AD410 lens issues with IR

[Revo2Maxx]

@GaryOkie
So looking into the issue of the Amcrest AD410 I think I might have found the issue.

Before that I was wrong about what I thought I remembered seeing the inside and it only having 1 Cap on a pair of wires. I WAS WRONG. It's just like the Lorex 2k camera and infact has a battery.

With that out of the way.

Taking my AD410 apart there is even in my camera an issue where the rubber seal is not placed right. It is also glued in place. So is the Lorex so I am clear, however even on my AD410 the glue is not placed well. Looking at it you can see it's pulled to one side of the housing.

20221227_232327.jpg (600.52 KiB) Viewed 549 times

20221227_232332.jpg (514.8 KiB) Viewed 549 times

[GaryOkie]

Hey Revo - thanks for the teardown! Yeah, I was quite sure the build and all components were the same in both, but glad you confirmed it.

A potential rubber seal or camera lens misalignment was the key suspect in this. So you've confirmed the seal isn't sealed very well. I'm having a hard time seeing exactly what you seeing from these pics. I assume the lower pic is the Lorex (white case) and the seal looks even all around where it borders the metal octagon/IR housing.

On the AD410, I can see a gap in the outer ring, but I don't see how that would emit light into the camera lens which I assume fits inside the black rubber tube seal.

I've made a copy of your top pic, rotated to show where the 2 IR LED's are located under the metal plate. I've highlighted in yellow where I see a small gap. Is this the area you are talking about not being sealed? Or is it the purple area?

ad410-bad_lens_seal.png (1.04 MiB) Viewed 545 times

[Revo2Maxx]

So in the area of the 1 Red Dot only is the area that I have that is pulled down from the glue. In the event other cameras were made with same type of issue and the lens is going though the camera it may be able to pick up IR because it might be fed through the rubber boot to far..

I hate to say it from what I see from both the Lorex and the Amcrest there is no way from the IR glass to reflect into the camera under the IRC. IF the camera happens to be mounted and pushed into the Rubber boot once the PCB is screwed into the housing there is no way there would be a gap. However in both the Lorex and Amcrest there is some Kapton tape on the IRC motor. Strange that on the Lorex one it has the start of a roll left on the section they installed LOL... I mean it is only 1/4" or less but to me that is just bad taste..

So that brings up 1 thing even though I just said I hate to say.. There is only 1 other thing that could cause it. Kapton tape if it was mounted in a way that it was holding the IRC lens mount away from the camera PCB enough and the light was reflecting back though the IR lens.. By the way it looks black but is really a Red Lens.. To make things worse the red lens is none reflective so I don't know where the IR back feeding could come from.

So how could someone test?

That is a very easy thing to do. The Rubber boot is easy enough that someone with the issue could cut a piece of paper like 20lb printer paper and wrap the paper around the ring so the lens it not able to see past the paper. (Best to use a Black or dark paper) and if the IR issue is still there then it will rule out being the outside lens area..

I really think it is outside lens issue. The camera can see 164degrees if I remember the specs right. That is very wide.

In closing, The Yellow area you colored, is in the other side of the IRC Kapton tape. Can IR Bend yes, can it sneak in there maybe. However I don't think it could get past that then around the Cameras lens mount to the other side of the camera and under the IRC motor to where it could then hit the Kapton Tape to keep traveling to the sensor. There is just to much bending and Refracting for that to happen.

20221228_013754.jpg (438.73 KiB) Viewed 542 times

[Revo2Maxx]

And before I get slapped by someone that knows more about UV and IR then I. I do know that Kapton tape will block UV light However I am not a light expert and don't know if Kapton tape would help IR to pass or not. So again is something that I see, I know that if it was UV then there is no chance. IR I am not so sure.. Just saying things that I see that could be an issue but again with 2 sides having a Reflective issue on both sides of the camera from Kapton Tape that is under the IRC, that is under the IR Board that is through the so on so on and on, I don't think that would be the issue..

For someone with the Glare best to do the paper test to see if that blocks the IR. I personally think it is from the front of the camera.

