Webcams

Webcam basics

USB webcams are low-resolution digital cameras that attach to your computer and display still images or live video streams. Webcams let you make short videos that you can e-mail to your friends, join in on video conference calls, direct and star in downloadable videos (commonly known as "video podcasts") or create a surveillance system. Reviews warn, however, that you shouldn't expect award-winning picture quality out of a webcam for either videos or still images.

Webcam resolution specifications can be misleading. Sometimes manufacturers cite interpolated resolution rather than optical (true) resolution. Most webcams have a native 640 x 480 pixel optical resolution, commonly known as VGA for video and still images. Higher-end webcams have a higher resolution 2-megapixel sensor, but not all make full use of it for video; some are capable of HD quality -- 960 x 720 pixels or higher (up to 1600 x 1200 on the newest models) -- while others capture video at 640 x 480, reserving the extra resolution for still images. The cheapest webcams have 352 x 288 resolution. As many cell-phone cameras have 3-megapixel resolution, you can get an idea of how much lower webcam resolution is.

Street prices for webcams commonly range from $20 to $130. The major difference between cheap, mid-priced and high-end webcams is that budget models usually don't have a microphone, and they feature less precise, plastic lenses, which reduce image clarity. Higher-end webcams also have video enhancement technologies, such as Logitech's RightLight2 technology, which automatically adjusts for light conditions, and RightSound, which filters background noise. They also usually come with built-in or headset microphones (often both).

System requirements are not very demanding. Most webcams require a Pentium 4 processor with 128 MB of RAM and Windows 2000 or newer; the newest webcams require Windows XP or Vista, so check the camera’s specifications if you are using a computer with an older operating system. All web cameras are compatible with USB 2.0, a connection that allows for faster data transfers than the old USB 1.1 standard. However, they are backward compatible if you have an old computer (pre-2002). Recently-released webcams are all compatible with Windows Vista, but cameras released more than six months ago are not consistently compatible with Vista; again, review system requirements carefully. Macintosh compatibility is a major issue, as discussed below.

Reviews say that most webcams produce choppy video-streaming at times, with audio and video out of synch. Higher frame rates help, but variables such as your connection speed (broadband is a necessity) and instant-messaging software can affect whether you end up with smooth video or a choppy image. Several reviews say Microsoft Live Messenger seems to deliver smooth video messaging more consistently.

Best webcams

If price isn't an object, reviewers agree that the Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000 (*est. $80) is one of the best performing webcams. In his review for PC Magazine, Rick Broida describes the image quality as "unsurpassed," and Frank Harrell at CowboyFrank.net writes that it "leaves the competitors dragging their cables in the mud." WebUser’s Andy Shaw points out that, combined with recent improvements in resolution available on video messaging services, the QuickCam Pro 9000 delivers "what’s effectively better-than-TV image quality to your internet communications."

One reason for that, reviewers say, is the superior optics; the QuickCam Pro 9000 has a glass Tessar lens with automatic focus designed by the Carl Zeiss company, worldwide leader in optical systems. According to EverythingUSB.com's Scott Clark, the glass lens improves clarity and takes in more light than plastic lenses. This minimizes exposure time and allows for higher frame rates. CNet.com's Matthew Elliot notes that the QuickCam Pro 9000’s images are "well-balanced, vibrant and clear … even in low light." He goes on to write that this newest webcam from Logitech produces better images than competing web cameras under any lighting circumstance.

The QuickCam Pro 9000 has an integrated microphone with echo-canceling and noise-reduction capability, and reviewers at Pocket-lint.co.uk and WebUser report favorably on the sound quality. Other features include a 2-megapixel sensor, a maximum optical video resolution of 1600 x 1200 pixels, 8-megapixel still images and a two-year warranty. The frame rate is up to 30 frames per second. The software also reviews well, and Benny Har-Even of Trusted Reviews -- who experienced a Windows Vista-related installation difficulty -- heaps praise upon Logitech for exceptional customer service (it should be noted that this is UK-based customer support, so the experience for U.S. customers could vary). On the downside, reviewers complain about the lack of Mac compatibility. Other complaints we saw are that the enclosed USB cable is too short for practical desktop use and that the face-tracking feature is occasionally delayed. Although this is one of the pricier webcams on the market, reviewers report that the QuickCam Pro 9000 is worth it for those who want the best image quality.

