2 thoughts on “Foscam Plug and Play FI9831P 1.3 Megapixel (1280x960p) H.264 Wireless/Wired Pan/Tilt IP Camera with IR-Cut Filter – 26ft Night Vision and 2.8mm Lens (70° Viewing Angle) – Black”

1. 59 of 61 people found the following review helpful

   
   Foscam finally gets it right with the FI9831W, April 14, 2014

   By 

   Tim –

   This review is from: Foscam FI9831W (Black) 1.3 Megapixel (1280x960p) H.264 Wireless/Wired Pan/Tilt IP Camera with IR-Cut Filter – 26ft Night Vision and 2.8mm Lens (70° Viewing Angle) – Black (Electronics)

   I’ve used a number of the FI8910s, and while they did “okay”, they were never great and the resolution is poor. The FI9821 was a good try, but was plagued with software bugs and just not very solid, hence the release of a V2 version. Skip those, and go with this camera. The several FI9831Ws I’ve used have all been solid, with good wired and wireless connectivity. Focus is good, and the video is much smoother than the weaker 9821 brother. This is now my “go to” IP camera choice. It’s still not great on motion detection, but that’s a tricky problem to solve.

   To those who complain about difficulty in setup, know that these are not for the unskilled. You need to understand how to set up network devices, and poke holes in your router’s firewall if you want external access.

   Although wireless performance is good, I generally hard-line mine when I can to avoid the vagaries of Wi-Fi. In that setup, I recommend setting the camera to a fixed IP address in the camera, so it always comes to the same IP address regardless of whether it connects by Wi-Fi or hard-line. This will make port-forwarding in your router easier.

   The only real ding I have with this camera is it doesn’t play nicely with the Chrome browser to save your password so you’ll need to type it in every time you access the camera if the Chrome browser is your viewer of choice.

   I mount my cameras outside, but protect them from rain by placing them under eaves….or pie tins. If there’s a chance your camera will get wet, tape over the unused connector openings. If you’re even more electromechanically inclined, open the camera and spray the PCBA with conformal coating to protect it from moisture. I used Humiseal 1B31, but many other options will likely work just as well.

   if you’re going to remote locate your cameras, I don’t advise extending the power cable very far. Instead, switch to a 12V brick and use the guts of a USB auto adapter to create the 5V the camera wants. Keep the 5V wire under 6ft, but I’ve run the 12V lines well over 100ft using low-cost sprinkler cable, and you could go much much farther if you wanted to with this approach.

   0

   Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

   Was this review helpful to you? 
   

   
   |

    Comments (2)

   Reply ↓
2. 40 of 41 people found the following review helpful

   
   Great view, October 17, 2014

   By 

   rblaw (Ann Arbor, MI USA) –

   Verified Purchase(What’s this?)

   This review is from: Foscam FI9831W (Black) 1.3 Megapixel (1280x960p) H.264 Wireless/Wired Pan/Tilt IP Camera with IR-Cut Filter – 26ft Night Vision and 2.8mm Lens (70° Viewing Angle) – Black (Electronics)

   This is a preliminary review, but I thought my setup process might help others. I will update the review when and if I successfully set up the camera for remote viewing from my vacation residence. I currently am just making sure it works and am wired to the router. When I used the camera search tool and linked to the camera, I did not get a camera view. I got a window with camera settings. On trying again, Chrome said it could not load without an extension plugin. I downloaded one and added it to the Chrome extensions. Then, when I opened the camera link, a nice high definition camera view appeared. I later closed and reopened Chrome and was unable to get the camera view. I went to the Chrome extension window and saw that the extension had been disabled because it had not been acquired from Chrome. That’s when I called Foscam. I was number 18 on hold, but finally talked to a technician who I allowed to control my computer. He seemed to do the same thing I did to add the Chrome extension and the camera view appeared. I then closed and reopened Chrome and expected the extension to once again be disabled it wasn’t and I don’t know why not. So when I need to view the camera from another computer, I may need another remote control session of my computer.

   I have purchased four other Foscams (or Foscam knockoffs). Three still work, but the camera view with this device is much much better. If things work out when I set the camera up for remote access, I may replace the other cameras with this model.

   UPDATE
   I managed to install the camera with Internet access at my vacation residence. By the time I finished installing, it was fairly dark outside. But the camera captured a much brighter view than I could see. Had that been the end of the story, I would have given a 5 star rating.

   If I had a WPS button on my router, the setup might have been easier. But I don’t. Lots of hit and miss messing with my router software. I was about to concede defeat when success popped up. I have had other cameras which do all the router configuration without the necessity of even opening the router software. Because of the tricky setup, I am lowering the rating by one star.

   Before I even tried to set things up for Internet access, I knew there was a viewer problem with Chrome. But a support techy claimed I just had to drag and drop the the viewer add-on. The problem with that is that Chrome permanently disables it whenever it is restarted. So if I want to use Chrome, I have to do a drag and drop after every restart. I used the same procedure to add the extension to Firefox and it still seems to work. Because of the hassle, I am lowering the rating to 3 stars.

   It would be nice to have a view with my iPad. But according to the reviews of the Foscam viewer apps, none work with this model camera.

   0

   Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 

   Was this review helpful to you? 
   

   
   |

    Comments (4)

   Reply ↓