New Camera Digoo DG-M1X

Hi, i’ve just bought a new chinese camera named Digoo DG-M1X

The camera is supporting Onvif, as soon as i try to add it to NetCamStudio through ONVIF the camera is found, after inserting the password also the list of profiles is popping up but after the confirmation i receive the error of Connection Failed.

Some hint?

Hi Cristian,

Don´t we all love these Chinese cams :slight_smile: Everything looks very promising. ONVIF set up the stream type to either rtsp over tcp or rtsp over udp. Probably this is the problem. When you have saved the configuration and get the Connection failed go back to the tab Custom URL. There you should have stream type and Address. Change the stream type to rtsp_tcp or rtsp_udp depending on what default is and save. I hope this helps.

Use the latest version 1.5.6 of NCS. Netcam Studio 1.5.6

The URL to the camera is
OR (quality difference)
You can add these manually in Custom URL and test with rtsp_tcp or rtsp_udp and see which one works.


Also try RTSP_UDP instead of RTSP_TCP because I do have a Digoo M1Q that answer RTSP negociation the bad way and say OK to a RTSP_TCP request.

Thanks, but that is what my text says :slight_smile:

oh yes sorry, was late when I read the message

1 Like

Hi all, thanks a lot for the hint, changing to udp let it works! Great

Good! Check if it is possible to change from udp to tcp in the camera. Problem with udp is that there is no error correction of the data tranmission. This inturn can cause a bad video in the end. Make sure you have good data connection.

No error correction is not the “real” technical explanation for TCP protocol but it explain itself :wink:

The main problem with UDP data streaming (among a few others) is that packets may come disordered and if the software do not manage to add itself some extra “order number” bytes in each UDP packet you may get corrupted image time to time because of a image packet will not fit the right position between the others.

But if you start to add more or less “control” bytes in your UDP packets then you go back to some TCP way of handling packet transferts and you start to loose a bit of performance that was the goal of UDP protocol :slight_smile:

The biggest TCP “slow down” being the acknowledge system that send back a small “OK I received your packet send next one” for received packet thus slowing down the whole transfert but making it fully reliable.

Since we are handling video here the packets must come in the correct order and that´s why it is more reliable to use TCP. This is a security system and therefore this is important. Since we are working with M/Gbit/s I don´t think that this “slow down” is that relevant today. Biggest reason why they still use UDP is that it is cheaper to implement in cheap cameras.

I am not trying to “sell” TCP vs UDP, I am just explaining the differences and for the “slow down” I am not talking about “pure speed” that may be reduced by a few more bytes in each packet, but some slowdown created by the round trip produced by TCP ACK management that can create bootleneck and many packet resend.

This is why UDP is often used in video streaming because “realtime” is more important than loosing/missordering a few packets that will create a few “scramble squares” on screen.

For example you may want TCP locally to get 100% good video quality but only UDP when viewing from mobile phone remotely.

1 Like

Hi, the camera is working well using the ONVIF trick you gave me. Pan and Tilt are not working, seems that they’re recognized but nothing happen trying to move the camera. Any hint on this?

Pan and Tilt have 2 different modes. None works?
How they work have changed. You need to hold down the button as long as you want it to move. Just a quick click will not work. Test if that is the problem.

Just bought this camera from Amazon to play with. It works good but a very serious security issue. Is has a telnet service running with root access. Just type "telnet " and then “root”. You are then allowed to do anything (including a potential hacker in your network).

So, I this camera should be avoided at all costs!
Read more about CVE-2017-8224 at
There might be other security issues as well on this camera.