Canopus ADVC100
Andrew V. Romero
purpose of transfering home videos to super VCDs and was wondering if
anyone had any comments on it. I have read a lot of reviews and user
reviews on it at www.dvdrhelp.com and people seem really high on it.
The downside in my mind is that it cost a little more than the Pinnacle
and Adaptec capture cards ($150-200 compared to $270 for the Canopus)
and that it doesn't come with any editing software. So anyone have any
bad experiences with it or think that there are better deals out there?
My general impression in reading has been that other cards (devices is
probably a better word) can work just as well but it is more hit or
miss. Some capture devices work fine on one person's system, on another
system they don't work. The canopus seems to work on every system with
very few exceptions. My system is a Gateway 2000 2.33ghz, 512 RDram,
40gb free HD space, firewire (on SB audigy card), and USB2.0 ports.
Nomen Nescio
I've had a Canopus ADVC-100 for over a year now and it kicks total ass. It
is better than any analog capture card I've used in its price range.
With many cheap analog capture cards (e.g., Brooktree chipset based, ATI
All-In-Wonder), they may use cheap filters/parts and I've found colors come
out not correct and the images don't seem clear. I guess some people can
tweak the captures thru filters, etc. to clean them up, and then sometimes
it still doesn't work. You've also got potential problems with audio/video
synch, especially on long captures, which I guess can be somewhat solved if
you use the proper capture software. Also, some PC motherboards with poor
PCI bandwidth (e.g., VIA chipset-based AMD) have problems capturing at
high-resolution/frame rate because of too much PCI traffic.
None of these problems exist with a Canopus ADVC-100.
Some of the very high end analog capture cards (e.g., Canopus DVStorm2,
Matrox RT.X10) have better quality than a Canopus ADVC-100 if you capture
at HuffYUV or high-bit rate MJPEG.
However, if you are capturing VHS quality material, these will give you no
better quality than a Canopus ADVC-100, and they cost hundreds more.
There's a reason nearly everyone at dvdrhelp.com says it's great. That's
cuz it is. I wholeheartedly recommend it.
BTW, if you are a student or work in the education field, you can get one
for $199.00. Also, you can reduce the cost by getting one of their
lower-end models, such as the ADVC-50 or ADVC-1394; just check to make sure
that their limitations, relative to the ADVC-100, isn't a big issue.
Bunghole
<rrst...@icqmail.com> spewed forth the following:
You get what you pay for. The ADVC-100 is one of those rare pieces of
hardware that does everything it claims, you just plug it in, and it
works. I couldn't be happier with mine.
I also have the ATI AIW, it's nice for watching TV on the desktop, but
useless for video work. Sure, the picture quality is fine, but I've
never got the audio to stay synchronized. (Common problem with
ShitBlaster sound cards and ATI AIW's)
Had a pinnacle DV500 for 3 days. Tried it in 3 computers, none of them
would work. Pinnacle was less than helpful. Sent it back and got the
ADVC-100.
Bunghole
"Life Half Open"
Peter Friend
Superb product
Peter
"Andrew V. Romero" <rrst...@icqmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FAEECE2...@icqmail.com...
David Chien
cheaper, but you sure won't find any other product that's so universally
loved and used and works 100% solid like the ADVC-100.
Basically, it was like this for me: bought one, used one, decided well,
maybe I really don't need one, sold it, regretted it, bought another.
Happy ending.
Basically the Lexus of the analog to digital of converter boxes.
Eric McDaniel
The Canopus ADVC100 seems to be universally loved by those who have it. As
another option, check out the Datavideo DAC 100. It's about $50 cheaper,
does the same thing, and also gets positive feedback in this forum. I have
one and love it.
-Eric
"Andrew V. Romero" <rrst...@icqmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FAEECE2...@icqmail.com...
Andrew V. Romero
the Canopus ADVC100 and it should be arriving on the 13th. I look
forward to trying it out. I have never seen any product that has such
univerisally high user reviews.
Thanks again,
Andrew V. Romero
dri...@inorbit.com
Not to offend any AVDC100 owners, Canopus pricing is a total ripoff IMO.
My Sony Digital-8 (TRV120) handycam does AV->DV and DV->AV with
perfect audio sync for multiple hour captures. It even bypasses m@cr0v1510n.
For $150 more, I got a fully funtional digital Camcoder with a terrific
25X optical zoom (haven't seen a consumer camcoder with better zoom).
The only avantage of AVDC100 is it does PAL&NTSC if that is important for you.
Steve King
news:5b14e72e.03111...@posting.google.com...
The ADVC100 is a far more robust device than a camera. For those of us who
do this for a living in circumstances where a failure could result in a
missed deadline your solution is a false economy. It is a good argument for
personal use perhaps.
Steve King
Per Andersson C (AS/EAB)
> > > > I am thinking of purchasing the Canopus ADVC100 primarily for the
> > > > purpose of transfering home videos to super VCDs and was wondering if
> > > > anyone had any comments on it. I have read a lot of reviews and user
> >
> > Not to offend any AVDC100 owners, Canopus pricing is a total ripoff IMO.
> >
> > My Sony Digital-8 (TRV120) handycam does AV->DV and DV->AV with
> > perfect audio sync for multiple hour captures. It even bypasses
> m@cr0v1510n.
