Ezcap HD Video Capture device any good? HDMI/Component

[ezcapper]

http://www.amazon.com/Capture-ezcap-Video-1080P-Recorder/dp/B00KMTYPXC/ref=sr_1_2?ie=U...d+game+capture
I am thinking about buying the above device. It is a very reasonable price, does anyone know the max bitrate of the captured hdmi/component video? thanks.

edit: I'm guessing it's 18mbps. It looks like the same device as this, they just added one extra logo on the side:
http://www.amazon.com/AGPtek-YPBPR-Recorder-Capture-Device/dp/B00MXK8SGS/ref=pd_sim_sb...RS2QMDNEQHDM5V

[usually_quiet]

I can't find any additional information about the device other than what is listed here on Ebay. Apparently it is HDCP compliant, so you would need an HDMI splitter that removes HDCP as a side effect if you plan to record from an HDCP protected HDMI source.

It is an unknown quantity, so buying one would be a gamble. Since Amazon isn't the seller, Amazon's return policy won't apply if you don't like it. In addition, there is no manufacturer support, and no warranty if it dies an early death. [Edit] Since the seller ships directly from China, returning it is likely going to be a problem or rather expensive.

[ezcapper]

Thank you for the reply, usually_quiet! Those specifications were exactly what I was looking for, it does do 18mbps. Looks like a good deal for $90, especially in combination with this ez cap component/composite dongle (ezcap pro 148) that seems to be getting good reviews:
http://www.ebuyer.com/247092-ezcap-148-usb-video-capture-pro-ezcap148
The dongle model is the ezcap 148. The h264 box model with hdmi support is called the ezcap 280, the splitter you mentioned is called the ezcap 81022.
http://www.szforwardvideo.com/article_read_310.html
http://www.szforwardvideo.com/article_read_342.html
http://www.szforwardvideo.com/article_read_247.html

[usually_quiet]

All the devices you are promoting are typical cheap crappy Chinese knockoffs with pirated software, no manufacturer support and dubious quality. People who buy them are generally disappointed. You know the old sayings: "You get what you pay for.", "Fools and their money are soon parted." and "If it looks too good to be true, it probably isn't." That is what I think about these products. My opinion of shills who use this forum as a cheap way to advertise their employer's products is even more negative.

[ezcapper]

I found the ezcap 280 on aliexpress for $67 free shipping, couldn't resist and ordered it. http://www.aliexpress.com/item/1-pc-Newest-HD-TV-Video-Capture-EZCAP-Black-1080P-Game-...034312978.html A generic version of the component/composite dongle is in the mail too, but I'll probably order the 148 as well, I'll let you know how they work. At that price, the 280 is half the price of the PVR rocket, and they seem like very similar devices. I have no need to capture protected sources, so didn't order the splitter. Now the only thing they need to make is a lossless hdmi dongle and their gift to humanity will be complete, haha.

[jagabo]

I think it's pretty obvious ezcapper is a spammer.

[Hoser Rob]

Spam, spam, spam, spam,
Spam, spam, spam, spam,
Lovely spam, wonderful spam (spam, spam, spam) ....

And, he or she is so moronically obvious the product name is in the login name.

WE'RE NOT THAT FRAKKING STUPID HERE.

[usually_quiet]

Yes, ezcapper is another dishonest Chinese shill promoting inferior products to the unwary.

[ezcapper]

I'll post an unboxing video when I receive the devices and post sample capture videos on youtube when I get permission of the local channels in South Bend, Indiana. I just happen to love ezcap devices because they have worked for me in the past and are cheap.

[usually_quiet]

I'll post an unboxing video when I receive the devices and post sample capture videos on youtube when I get permission of the local channels in South Bend, Indiana. I just happen to love ezcap devices because they have worked for me in the past and are cheap.

More lies from a professional liar.