The Logitech QuickCam Ultra Vision Special Edition (*est. $110) also reviews well and was largely favored by reviewers prior to the release of the QuickCam Pro 9000. Though most reviews are actually of the original QuickCam Ultra Vision, the newer Special Edition is identical, save for a change in case color from silver and white to all black. Otherwise, the specifications, form factor, etc. are identical, according to Gundeep Hora of CoolTechZone.com.

CowboyFrank.net lists the QuickCam Ultra Vision as "2^nd Best Image," and Which? reports that it "boasts great video and sound quality" and "an excellent mounting mechanism." The Ultra Vision Special Edition features a wide-angle lens, which the Pro 9000 does not have, and a few additional convenience features such as snapshot and video preview buttons. Most reviewers, however, find it pales in comparison to the QuickCam Pro 9000, and it’s also the more expensive of the two webcams.

All credible reviewers who analyze and rate multiple webcams choose the Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000, Logitech QuickCam Pro for Notebooks (covered below with other laptop webcams) or Logitech QuickCam Ultra Vision Special Edition as the best webcam, with the large majority favoring the QuickCam Pro 9000 or QuickCam Pro for Notebooks. However, a few other webcams have some unique capabilities that might make them better suited to your use. For example, the Logitech QuickCam Orbit AF (*est. $95) has a desktop stand and ultra-wide-angle lens, as well as a mechanical pan and tilt. The Orbit has been revised twice without a name change. Most reviews are of older versions, and the Orbit does not impress reviewers as much as other Logitech webcams.

Logitech is one of the two major webcam manufacturers; Creative is the other. Most reviews say the Creative Live! Cam Optia AF (*est. $90) is Creative's best webcam, but -- as detailed above[JW2] -- it falls short compared to Logitech's best efforts. That said, as a generalization, reviewers do like Creative's software better than Logitech's and also prefer the "ball and socket" mounting system that makes it steadier and studier than Logitech and Microsoft webcams. However, reviews say image quality is just decent, and low-light performance is poor. Resolution is capped at 640 x 480 pixels.

We found several reviews that complain about bloatware in Logitech and Creative products. In particular, both brands install unnecessary startup items. We didn't find those complaints with other brands, but other brands are reviewed less often.

Microsoft’s LifeCam VX-7000 (*est. $60) has a 2-megapixel sensor and out-of-the-box integration with Microsoft Live Messenger. That automatic integration with Microsoft features is, generally, the only reason to choose this camera, according to reviews. Consistently, the VX-7000 disappoints reviewers, with complaints of grainy video, annoying software prompts and poor audio quality. One issue raised is this model’s clunky design: "The VX-7000 camera might as well have ’keep me stationary’ stamped on it in big red letters," says EverythingUSB.com. Poor video performance -- classified by Rick Broida at PC Magazine as "jerky" and "lifeless" -- is another complaint. Overall, Microsoft’s newest desktop webcam is dismissed over and over by reviewers as unable to compete with other, similarly priced options. A typical conclusion is that of Andy Shaw at Britain's WebUser, who encourages readers to choose a different product.

The HP Elite Autofocus (*est. $100) is one of the newest webcam contenders. Webcam enthusiasts are buzzing about this release, which is just reaching buyers hands at the time of this update, as HP is promising a product that can take 12-megapixel still images, has a 3-megapixel sensor and is priced to compete with the Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000.

HardwareGeeks covers the Elite in a lengthy and well-detailed non-comparative review. Blogger Michael writes that the webcam itself is "fantastic," with "crystal clear" images (after some tweaking of settings). He does complain about the bundled ArcSoft software, however, and ultimately opts not to install it at all. Reader responses generally agree with the review; many users write that HP’s Elite and Logitech’s QuickCam Pro 9000 webcams offer similar image quality, but Logitech supplies superior software. Readers also comment that at default resolutions, the QuickCam Pro 9000 outperforms the Elite, indicating that for less savvy users who may not be comfortable adjusting settings, the Logitech webcam will deliver a better experience.

