Thank you for the report!
That’s exactly the info I was looking for. 
1 Like
Remember you should test them under all conditions. I’d suggest a week of testing on a Hawaii beach.
2 Likes
No worries , They will be tested all over the Country
1 Like
Im hoping the outdoor cam has a small solar panel option similar to the Reolink Argus Eco. Id like to use it outside above my garage where there is no power outlet.
1 Like
Oooh… I definitely call dibs on the Hawaii test! 
You’re welcome for the report, @LowLight. Happy to help!
2 Likes
Thanks for the updated info Gwendolyn, I have been anxious about at least seeing the hardware design but understand that cannot be revealed yet. I will be happy with smart/intelligent alerts that I actually care about, better IR night vision, and much less image wash out / blurriness so that I can hopefully have a better chance of seeing more useful stuff FROM FURTHER AWAY, such as license plates. 
1 Like
We actually showed one of the prototypes in the April Fool’s video.
But that may not be finalized.
3 Likes
The existing cam seems to work well according to many users, so why re-invent the wheel? Simply redesign it with a waterproof casing - accessory cases seem to suggest simple shrouding of the cooling holes and USB connection are sufficient. eg: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07HVM3YGP/ref=sspa_dk_detail_2?psc=1&pd_rd_i=B07HVM3YGP&pd_rd_w=kFnTW&pf_rd_p=8a8f3917-7900-4ce8-ad90-adf0d53c0985&pd_rd_wg=sR1KZ&pf_rd_r=SY9NSVD6V9NBKBMZ4TWP&pd_rd_r=d43b240f-6f3b-11e9-a246-0ddaba5d67f8
I’m sure you can come up with your own design. BTW, it needs both black and white options as black stands out too much against the eaves where cams are mounted on white soffits. However, white stands out too much against brickwork and black soffits / guttering. So a choice of black or white would be helpful.
One answer with a new model - simply design it with a waterproof casing from the start for inside and outside use.
I personally don’t see a battery version as a viable option. Batteries seldom last long in CCTV cams and it’s all too easy to forget to change them.
2 Likes
I agree. With the simple USB power required I can supply a battery and solar charger for my remote needs or take a power feed from outside lights.
I’d like an IP 65 minimum.
Ok just looked at the aprils fools video… Do I also see a wyzecam pan BLACK EDITION by chance?
And for those that might look for it. At 1:49 on the dry erase board behind them looks to be a birdhouse wyzecamish looking thing… Or its the bigger dome looking thing behind all the folks talking about Wyze Cam Saran… lol
I honestly wish there would be two different outdoor versions. One like the Arlo’s or the ring cams. And one that competes with the newer floodlight camera market.
I have a netatmo presence as I didnt like the thought of some monthly fee to view my camera footage. AND I would love for Wyze to do a floodlight camera that looks similar or dead on to the netatmo presence. I love the presence. But for $300 and the fact that they have already given up on support for it. Plus it hates SD cards yet requires them gives Wyze an edge here. They could take on the really big guys with two different outdoor cams.
The camera shown at 0:26 is also different from any publically available Wyze Cam. Could that be the outdoor camera? Or is it just some variant I haven’t seen yet?
Not wanting to knock your suggestion, but there are several issues when you go down the combined floodlight route:
- Cost / Cost of replacement - you up both the initial purchase cost and the cost of replacement. With a separate camera and floodlight, if 1 fails, you simply replace the item failed ie camera OR light. With a combined unit, if 1 item fails, you have to replace the whole combined unit of both camera AND light = 2-3 X more expensive. eg the Wyze cam is $19.95. A combined unit might be eg. $59.95. A flood light depending on the wattage, may be $29.95. If some thing fails, what would you rather pay? $19.95 for a broken cam, $29.95 for a failed light, or $59.95 for a combined unit even though only 1 item failed?
This is also the reason why I buy non PIR lights. I can buy a separate PIR for £7.98 and will inevitably go through several of these before the light fails. So if the light outlasts the PIR by 4 times, the cost is 1 light + 3 PIRS, vs 4 Lights with built in PIR. A PIR = £7.98 vs around £29.99 for the combined PIR + Light. Simple math (1 light £29.99 + (3x7.98) = £53.98 vs 4 x £29.99 = £119.96). What does you wallet prefer?
