Seeking comments on analog-to-digital capture with DV cam

[FulciLives]

Hello

Well I'm getting a pretty large IRS TAX refund check which should be here in the next week or so.

As a result I was thinking of buying the Canopus ADVC-100 whereas now I use an Avermedia PCI capture card.

But then I started thinking ... why not spend just a little bit more and get a DV camcorder.

Seems like the one to get is the SONY DCR-TRV460 which supports analog-to-digital conversion with pass-through.

So will I really get captures that are as good this way as using the Canopus ADVC-100 when it comes to VHS, LaserDisc and cable TV etc.?

I've read that some people get audio sync problems with DV cam pass-through and it seems alot of those people are SONY owners to boot but I also have heard that ScenalyzerLive seems to cure that (knock on wood) as opposed to other DV capture programs.

What about tracking problems etc.
I've heard that the Canopus ADVC-100 is really good at "keeping" up with such problems and not going all "crazy" when bad drop-outs occur although I should point out most of the VHS stuff I'm doing is SP speed stuff. Does the SONY model I mentioned have a built-in TBC and will it kick in on analog-to-digital pass-through? I seem to recall reading conflicting things about this.

In short I'm more concerned with capture quality than having a DV camera but if I have to spend $250 on the Canopus ADVC-100 then my mind tells me I can't chew on another $125 extra and ALSO have a DV cam ... which would be nice ... especially since my old Hi8mm is getting damn old and is big and bulky with no flip out screen (only b/w viewfinder).

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[holistic]

No complaints with my Canon ZR-40 (~2 years old) There are better models now.
I have done many 2 hour Hi-8 ( A-D ) conversions and no syncs issues.

"Captures" are with Premiere 6 to a NTFS formatted drive. ~26 Gb file when done.

][

[petar]

So will I really get captures that are as good this way as using the Canopus ADVC-100 when it comes to VHS, LaserDisc and cable TV etc.?

Almost. I've tried quite a few DV camcorders for analog-to-DV conversion and the quality was very close to the ADVC100. IMO, even better than some other DV converters. If I have to rate all the DV converters through my experience, Canopus would come first, all DV cams (close) second (I could spot almost no difference between Panasonic, Hitachi and Canon) and then Pinnacle and Dazzle (though I wouldn't recommend them). I've never tried the Sony though.

If you could use a DV cam, I'd say go with it. You get a very good DV converter plus a digital camcorder.

I've successfully done hundreds of analog tapes with the ADVC100 but there was one (admittedly of very bad quality) that it just did not want to do. Every 10 sec or so would freeze for a second. The Canon did it fine. I'm no expert on electronics but I assume the DV cams don't employ great deal of intelligence in the pass-through (output whatever you throw at them, no matter the quality of the signal) hence it had no problem with the bad tape.

[Will Hay]

go

[Will Hay]

with

[Will Hay]

.......the DV cam.
The difference in price for you yanks is marginal and you'll never regret the upgrade from Hi8 to MiniDV.
From the brief testing I did with a DV cam before I bought the ADVC-100 I was pretty happy, but I already had my own Sony DV cam and whilst found using the Canopus easier (less fraught, worries of over-use and clumsyness using the DV cam) for me there's little difference in quality.
In fact, I never even bothered to compare, they both did exactly what I needed and don't forget your source; for what you need it for, IMHO, you won't notice a difference.

Will Hay

[cbkilner]

My MiniDV (Canon ZR60) analog-to-digital pass-thru can handle tapes with poor video sync (that usually require TBC) that my Dazzle can't handle without dropping frames, but my Dazzle handles video dropouts better - the Canon will sometimes stop with a "no tape" error in iMovie (which I use for the capture).

The Canon A-D is better/cleaner than the Dazzle, but then so is the Canopus.

If your Hi8 is still working, get a better MiniDV with A-D passthru instead of a Digital8...Sonys latest D8 offerings are fairly low-end and the D8 format is on the way out.

[FulciLives]

If your Hi8 is still working, get a better MiniDV with A-D passthru instead of a Digital8...Sonys latest D8 offerings are fairly low-end and the D8 format is on the way out.