[ezcapper]

I know you think I'm a liar because they have a bad reputation, but I don't understand why. For use as a casual dvr, they are great and the cheapest. I think alot of people bashing them have not seen videos. I have an outdated generic version of the dc60 with only composite input (Now $7 on Ebay), and even that produces good enough video for my needs (noncommercial simple dvr). Can't wait until the newer input versions arrive in the mail. Here is a sample video from the outdated dc60 knockoff. It's pretty much just a hit record video, no special settings or post processing, I don't see anything wrong with it. I use the free version of the PICMJPEG codec and Virtualdub.
http://youtu.be/55QAcT7trS4

[TreeTops]

I read somewhere that EZcap was a knockoff of EasyCap. Or is it the other way around? One is legitimate the other not. But I could be wrong as I could no-longer find the source of that posting.

[usually_quiet]

I know you think I'm a liar because they have a bad reputation, but I don't understand why. For use as a casual dvr, they are great and the cheapest. I think alot of people bashing them have not seen videos. I have an outdated generic version of the dc60 with only composite input, and even that produces good enough video for my needs (noncommercial simple dvr). Can't wait until the newer input versions arrive in the mail. Here is a sample video from the outdated dc60 knockoff. It's pretty much just a hit record video, no special settings or post processing, I don't see anything wrong with it. I use the free version of the PICMJPEG codec and Virtualdub.
http://youtu.be/55QAcT7trS4

Some members here have seen the captures from the generic Easycap devices. The general consensus here is that they are rubbish. If you are not a liar knowingly promoting bad products to the uninformed, then you yourself are both ignorant and unobservant. Fortunately for the people who come here looking for advice, the membership here is generally pretty discriminating when it comes to video. Generic Easycap = generic crap.

Nobody can do an accurate assessment of a capture device from YouTube video. YouTube butchers uploaded video and the processing they do conceals artifacts.

[DB83]

Official EasyCap changed their name to EZcap due to numerous fakes.

There is no mention of this product on the Official EZcap site.

[usually_quiet]

I read somewhere that EZcap was a knockoff of EasyCap. Or is it the other way around? One is legitimate the other not. But I could be wrong as I could no-longer find the source of that posting.

ezcap.tv claims ownership of the EzCAP name in the US and UK. There are many generic devices using a variation of that name. The actual hardware inside the enclosure varies, but none of the generic products includes any manufacturer support, including driver downloads, and the provided software is unlicensed.

[ezcapper]

Just to be clear, this is the version I have:
http://www.amazon.com/EASYCAP-Audio-Video-Capture-Adapter/dp/B0019SSSMY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=...ywords=easycap
It comes with software that is not pirated. I called the software maker myself to double check. There is a registration code with the software, Honestech TVR 2.5. I don't use that software though, because it makes you use their codecs. Virtualdub is the simplest and best. My point is just that for a certain demographic (like myself) these devices are great, especially when using picmjpeg at the default setting. It's better than recording tv with vhs tapes like we used to do forever. My goodness, its just $7, I'm really confused why people think this is a ripoff or the devil or something, and I have the "worst version" (usb007). People say it doesn't work with windows 7, it does. They say it doesn't record audio, it does just fine as long as you aren't blasting the volume. People say the software is pirated, its not. People say the output is unwatchable, it's not. There's nothing whatsoever wrong with the device at that price.

[usually_quiet]

Just to be clear, this is the version I have:
http://www.amazon.com/EASYCAP-Audio-Video-Capture-Adapter/dp/B0019SSSMY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=...ywords=easycap
It comes with software that is not pirated. I called the software maker myself to double check. There is a registration code with the software, Honestech TVR 2.5. I don't use that software though, because it makes you use their codecs. Virtualdub is the simplest and best. My point is just that for a certain demographic (like myself) these devices are great, especially when using picmjpeg at the default setting. It's better than recording tv with vhs tapes like we used to do forever. My goodness, its just $7, I'm really confused why people think this is a ripoff or the devil or something, and I have the "worst version" (usb007). People say it doesn't work with windows 7, it does. They say it doesn't record audio, it does just fine as long as you aren't blasting the volume. People say the software is pirated, its not. People say the output is unwatchable, it's not. There's nothing whatsoever wrong with the device at that price.

The product description for your link says nothing about Honestech. It says Ulead Video Studio 8.0 SE DVD, a very old program, from a company acquired by Corel in 2006. More misinformation, what a surprise. People must be catching on that it is $7 wasted on a piece of junk, and sales are falling off. Hence the need to send someone to shill here.

