Why buy an MPEG 2 old compression when new H.264 with more tool available

P

P2metoo

Active member
I had a discussion with my friend about S company and P and J and C company and he said it is very confusing where should I invest the money.
I told him everyone makes a decent picture but at the end of the day it is the compression that matters. S company still using MPEG-2 in EX1, EX3, XDCAM etc, JVC using same MPEG 2 with new wrapper so it works with MAC only, and Cannon still using the MPEG 2.
Only Company which using the 21st century compression is consumer and Panasonic professional. Sony probably in NAB will join Panny as they did EX cards will do the same with codec but JVC and Canon still using the 19th century codec. Yes it is very good and works nice just like my old CRT 27" TV in bedroom.
If you want to archive something for the future in 21st century I will buy Panny for there codec and archive all my shoot today instead of S, J, C company Mpeg 2.
It is a file based archived and in future if there is a better transcoder then Prores or the current best Panny AVC-I at 100MB converts in real time using Aj-HPM200 you can archive both 24Mbps and 100Mbps and nobady can question the footage.
I like someone else input for helping my friend.
Happy New year
 
I don't know why you would look at when a particular compression technology was introduced when picking out a camera.

Yes, Mpeg-4 is going to be better all other things being equal, and it happens to be newer, but its introduction dosen't somehow make something like XDcam-HD "worse". Actually, XDcam-HD absolutely flies in post compared to any flavor of Mpeg-4 so that can be a big plus in it's column.
 
XDCAM EX is an MPEG-2 format in an MP4 wrapper. Confusing, but it is what it is.

The argument of MPEG-2 versus MPEG-4, for me XDCAM-EX versus AVC-Intra, is something i have asked on this forum to mixed results but here is what seems to be the best answer for me:

AVC-Intra (MPEG-4) will have it's advantages in high movement situations or situations where there is a significant change between frames. XD-CAM EX will look pretty much the same for interviews and the like. However, the information of AVC-Intra will not make you sorry if you choose it.


That was compiled from a question I asked here and a bunch of admins answered. I trust their opinions and years of experience, so for me, I'm saving for an HPX300 :)
 
Instead of getting all worked up about a codec, look at the big picture (literally). There's a whale of a lot that goes into acquiring and recording an HD image, starting with the quality of the glass, then moving to the imaging chips, etc. It's the final product that counts, not one part (among many) that goes into making that "big picture" you actually look at, when all is said and done.
 
Panny is a winner when it comes to codec but as Robert pointed out it's only one element in the equation. For instance P's sensor is below C's or S's thus even with superior codec you might be producing inferior images. And even then it's a matter of how geeky you want to get about the comparisons. In my personal opinion P's cameras is nothing to rave about. I shoot with those when the circumstances ask for it but also i use a whole range of other cam's when particular feature is needed (JVC for mobility), Canon for over all picture niceness, Sony for picture niceness when we can afford it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top