Compared with competitors, the Infant Optics DXR-8 has a more intuitive, easier to use interface, and the battery life on its parent unit (aka the monitor) lasted longer than on any other video option we found. On other requirements, it delivered as well as the best monitors we tried: It has an adequate range for home use, acceptable image quality, an ability to add on multiple cameras, and overall simplicity and ease of use with a minimum of annoying quirks. Most of its specific flaws concern battery life and charging, but this is a common problem among baby monitors, and the company has a good record of responding to customer service issues.

Reviews.com has an advertising relationship with some of the offers included on this page. However, the rankings and listings of our reviews, tools and all other content are based on objective analysis. For more information, please check out our full Advertiser Disclosure. Reviews.com strives to keep its information accurate and up to date. The information in our reviews could be different from what you find when visiting a financial institution, service provider or a specific product’s website. All products are presented without warranty.
Traditional video baby monitors don't offer the same high-resolution picture quality we're used to seeing on our smartphones and tablets. If you want high-resolution video of your baby, you'll have to go with a Wi-Fi monitor like the NestCam that streams video to your phone or tablet. The Phillips AVENT SCD630 video monitor may not be high-res, but it's the best of the bunch.
If you're looking for a smartphone-compatible baby monitor that's designed first and foremost to fill that role, Wirecutter calls the iBaby M6S (Est. $135) "the least bad Wi-Fi monitor (so far)," simply because it's "slightly easier to set up than its competitors." Once again, however, experts disagree: Baby Bargains says Nest Cam "runs circles around iBaby when it comes to set up and ease of use."
Like most other product review sites, ConsumerSearch is supported by a combination of commissions on the sale of the products we recommend and ads that are placed on our site by Google. If you find something you like, you can help support us by clicking through and buying the products we pick. Our editorial process is independent and unbiased; we don’t accept product samples, requests for reviews or product mentions, or direct advertising.
Wireless devices and dirty electricity are almost impossible to get away from in our current technological age, but it doesn't mean we can't take steps to limit the exposure to ourselves and our children. Even though the current evidence is somewhat conflicting, and shows we need more studies and research because the potential is there for harm, parents should make informed and thoughtful decisions regarding their children's exposure to potential health risks, especially given that their bodies are developing and more susceptible to this type of radiation. We can't say for certain that monitors pose a health risk, but we also can't say for certain that they don't. Given this information, we feel it is important to test and report on the EMF levels of each monitor so parents can decide for themselves which product fits in best with their goals and concerns.
If you sleep in the same room as your baby or live in a small enough space that you can always hear or see what your baby is up to, you probably don’t need a monitor. Otherwise, most parents enjoy the convenience a baby monitor provides—instead of needing to stay close to the nursery or constantly checking on your child, you’re free to rest, catch up on Netflix or get things done around the house during naptime. Monitors can also double as a nanny cam to keep an eye on your child and their caretaker.
×