MPEG-2 Long GoP Vs. H.264...

It depends on the implementation, obviously, but as a compression format in general h.264 is much superior to MPEG-2 in every possible way.

Sony's own statements on the subject are:


Q. How does HDV and AVCHD picture quality compare?
​
​
​
​
​
​
A. The quality of AVCHD recording in the 9 Mbps (HD-HQ) mode is roughly equal to​

HDV recording
Click to expand...
(understanding that they're talking about 25 megabits of MPEG-2 in HDV)

and

The MPEG-4/H.264 codec is a promising technology which is over two times more efficient than MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 codec technologies.
Click to expand...

and even though Sony is the primary manufacturer of MPEG-2 based HDV equipment, they developed and promoted h.264-based AVCHD as:
the new HD digital video camera recorder format best suited for the HD era.
Click to expand...

and, regarding the specific question of MPEG-2 vs. H.264, they indicated their future products will be going h.264 (including their own version of AVC-Intra!) with:


Sony B&P is developing a highly complex IC which will implement AVC Long & Intra GoP to be deployed in future products​
​
​
Click to expand...
​


So, apples to apples, h.264 spanks MPEG-2, and I think it'd be fairly impossible to find anyone who disagrees.

But, as to your specific question, apples are not apples here, and the 5D Mk II's codec doesn't handle 60i or 24p footage, IINM. So when you compare the EX1/EX3's codec to that, the question becomes: do you want to record 1080/24p footage? If so, the EX1/EX3 is the only one of your two proposed options that will work at all. So what's there to compare?
 
Barry_Green said:
It depends on the implementation, obviously, but as a compression format in general h.264 is much superior to MPEG-2 in every possible way.

Sony's own statements on the subject are:


(understanding that they're talking about 25 megabits of MPEG-2 in HDV)

and



and even though Sony is the primary manufacturer of MPEG-2 based HDV equipment, they developed and promoted h.264-based AVCHD as:


and, regarding the specific question of MPEG-2 vs. H.264, they indicated their future products will be going h.264 (including their own version of AVC-Intra!) with:

[/left]

So, apples to apples, h.264 spanks MPEG-2, and I think it'd be fairly impossible to find anyone who disagrees.

But, as to your specific question, apples are not apples here, and the 5D Mk II's codec doesn't handle 60i or 24p footage, IINM. So when you compare the EX1/EX3's codec to that, the question becomes: do you want to record 1080/24p footage? If so, the EX1/EX3 is the only one of your two proposed options that will work at all. So what's there to compare?
Click to expand...

Barry - Thanks for the info.

So would this mean the 5D MKII is capable of shooting images of higher quality than the EX1 / EX3? Being that it uses a superior codec, and shoots at a higher bit-rate...

DD.
 
Well, it means that the format is likely quite superior, but there's a lot more that goes into making a final image than just the recording codec.

The 5D MkII might make some 1080/30p images that look better than anything the EX1 could produce. It has shallower depth of field and a superior recording format.

But then again, the 5D MkII has extreme jello and aliasing issues. The EX1/EX3's jello is quite tame by comparison. And the EX1/EX3 can do 24p, and slow-mo, and all sorts of stuff that the 5D MkII can't do.
 
Barry_Green said:
But then again, the 5D MkII has extreme jello and aliasing issues. The EX1/EX3's jello is quite tame by comparison. And the EX1/EX3 can do 24p, and slow-mo, and all sorts of stuff that the 5D MkII can't do.
Click to expand...

The "jello" effect is not something I'm really bothered about, but what are these "aliasing issues"?

DD.
 
Look in the 5D forum. The speculation is that the 5D doesn't do a scaling of the image, but that it skips pixels to make its HD image, and that leads to a lot of stairstepping and aliasing on fine detail. I am not a 5D expert though, so I recommend looking through that forum for the answers.
 
Dave Draper said:
The "jello" effect is not something I'm really bothered about, but what are these "aliasing issues"?

DD.
Click to expand...

It is the third pixel row issue, instead of resampling full-res picture it takes every third pixel row. Using (in the 5D Mark II's movie mode) every pixel on every third row -- samples one out of 3 pixels (horizontal not vertical), the resolution drops to 1/3rd. Being the full resolution (sensor) in movie mode (before downsizing to 1920x1080) 5.9MP instead.