Budget webcams

Reviewers describe the best budget webcams (typically in the vicinity of $40) as "adequate" or "acceptable." Video and still image quality are noticeably inferior to the better webcams. The image quality can be grainy, streaming is more likely to be choppy, and the webcams may not show intelligible images in very low light or extremely bright light. In a well-lit room, quality can be very good, however. Budget webcams usually do not have a built-in microphone, and some don't even come with a headset microphone. You'll need to buy a microphone, or use one you already have. Budget models lack image and sound enhancement features as well as advanced features, such as face tracking and remote monitoring.

The Logitech QuickCam Communicate STX (*est. $45) earns lukewarm praise from most reviewers, who generally describe video quality as "decent." Even so, reviews say the Communicate STX webcam is the best choice in its price range and a vast improvement over lower-resolution webcams.

Logitech revised the QuickCam Communicate STX without a name change, so we only relied on the most recent reviews to draw conclusions. Reviews at WebUser and Consumer Guide rate it slightly above average. Frank Harrell at CowboyFrank.net chooses the Communicate STX as the best webcam under $50, but this report consists only of a brief list of features. Reviewers express the same major criticisms. The fixed focus is a problem; users need to be able to make adjustments. Image quality is average. On the plus side, reviewers note that an integrated microphone is a bonus in this price range. Most reviews say that a headset microphone will sound better, but the Logitech webcam's built-in microphone isn't too bad, and it's nice to have the option of skipping the headset. User reviews are largely positive, however, indicating than many users may not care that much about getting the best images and sound.

An even lower-priced option is the Hercules Deluxe Optical Glass (*est. $25) . There are few reviews available on this model; the best is by Rick Broida for PC Magazine. This particular webcam review is re-published on numerous enthusiast sites and weblogs, and it accurately conveys the feelings of users who contribute to consumer review sites such as PriceGrabber.com. Though far from a competitor to upper-end webcams, the Deluxe Optical Glass delivers good performance for the price and is packed with surprising features. Broida writes that it is innovatively designed and sturdy, adding that it’s equipped with a glass lens, integrated microphone and headset, all of which are pleasantly surprising pluses in this lowest-budget range. Even more surprising, he notes that the audio quality on the Deluxe Optical Glass is just as good as in higher priced models.

When it comes to video performance, however, the Deluxe Optical Glass shows its bargain roots -- the manual focus is difficult to use and image quality is not great. Even so, the Deluxe Optical Glass is a good option for occasional users who want a simple, low-priced webcam.

Webcams for Macintosh

Apple used to make a great webcam, the Apple iSight. However, Apple now integrates webcams into all but one of its consumer-model computers. That, combined with Apple's market share, leaves little incentive for third-party manufacturers of standalone webcams to create Macintosh drivers. If you plan to upgrade to a new iMac or Macintosh laptop in the not-too-distant future, your best bet might be to wait, since you'll likely get an integrated webcam in your new Apple laptop.

If you want a Mac-centric third-party webcam, the Ecamm Network iMage USB webcam (*est. $60) is one choice. The diminutive webcam doesn't require a driver. However, it doesn't include a microphone and isn't compatible with all Macintosh applications. Ars Technica reviewer Jeff Smykil says, "In artificial lighting at 640 x 480, the image quality is poor at best." Other reviewers don't disagree, but they do point out that the price is fairly low and that Mac users have few alternatives.

Another alternative is called "macam." This is a freeware driver that makes most USB 2.0 webcams compatible with Mac OS X. We didn't find any professional or user reviews. The site also maintains a listing of which cameras work (or should work) with the driver.

Some people claim that webcams that meet the Universal Video Class (sometimes labeled UVC) standard required for Windows Vista will work with Macintosh systems. Some users of the MacInTouch forum experienced success with new Logitech webcams. Others had trouble or found they only worked in some applications. User expertise and comfort in locating and installing drivers appears to be a factor. Older Logitech webcams are compatible with Macintosh computers; check eBay or similar sources for a used model.