[GaryOkie]

So did this AD410 you took apart have the IR flaring issue? If so, how about reassembling the doorbell, taping over the external lens to cover the IR's and only leaving the circular camera lens unblocked. Then take a selfie with a mirror or other nightvision camera (with IR OFF) to see if there is any brightness in the center area. It theoretically should be all dark.

Here is a pic from an Amazon Review where someone had this issue with 3 different AD410's he returned. The originals are here: https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-revi ... B091KMT9GB

Since SmartHome improperly stretches the image to fill the phone screen, I shrunk the sides to a normal 4:3 aspect...

Dual IR Flare.png (198.09 KiB) Viewed 537 times

The two bright lights on each side are the internal IR LED's, NOT lights out in the yard. Crazy.

What I still can't get my head around is why the flaring doesn't just fade across the entire image sensor. How can there be such a sharp vertical cutoff to clear? Before now, I thought the curvature was due to the round rubber gasket edge, but now I see that the curve is mostly or entirely an artifact of the fisheye effect.

Probably no point in digging into this further. I would much rather have Amcrest step in and explain the situation and quit selling this batch of defective units.

EDIT: I took the trouble of counting the number of times this issue has been posted here, Reddit, HA, & ipcamtalk, plus counting the total number of returns, and came up with 25 instances of defective AD410's being reported - all since September 2022. Surely the actual number is a lot higher.

[Revo2Maxx]

I agree the number must be a lot higher..

About the LEDS. that is going to be clearly an issue with the IR from the outside. There is 0 way that it would be able to look like that being bounced back into the camera through the Kapton tape and be 100% perfect dual dots on either side.

If I had to guess this is an issue with Lens type that is used. They are curved and even looking at my footage when I had my doorbell mounted on the front of the house you can tell it was bending. The picture isn't like it would be with a normal flat lens.

About the camera, No it is my camera I took off the house. Even though the snow is still out the weather is much better and no longer -29f outside. So I went out and took my AD410 off the house so I could look at things to try and find out why.

My camera worked and while it might not have been that great with the quality of others my camera worked in IR without any IR lights hitting my lens.

About the Flaring.

Ok so it is kind of hard to explain what I am going to try and explain.. SO here it is.. 1 the LED that is on the right side of the picture is from the left side of the camera and same for the other side. What is going on is the IR is being picked up reflected off the inside of the lens and that is why there is a Flare from top to bottom. Curve of the lens. The front most out point of the lens is the Center, then the lens is picking up left IR and put it on right of the then the curve seen is the rim of the lens.. If you look at this not so great picture of IR night you can see the curve in the lens and even at day time but this is a night issue so night picture.

Also one last thing.

With AD410 if there is anyone with that issue with IR, Please make a Ticket with Amcrest for replacement as they can give a Replacement that don't have that issue. Where if they just return and get a new one from Amazon there is no way they could just give from a different Man Date until that stock is removed/replaced. Amcrest can and would pull from a good date of stock.

Screenshot (3782).png (1.53 MiB) Viewed 533 times

[GaryOkie]

Thanks Revo - your analysis does make sense.

BTW - I'm not so sure Amcrest can ship a good/tested unit via a ticket/RMA process.

If you read the Amazon review (link above) he said:

I've returned the item and bought another one. The second one had exactly the same issue (second photo), Amcrest support is helpless and ping me back between RMA and Houston Escalation Team. They are also unable to send me a working unit, verify it before shipment or anything like that. So it seems that to get a working unit will be a trial and error adventure.

[Revo2Maxx]

I personally can't say. I was passing on what I was told.

[GaryOkie]

For anyone who has an AD410 with this IR glare issue - there is a "patch" that was just discovered last night!

Not a patch in the software sense, but literally a small patch of electrical tape on each side of the protruding camera lens dome.

The camera dome is supposed to protrude only very slightly from the outer flat red IR lens cover, but apparently on many newer AD410's the lens dome is protruding too far.

Credit due to cybermage over in the ipcamtalk forum who discovered this simple solution to this defect. https://ipcamtalk.com/threads/new-amcr ... ost-730094

Please post back if this fixed the nightvision problem for your AD410 and if you came up with a more esthetic way of covering the lens sides.