[Edit] Honestech TVR 2.0 is also a long-discontinued product. There is no Honestech TVR 2.5 listed on Honestech's website. I have read statements from Honestech regarding their software being included with some of these devices. They say something like "It's our software but we don't provide support because it has been customized by the people distributing it. " I suspect they are tip-toeing around the piracy issue because they buy hardware from the Chinese to bundle with their own products and can't afford to offend them by telling the truth.

The demographic is mostly people who have no money, young and old. Separating poor folks from the little money they have is a long standing tradition among shady operators.

[turk690]

Just to be clear, this is the version I have:
http://www.amazon.com/EASYCAP-Audio-Video-Capture-Adapter/dp/B0019SSSMY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=...ywords=easycap
It comes with software that is not pirated. I called the software maker myself to double check. There is a registration code with the software, Honestech TVR 2.5. I don't use that software though, because it makes you use their codecs. Virtualdub is the simplest and best. My point is just that for a certain demographic (like myself) these devices are great, especially when using picmjpeg at the default setting. It's better than recording tv with vhs tapes like we used to do forever. My goodness, its just $7, I'm really confused why people think this is a ripoff or the devil or something, and I have the "worst version" (usb007). People say it doesn't work with windows 7, it does. They say it doesn't record audio, it does just fine as long as you aren't blasting the volume. People say the software is pirated, its not. People say the output is unwatchable, it's not. There's nothing whatsoever wrong with the device at that price.

without missing a beat

[Brad]

I actually agree that the video quality is "adequate", if you get the thing to work. Chroma is misaligned in both directions; casual viewers won't notice.

But you may want to visit an audiologist. Your sample contains an annoying noise throughout, around 8 kHz.

[ezcapper]

ok, the ezcap 148 which includes component input came in and I love it. For my preferences, the quality is much better than the Hauppage PVR Rocket, will post comparison files this wknd. The problem with the rocket is that the faces are pixelated at a distance when it is a very complex frame because of the baseline h264 compression. The MJPEG compression you can use with the ezcap produces a smoother picture at similar bitrates as the maximum quality of the PVR Rocket. But I'm wondering if the ezcap will accept video from HD sources by downscaling the resolution or not accept it at all and just display a black screen. I do not have any HD channels so I cannot test it, does anyone have one of these devices and tested it? Thanks.

[jagabo]

Capture from a Blu-ray player, or upscaling DVD player.

[ezcapper]

Sounds good, thanks. Just ordered $35 one off of ebay.

[jagabo]

Keep in mind that Blu-ray and DVD players will require HDCP when playing commercial discs. So you need to play non-commercial content or use an HDCP stripper.

[usually_quiet]

ok, the ezcap 148 which includes component input came in and I love it. For my preferences, the quality is much better than the Hauppage PVR Rocket, will post comparison files this wknd. The problem with the rocket is that the faces are pixelated at a distance when it is a very complex frame because of the baseline h264 compression. The MJPEG compression you can use with the ezcap produces a smoother picture at similar bitrates as the maximum quality of the PVR Rocket. But I'm wondering if the ezcap will accept video from HD sources by downscaling the resolution or not accept it at all and just display a black screen. I do not have any HD channels so I cannot test it, does anyone have one of these devices and tested it? Thanks.

A shill setting up a test that makes the product he is promoting appear to be the better one, what a surprise. Comparing your new EzCrap 148 (SD component video capture only) with the HD-PVR Rocket is like comparing apples and oranges. Your contention is EzCrap products are as good or better than similar device that cost more. If you are going to compare an EzCrap 148 to HD capture devices, compare the EzCrap to an HD component capture device that outputs uncompressed video. Say, the Blackmagic Intensity Pro or the AVerMedia AVerTV HD DVR C027.

[ezcapper]

ok, the ezcap 148 which includes component input came in and I love it. For my preferences, the quality is much better than the Hauppage PVR Rocket, will post comparison files this wknd. The problem with the rocket is that the faces are pixelated at a distance when it is a very complex frame because of the baseline h264 compression. The MJPEG compression you can use with the ezcap produces a smoother picture at similar bitrates as the maximum quality of the PVR Rocket. But I'm wondering if the ezcap will accept video from HD sources by downscaling the resolution or not accept it at all and just display a black screen. I do not have any HD channels so I cannot test it, does anyone have one of these devices and tested it? Thanks.

