Tapo D225 Smart Video Doorbell Camera with Chime

Tapo D225 Smart Video Doorbell Camera with Chime Review

Brand: TP-Link
Released: July 2024
Updated: 2 weeks ago
4.0
Consolidated expert score
190
Review insights
49
Scored features
13
Expert reviews

Bottom Line

Choose the Tapo D225 if you want a high-value no-subscription doorbell with wide 2K video, local storage, and wired 24/7 recording. Skip it if bulky design, HomeKit, stronger night lighting, or true always-scroll CVR matter most.

Best for

Best for shoppers who want a no-subscription-friendly video doorbell with wide 2K coverage, local storage, phone-call answering, and the option to hardwire for pre-roll or 24/7 recording.

Not for

Not for buyers who want a small or refined-looking doorbell, Apple HomeKit support, RTSP streaming, stronger spotlight-based night performance, or charging without removing the device.

Verdict

Reviewers consistently frame the Tapo D225 as a high-value video doorbell because it combines sharp 2K footage, a very wide head-to-toe view, local microSD storage, free smart alerts, Ring Call, and wired 24/7 recording with pre-roll. The strongest tradeoff is that the hardware looks and feels large, and the best recording features depend on wiring and bypassing an existing chime. Night performance is useful but not flawless: infrared was praised, while the spotlight and color night vision drew mixed comments. Smart-home support is useful with Alexa, Google, Amazon routines, and Tapo’s ecosystem, but HomeKit and RTSP gaps limit advanced setups.

Compared in Reviews

Products reviewers directly compared with this model, grouped into quick takeaways.

D210

  • Worse: continuous recording completeness The Verge says the D225 gives a more complete event view than the D210.
  • Alternative: budget model The D210 is praised as a budget alternative, though the D225 remains the flagship with more features.
  • Alternative: battery-only use The reviewer says the D210 makes more sense when the buyer will only use battery power.

2K version of the second-generation Arlo Video Doorbell

  • More expensive: features and price PCMag says the D225 offers more features than Arlo’s 2K doorbell while costing less.

Google's Nest video doorbell

  • More expensive: 24/7 recording and pre-recording cost The D225 is framed as delivering Nest-like continuous recording value without paying for Nest’s top subscription tier.

Feature Scorecards

Summary

49 reviewed features
  • Very positive 4.5-5.0 31% 15 features
  • Positive 3.5-4.4 51% 25 features
  • Neutral 2.5-3.4 10% 5 features
  • Negative 1.5-2.4 8% 4 features
  • Very negative below 1.5 0% 0 features