- Placing any light source, IR especially but also visible light, close to the lens can cause a flare or fogging effect off the lens and reduces the quality of the video capture massively. The best way to mount a light is a good distance away from the camera ie 5 or 6 feet and so it can’t cast stray light onto the camera lens (but pointing in the same direction). If you head over to IP cam talk, you can find several comparisons, especially with doorbell cameras, of built in IR vs separate IR emitter videos, and the same with floodlighting and it’s mounting relative to camera position.
Not sure where you are located, but separate LED floodlights are cheap to buy, very powerful and cheap to run. eg:
https://www.toolstation.com/led-ip65-slim-floodlight/p71754
I have many of these for different locations but the most powerful I’ve got is 25W and the least powerful 10W, although the 10W are run as multiple items with the aim of giving more even lighting in a certain semi-enclosed area. Really you want something 15W+ for standalone depending on the area / distance covered. A 25-30W LED has around the same light output as from a 300W halogen flood. You can’t really go wrong especially as LED flood lights are available in daylight / near daylight colour cool temps. Colour temp is important for CCTV as the camera can’t compensate for yellow lighting in the same way the eye can and a daylight lamp provides much better colour accuracy.
Overall, keeping the cam separate is a win win for many reasons.
2 Likes
I would personally love to see a hard wire adapter, so I can hard wire them into existing light circuits. I made mine from a Roku wall charger, but I would much rather buy them.
After seeing the Blink XT2 for $130 on amazon.ca, I am very excited to see what Wyze can produce. I am using this as a benchmark for an outdoor camera.
1 Like
One thing I’d like to add, if this is to be a new camera rather than as I understand it to be , a re-badged Chinese camera design as per the indoor Wyze, Wyze should consider if they can use a Sony IMX 291 STARVIS sensor within their budget. This is a 2mp sensor, that’s pretty old now, but gives one of the very best night time performances and a very good daylight performance. I don’t know what they cost now, but age is on their side. I’m sure most people would pay a little more for extra picture quality.
Of course there are better daylight sensors, especially the higher MP ones. However, this is at the expense of night performance and I doubt a top level eg 8mp sensor would be within Wyze’s low cost aims. Even that although far superior in daylight and for detail, especially on zoom, would be inferior at night.
I have some blink XT. Was going to get an XT2 just to see the difference but I think I’ll wait as it seems WYZE’s will be something similar.
A 2mp large pixel sensor should definitely be considered, or offered as an option.
Combined with a fast lens it would offer a much much better night-time performance.
And the day time picture won’t be any inferior either.
Such a combo would nicely work at night if assisted by a couple of low wattage porch lights without a need for any night-vision LEDs.
Another benefit is a full color picture at night instead of black-and-white.
2 Likes
I wouldn’t say an IMX 291 is large. However, it is very sensitive. It’s been the go to sensor for low light dashcams for some time now and many pro CCTV cameras such as Dahua’s ipc-hdw5231r-z.
However, equally we’ve got to be realistic here. Wyze are in the habit of producing a $20 camera. That’s a long long way from many products, even dashcams, using the IMX 291, in price.
Whether or not it’s viable therefore, I don’t know. Maybe Wyze might be able to produce a $40 outdoor cam with a 291. Maybe it will be just too expensive to fit into a product for their budget target audience at all, coming in at double that or more. I simply don’ know. However, it is worth a mention as a new product, especially if ground up, presents some opportunity for some change.
Another potential candidate has to be a possible re-cased / slightly redesigned Xiaomi Miija Dashcam. These reportedly use a MStar MSC8328P processor (formerly named the AIT8328P) paired with a Sony IMX323 CMOS sensor (from Dashcam Talk). They retailed for $80 in 2018. Unsure if these re-cased could be made cheap enough trade to give Wyze the necessary margins and a lower selling price, assuming Xiaomi were interested in partnering, but video is excellent day and night by all accounts for such a cheap cam. If they could be re-cased, the battery dispensed with in favour of soley a USB C power input, and the other Wyze features added within a still reasonable price, maybe they might be viable as a more or less off the shelf option for an outside CCTV cam.
I hope that you will have them operating for the cold winter temperatures in the Northeast and Central states.
I dont know if youve seen the netatmo presence. Its essentially the wyzecam for the camera. And has a floodlight on the top with extra IR lights built in. Its the best of both worlds combined. But the costs of the things are at $300 a piece.
Go check the thing out and then you can see what I am talking about. If Wyze could make something similar to it for cheaper than $300 bucks it would be a winner. The cameras are on par for sure. And the only thing would be a housing and light with a board to control the light on motion triggers? Its definitely doable for not that much. Heck it could even be done with 3d printing these days for cheap.