Analog to Digital - wich's better?, a DigitalCam or ADVC-100

[LordVader]

Conecting analog sources to Digital camcorders, and transfer this trough the firewire, could be a better way to convert do digital ?

Should i use a hardware like ADVC-100, or my digital cam does the job even better ?

[indolikaa]

I use the DV Passthru on my Digital8 camcorder, and I'm happy enough with it that I didn't order the Canopus. I myself would be interested in knowing what advantage you gain with the Canopus.

[LordVader]

i should save my money, then.

i still don't know wich are the advantages.

The only problem that i see very relevant, is that i guess the advc is designed to be always on without any problem.

That's not good for a camcorder to stay always ON.

But if the quality is good :P , i guess i can use that method for now

[Towncrier]

I've only used the Canopus and have nothing but good things to say about that device. No audio sync problems. No sync problems (tearing) with the first few lines of the captured image. Well worth the money spent.

Besides, my wife wouldn't let me buy a new digital camcorder.

[wwaag]

I have both and only use the ADVC-100. The main advantages I see are locked AV (no loss of sync problems) and removal of macrovision. I also have a Sony GV-D200 (Hi-8 DVR) which has pass-through. After about 45 min, it loses sync to the point of becoming virtually "unwatchable". If you search the forums, you'll find that this a commonly reported problem although others have reported it works OK for them. There are also "color differences" between the two--the Sony tends to produce less vivid, washed-out colors (less saturated) than the Canopus. For these reasons, I would suggest that you go with the ADVC-100 if your budget allows it. Just my nickels worth.

wwaag

[vhelp]

Hi guys..

My two cents is like this..

I would spend the $$$ for the ADVC-100 because it was ment to be a
die-hard (so to speak) for constant use, while the DV CAM proves worthy
for such a task, at the $$$$ of it, I would not rely on it indefinate, and its
not worth getting another one if it breaks down on you shortly after buying
it in the first place.

I'm on my 2nd DV CAM, Sony TRV22, and am very happy w/ it. Xcept,
that I had a bout w/ it, cause I sliped in some sticky tape and it cause me
some issues (not palying video etc) but I fix it, but needs to be serviced
professoinaly. Anyways..

The only time when I would use my TRV22 for any DV transfers, is after I
had some some footageing, and I leave my ADVC-100 for everything else.

There is so much uses for the ADVC-100, I just can't go listing them all
here. They've already ben through all that, spead accross many threads
on these FORUMS

I don't like the idea of using a DV cam for these sort of things, unless you
only have a DV cam, and nothing else. Otherwise, I would not recommend
forcing so much stress on a DV cam. I know, I know.. some of you guys
have PASS-THROUGH. And, thats great, but you're still stressing out your
EXPEN$$IVE device through everyday use.

Well, something to think about, and consider
-vhelp

[TheGr8Steve]

If you want to save a buck or two, (besides using your camcorder), you might look into the datavideo DAC-100. I'm sure the Canopus is a micron or two better, but without somekind of electronic readout, I don't know that you would be able to see the difference. I picked one up on Ebay for $184. including shipping charges. I've been completely happy with it. The audio and video stay sync'd up, it looks really good. (I hear it looks a lot better than the 'Dazzle' converters, richer more natural colors, but I haven't personally compared them with each other.) and the icing on the cake is that it doesn't seem to know what 'macrovision' is. So copy away. PS: S-video in/out, RCAs for video and audio in/out and (2)two-IEEE1394 jacks that can be used in or out. The only bad thing I can say about it, is the cheap plastic case that houses everything. (came with cables too.)

[wwaag]

Agree with Vhelp 150%. In addition to the GV-D200, I also have a TRV-30 that has pass-through--great camcorder which I would never use for analog capture. Why put the "wear and tear" on a very expensive camcorder whose service charge for repair would likely be more expensive than the ADVC-100 in the first place? Camcorders were NOT designed to be A-D converters for use over extended periods of time, i.e. repeated long captures. Just another 5 cents.

wwaag

[Hazza]

Although I don't disagree with the consensus here I must say that the MiniDV camcorders do at least as good a job with analogue->digital conversion as the ADVC-100. I borrowed a ADVC-100 from a friend to do a side by side test and I must say that although the ADVC was a smidgeon cleaner it was very noticeably darker than the capture from my TRV22 using the same video. So I decided then that I wouldn't consider one.