Well my old Hi8 was a very high end model when I bought it and it can still play back tapes A-OK but it is very old now (bought it in 1991 or 1992) and the damn thing is falling apart i.e., microphone hanging on by a thread of wires etc.

My reason for the SONY DCR-TRV460 is that it is digital ... cheap ... and features digital-to-analog pass-thru. Yes it is Digital8 rather than miniDV but for me that is a plus as I still have a lot of Video8 and Hi8 analog tapes.

I'm not aware of any miniDV cam models that are as cheap as the SONY DCR-TRV460 ... at least not any that support analog-to-digital pass-through.

I am of course open to suggestions on that

As for what WILL HAY (our resident post whore hehehe) said yes I know both methods (cam and canopus ADVC-100) give great results picture quality wise I'm just worried about having possible audio-sync problems with the cam method. I know there are no such worries with the canopus ADVC-100

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

P.S.
Thanks for all the input so far ... keep it comming

[BSR]

I have the Sony DCR-PC101.

Sync issues with WinDV and DVIO on long clips(1hr and over, haven't really tested to see at what time the sync issue begins or becomes noticable exactly.)
No sync issues with Video Studio 6, Premiere 6.5, or Scenanalyzer(demo).

Had some bad tapes that jittered on the VHS, but when captured through the passthrough of the Sony cam where steady. Maybe some type of TBC?

Of course this is only from my experience with this DV cam.
Good luck.

[Will Hay]

said yes I know both methods (cam and canopus ADVC-100) give great results picture quality wise I'm just worried about having possible audio-sync problems with the cam method. I know there are no such worries with the canopus ADVC-100

I don't know why I bothered posting now, if I'd had sync issues with the camcorder I'd have said so.
Isn't that what you wanted, opinion, or did I mis-understand your thread title.

As for what WILL HAY (our resident post whore hehehe)

I don't know why I bother.
I tried; I'm done with you now young-un.
Will Hay

[lenti_75]

don't know about Sony, but my Canon Elura 50 does a perfect conversion......i love it. I converted about 10 HI8 cassettes into dvd, and it's the same quality.....
by the way, I have Canopus encoder...and it's the best, I use that to convert the files into DVD mpeg2.....

[victor010170]

Sony digital camcorder is fine. I have DCR-TRV350. Reason to buy it because 350 able to run 8mm with pass-through. Love it. QA is great. Have convert many movies to DVD with great QA (assume you have good perf VCR).

Dislike Sony software, it is Pixela Image mixer. QA of software is good but its program design to capture only 4 GB in AVI, around 15 minutes. Then it automatically conver to mpeg 2 if you prefer, and stop. You have to manually find out where it stops and continue capture by yourself. One of my frustration. Do not use USB 2.0, I tested and qa of movie is not good as using firewire to connect from sony to pc. I then use windv (see DV forum) and extremely happy with the program. It allows me to transfer movie from the beggining to the end with no stop in the middle, and no drop frame.

Lately, I got a copy Ulead video 7 version from a friend and it runs well too.

Conclusion, Sony digital with pass-through is great but Sony software sucks. Use windv or else.

[FulciLives]

said yes I know both methods (cam and canopus ADVC-100) give great results picture quality wise I'm just worried about having possible audio-sync problems with the cam method. I know there are no such worries with the canopus ADVC-100

I don't know why I bothered posting now, if I'd had sync issues with the camcorder I'd have said so.
Isn't that what you wanted, opinion, or did I mis-understand your thread title.

As for what WILL HAY (our resident post whore hehehe)

I don't know why I bother.
I tried; I'm done with you now young-un.
Will Hay

Oh you know I love you Will :P

But OK maybe I am being a bit overly cautious perhaps but I have heard of people having sync problems and I would go crazy if I had that. So I dunno I might just go with the Canopus ADVC-100 and screw the cam.

I just can't make my mind up hehehe

If I had enough for both then this post wouldn't exist but of course I don't hehehe

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[FulciLives]

Well I just wanted to say I thank everyone for the comments here.

