A few folks here have noticed that the issue with M5's lack of video capabilities is not solely (or perhaps not at all) about its lack of 4k. So, I was wondering if the majority of M5 target market simply doesn't care for video at all. Below, I have re-worked Jonathan Brady's poll (thank you, Jonathan) to ponder that question. Please feel free to elaborate below.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Would you pay more for 1080p in the M5 that is at least as good as in 80D?
- Thread starter PhotoDiod
- Start date
-
- Tags
- canon eos 80d
Bitrate, for one:
M5
1920 x 1080 @ 60p / 35 Mbps, MP4, H.264, AAC
1920 x 1080 @ 30p / 24 Mbps, MP4, H.264, AAC
1920 x 1080 @ 24p / 24 Mbps, MP4, H.264, AAC
80D
MOV: 1920 x 1080p / 29.97 fps (90 Mbps) / 23.98 fps (90 Mbps)
MP4: 1920 x 1080p / 59.94 fps (60 Mbps) / 29.97 fps (30 Mbps) / 23.98 fps (30 Mbps)
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.
Alastair Norcross
Forum Pro
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.
--
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
Last edited:
User5790131082
New member
- Messages
- 4
- Reaction score
- 0
Good quality 1080P is fine with me.
trungtran
Senior Member
If you need the 80D then just go buy the 80D.
This poll is just silly now.
This poll is just silly now.
Telling people where they need to go and what they need to do is a slippery slope--you might not enjoy the activity one might advise back. Like, learning reading comprehension, for example.
Peter Kwok
Senior Member
Perhaps the more advanced Digic 7 in the M5 can compress video better than the Digic 6 in the 80D, smaller files without sacrificing quality. Without good side-by-side comparison, we don't know whether it is bettor or worse.
But, since Canon did not copy the exact design of 80D, there must be a reason to spend efforts to redesign the compression algorithm. I hope not letting the tiny M5 to compete against the 80D is NOT a reason.
But, since Canon did not copy the exact design of 80D, there must be a reason to spend efforts to redesign the compression algorithm. I hope not letting the tiny M5 to compete against the 80D is NOT a reason.
trungtran
Senior Member
LOL, why don't we all just post polls on silly specifications that the M5 does not have and the 80d does.
Would you pay more if the m5 had weather sealing like the 80D?
Would you pay more if the m5 had the same shutter speed as the 80D?
The 4k poll already showed that the majority don't care about video.
What is it that you trying to achieve with this poll?
I can read perfectly fine, thank you.
Sorry, you lost me. Are you trying to tell me and everybody who contributed to the poll what we can or cannot do? Or, you are trying to assert some kind of intellectual superiority?
Thanks.
I do on occasion notice the foliage can look a bit mushy but having used the efーs kit lens I feel the mushyness is more cntrolled on the M5 than 80D．The kit lenses are playing ia bigger part in the percivied rendering than the sensors or compression in my opiniin.
--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/76058747@N07/
Last edited:
So, have you actually verified the "smartness" of the different compression algorithms and what the effect is on "video quality", as implemented by Canon in the M5 and 80D?
Does more compression automatically mean loss of quality, and if so, in which area exactly: details, dynamic range, colors, etc.? From what I read, H.264 is quite a leap in the compression world but it does require higher processing speed, like in Digic 7. Which 80D doesn't have...
Anyway, all seems a bit irrelevant if noone can tell them apart unless when comparing specs. IMO.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum