Panasonic GH5?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Barry_Green said:
Yes, within the same codec, adding more mbps will always make the quality better.

What you can't compare is mbps across *different* implementations of the codec, or (especially) between different codecs entirely.

So on an AVCCAM camera, unquestionably the quality goes up as the bitrate goes up -- 21 is better than 17 which is better than 13 which is better than 6.

But 9mbps of AVCCAM is better than 25 megabits of MPEG-2. And 21 megabits of AVCCAM is better than 35 megabits of MPEG-2.

And you can't even count on the same family being equivalent -- AVCCAM uses AVCHD, and the GH1 uses AVCHD, but 21mbps of AVCCAM is embarrassingly better than 17mbps of GH1 AVCHD.

So -- megabits are meaningless as a statistic to compare, unless you're talking about the exact same codec.
Click to expand...


Gotchya...

So comparing AVCHD to AVCHD is fine, comparing cams that utilize MPEG-2 to one another is fine, but comparing codecs (as in regard to megapixels therein) shouldn't be done.

So people choose cameras with shoddier codecs because they like the camera itself better? I mean, if the H.264 ('er whatever) codec is typically "best" is there some reason why all the cams don't use it? Why even use MPEG-2 or AVCHD?

Also, I think I asked this before, but why is the EX1's picture better than the HMC150 if the EX1's codec is worse?
 
Chamber005 said:
So people choose cameras with shoddier codecs because they like the camera itself better? I mean, if the H.264 ('er whatever) codec is typically "best" is there some reason why all the cams don't use it? Why even use MPEG-2 or AVCHD?

Also, I think I asked this before, but why is the EX1's picture better than the HMC150 if the EX1's codec is worse?
Click to expand...

ex1 has a different imaging sensor to the hmc150.. that makes it sharper.

if you put the ex1 image inside an avccam codec, itll be a very good combination
ergo look at barry's xdcamex vs avccam article.
 
Chamber005 said:
Gotchya...

So comparing AVCHD to AVCHD is fine
Click to expand...
Yes, but no. You've got the right idea, but unfortunately there's a whole different kettle of fish going on with AVCHD. The 1080 AVCHD in the GH1 can't hold a candle to the 1080 AVCHD in the AVCCAM products, so even though they both say AVCHD, they're still not directly comparable!

It's enough to drive someone mad...

So people choose cameras with shoddier codecs because they like the camera itself better? I mean, if the H.264 ('er whatever) codec is typically "best" is there some reason why all the cams don't use it? Why even use MPEG-2 or AVCHD?
Click to expand...
Well, as far as SLRs, Canon and Panasonic are using h.264, Nikon was using a low-bandwidth version of MJPG, and Sony hasn't done video yet.

In professional video there's primarily MPEG-2 and h.264 out there. Sony is sticking with MPEG-2, and their reasons are stated as that it's easier to edit, etc. (which, it is).

Also, I think I asked this before, but why is the EX1's picture better than the HMC150 if the EX1's codec is worse?
Click to expand...
The EX1 has larger chips with 4x as many pixels on them. And it costs twice as much. The higher price can probably buy a better DSP or other processing, etc.

That codec test was fun to do because it finally separates the camera away from the format. I'd been wanting to test the claims about AVC's superiority forever, but there was no way to do it without involving different camera heads, which compromises the testing to an extreme degree. So with that little external recorder I finally had a way.
 
Many people wonder why it's called GH5...

Very simple


type GH1 into Youtube / Google and guess what comes up?

Guitar Hero, the video game.

Type GH2 into a search engine, you get Guitar Hero 2.

Ditto for 3, 4.

GH5 - keeps Panasonic ahead of Guitar Hero sequels

:kiss:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top