Also having done about 30 hours of conversion so far I have never had any audio sync problems with the 22 (this includes some high quality captures from Star Wars Trilogy Surround Sound VHS tapes for conversion to DVD). Also I disagree that it puts anywhere near significant wear on the camera compared to using it as a video camera, especially if you make sure there is not a tape in when you do your conversion. There is absolutely no mechanical usage at all as far as I am aware when using passthrough (except maybe the lcd if you preview while you capture).

Also this camera does remove macrovision just as the ADVC does. At the end of the day if you don't have a DV passthrough camcorder (and don't need one) then get the ADVC otherwise use your camcorder. I know the 22 will be extinct in a couple of years anyway and I have an extended 4 years warranty on it anyway which was thrown in as a special at the time.

My two cents.

Hazza.

[holistic]

.... Also I disagree that it puts anywhere near significant wear on the camera compared to using it as a video camera.....

Well you saved me alot of typing Hazza. I agree with you also on this point. A-D is straight electronic - no movement of tape transport or heads.

][

[turk690]

Apart from the camcorder paas-through and Canopus, you might want to try Matrox RTX10. At the price, and with a fast PC, its realtime feature is cool & timesaving.

[spectroelectro]

THere's one significant advantage to using a digicam to capture video footage: if you want to import something off VHS, recording it to digicam first will pass the video through the digicam's built-in digital time base corrector. This completely eliminates dropped frame problems.
Capturing the playback from VHS into a Canopus ADV-100 or Datavideo DAC-100 can produce problems with dropped frames. neither of these deivces have built in digital time base correctors.
Since a TBC costs at least $180, you're saving some money by using a digicam. As mentioned, however, it will put a lot of wear and tear on your digicam.
Using a digicam as an analog pass-through device won't do anything to help the dropped frames from VHS.

[hhamzeh]

spectroelectro,

I also have SONY TRV-350 Cam which has pass through and TBC features. Are you 100% sure that the TBC just works ONLY when the movie has been recorded into the digital tape first? Why the TBC should not work while using pass through? Thanks.

[yg1968]

Digital 8 camcorders often have TBCs but very few (if any) DV camcorders do. Here's a related thread:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=eb1e59b3e6574fd58178eb82d41da169&threadid=48138

[indolikaa]

I've passed about 400+ hours through my Digital8 and never noticed any sync issues.

Regarding the TBC issue. I have several video tapes that caused a variety of capture devices to freeze, particularly at the point where a new recording would begin. These tapes were recorded in 1979/1980 so there was no flying erase head on the VCR.

The DV Passthru captured them with no lost frames. I can't imagine this being possible without TBC, which my TRV-120 has. So I have assumed that the TBC works on whatever signal passes through the A/D converters...

[LordVader]

the post is resulting more helpful than i tought.

OK wait a sec, TBC is something that i have to worry about with the ADVC ?

i mean, i can trust in a Digital CAM with TBC, cause sometimes tracking problems that we can't correct, always cause dropped frames.

But i can trust advc in the same way or not ?

[TheGr8Steve]

Here's two more of my cents I'm throwing in. I'm the one who bragged about the datavideo DAC-100. (above). The only frames I've dropped, were from the edited SVHS tapes I was copying. They actually looked okay on the video tape but at the place where an old video stops and a new video was added on later, even though when watching the tape you would not see a glitch, that's where I dropped quite a few frames. But they were all empty frames. It was annoying, but I'm trying to clean these videos up anyway, so you just chop out the blank frames and what is left is all the video. If you have a million starts and stops on video tape that you are copying, then I can see where you could get sick of this. I've never dropped a frame using my DAC-100 except at the point where two sections of SVHS videos are back to back (end of one/start of next ) And I'm sure when I finally get to a tape that may have a physical glitch, I'll have the same problem again. ( IE: a tape that doesnt' play quite right.) But I take care of my tapes and haven't had that problem yet.

[ImaWeTodd]

Should i use a hardware like ADVC-100, or my digital cam does the job even better ?

I don't have a ADVC-100, but I do have 2 DV cams. A Sony TRV900 (which doesn't officially support passthru), and a really cheap Sharp ~$280. I ran some tests on this and the Sharp produces a much poorer capture.

So i'd say people should not expect to buy a cheap cam to do this. What you get depends on the cam.

BTW: My 3yr old kid uses the Sharp. When he's not shootin pictures of the floor or the TV, his footage is amazing. The 3 foot camera angle is much more interesting than what you normally see.

[yg1968]

I could be wrong but I don't believe that the TBC in your digital 8 camcorder works on anything but Hi8 or 8mm analog tapes. However, I think that the passthrough kind of acts like a TBC in that it stabilizes the video. I also believe that the ADVC-100 or DAC-100 do the same thing as a passthrough feature.