Re: Would you pay more for 1080p in the M5 that is at least as good as in 80D?
PhotoDiod wrote:
justmeMN wrote:
PhotoDiod wrote:
Alan Sh wrote:
What is better about 80D video?
Bitrate, for one:
So, a higher bitrate means less compression, and therefore higher image quality? Do I have that right?
Unless the newer compression algorithm is eons smarter, that is how I understand it, yes.
Are there any side by side comparisons available on the web, so we can see the difference the different bitrates make to the quality of M5 video versus 80D video? Is it likely to be something we can actually see? I'm thinking of the different compression settings for JPEG stills on most cameras. If you take a shot at the highest quality JPEG setting (lowest compression setting) and another at the next highest quality setting, you won't be able to tell the difference between the shots. I'm talking about the same size shot, just different compression settings. As I understand it, the higher quality JPEG will stand up to editing a bit better, which is the reason to opt for it, as opposed to the higher compression setting (if you don't shoot RAW, of course, which is better than both). If it's similar for video, the different compression settings would only have a visible effect on the end product, if we did a lot of editing to the video. But perhaps I'm missing something.
-- hide signature --
As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile