Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Jopling

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jul 14, 2004
363
0
I currently have en EyeTV 250 hooked to my 17 inch laptop and the picture quality is terrible. Id like HD quality (for Lost mainly) but don't want the hd tuner because it can't pick up normal cable so that knocks it out of the contest. I'm going to be upgrading to a Mac Pro as soon as it arrives and was wondering since the EZ relies on your computers hardware would I get a better picture? I can't stand any graininess like my current tuner displays. (Btw Im on a 23 inch cinema display if you want to know how big im blowing the picture up).
 
No, I don't think having your computer doing the encoding will make the picture quality any better and it will just bog down your computer resources. Also if you want to watch HD on your computer you have to buy something that supports OTA HD signals. Currently there is no consumer product out there that will pick up Cable HD signals due to encryption, and fears of copyright infringement.
 
i own the plextor convertx tv402
it is great, and be had at a great deal
works with EyeTV 2.3 perfectly
 
oh my EyeTV works great, it just doesn't look great. Oh BTW I dont think mine is the 250, i think its the 200. Could this be the reason for quality loss?
 
does anyone here know how the plextor convertx tv402 compares in picture quality to the eyetv 250?

i'm thinking about getting the tv402 for my 20" imac which is on the way mainly because of hardware divx/mpeg4 encoding.

-jsklar
 
jsklar said:
does anyone here know how the plextor convertx tv402 compares in picture quality to the eyetv 250?

i'm thinking about getting the tv402 for my 20" imac which is on the way mainly because of hardware divx/mpeg4 encoding.

-jsklar

ive seen it in comparison with the eyetv 200. and they are pretty even.
i use the tv402u with my imac 20" and it works great. quality is near TV quality. i included a recording i did earlier this year. i chose a screenshot with text so you could see resolution a little better.

http://www.blakepetersonphoto.com/eyetv.png
 
Jopling said:
oh my EyeTV works great, it just doesn't look great. Oh BTW I dont think mine is the 250, i think its the 200. Could this be the reason for quality loss?
standard def tv has very low resolution - maybe 640x480 (? don't know exact resolution). so if you watch full-screen on a 20" computer monitor like the imac, it's going to look bad. there's nothing you can do about it...it's not that the eyeTV is bad, it's just how standard def resolution looks on a computer monitor. you'll need HDTV if you want it to look good fullscreen on your computer.
 
tipdrill407 said:
how does this offer better quality or are you just referring to the capability to recieve OTA HD signals?

tipdrill407's right, I don't see how that fixes your problem.

NTSC is 720 x 480. So adding more equipment will not improve the picture quality. It is the quality of the signal you are receiving that is the problem.

kugino said:
standard def tv has very low resolution - maybe 640x480 (? don't know exact resolution). so if you watch full-screen on a 20" computer monitor like the imac, it's going to look bad. there's nothing you can do about it...it's not that the eyeTV is bad, it's just how standard def resolution looks on a computer monitor. you'll need HDTV if you want it to look good fullscreen on your computer.

This is also correct, if you have low resolution picture and stretch it, it simple enlarges every thing it will not add any detail.

To summarise if u put sh*t in u get sh*t out. fix the dish or aerial on the ur roof!!
 
It has support for HDTV which means I can get HDTV for the 5 or 6 main stations that offer it and then i get SD for normal channels that i only watch occasionally.

EDIT: I also plugged in my Eye TV 200 into a g5 and the quality did look better compared to my 1.33ghz pb g4
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.