Laptop webcams

Most web cameras come with a little stand that allows you to place it on your desktop or on top of your monitor. For use with a notebook computer, you may want a USB web camera specifically made for laptops. These webcams come attached to a clip that's intended to hook onto the top of your laptop. Many standard webcams, such as the Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000, can hook or clip on top of a laptop. On the other hand, notebook-specific webcams are made to attach more securely and easily, and they are smaller and lighter than their desktop counterparts. Traditionally, standard webcams have produced much better video quality than laptop webcams. A new generation of notebook webcams is turning tradition on its head, however, and is delivering performance equivalent to or better than many upscale desktop models.

According to reviews, the Logitech QuickCam Pro for Notebooks (*est. $75) is the best webcam for laptops and gives even the best standard webcams a run for their money. No other model earns as much recent support from reviewers. Logitech has revised this webcam with a very minor change to the name (QuickCam Pro for Notebooks vs. QuickCam for Notebooks Pro), so older reviews are less useful. Everything USB.com has an outstanding comprehensive review that is illustrated with webcam photos and screenshots, and it favors the QuickCam Pro for Notebooks over standard desktop webcams from Creative and Microsoft.

The QuickCam Pro for Notebooks is nearly identical to the QuickCam Pro 9000 in terms of specifications. It features a 2-megapixel sensor, glass Carl Zeiss Tessar lens, the ability to capture video up to 1600 x 1200 resolution, various software effects and both RightLight and RightSound technology. The differences between notebook and desktop webcams are in the size and mounting mechanisms -- the QuickCam Pro for Notebooks has a clever attachment clip that maximizes maneuverability on a notebook or LCD desktop monitor. It also comes with a stand for desktop use, though reviewers warn that the USB cord is too short for most desktop users.

Earlier versions of the Logitech QuickCam for Notebooks Deluxe (*est. $40) and entry-level Logitech QuickCam for Notebooks (*est. $30) did not impress most reviewers, though the Deluxe did score fairly well with Amazon.com customers. Both models were refreshed in the last year, but bear the same name. Improvements include enhanced audio noise suppression and a snapshot button. In addition, the Deluxe now sports a glass rather than a plastic lens. Frank Harrell comments that with Logitech, you generally "get what you pay for," and according to reviews, this holds true for their notebook webcams. The newer version of the QuickCam for Notebooks Deluxe is an improvement over the previous incarnation, but it delivers poorer video and audio quality than the QuickCam Pro for Notebooks. However, it is also significantly lower in price and may be a good option for budget shoppers.

We also found quite a few reviews of Microsoft’s laptop webcam, the LifeCam NX-6000 (*est. $55) and a few solitary comments on the newly released LifeCam NX-3000 (*est. $40) . VideoCallTips.com rates the NX-6000, along with other desktop Microsoft models, as mediocre, with the comment that there are better webcam models from Logitech and Philips available in the same price range. Laptop Magazine’s review of the NX-6000 finds that the webcam is difficult to maneuver, produces bland colors and experiences video delays. Additionally, the special effects are described as "boring and generally juvenile."

CNet.com covers the new LifeCam NX-3000, one of the few review sites to do so. Matthew Elliot is unimpressed, finding that it "delivers acceptable video quality and little else." Like Microsoft’s desktop models, the NX-3000 (and NX-6000, for that matter) is optimized for use with Microsoft services such as Live Messenger. This is convenient for Microsoft purists, but most reviewers find the barrage of prompts to install Microsoft programs to be bothersome.

Elliot complains that the NX-3000 requires manual adjusting for image quality and that image suffers in low-light conditions. Yet he also reports that with some adjustments, the video output is superior to that of the Creative Live! Cam Notebook Ultra, though still far behind the Logitech QuickCam Pro for Notebooks. Similarly, Frank Harrell at CowboyFrank.net writes that the NX-3000 is a better option than Creative’s notebook webcams, but not as good as Logitech’s models. Harrell adds that he prefers Microsoft’s higher-end NX-6000 to the new NX-3000, describing the NX-3000’s output as "fuzzy."

Creative's top portable webcam, the Creative Live! Ultra for Notebooks (*est. $65) is not highly recommended in any credible review. The Live! Ultra for Notebooks has a 640 x 480 pixel sensor, which positions it below the top Logitech and Microsoft models. Professional and user reviews cite problems with the software, with many users at Amazon.com and CircuitCity.com saying they couldn't get the webcam to work. The Live! Ultra for Notebooks has a wide-angle lens. It doesn't have an integrated microphone, but you do get a headset.