A shill setting up a test that makes the product he is promoting appear to be the better one, what a surprise. Comparing your new EzCrap 148 (SD component video capture only) with the HD-PVR Rocket is like comparing apples and oranges. Your contention is EzCrap products are as good or better than similar device that cost more. If you are going to compare an EzCrap 148 to HD capture devices, compare the EzCrap to an HD component capture device that outputs uncompressed video. Say, the Blackmagic Intensity Pro or the AVerMedia AVerTV HD DVR C027.

I can't test the two devices you mentioned because i have a laptop without an express port or usb 3.0. Plus the EZCap 148 was $20. So I could buy it without thinking too much. My eyes at a casual glance can't tell the difference between the original video and the capture, but I'm sure if I analyzed it carefully side by side I could.

[usually_quiet]

So what? Every member participating in this thread knows that devices that hardware encode provide convenience and smaller capture files at the expense of some quality, and often cost more than those that provide uncompressed output and use software for encoding. Your comparison is a stunt designed to make an impression on people that your employer wants to persuade to buy their cheap wares. I'll bet your stealth advertisement on YouTube won't mention the disadvantages of using such a product. Namely, losslessly compressed or uncompressed capture files are very large and hardly anyone wants to keep them in their original format. They have to be re-encoded to their end format, which requires extra time and more effort from the person using them.

BTW the two devices I mentioned have a PCI-e interface and are for desktop PC use. While there are similar devices from these companies that have ExpressCARD or USB 3.0 interfaces, I did not mention them.

[ezcapper]

I'm not sure I understand the file size argument. When I use MJPEG, the video bitrate is about 18mbps. With the h264 box, the max bitrate is 18mbps. The file sizes are very similar. Recording below that with either does not give good enough quality for me. If you reencode either, the result is not very good, so with either, it is best to keep the original file. H264 especially is not considered an intermediate codec, so I would imagine there would be more quality loss on the second encode. If I have time, I will do a second reincode test. I will use the program SUPER. There is a big difference between the EZcap 148 type devices than the dc60 type. Alot of the color problems mentioned earlier have been fixed

[usually_quiet]

I'm not sure I understand the file size argument. When I use MJPEG, the video bitrate is about 18mbps. With the h264 box, the max bitrate is 18mbps. The file sizes are very similar. Recording below that with either does not give good enough quality for me. If you reencode either, the result is not very good, so with either, it is best to keep the original file. H264 especially is not considered an intermediate codec, so I would imagine there would be more quality loss on the second encode. If I have time, I will do a second reincode test. I will use the program SUPER. There is a big difference between the EZcap 148 type devices than the dc60 type. Alot of the color problems mentioned earlier have been fixed

First you aren't capturing SD video at 18 mbps using the Rocket. If the Colossus is any example it won't let you do that.

Second, the Rocket isn't designed to do lossless H.264 encoding, which would be equivalent to lossless MJPEG. It was made for a different purpose. People buy something like the Rocket that does H.264 hardware compression precisely because they want to use H.264 for smaller file sizes, and don't want to re-encode. They almost certainly want to use High Profile, not Baseline Profile, and they would probably not try to use 18 mbps average VBR or CBR unless they were recording HD video.

Only a moron, or you apparently, would buy the Rocket intending to capture SD video using a H.264 baseline profile at 18 mbps average bitrate or constant bitrate. You are only doing a quality test against the Rocket because your intent was to create a skewed result for the purpose of deceiving the public.

A valid quality test would be a comparison between your EzCrap 148 and another device that could employ the same kind of MJPEG compression. A valid quality test would be to use your EzCrap 148 and H.264 software compression in real time with similar settings to those normally being used by the Rocket. ...but you aren't interested in performing a valid quality test, only a test that makes the product you are trying to sell look better.

[squallmx]

I actually interested on the ezCap 280, but the lack of samples is discouraging...

Seems to be a clone of the "Hauppauge HD PVR Rocket Portable Stand Alone" minus the PC Mode, same features, same maximum bit-rate (18 mbps), same output format...

