Richard Müller wrote:
> I think I did not make clear what I intend:
> I want to have the _live_ picture on the monitor. Background: My institution
> uses the Coolpix on a microscope and we want to use the computer screen to
> see what the camera sees in the same moment for focusing etc. (We use the
> computer [xphoto via the serial port] also to trigger the camera). We had a
> ATI graphic card with a video in terminal, that went fine. But now we
> vcan't use that card any more, we want to switch to a more portable
> solution with an external "card".
> Good night, Richard
There are potentially a ton of solutions to your problem.
Reading reviews for video capture products, none seem to receive
100% approval ratings. Thus, you're comparing the deficiencies
of each of them, to see how best to fit the problem.
In your case, I still don't have a clear picture, why the interface
*has* to be USB 1.1.
If you want a good quality video capture device, this is an example.
It is $450 and has a Firewire interface. It probably doesn't need to
have such an interface, but there you go.
Canopus ADVC300 $450
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814144209
So, to define the problem a bit better:
1) Laptop or desktop ?
2) If laptop, PCMCIA or PCCard slot, Expresscard slot available ?
For example, you may be able to fit a Firewire card, then use
a nice device.
3) If desktop computer, do you have a PCI slot available. There
are all sorts of cards available, starting at $20, that can capture
video. Older cards had stuff like BT848/BT878, but there are other
single chip solutions that people report that they like. A major
weakness is software, and people even complain about what they
get with Hauppauge cards. I've been pretty happy with my experience
with one of their cheaper cards. It did what it was supposed to do.
4) If you go USB, and the capture device uses compression, then the
data rate on the cable can be reduced. I don't know what tradeoff
there is between bitrate, and captured quality. Some compression
method seem to leave the image a bit soft, and if you are recording
from the device (and not just previewing), sometimes you have to
sharpen the results to make it acceptable.
The reviews on Newegg can give you some idea as to what issues
some of these products have. But without knowing exactly how
many options are available besides USB 1.1, it is hard to offer
lots of alternatives. I guess I consider USB 1.1 to be pretty
limiting, and if that choice limited the resolution of the
capture device, you might not be very happy about that.
There are 159 entries here, starting at $20:
http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCateg...=Video-Devices
Paul