Buying a Wi-Fi camera should be a household decision, with placement, usage, and viewing agreed on by everyone concerned.
This means deciding which camera is best for you may depend on how obvious you want it to be, and at what functions it excels, and what and when it records.
It’s basically useful only for live viewing, unless you pay for a monthly or annual subscription.
Also, some of the camera’s most useful features—like motion-detection algorithms and the ability to create clips and time lapses—can only be used if you’re a paying subscriber. As a freelance writer, I’ve covered technology for more than three decades and have attended more than 40 Consumer Electronics Shows (there used to be two CES a year).
I’ve written reviews, trend and marketing essays, and history pieces for more consumer, trade, and hobbyist publications, both physical and virtual, than I’d care to think about.
To name a few: Playboy, Rolling Stone, Huffington Post, re/code, NBC-Universal, CNET, Popular Science, e Bay, Mashable, Stuff, Ubergizmo, Tom’s Guide, Digital Trends, Laptop, Techlicious, and many others both extant and, well, un-extant.
A home security system, such as the ones The Wirecutter recommends here, or just some smart lighting, will do a better job of that.
In day-to-day use, your Wi-Fi camera will be more for home monitoring than home security.This was not an easy choice; at various points during our testing we considered three other models.The problem is that Wi-Fi cameras are not exactly TVs—you just can’t look at the picture quality and say “that’s the best” and be done with it.We found that you should expect to pay about 0 to 0 for a camera that has all the features you’d want: As we boiled down qualifying models, we also considered cloud recording optimal vs.local recording on a micro SD card—as noted, if someone decides to steal your camera, then they’ve also stolen any incriminating footage.We then set up each one to the same 2.4GHz Wi-Fi network, where possible.