[ezcapper]

I'm not sure I understand the file size argument. When I use MJPEG, the video bitrate is about 18mbps. With the h264 box, the max bitrate is 18mbps. The file sizes are very similar. Recording below that with either does not give good enough quality for me. If you reencode either, the result is not very good, so with either, it is best to keep the original file. H264 especially is not considered an intermediate codec, so I would imagine there would be more quality loss on the second encode. If I have time, I will do a second reincode test. I will use the program SUPER. There is a big difference between the EZcap 148 type devices than the dc60 type. Alot of the color problems mentioned earlier have been fixed

First you aren't capturing SD video at 18 mbps using the Rocket. If the Colossus is any example it won't let you do that.

Second, the Rocket isn't designed to do lossless H.264 encoding, which would be equivalent to lossless MJPEG. It was made for a different purpose. People buy something like the Rocket that does H.264 hardware compression precisely because they want to use H.264 for smaller file sizes, and don't want to re-encode. They almost certainly want to use High Profile, not Baseline Profile, and they would probably not try to use 18 mbps average VBR or CBR unless they were recording HD video.

Only a moron, or you apparently, would buy the Rocket intending to capture SD video using a H.264 baseline profile at 18 mbps average bitrate or constant bitrate. You are only doing a quality test against the Rocket because your intent was to create a skewed result for the purpose of deceiving the public.

A valid quality test would be a comparison between your EzCrap 148 and another device that could employ the same kind of MJPEG compression. A valid quality test would be to use your EzCrap 148 and H.264 software compression in real time with similar settings to those normally being used by the Rocket. ...but you aren't interested in performing a valid quality test, only a test that makes the product you are trying to sell look better.

Okay i posted the comparison files. A couple things you mentioned should be corrected a little bit. The Hauppage can do 18mbps on the max setting, but it only captures VBR so it varies a little based on the source file, but is always close to 18 (16-19mbps) on the max setting, which is labeled 18mbps. It cannot record higher than the h264 baseline profile.

I went ahead and did your "valid quality test" and set the ezcap 148 settings as similar to the rocket as possible. But I have a 5 year old laptop with a processor 1/5th the power of modern day intel core i5 etc processors, so I could not encode the audio in realtime. I will concede that the audio might be a little better on the hauppage, I can't tell much of a difference. In my opinion, this isn't as good of a test as the MJPEG one, because encoding with h264 in realtime, I had to use all the lowest quality settings (ultrafast baseline 3.0) just to get it not lag.

I did 18mbps. I captured a 5 minute clip from a feature film called Valkamma. It is Creative Commons license Share Alike. I tried to include a portion that had motion (the car scene) and faces at a close, medium, and far distance. The ezcap file is very slightly bigger because mostly because the audio is not compressed. Both the files look poor to me, but I slightly prefer the ezcap to the rocket. For example, when it cuts to the young man on the bench, the rocket file has his face very pixelated, but the ezcap file looks more like a human face. I think most people would say that the ezcap file looks a little better.

The ezcap can produce much better quality files at this bitrate by using a different codec. MJPEG is much lighter on the cpu and produces a much better picture quality at these bitrates. The rocket is set to it's highest quality settings and the ezcap is set to it's lowest. For my money, the ezcap still has better picture quality.

I also included an optional 4th file that shows the composite input quality of the generic 148, from a football game on tv, encoded realitime with your h264 18mbps valid quality test settings. I did this to show that they have improved composite input quality quite a bit since the d60. Remember the 148 is a $17 device.

Rocket file (720.56mb):
https://depositfiles.com/files/a9no729ey

Generic version of EZCAP 148 file (748.77mb):
https://depositfiles.com/files/jdwbquzy1

Original video clip:
https://depositfiles.com/files/8zir00o24

COMPOSITE input generic version of ezcap 148 (1min from football game 138.54 mb):
https://depositfiles.com/files/7vr3pikby

obviously, there is no postprocessing or editing on any of the files.

To squallmx, do not fear my friend. My ezcap 280 is in the mail, I will post sample videos when I get it. I'm hopeful that the ability of the 280 to accept a 2 amp power supply will allow it to record directly to my toshiba canvio external hard drive. The hard drive fails with the rocket, which can only accept a 1 amp power supply.