> > For $150 more, I got a fully funtional digital Camcoder with a terrific
> > 25X optical zoom (haven't seen a consumer camcoder with better zoom).
> > The only avantage of AVDC100 is it does PAL&NTSC if that is important for
> you.
>
> The ADVC100 is a far more robust device than a camera. For those of us who
> do this for a living in circumstances where a failure could result in a
> missed deadline your solution is a false economy. It is a good argument for
> personal use perhaps.
>
> Steve King
In what way is it more robust than a camera?
/Per
Richard Crowley
> > The ADVC100 is a far more robust device than a camera. For those of us
who
> > do this for a living in circumstances where a failure could result in a
> > missed deadline your solution is a false economy. It is a good argument
for
> > personal use perhaps.
"Per Andersson C (AS/EAB)" wrote ...
> In what way is it more robust than a camera?
No moving parts?
Likely not hauled around in the field (with risk of being dropped)?
Any number of reasons.
dri...@inorbit.com
the camera is less robust than AVDC.
Steve King
Perhaps I was not clear in my earlier post. What I meant to say was... for
home use, for personal use what you suggest may be the best solution.
However, in a professional situation, when my livihood and the continued
confidence of my clients is concerned, I am more confident of the rugged
case, the 'more robust' connectors, and the more professional appearance of
the AVDC100. In addition, the AVDC100 lives in my equipment rack. Cables
are permanently attached and laced to the rack. I do not have to nor wish
to dismantle this part of my system for other purposes. It is just there.
It works. Every time one unhooks cables, transports equipment, etc. the
probability of damage and intermittant performance becomes greater. These
are the elements of dependability that my clients pay me to maintain. Its
cost is so low for the value received that it is a no brainer FOR ME. Your
criteria could be different, as I said at the top of this post.
Steve King
William Meyer
> Not to offend any AVDC100 owners, Canopus pricing is a total ripoff
> IMO.
Clearly, you fail to comprehend the difference between devices in the
consumer market (VGA cards, etc.) and cards that address a narrower
market segment. While ATI may sell millions of a particular model of
VGA card, the number of ADVC100 units sold will likely be in the small
number of thousands. That means amortizing development costs (still
subsatntial) over a much smaller market. At a list price of $299, the
ADVC100 is really a very cheap tool.
(I am not affiliated with Canopus, and will not profit from the views
expressed here.)
--
Bill
Posted with XanaNews Version 1.15.7.4
David Chien
New ADVC-300 arriving this year!
http://www.canopus.us/US/products/ADVC300/pt_advc300.asp
$550 USD with 3D noise reduction, time base stabilization, etc. etc.
Too bad it doesn't have the TV tuner of the Japan-only ADVC-200TV model.
http://www.canopus.co.jp/catalog/advc/advc200tv_index.htm
Martin Heffels
<rcro...@xprt.net> wrote:
>No moving parts?
A camera used for simple pass-through doesn't use any moving parts,
except for the rotating on/off-switch of course ;-)
>Likely not hauled around in the field (with risk of being dropped)?
I don't see why the ADVC100 would be more robust then a camcorder
which would never leave the place, but is used as
playback/recording-device.
cheers
-martin-
--
filmmaker/DP/editor,
Sydney, Australia
Steve King
news:5uubrvokkakhtoa9e...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 07:51:11 -0800, "Richard Crowley"
> <rcro...@xprt.net> wrote:
>
> >No moving parts?
>
> A camera used for simple pass-through doesn't use any moving parts,
> except for the rotating on/off-switch of course ;-)
>
> >Likely not hauled around in the field (with risk of being dropped)?
>
> I don't see why the ADVC100 would be more robust then a camcorder
> which would never leave the place, but is used as
> playback/recording-device.
The whole point of the poster who suggested a low-end consumer camera as a
pass through device was that for only $150 MORE than an ADVC100 one could
get a CAMERA that one could then use as a camera AWAY from the studio. Used
only in the studio, as you suggest, simply means that you are anxious to pay
$150 more than you need to for less functionality. For instance, will the
camera take a fire-wire input and output fire-wire, SVHS, and composite
simultaneously? Or any other combination of input and three outputs? On
the other hand, I think you just like to argue and are willing to look silly
for the pleasure. BG
Steve King
Martin Heffels
<st...@stevekingWORMBLOCK.net (Take our WORMBLOCK to reply)> wrote:
>The whole point of the poster who suggested a low-end consumer camera as a
>pass through device was that for only $150 MORE than an ADVC100 one could
>get a CAMERA that one could then use as a camera AWAY from the studio.
Hmm, haven't seen that message here, and maybe not read it properly
between all the quoting.
> Used
>only in the studio, as you suggest, simply means that you are anxious to pay
>$150 more than you need to for less functionality.
Uhm, you would need an extra deck though, which comes down to more
than $150 extra....
> For instance, will the
>camera take a fire-wire input and output fire-wire, SVHS, and composite
>simultaneously?
That would be nice, but hardly has any pratical value for most folks.
If that is important you get a camcorder which has this possibility.
>On
>the other hand, I think you just like to argue and are willing to look silly
>for the pleasure. BG
Of course :)
cheers
-m-