

Thanks,

Jack

I agree with that. When I had a run of bad luck with getting cameras stolen and flooded - I started putting them up in a tree with a step ladder - that was a pain in the butt - would definately need buckeye or cell cams or cuddelink to keep from having to climb a ladder. But, I never could get those elevated cameras to get as many pictures as deer level cameras on the same tree. I believe because they are angled down - they have a lot less forgiving zone of detection.

 

[yoderjac]

I agree with that. When I had a run of bad luck with getting cameras stolen and flooded - I started putting them up in a tree with a step ladder - that was a pain in the butt - would definately need buckeye or cell cams or cuddelink to keep from having to climb a ladder. But, I never could get those elevated cameras to get as many pictures as deer level cameras on the same tree. I believe because they are angled down - they have a lot less forgiving zone of detection.

Yes. The technique works best if the angle is not too sharp and you use a cheap camera with a short wide-angle PIR detector rather than a long narrow one like my Orions. It works best on point source things like scrapes and rubs where deer are going to specific locations.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[FredG]

Yes. The technique works best if the angle is not too sharp and you use a cheap camera with a short wide-angle PIR detector rather than a long narrow one like my Orions. It works best on point source things like scrapes and rubs where deer are going to specific locations.

Thanks,

Jack

There's nothing inherently 'cheap' with a short-wide detection zone and nothing inherently 'top shelf' with a long-narrow zone. Just different design philosophies often accomplished with identical pyros using differing fresnel lens designs. Both have their strong points and I use either one depending upon the setup... just swap out the fresnel.

 

[yoderjac]

There's nothing inherently 'cheap' with a short-wide detection zone and nothing inherently 'top shelf' with a long-narrow zone. Just different design philosophies often accomplished with identical pyros using differing fresnel lens designs. Both have their strong points and I use either one depending upon the setup... just swap out the fresnel.

Yes, it is the opposite direction. Long range narrow PIRs are typically used in cameras with fast trigger times which tend to be higher-end cameras. The reason is that you get game mostly centered in the picture aiding identification. Short range wide PIRs are often used in less expensive slow trigger time cameras to compensate for the slow trigger time. This presumes a deer walking past the camera triggers the camera and by the time the picture is taken the deer is closer to the center of the picture. That was the original theory behind the short range wider PIRs. In practice it usually results in a lot of head and butts depending on how the camera is deployed.

So, you are correct, that there is nothing cheap about short-wide PIRs compared to long-narrow PIRs. It is simply that short-wide PIRs are frequently found in lower-end cameras as a poor attempt to compensate for other design elements. Long-narrow PIRs or more frequently found in cameras with fast trigger time.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[Dukslayr]

I’ve long been a fan of Reconyx since purchasing my first one 8-10 years ago. I’ve got a small fleet of them now and other than my two Spartan cell can they’re all I use. Fortunately haven’t had theft issues and hot in never do. I talked to Bill a lot about his Buckeye setup and actually spoke with the company several times and got a quote for a 6 camera system. The cost is definitely not for the faint of heart, but I nearly pulled the trigger until I talked to Reconyx and they let me know about their next gen cell cam. Ultimately I think the Reconyx cellular (while not cheap) will meet my needs as well or better than the Buckeye with less moving parts and lower up front cost. They will be shipping later this month so I’ll update once I have them deployed.

 

[yoderjac]

I’ve long been a fan of Reconyx since purchasing my first one 8-10 years ago. I’ve got a small fleet of them now and other than my two Spartan cell can they’re all I use. Fortunately haven’t had theft issues and hot in never do. I talked to Bill a lot about his Buckeye setup and actually spoke with the company several times and got a quote for a 6 camera system. The cost is definitely not for the faint of heart, but I nearly pulled the trigger until I talked to Reconyx and they let me know about their next gen cell cam. Ultimately I think the Reconyx cellular (while not cheap) will meet my needs as well or better than the Buckeye with less moving parts and lower up front cost. They will be shipping later this month so I’ll update once I have them deployed.

Before I went dumped the cheap Chinese cameras and went high-end, I did a pretty hard engineering analysis of the cameras at the time. It came down to two, BuckeyeCam and Reconyx. Both had top notch engineering and designs. This was before I went to wireless. BEC had just come out with the Apollo cameras. They were the a less expensive version of the Orion that did not have the wireless radio, but they could be upgraded to it. I could not afford to go wireless at the time and I was very gun-shy of game cameras based on my previous experience with the Chinese cameras. The only reason I chose BEC over Reconyx was the potential to go wireless in the future.