Surveillance webcams

Surveillance cameras are only marginally consumer products, which is why they are not reviewed by the mainstream media or most websites devoted specifically to webcams. These specialty products have a network interface and software that enables using them to monitor a home or other site from a remote location via the Internet.

We checked reviews of a couple of entry-level network webcams and found that they generally work poorly. D-Link and Linksys have good reputations for their networking hardware, but their entry-level network webcams appear to be difficult to set up and use, with inadequate video quality, according to professional reviews. The D-Link DCS-6620 (*est. $630) and 6620G Internet Cameras (*est. $680) and Linksys WVC54GC Wireless-G Internet Video Camera (*est. $110) both draw lower average ratings in user reviews than the cheapest regular webcams. The best reviews recommend that if you want a webcam for monitoring, you need to step up to a professional product.

Important Features: Webcams

Here's what the experts say to consider before buying a web camera:

• The standard resolution is 640 x 480 pixels for video. That resolution is just fine for video, e-mailing and posting on the web. The web camera should include software to help you present and adjust the picture. Some webcams can take stills at as much as 8 or 12 megapixels, but video is often capped at 640 x 480. That resolution works well for video. Anything higher could be a huge drain on your processor, and some people may find they need to reduce resolution for this reason. A few webcams are capable of capturing video at up to 1600 x 1200 pixels.

• The frames-per-second (fps) rate determines how quickly a webcam can capture and move video. The fewer frames per second, the choppier the picture. Full-motion video is generally 30 frames-per-second. Due to the limitations of most instant messaging software and servers, however, models that claim 30 fps or more usually get about half that in practice.

• Keep in mind that webcam video is limited by the speed of your Internet connection and instant messaging servers. Streaming video works best with a high-bandwidth DSL or cable connection. Even then, transfer rates can be further limited by instant messaging servers themselves. Several reviews say Microsoft Live Messenger is better than others for smooth video, and we found some good reviews of Skype's video-chat service.

• Some webcams include focus dials and lens covers, as well as pan, tilt and zoom capabilities. Also, if your computer doesn't have a microphone, be sure your Webcam includes a built-in microphone or comes with a headset. Most do.

• Almost all webcams come bundled with video-conferencing software, such as Microsoft Live Messenger, Yahoo Messenger or AOL Instant Messenger. Most packages also include software for video editing, surveillance, stop motion, video conferencing or e-mail.

• Webcam designs vary by manufacturer. Some have a swiveling base and some can be attached to a tripod. The traditional "eyeball" shape seems to be giving way to more oblong models that mimic the form of a camera. Any web camera should allow you to tilt and pan, either manually or mechanically. Laptop webcams are smaller, and in general, they don't let you tilt and pan.

Our Consensus Report shows how many times products are top-ranked by reviewers included in our
All The Reviews Reviewed chart.

# of Picks	Model (With Retailer Links)	Details from Amazon.com
7	Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000 (*est. $80)	details
4	Logitech QuickCam Pro for Notebooks (*est. $75)	details
2	Logitech QuickCam Ultra Vision Special Edition (*est. $110)	details
2	Logitech QuickCam Communicate STX (*est. $45)	details
1 each	Microsoft LifeCam VX-7000 , Philips SPC 900NC, HP Elite Autofocus

Logitech webcams easily dominate in reviews, and the latest Logitech QuickCam Pro 9000 gets the best reviews in recent coverage. Reviewers agree that it produces the best video quality and more than justifies its higher price. With several models available at a higher price point but with poorer reviews, the QuickCam Pro 9000 also proves itself a good value at its current price.

In reviews, Creative webcams generally fall short. In all price ranges, Logitech webcams are judged better, according to reviewers who have recently compared products from both brands. Microsoft Webcams receive mostly poor reviews, and opinions of Philips webcams are split, with some reviewers finding them close to top Logitech models and others panning them entirely. It remains to be seen whether HP’s new Elite Autofocus webcam will give the company an edge in the webcam market, though the low-quality third-party software currently seems to be undermining the camera’s performance promises.

Sponsored links