Arlo Essential Video Doorbell Wire-Free review: a bell full of advantages

Arlo Essential Video Doorbell Wire-Free review: a bell full of advantages

Advertisements

The wireless Video Doorbell seems to take over the camera from the wired model. Like him in any case, it produces images in a 1:1 ratio. An unusual, but sensible choice, as it offers in combination with the ultra wide-angle optics (180° diagonally) a wide vertical field of vision and thus allows you to see a person from head to toe with very little hindsight .

During our test, 60 cm was enough by installing the doorbell at a height of about 1.20 m, as the application recommends. This wide viewing angle is obviously interesting for parcel detection. Only Google’s Nest Doorbell (battery) really does better in our comparison with its 3:4 ratio, but by little.

On the definition side, three are offered: 1536 x 1536, 1088 x 1080 and 720 x 720 pixels. However, the lower the definition, the less the images are heavy and it may therefore be interesting to select a low definition to avoid saturating the memory card (with the optional base), as well as to limit live latency, but the quality image is then less. Arlo offers night vision, but also an always welcome HDR mode on a doorbell, as well as different brightness levels.

By day

The Arlo Essential Video Doorbell Wire-Free delivers great picture quality. The various elements that make up our test scene are captured with a satisfactory level of detail, even if it is not sufficient to distinguish the embroideries of our square of white fabric, for example. The faces in our portrait column are easily identifiable and our book cover is easy to read.



Google Nest doorbell (battery)
Advertisements


Arlo Essential Wireless Video Doorbell

Opposite, the Nest Doorbell (battery) abuses the accent to compensate for its low definition of 1280 x 960 pixels and give the illusion of a detailed image. However, the Google doorbell does much better on exposure. At Arlo, our test scene is totally overexposed. This certainly helps maintain good readability in dark areas of the image, but bright areas appear mostly burnt out. The brightness settings, however, partially correct the problem on our test scene, and we will add that we did not find it in a real situation.

By night

The infrared vision of Arlo’s latest doorbell is unfortunately not the most efficient. Exposure is less of a problem than with normal vision, but the image lacks sharpness and facial features stand out a little less well. The accent game of the Nest Doorbell (battery) ultimately allows it to offer more readable images – this is all the more true when viewed on the small screen of a smartphone – despite a level of detail inferior.



Google Nest doorbell (battery)


Arlo Essential Wireless Video Doorbell

This was also confirmed on our identification test, the Essential Video Doorbell Wire-Free Essential can make it difficult to identify visitors standing more than 1.30 m from the doorbell. The images from the Google doorbell had enabled us to identify a face more than 2 m away. In both cases, it is more than enough for a doorbell since you have to be in front to activate it.

On the other hand, it is a little fairer for video surveillance with motion detection. That of the Arlo doorbell is also quite effective: it was able to detect activity up to 6.30 m during our tests and a person up to 4.50 m. It’s even a little better than the Google doorbell, activities are no longer detected beyond 5.50 m with it.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.