At the time, I was teaching a game camera class for the state Hunter Education instructors. Our volunteer instructors meet at a central location in the state to attend advanced subject matter specific classes and my game cam class was one of them. I contacted a number of manufacturers asking if they were willing to send me demo cameras and/or literature for the class. Several responded including BEC. They sent me an operational Orion system with PC base and a single camera to demo. They let me keep it for several months, so I was able to take it to the farm after the class and test signal levels at different locations to get a feel for how well it would work. I'm pretty familiar with RF transmission. I road around the farm on my ATV with a directional antenna on a 6' mast and the camera to test signal levels. I convinced myself it would be a challenge but I thought I could set up a network on the farm.

If I did not have that system to test, I probably never would have made the investment into BEC. I then ordered a PC Base and radio kits form my Apollos and converted them into Orions. Over the next few years, I built out the network by adding cameras as I could afford them.

Cellular is not as challenging as the private 900 mhz terrestrial network. The frequencies are different and the commercial towers are typically very high with respect to cell phones. So, the amount of vegetation you need to transmit through is minor compared to ground based equipment on a pine farm. I don't know if Reconyx has reduced quality since I evaluated them, but based on my evaluation, you should be very happy with a cellular product from them.

There are only two downsides that I see. One is the recurring cost of cellular service. The second depends on your application. I need full resolution pictures for my application. Most of the Chinese cell based systems only transmit low resolution pictures like the Cuddelink system. Cuddelink uses the same 900 mhz unlicensed band as BEC, but because of the challenges of a ground based network at that frequency, they only transmit dumbed down thumbnail pics. Most of the cellular based systems do the same to reduce the cost of data transmission. I don't know about reconyx. That is something to consider and look into if your application requires full resolution pictures.

One more thought on cell based systems. It will be interesting to see how the build-out of 5G impacts the cost of cell data. If the cost of data drops significantly, it may make future cell base systems more cost effective.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[Dukslayr]

Before I went dumped the cheap Chinese cameras and went high-end, I did a pretty hard engineering analysis of the cameras at the time. It came down to two, BuckeyeCam and Reconyx. Both had top notch engineering and designs. This was before I went to wireless. BEC had just come out with the Apollo cameras. They were the a less expensive version of the Orion that did not have the wireless radio, but they could be upgraded to it. I could not afford to go wireless at the time and I was very gun-shy of game cameras based on my previous experience with the Chinese cameras. The only reason I chose BEC over Reconyx was the potential to go wireless in the future.

At the time, I was teaching a game camera class for the state Hunter Education instructors. Our volunteer instructors meet at a central location in the state to attend advanced subject matter specific classes and my game cam class was one of them. I contacted a number of manufacturers asking if they were willing to send me demo cameras and/or literature for the class. Several responded including BEC. They sent me an operational Orion system with PC base and a single camera to demo. They let me keep it for several months, so I was able to take it to the farm after the class and test signal levels at different locations to get a feel for how well it would work. I'm pretty familiar with RF transmission. I road around the farm on my ATV with a directional antenna on a 6' mast and the camera to test signal levels. I convinced myself it would be a challenge but I thought I could set up a network on the farm.

If I did not have that system to test, I probably never would have made the investment into BEC. I then ordered a PC Base and radio kits form my Apollos and converted them into Orions. Over the next few years, I built out the network by adding cameras as I could afford them.

Cellular is not as challenging as the private 900 mhz terrestrial network. The frequencies are different and the commercial towers are typically very high with respect to cell phones. So, the amount of vegetation you need to transmit through is minor compared to ground based equipment on a pine farm. I don't know if Reconyx has reduced quality since I evaluated them, but based on my evaluation, you should be very happy with a cellular product from them.

There are only two downsides that I see. One is the recurring cost of cellular service. The second depends on your application. I need full resolution pictures for my application. Most of the Chinese cell based systems only transmit low resolution pictures like the Cuddelink system. Cuddelink uses the same 900 mhz unlicensed band as BEC, but because of the challenges of a ground based network at that frequency, they only transmit dumbed down thumbnail pics. Most of the cellular based systems do the same to reduce the cost of data transmission. I don't know about reconyx. That is something to consider and look into if your application requires full resolution pictures.

One more thought on cell based systems. It will be interesting to see how the build-out of 5G impacts the cost of cell data. If the cost of data drops significantly, it may make future cell base systems more cost effective.

Thanks,

Jack

I have complete confidence in the Reconyx cell cams based on my experience with their non cell cams. They also come with a 5 year warranty. They stand by their stuff and customer service has been a dream to work with. Regarding images, you can request a full HD photo buy yes it sends low quality pics to save data. I don’t need high resolution for all my pics, just the bucks I need a better view of :)