|
|
|
Canopus ADVC-100 vs ConvertX
|
|
|
Gardener3
Junior Member
|
2. March 2004 @ 06:49 |
Link to this message
|
This is what the manufacturer says about its product:
DivXNetworks(tm) and Plextor(r) Corp. have joined forces to create the first DivX Certified hardware video encoder. ConvertX lets you convert video from TVs, VCRs, DVD players and camcorders into high-quality DivX video in real-time. The new ConvertX
device also lets you easily edit DivX video content, making it faster and easier to cut unwanted scenes and add titles, transitions, and special effects.
This is the website:
http://www.plextor.com/english/products/ConvertX2.htm
Any thoughts on this?
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
fugitive2
Member
|
3. March 2004 @ 03:19 |
Link to this message
|
You can't compare these two, 1st, ConvertX has (fast)
hardware encoding,MPEG 1,2,4,Divx, ADVC100 has audio lock, ConvertX has not, The ADVC100 converts to DV AVI, you need to (software) (slow) encode that.
Quality wise, ADVC100 is better... (ask around)
Bedankt, Thanks,
Fugitive.
|
|
Gardener3
Junior Member
|
3. March 2004 @ 13:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
Fugitive,
I was impressed with the quality of the DVD that I got using the ADVC-100 on a VHS tape that I copied from a Hi8 tape (Hi8 recorder was borrowed and not available when I did the conversion), and doing the encoding and burning with the built-in software in my Sony VAIO.
Just curious as to the latest similar gizmos out there.
Gardener
|
|
fugitive2
Member
|
4. March 2004 @ 03:16 |
Link to this message
|
Yes, there are a lot of "capture boxes" now, but
many have problems with audio synchronity,
because this is not locked on them, Dazzle is also
one of these...:(
The Canopus is a good one, but with MPEG encoding,
they are expensive..
You can get good results with the cheaper ones,
but you must do a lot of effort, and have a "clean"
system, and don't "confuse" the capture "engine" of
such a device.
I'm also very happy with my ADVC100, recently i
registered TMPGEnc Plus, it has many nice features..
Next step is buying a JVC S-VHS vcr, which has TBC,
(Time Base Corrector) for "cleaning up" old tapes,
or ones that weren't recorded on the one i now have.
Bedankt, Thanks,
Fugitive.
|
|
Gardener3
Junior Member
|
4. March 2004 @ 06:27 |
Link to this message
|
Fugitive,
Not sure what your quote "The Canopus is a good one, but with MPEG encoding, they are expensive.." refers to. When I use the unit, my PC always saves the signal as an AVI. Please explain.
Gardener
|
|
fugitive2
Member
|
4. March 2004 @ 08:43 |
Link to this message
|
Canopus has also models, that encode also to MPEG,
(hardware enoding)
but these are a lot more expensive, than the ConvertX,
What i meant is, you get where you pay for.
Yes the ADVC100 "only" encodes to AVI, but it's a good
basis to edit, add effects, and then encode with a
codec of your own choice.
Material already encoded in MPEG, shouldn't be edited,
this gives quality loss, that's also the negative "side" of captures already in the MPEG format, you should only "author" this material,
to burn on cd or dvd.
On the other hand, when you want a quick transfer,
of all your "analog" video material, the ConvertX is
a good choice, but i guess standalone dvd recorders
will drop in price also :)
Bedankt, Thanks,
Fugitive.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Gardener3
Junior Member
|
4. March 2004 @ 19:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
Fugitive,
Thanks for clearing it up.
Yes, when DVD recorders such as the Philips DVDR80 sooner or later sell for under $200, it would be difficult not to justify buying one for direct DVD burning, which simplifies the process by eliminating the need for converters, encoders and burning software.
Sort of like comparing to digital cameras to film cameras.
The older, conventional processes will never die, but the masses will gravitate to the convenience of the new technology.
Gardener
Ersten
|
|
