I have had issues before trying to connect devices over WIFI, it seems complicated (even though its not) and has never worked for me before. I have a mobile broadband from telus, tried to use an ethernet cable to connect to a PS3 for internet. The devices recognized eachother and I was able to share files, tried internet never worked.

Everytime I try using wifi to connect devices, they never work. I have very bad luck trying to connect devices with WIFI and I wouldn't be surprised if it happened again. If I can get a transmitter with enough frequency difference and many channels, would I be seeing much interference. Also the recieving end of the camera needs to output in AV cable to attach to the small LCD screen that I will be attatching to a box casing with the receiving XBee and possibly a reciever inside, with antennas sticking outside.

I like the idea of wifi, but I am really worried about it not working, and 650 ft wont be enough, that is 225 m. Only twice the distance of the EZ-B camera I already have. The idea is good, I understand your point with wifi channel separation, but at 225 m it isn't worth spending all that money. Plus I will still need an ad hoc adapter.

I think a transmitter with enough channel separation will be my best choice, as for I can get 1000 m out of them. The one that I have been looking at has the same frequency as XBee but also has 4 channels. I am not sure if that is enough though.

Here is something that I would consider, just the frequency might not let this one work. If I can find a similar product to this with a difference in frequencies but similar size, shape, etc, I would trust that it would work. Also here is the camera, which is very cheap.

I am really sorry but WIFI doesn't sound very satisfying, and outputting to a computer isn't going to help me out with the LCD screen issue.

Its up to you. Take in mind 600 ft is two football fields , do you really need more than that? Well anyways goodluck

OK I totally understand what you mean by 2 football fields, yes that is a lot of distance. There is absolutely nothing wrong with IP Cameras, I have no disrespect for them, as for they work great for many people, and hold many good characteristcs. As for interferance is not an issue when using them, which is very good. My problem more stands my history with WIFI and that it would output in USB and not AV.

Thanks for pointing me out to them, as well as notifying me that the connection between the two could effect one another (XBee and trasmitor). Do you think I will be safe with the one shown, or more frequency separation? If not, will a lower frequency XBee make it better or worse? (does it matter which device is higher or lower from 2.4GHz)

If you need to run two long range devices close together it is best the frequency is not close together. So yes a lower frequency xbee and 2.4 GHz camera is a better combination.
https://www.sparkfun.com/products/9099 ZigBee PRO 900mhz with small antenna connector for long range up to 6 miles

Another ZigBee 900 MHz with wire antenna https://www.sparkfun.com/products/9097

Both support 128 bit Encrypted link at 256kb serial link

Although if I use a 2.4GHz XBee I can change the channel to anything between 2.4GHz and about 2.48GHz, There are at least 15 ch, see here. If I change the channels on the cheaper XBee Pro ZB enough, will this stop interference? If so it will be half the price. As for the 900's are more expensive, but travel at far distances, distances I don't even need. I have a tough time buying more than what I need, so will the ch on XBee as well as the 4 ch on the transmitter be enough, or should I be buying an XBee Pro 900 MHz?

Also here shows the ch and conflicts between them. If I change the ch to 25 (2.475 GHz) or 23 if what I buy is not new enough (2.465 GHz) I think I would be fine, as for it has no conflict. But Clearing this up would be good, will this be enough?

So how far do you "need" and is it line of site or is it possible there could be buildings or trees in the way? The thing about buying wireless is they rate the product on the max it could perform in a laboratory setting. That means no interference, no trees, no sun radiation , perfect world. When you add those factors the reliable distance plummets. Anything other than open line of sight with no obstructions will cause a drop.

I would like to be close to 1 Km, at least 500/600 m, the WIFI gave 600ft (roughly 200 m). The XBee Pro ZB gives 3.2 Km in a "Perfect World", but even if it only performs a third of that I will be happy, that is why I don't want to buy a 900 GHz as for it is way more than what I need (24-50 Km). All I need is the XBee Pro ZB if interference is not an issue.

On the web site that I found the XBee has 25 channels that it can go on, And you can set it up to automatically go to available channels within the min and max range that you wish. If I set it up to stay a few channels above the transmitter (2.4GHz) Do you think I should be OK? As for the transmitter that I showed you is very small and has a 1000m range in a "Perfect World". But I know that it decreases dramatically as walls become a factor, that is partly why I want it high, as for i will be a fair distance but metal walls will be close by. It will mainly be outside but objects will be around it.

Basically I will be in a truck controlling my robot that is outside (truck has walls, and radio-waves (will shut it off)) my robot will drive across a smaller field to where a well site will be held. It then goes into a metal building and checks the H2S levels from my H2S monitor. If there is H2S, I encourage not to go in there, if levels are clear then it is OK to go and work in there.

The reason you want 900 MHz is that most the long range cameras will not automatically signal hop and they have a wider frequency. So anyways if its going into buildings 900mhz has 3 times greater building penetration. Its ideal. Well it look like you have all the information , next step is to buy some equipment... Have fun