Video transmission over UTP versus Co-ax

[Colin MacDougall]

Hi folks,

wonder if anyone could say what the better way to transmit a composite
video signal over a few hundred feet would be ? Normally I would use a
piece of RG59 co-axial cable but I have been reading of claims that
using
Cat 5 UTP cable with a passive balun at each end is the better way in
terms of signal loss and interference. I'm guessing the balun is only
to change cable impedances from 75 ohm (RG59) to 100 ohm (Cat 5).

thanks, Coda

 

[Jan Panteltje]

Hi folks,

wonder if anyone could say what the better way to transmit a composite
video signal over a few hundred feet would be ? Normally I would use a
piece of RG59 co-axial cable but I have been reading of claims that
using
Cat 5 UTP cable with a passive balun at each end is the better way in
terms of signal loss and interference. I'm guessing the balun is only
to change cable impedances from 75 ohm (RG59) to 100 ohm (Cat 5).

thanks, Coda

I would not say it is better, but I do have a small PAL camera via
cat5 and power too, with a local 7805 to regulate at the camera end.
Picture is OK, for such a small camera, never measured amplitudes or freq response.
It is about 20 meters only...
I must say, FORGET ABOUT COMPOSITE VIDEO, go digital, or in case of ethernet
cable get a camera with ethernet interface.
In a few years you will haldly be able to find a digitiser or even something with
composite in.
Your balun will reduce signal level, sucks.
Just use coax if you need the correct impedances, or you will need a video amp.