Pros

  • 4.8
    based on 1 review
    Base / Hub integration: 4.8, based on 1 review
    The D225 earned praise for offering continuous/local-style functionality without needing a separate hub.
  • 4.8
    based on 1 review
    Complete kit in box: 4.8, based on 1 review
    The included hardware was praised as complete enough for installation without hunting for extra basics.
  • 4.8
    based on 2 reviews
    Delivery package monitoring: 4.8, based on 2 reviews
    Package monitoring was praised for keeping packages in frame and producing quick package-related alerts.
  • 4.7
    based on 11 reviews
    Subscription: 4.7, based on 11 reviews
    Subscription value was a major strength because smart alerts and local recording are largely available without mandatory monthly fees.
  • 4.7
    based on 9 reviews
    Field of view and framing: 4.7, based on 9 reviews
    The wide, head-to-toe field of view was one of the most consistently praised strengths across reviews.
  • 4.7
    based on 8 reviews
    Recording: 4.7, based on 8 reviews
    Recording was a headline strength thanks to wired 24/7 recording and strong clip controls, though one review found CVR not fully Nest-like.
  • 4.7
    based on 2 reviews
    Automation flexibility: 4.7, based on 2 reviews
    Automation evidence was positive, especially with Amazon/Alexa routines that triggered reliably and with little delay.
  • 4.7
    based on 2 reviews
    Peace of mind: 4.7, based on 2 reviews
    Reviewers connected the doorbell’s monitoring and communication features with added household peace of mind.
  • 4.6
    based on 6 reviews
    Power Options and Compatibility: 4.6, based on 6 reviews
    Dual-power flexibility was a major strength, especially for buyers who can hardwire while keeping battery backup.
  • 4.6
    based on 6 reviews
    Pre-roll buffer: 4.6, based on 6 reviews
    Pre-roll was praised for capturing context before motion and helping avoid incomplete event clips.
  • 4.6
    based on 6 reviews
    Phone call integration: 4.6, based on 6 reviews
    Ring Call was a standout communication feature because it made answering the door faster and harder to miss.
  • 4.5
    based on 8 reviews
    Storage: 4.5, based on 8 reviews
    Storage was a major strength, especially free local microSD recording and the ability to avoid cloud dependence.
  • 4.5
    based on 10 reviews
    Price and value: 4.5, based on 10 reviews
    Price and value were among the strongest themes, with reviewers repeatedly calling the D225 affordable, feature-packed, or a bargain.
  • 4.5
    based on 3 reviews
    System completeness: 4.5, based on 3 reviews
    System completeness was praised because reviewers saw the feature set as comprehensive for a doorbell at this price.
  • 4.5
    based on 10 reviews
    Recommendation for new buyers: 4.5, based on 10 reviews
    Reviewer recommendations were broadly positive, especially for buyers prioritizing value, local storage, and wide 2K coverage.
  • 4.4
    based on 8 reviews
    Video resolution and detail: 4.4, based on 8 reviews
    Video quality was consistently praised for sharp 2K detail, though one comparison found it close to the cheaper D210.
  • 4.4
    based on 5 reviews
    Notifications: 4.4, based on 5 reviews
    Notifications were commonly praised as quick, accurate, or relevant, with occasional false-alert caveats.
  • 4.4
    based on 2 reviews
    Personalization options: 4.4, based on 2 reviews
    Personalization was a positive, especially LED appearance changes and extensive app customization.
  • 4.4
    based on 2 reviews
    Theft and Tamper: 4.4, based on 2 reviews
    Theft and tamper protection was viewed positively because anti-theft behavior and reset protection were called out as useful.
  • 4.3
    based on 3 reviews
    Ongoing ownership costs: 4.3, based on 3 reviews
    Ownership costs were viewed favorably because local storage and optional subscription plans reduce recurring-cost pressure.
  • 4.3
    based on 3 reviews
    Reliability (general): 4.3, based on 3 reviews
    General reliability was positive, with reviewers reporting good performance and only a few hiccups.
  • 4.3
    based on 5 reviews
    Installation and Mounting: 4.3, based on 5 reviews
    Installation was mostly described as easy, though one reviewer was briefly confused by the mounting bracket setup.
  • 4.3
    based on 4 reviews
    Zones and activity areas: 4.3, based on 4 reviews
    Activity zones were praised for narrowing notifications and customizing alert types, though one review wondered whether the feature could be overkill.
  • 4.2
    based on 2 reviews
    lag): 4.2, based on 2 reviews
    Lag evidence was mostly positive when hardwired or integrated with Amazon, while battery mode showed more delay.
  • 4.2
    based on 2 reviews
    Quick-reply / pre-recorded message usefulness: 4.2, based on 2 reviews
    Quick replies were treated as useful for communicating when the owner cannot or does not want to talk live.
  • 4.2
    based on 2 reviews
    Security ecosystem integration: 4.2, based on 2 reviews
    Security ecosystem integration was positive, with reviewers pointing to Tapo’s broader ecosystem and smart-home connections.
  • 4.2
    based on 5 reviews
    AI features: 4.2, based on 5 reviews
    Reviewers liked the free AI detection and generally found smart detection strong, though one reviewer reported some false alerts.
  • 4.1
    based on 5 reviews
    Motion detection: 4.1, based on 5 reviews
    Motion detection was broadly seen as strong and quick, though false alerts kept it from being perfect.
  • 4.1
    based on 4 reviews
    Object and person detection: 4.1, based on 4 reviews
    Object and person detection was often praised for identifying people, packages, vehicles, or pets, but false alerts appeared in one review.
  • 4.1
    based on 2 reviews
    Privacy: 4.1, based on 2 reviews
    Privacy-related evidence focused on useful privacy-mode behavior rather than a full audit of data practices.
  • 4.0
    based on 4 reviews
    Audio: 4.0, based on 4 reviews
    Two-way talk was viewed as useful and clear overall, with one caveat that recorded conversation audio captured only the doorbell side.
  • 4.0
    based on 3 reviews
    Battery and Charging: 4.0, based on 3 reviews
    Battery life was praised as strong, but charging is less convenient because the whole doorbell must be removed.
  • 4.0
    based on 1 review
    Color options: 4.0, based on 1 review
    The LED color customization was treated as a small but enjoyable way to change the doorbell’s appearance.
  • 4.0
    based on 1 review
    Weather and temperature tolerance: 4.0, based on 1 review
    Weather tolerance had limited but positive evidence through CNET’s pro-level mention of the high IP66 rating.
  • 4.0
    based on 7 reviews
    Low-light and Night vision: 4.0, based on 7 reviews
    Night vision was generally useful, especially infrared or color night modes, but reviewers criticized weak spotlight illumination and color-night tradeoffs.
  • 3.9
    based on 4 reviews
    Chime: 3.9, based on 4 reviews
    The included chime was loud, customizable, and quick to set up, but Always On/CVR limits use of an existing chime.
  • 3.9
    based on 5 reviews
    Smart-home integration (Alexa, Google, Siri, HomeKit, Matter, Thread): 3.9, based on 5 reviews
    Smart-home integration was useful with Alexa, Google, Amazon, and Tapo, but HomeKit limitations reduced the score.
  • 3.9
    based on 5 reviews
    App, software and firmware: 3.9, based on 5 reviews
    The app was praised for useful controls, quick loading, and a nice interface, but reviewers also noted old-school setup, minor bugs, and app-fit caveats.
  • 3.7
    based on 2 reviews
    Light adjustability: 3.7, based on 2 reviews
    Light controls were useful, but color-night-vision lighting could add distortion and was not universally ideal.
  • 3.5
    based on 2 reviews
    Upgrade value vs previous model: 3.5, based on 2 reviews
    Upgrade value was context-dependent: the D225 is worth more for wired/CVR use, but less compelling if used only on battery.