BUT I have made up my mind and I am going to get the Canopus ADVC-100

The main reasons being:

1.) Can do PAL and NTSC
2.) Selectable IRE BLACK LEVEL input settings
3.) Macrovision is ignored

I just couldn't resist thinking about getting a DV cam for just a lil wee bit more but I think for me that the Canopus ADVC-100 will be the better option for capture.

Thanks everyone

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[fourthquark]

To the folks using a mini-DV cam pass-through to do analog-to-digital conversion - does the mini-DV cam encoder detect Macrovision protection, or does it ignore Macrovision? I am specifically interested in the Canon ZR-40, but the same info for other cams would be useful information as well. Thanks.

[troyvcd1]

I got a sony trv25 and it ingnores macrovision.

[vhelp]

Hello everyone :P

Fulci,

Sorry for being late in the subject here..

I would go with the CAM only if you were able to be fortunate enough to get
one w/ some Progressive features (not just Interlace only) and has the included
PASS-THROUGH feature :P
.
Its not worth the monies (IMO) to get a dv cam that only has Interlace as your
only output. You've seen (or experienced) plenty of hard issues w/ sources
that are Pure Interlace. Cams are nortorious for this (for good reasons) but
MPEG encoders do not really handle Interlace well, due to the distortions in
the (merged fields) - - that's the bottom line. But, if you could get one w/ a
Progressive feature, than I would say that it's worth it to get it, over the ADVC
..plenty of fun adventure awaits you.

However, your budget is low, and the ADVC seems like a good choice if you
are ready for the upgrade (finally - - at last) and again I stress, once you go
ADVC, you'll almost "never" want to go back. Though I seem to be just
that w/ my LD captures of SW.
.
OT - I believed I fixed my issue w/ my CLD-D701 vs. CLD-V2600 models
video quality. Anyways..
.
The one thing you first noticed (in addition to it's quality) is the zero noise
that this device outputs. A must have feature, for any MPEG encoder, when
your aim is minimum bitrate encoding. Specially when you do your VHS
(and LD) conversions, their is no noise in these two mediums, which I say
again, is a must for MPEG encoding.

As far as noticing any difference (DV Cam vs. ADVC) yes, you'll notice some,
but only if you're a quality freak like myself
However, w/ a dv cam, you have the luxury of either going Firewire or Analog capture route. Whatever works best for you, really.

Also, FWIW.. please don't get confused w/ the colorspace issue that TMPG seems
to have, when your source is DV. You know.. the it says:
** [x] Output YUV data as Basic YCbCr not CCIR601.
This is only good for DV cam footage, not already 4:2:0 (such as cable tv,
satellite, vhs, laserdisc, and dvd are) For instance, when we all capture our
satellite tv shows, the output is already 4:2:0 (not 4:2:2, even though some
capture cards will sample video in this mode (ie, Wintv Go))
Well, I'm sure you know this :P
But, there are ways of utilizing this feature (for any source) w/ the proper
techniques. Ok, just me being ilusive, hehe..

If I was OT, my appoligies.

Cheers all,
-vhelp

[vhelp]

oops, I replied to a post here by mistake.. post moved here:

* When DVDRHelp.com Gets New Colors...

-vhelp

[andie41]

Also, FWIW.. please don't get confused w/ the colorspace issue that TMPG seems to have, when your source is DV. You know.. the it says:
** [x] Output YUV data as Basic YCbCr not CCIR601.
This is only good for DV cam footage, not already 4:2:0 (such as cable tv,
satellite, vhs, laserdisc, and dvd are)

This "Output YUV data as Basic YCbCr not CCIR601" is useful for maintaining and/or creating the proper colorspace, depending upon one's source and the intended use. If I frameserve from an NLE or VDub (without selecting the "output YUY ..." option . TMPGenc will compress the colorspace (probably not what I want) but by selecting this option the colorspace will be expanded to proper values. If, on the otherhand, I do not frameserve, but take DV directly into TMPGenc, I do not want to select this option, because the colorspace will be expanded outside legal values, assuming I have proper color values to begin with.