Canopus ADVC 110 or Canon HV40 for Best Capture

[jaydub]

I have three questions:

1) I have a JVC SR-VD400U DVHS VCR and a Canon HV40 camcorder. I can capture analog video from the VCR to my PC using the camcorder's pass-through function with DVIO capture utility, and the capture is pretty good. My only issue is that there is no s-video port on the camcorder, so I have to use composite. Would an Canopus AVDC 110, which has s-video, provide a discernably better capture?

2) Also, all current model camcorders, except semi-pro or pro models, only have a composite port for analog video, no s-video port. Is it just a cost-cutting measure, or has it been determined that DV doesn't really benefit much from s-video? I find it odd that a $1,300 camcorder wouldn't have s-video, just composite.

3) Lastly, marketing materials at the time said my VCR had time base correction. Specifically, the color brochure, which is still on line at JVC says:
"TBC and 3-Dimensional Digital Noise Reduction for Pristine Analog-to-Digital Dubs.

When dubbing, the high quality digital dubs can actually appear to surpass the original’s quality. It applies Frame Synchronization to correct frame crossover jitter and Time Base Correction to precisely stabilize the video signal to conform accurately to the NTSC signal standard. Its Motion Compensating Noise Reduction is a new 3-Dimensional Digital Noise Reduction that cleans both still and moving parts of video pictures of noise without afterimages and ghosting".

However, my manual makes no mention of any time base correction or DigiPure (series 7000/9000 manuals do) and there certainly is no TBC on/off button. Does anyone know the real story on this?

[2Bdecided]

I have a Canon HV20 and an ADVC110. The composite input of both devices has the issues you'd expect: fine luma detail (from S-VHS) gives rise to rainbow colours and/or dot crawl. The S-video input of the ADVC110 is appreciably cleaner.

If there are no fine details, you're unlikely to spot the difference.

The HV20 treats the analogue signals in a completely different way from the ADVC110 - the ADVC110 seems more accurate, the HV20 seems more forgiving.

I wouldn't dream of using the composite input, and I wouldn't dream of capturing without a TBC.

I've no knowledge of your VCR - I assume it's not one of the DVHS models that can do DV-out from VHS then?

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
David.

[jaydub]

If you wouldn't capture via composite, how would you get DV from the camera tape on to an S-VHS tape? Capture digitally to the PC, then out to the tape player via ADVC 110? Why is the TBC a must when using a ADVC 110. It's not like I'm dealing with some old, crummy VHS recording. I would think the DV tapes would transfer well without the need for a TBC.

[2Bdecided]

You've lost me. I thought you were transferring (S-)VHS > PC? That was the question I answered.

DV>S-VHS?! I don't shoot DV any more, but when I did, it went into the PC via Firewire to a DV-AVI file. I've never had a reason to copy it onto S-VHS. Of course you don't need a TBC with a digital source.

If you're talking about watching it from the camcorder, then yes, S-video is better than composite. Component is better than S-video. HDMI is better than component. Decent modern camcorders usually have the last one or two of those so don't need S-video. If your TV only has S-video + composite, then yes, you're now stuck with a lower quality composite connection only.

Cheers,
David.

[yoda313]

To add to 2bdecideds list do you have a standalone dvd recorder by any chance? If so there is a 99% chance you have a dv input jack on it. That way you should be able to watch it "live" from the camcorder. I don't know if models let you do that without having a blank disc for recording or not. Its something to consider anyway.