Cons

  • 3.4
    based on 2 reviews
    Controls and indicators: 3.4, based on 2 reviews
    Physical controls were partly praised for reducing app dependence, but the doorbell button/icon visibility drew criticism.
  • 3.2
    based on 1 review
    Snapshot capture: 3.2, based on 1 review
    Snapshot capture was treated as optional rather than essential because the reviewer felt the camera loaded quickly without rich snapshots.
  • 3.0
    based on 2 reviews
    Lens distortion handling: 3.0, based on 2 reviews
    The lens was considered usable but imperfect, with reviewers noting fisheye distortion or soft edges.
  • 3.0
    based on 1 review
    Wi-Fi range and stability: 3.0, based on 1 review
    Wi-Fi evidence was limited and mixed because one reviewer flagged 2.4GHz-only support as a constraint.
  • 2.5
    based on 2 reviews
    Porch light brightness: 2.5, based on 2 reviews
    Porch/spotlight brightness was mixed to weak: it could be too bright close-up yet still insufficient for distant night detail.
  • 2.3
    based on 3 reviews
    Size and form factor: 2.3, based on 3 reviews
    Size and form factor were criticized because the unit is bulky, large, or a honker compared with some rivals.
  • 2.2
    based on 4 reviews
    Design aesthetics: 2.2, based on 4 reviews
    Design was the clearest aesthetic weakness, with reviewers calling it homely, garish, awkward, bulky, or not as nice looking.
  • 1.5
    based on 1 review
    Face recognition: 1.5, based on 1 review
    Face recognition was a weak point because reviewers explicitly noted it is missing.
  • 1.5
    based on 1 review
    RTSP stream availability: 1.5, based on 1 review
    RTSP was a downside because one reviewer specifically called out its absence.

