Outdoor Cam bundle question

Can I ask what powered the design decision to go with a base rather than connecting the cams to wifi directly? WiFi noise and channel bleed is becoming a problem in residential areas, and another emitter isn’t really something I needed.


For one thing, now if someone steals the camera, you still have the footage on the base.

With people using the V2’s, someone steals the camera and all footage is permanently lost.

Hopefully the camera will have the option to use wifi directly.

It currently requires a base. WIFI at the camera is not an option.

1 Like

Again, I would be interested to hear what design pressures pushed the idea of a base. Yes, you can lose video to someone taking off with a camera. You should be taking that into account when you place them, making them difficult to get to.

A base creates several issues, the first being the overcrowding of the 2.4 ghz WiFi band in residential areas. Another emitter does not improve things. It also presents a single point of failure for the entire camera system at a given location.

Between this and the fact that the battery cannot be swapped out, I think I’m going to wait and see how the product matures. Kudos to Wyze for hitting a difficult price point, but there are some issues here, and I have no desire to lug a ladder around every other month and take cameras down to charge them.

For now I will stick to my inside cameras in outdoor enclosures.

I believe the base station does some of the work to save battery power in the cam. This however is an assumption on my part

Also to be noted is that the base itself cannot use WiFi and must be hard wired Ethernet. Nutty but reportedly true.

I think that was mentioned in the YouTube intro video.

This is true, the base station must be hard wired via ethernet to your router.

To be clear I think that’s terrific for reliability but to require it is going to pose problems for all kinds of people. And it’s certainly not the sort of requirement I (or I would expect the average user) would have expected.

My router is in the back of my home and the camera is going to be located in front of my garage, hopefully it have enough reach.

Faq in the details on the product explains why they decided to go with hub.

Except the answers make no sense. Save battery? How? It’s still a 2.4 ghz radio.

Hard wiring the hub makes sense. Otherwise you have two piggy backed WiFi conn3ctions, a recipie for latency problems.

Requiring a base still doesn’t make sense.

There’s facts that show hubs help with communication and battery life in wireless cameras.loik at Arlo, Eufy and many more. They started with no hub then realized it sucked so much battery with communication between camera, now hub does the work.

Wifi could be an option in the future via a software update. Many of us have run out of ethernet outlets for our routers as it is.

1 Like

I know what you mean. My modem/router only has 4 ports, I needed way more than that. First, I wanted my basement TVs and Blu-Ray players to get the best connection speeds (that’s 4 right there) and I have to add this base station? I was stuck…for a bit.

I bought a small travel network extender and connected the base to that. Now, I was able to place the base anywhere in the house that had a reasonable WIFI connect and I could also get the best connection between the base and the camera. And I didn’t have to run ethernet cable out to every room.