Arlo Pro 3 VS Ultra/Ultra 2

[Allen012]

Hi,

I'm looking for some feedback on those that have used the Pro3 vs the Ultra or Ultra 2 regarding motion detection to alerts being received by smartphone.  I've got the Pro3 and I'm noticing a significant lag time from the time motion is detected to the time an alert is sent to my phone and even then the recording is catching the person walking away and missed the first half of the motion event.  Is there a significant difference between the Pro3 and the Ultra regarding the lag time (considering both cameras are the same distance from the base station).  Is the Ultra better at detecting motion earlier?  Lastly, has anyone used the Arlo security light with the Pro3 and does this aid in detecting and recording motion earlier?  Thanks for any advice.  

[jguerdat]

I've seen no issue between the Ultra and Pro 3 as to motion detection. Have you adjusted the motion sensitivity in your modes and rules? Since you're not getting the first part of motion that you want, it sounds like the camera should be positioned differently. Read the FAQ here in the support section about camera positioning. Motion needs to be across the FOV, not at the camera. Post a screenshot of the camera view for suggestions.

I've used the lights with earlier Pro cameras but not the Pro 3. The cross-triggering worked well for me. Again, the ability to detect the motion properly is  the key - if there's no way to reposition the camera, using the light could solve the issue.

[Allen012]

jguerdat, thanks for the feedback.  Yes, I'm able to move the camera, but it creates other problems.  For example, I've got a camera that is on my house facing the driveway and centered on the driveway which as I've read makes motion difficult for the camera to sense as the person or car is coming right at the camera.  If I move the camera to either side of the house so it has more of a cross sectional view of the driveway then the person walking is much further from the camera and harder to zoom in on if I want to identify them such as a break in so it creates a whole separate issue.  It also makes it impossible to see a license plate.  Whats worse, having the camera too far, but sensing the motion or having it right on the subject, but sensing motion late?  Hard to say.  Either way you'd think Arlo would have modified their software/algorithms to improve the motion capabilities of the camera as this is a massive issue for almost everyone purchasing these expensive cameras.  Although companies like Nest use pixel movement it has its advantages and catches motion much earlier, but sacrifices clarity such as 1080 vs 2k/4k.  Makes one wonder if there's a way to combine to two technologies to get max benefit.  I'm not a software engineer so who knows?