Does the Arlo system record more than one camera at a time?

[COGuy14]

I just purchased the Arlo 3 camera system.  I really really want to like this system, but so far been a bit frustrating.  The lag in recording is crazy.  I have one set up in the basement, very close to the base and in a very "optimum" location (cross view to the room, 8 feet high, pointed slightly down, etc).  But I can walk across the room and into my office and by the time the recording starts I'm already in the office and it catches nada.  If I was a criminal, I could walk to my office without getting recorded, take whatever I wanted (while the camera records an empty room for 2 mins), then walk back outside and the camera would capture another 2 minutes of an empty room.  I have a very fast internet connection and very good wifi router.  If this continues I will return soon.

But, I digress - my original question is....  Does the system record simultaneously from multiple cameras?  My downstairs camera was recording activity (ie - kids) playing in the basement but at the same time somebody walked in the upstairs main floor through the living room and into the kitchen but nothing was recorded from that camera.  Is this normal?  Is this a limitation?  I tried looking through the manual but didn't see anything obvious around this.

Thanks!

[TomMac]

Does the system record simultaneously from multiple cameras? 

Yes it does.... Don;t know why you had an issue, but mutli cams recording is not it

[steve_t]

I agree that the lag of the Arlo HD is terrible. The Arlo Pro has pretty much no lag and IMO is more than worth the extra cost.
Is your internet upload speed quite fast? I would wonder if that might limit the number of simultaneous uploads.
With my system, I have some cameras that not only record on motion but trigger other cameras to record as well so definitely more than one camera can record at the same time.

[COGuy14]

Thanks Steve - good point.  Didn't think about the upload speed.  I ran a few speed tests and my download is ~170Mbps and upload is around 23Mbps.  I'm thinking that should be fast enough.  

I've been toying with the camera position but the lag is still unacceptable.  I'll probably end up taking them back, too bad since I got a pretty good deal at my local big box store.  I may try the Pro, not sure yet.  I tried a couple of "cheaper" cameras I purchased from Amazon (which I returned and purchased the Arlo system).  They weren't completely wireless, had to plug them into an outlet, but I now realize how 'good' they were.  No lag, no motion issues, local storage (they could store lots of videos locally on a SD card), etc.  Their app/interface wasn't as nice as Arlo's but they worked much better.  

[COGuy14]

Oh, and one more thing - there's no way I'm purchasing more cameras just to sense motion and start the recording for other cameras!!  Not sure how that makes any sense at all.  

[steve_t]

---

wrote:

Oh, and one more thing - there's no way I'm purchasing more cameras just to sense motion and start the recording for other cameras!!  Not sure how that makes any sense at all.  

---

Yep. I wouldn't buy more Arlo HD to make up for the lag now there are better options in the Pro and Pro 2 but back a few years ago, it was the best way to get good coverage. And of course the additional camera is also recording video, not just working as a motion sensor. 

Definitely look at the Pro if you're going wireless. I'm sure many online reviews will tell you it's 1000x better than the Arlo HD in every aspect

[jasonx101]

Most of us have been saying they need to come out with a cheap motion detector that works with the system. So it could be placed anywere, and can trigger a camera that is in a different position to the motion detector.

It would also allow recording from inside a window for those who want to record in daylight or have good nightlight outside.

The new arlo light is close to this but still a bit too expensive, when what we really need is a cheap as chips MD.