More info here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist–Shannon_sampling_theorem

Here's the result -- the infamous aliasing:

http://www.vimeo.com/2738955

Here are some workarounds for avoiding the problem:

http://cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1163&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=10

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/canon-eos-5d-mk-ii-hd/140442-aliasing.html#post985988

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/canon-eos-5d-mk-ii-hd/140442-aliasing-2.html#post991756

Follow the links and try them out.

Hope these hints help,
E. :-)
 
h.264 is a more efficient codec but that almost works against it when it comes to editing. right now it is harder to natively edit h.264, partly due to the faster processor speeds required and also current lack of application support. the same used to be the case with mpeg-2 though so things could change pretty soon. both mpeg-2 and h.264 could be considered better as delivery/final output formats than as intermediate acquisition or editing ones, but as a delivery format h.264 is better.

as far as ex1/3 vs. the 5d, the ex1/3's would be considered better since it uses b-frames, which the 5d does not.
 
killacam said:
h.264 is a more efficient codec but that almost works against it when it comes to editing. right now it is harder to natively edit h.264, partly due to the faster processor speeds required and also current lack of application support. the same used to be the case with mpeg-2 though so things could change pretty soon. both mpeg-2 and h.264 could be considered better as delivery/final output formats than as intermediate acquisition or editing ones, but as a delivery format h.264 is better.
Click to expand...

Transcoding to ProRes, from whatever format you shot on, is a pretty standard practice. It takes a little time though, so if you're shooting the nightly news, either cut on a monster or stick to mpeg-2.

killacam said:
as far as ex1/3 vs. the 5d, the ex1/3's would be considered better since it uses b-frames, which the 5d does not.
Click to expand...

I think it'd be really hard for anyone to make this call without sufficient testing, considering that Mpeg-2 is not the same as H.264. Also, the EX1/3 maxes out at 35mbps, right? The 5DII bitrate is somewhat variable, but it hovers around 40mbps and I've seen it go as high as 50mbps. Still, conclusions can't be drawn without testing.
 
Emanuel said:
More info here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist–Shannon_sampling_theorem

Here's the result -- the infamous aliasing:

http://www.vimeo.com/2738955

Here are some workarounds for avoiding the problem:

http://cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1163&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=10

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/canon-eos-5d-mk-ii-hd/140442-aliasing.html#post985988

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/canon-eos-5d-mk-ii-hd/140442-aliasing-2.html#post991756

Follow the links and try them out.

Hope these hints help,
E. :-)
Click to expand...

Emaunel, I think I can remember that you own a 5D. What's the way you personally deal with aliasing?
 
The aliasing is there @ wider end at times but it can be less or more under control, visible through an useful LCD where you have an helpful manual focus assist (5x and 10x magnification only available before recording). My best method is using the shallow DOF. If you don't want it or you can't avoid the subject ala Steev Dinkins aka holyzoo (it can be funny but fully works LOL) such as EXT buldings roofs, one or another or all of them should work. 5D Mark II's 1080p recording is sharp enough to deal with.

Unfortunately, I haven't yet had opportunity to test these tips (from those links above) out once 'cause hot pixels my unit is for replacement at Walters Photo Video, my Canon supplier in Wales.

After June 2 there's manual exposure control, an epic begins with, as Canon says. :laugh: It will surely be easier to handle with it.

IMHO this camera is the best for the buck, today. A true 30p non-intrusive cinema camera nowadays like Scarlet 2/3" shall be up to 120fps (150fps burst) -- not in the FF35/S35 offer though :(, so unless you go with both small (with obvious DOF limitations and a different bokeh) and large formats. A dream for documentary moviemakers or cinema verité style, actually. With its commitments as everything in life and a few exceptions as for instance events stuff, it is a real workhorse in any route what so ever. :thumbup:

- Emanuel :-)
 
I have extensively used the 5d and the ex1/3. I can tell you that without a doubt that the image quality, SPECIFICALLY due to compression that comes out of the 5d is head and shoulders above both the ex1 and ex3.

I have done everything in my power to beat up the 5d's codec in terms of fast motion and level of detail. Though there is definitely a jello effect, the codec has yet to break up. On the other hand I have seen the ex1/3's codec break up fairly consistently under heavy strain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top