Compared With Category Average

Compared with other Video Doorbells, this product is above average in Delivery package monitoring, Subscription, Recording, below average in Design aesthetics, Face recognition, RTSP stream availability.

Summary

8 compared features
  • Above average 0.4+ pts higher 50% 4 features
  • Same as average within 0.3 pts 0% 0 features
  • Below average 0.4+ pts lower 50% 4 features
Attribute This product Category average Difference
Design aesthetics 2.2 4.1 -1.9
Face recognition 1.5 3.3 -1.8
RTSP stream availability 1.5 3.3 -1.8
Size and form factor 2.3 3.8 -1.5
Delivery package monitoring 4.8 3.4 +1.3
Subscription 4.7 3.6 +1.1
Recording 4.7 3.6 +1.1
Pre-roll buffer 4.6 3.5 +1.1

FAQ

Does the Tapo D225 require a subscription?

Reviewers repeatedly praised that many core features do not require a subscription, including local microSD recording and smart alerts. Tapo Care is optional for cloud storage and extras such as rich notifications.

Is the Tapo D225 better wired or battery-powered?

Reviewers liked that it can work either way, but the strongest features require wiring. Hardwiring enables 24/7 recording, pre-roll, and less charging hassle, while battery use is simpler but less complete.

How good is the video quality?

The consensus is positive: reviewers praised sharp 2K video, good detail, and a wide head-to-toe view. Some also noted fisheye distortion or shadow/overexposure issues in harder lighting.

How well does it handle packages?

Package monitoring was a strength. Reviewers said the wide view keeps packages visible at the doorstep, and testing showed package alerts arriving quickly.

Does it work with Alexa, Google, or HomeKit?

Reviewers reported useful Alexa, Amazon, Google, and Tapo ecosystem support, including routines and smart displays. HomeKit support was repeatedly missing, which several reviewers treated as a drawback.

What are the biggest downsides?

The common downsides are bulky design, no HomeKit, no RTSP, spotlight/night-vision limitations, and the need to remove the unit for battery charging. One review also found Always On recording less true-continuous than Nest’s timeline.

Sample Expert Reviews We Analyzed

These are a few of the reviews included in our analysis.

Video Reviews

Article Reviews

Consider This Instead

If you want better RTSP stream availability

Choose Reolink Video Doorbell. It scores 4.5 vs 1.5 for RTSP stream availability, with a 3.8 overall score.

Compare

Overall Top Video Doorbells Alternatives

#1 Eufy 2K Video Doorbell S220
4.3

Good if you want sharp video, local storage and no required subscription. Skip it if you need 24/7 recording, flawless AI alerts, broad smart-home support or true six-month battery life.

Pros: Ongoing ownership costs, Privacy

Cons: Controls and indicators, Smart-home integration (Alexa

#2 eufy Video Doorbell C31
4.2

Good if you want an easy, no-fee doorbell with wired/battery power, local storage, and solid 2K coverage. Skip it if you need premium video bitrates, effortless chime coexistence, or built-in...

Pros: Wi-Fi range and stability, Ongoing ownership costs

Cons: Smart-home integration (Alexa, Google

#3 Eufy Video Doorbell Kit, C210
4.2

Choose the Eufy C210 if you want a no-fee, battery-friendly doorbell with local storage and good 1080p video. Skip it if you need hardwired charging, HomeKit, or consistently instant motion...

Pros: Ongoing ownership costs, Subscription

Cons: Wi-Fi range and stability, Chime

#4 Nest Doorbell Wired, 2nd Gen
4.2

Choose it if you want sharp HDR video, excellent smart alerts, Google Home integration and flexible zones. Skip it if subscription costs, a narrow horizontal view, wiring work or weaker...

Pros: Motion detection, Object and person detection

Cons: Storage, Field of view and framing