It's astonishing how much of a difference intelligent, considered narration makes. I really enjoyed watching this and it was very helpful too. Well done.
I'm using a Canon AX30 / Atomos / 1080i60 / HDMI out / ProRez 422 With motion or panning I'm getting razor thin black lines Have you ever experienced that? Wondering if your shooting in 1080i or maybe 30 or 24? Outstanding video TY
Just stumbled on this. Excellent overview about some sometimes tricky production choices. Even in 2023 editing in AVCHD feels so much freer than dealing with gigantic files with little quality gain. The next video needs to look into grading the different codecs. Thank you!
I use avchd most of the time even when XAVC S is available. XAVC S uses almost double the bit rate compared to AVCHD (50 mbps vs. 28 mbps), yet I cannot notice the difference while playing the video.
This is the most clear, in-depth, well done, accurate comparison I have ever seen. The AVCHD implementation that Canon has done is brilliant, miles ahead of AVCHD consumer camcorders. Thank you very very much for taking the time to do it. I'm a broadcast engineer and I agree completely on your points. Thanks again for the effort.
This was awesome. Clear, concise, really fantastic. I like how you brought this down to a really practical level and analyzed it. I especially liked how you explained the difference between intra and inter frame codecs. That was always a murky area for me.
Great work, thanks for that analysis, funny and right to the point.I think you summarise this perfectly. For the most important projects, where the intrinsic value is higher, use the HQ and AVCHD for the smaller work. Thanks again.
Thank you SO much for this thorough side by side look between AVCHD v ProRes formats. I wish more folks did reviews like this. Was wondering how much quality I'd be losing with the C100 & if ProRes (which the industry is raving about) was worth the upgrade. You've answered my question!
Danke! This was the best comparison that I have yet seen of the intenral vs external codecs. I am so on the fence about purchasing an external recorder for my c100. I see a lot of macro-blocking and am hoping to get rid of that. This is quite helpful.
I recently got my C100 mkii + atomos ninja blade and I'm so happy to have found your video. The level of detail combined with passion for what you do made this video very enjoyable. Thank you for sharing your work as this has helped me understand the codecs a little bit better. Good luck with all future videos :)
This video was extremely informative for me. I have been considering an Atomos Ninja (for my current C100) or Shogun (protect for future 4K) purchase hoping it would open doors to greater flexibility in post. Seeing how well the AVCHD holds up in comparison, as well as the downside and cost of additional storage to accommodate huge ProRes files, has convinced me to wait. Thank you !!
Very, very helpful, especially if you want to learn about compression algorhythms. Very well presented and well thought and observed. Gratulation für die Mühe!
This is an excellent video - your narration is spot-on and very helpful to explain what's happening. I kind of wish now that I hadn't just sprung $400 for a Atomos Ninja Star and CFast card...but se la vie. Superb video.
Thank you for this demonstration. I have both the C100 and the Ninja2 and this information confirms my same findings and I would have the same resolve for usage.
Congrats to you for providing such a useful comparison - I just bought a Ninja Star and was also experiencing the same disappointment as you. It just goes to show what a great job Canon have done with their C100-ii and the supposedly 'terrible' AVCHD codec. I think I (too) will just be using the Prores HQ for really important interviews/things (and for colour-banding issues eg clear blue skys/green-screen where 4:2:2 will make a noticeable difference). Other than that, I don't think it will be worth the premium in hard-disk space for me.
Wow, I've been in the game for almost 20 years and have seen many do technical pixel peeping and getting it wrong, your video comparison however, is probably the best I've seen (with exception to the Zacuto series) and so, congrats and thanks for your time.
Hey! Super Video! Ich komme von der Fotografie und war bisschen verwirrt von all den Atomos gewrabbel. Ich dachte es sei ein muss! Jetzt verstehe ich die Unterschiede! Danke!
thank you thank you thank you thank you!! I have been noticing this myself when working with the c100 mk2 and ninja blade ext recorder with a color artist on a job. We thought I was doing something wrong since I couldn't see a difference between internal recording and external recording at 220mb prores 422. This video explains why. I thought I was crazy.
A huge advantage in using ProRes is when trying to color correct and color grade. ProRes hold together very well when doing heavy grading where as AVCHD falls apart quickly. When doing any serious work I always shoot in ProRes.
I'm more impressed with your detailed analysis of the video than even the results. Any chance of comparing MP4 to AVCHD? You seem to be able to spot the deferences better than any other poster on youtube.
I tried to do one test on my gh4 with its codecs: mov, avchd, mp4, all intra, and it seems to me that mp4 is best with details Although all intra goes to 100-200 bitrate.
MP4 is a container, not a codec. It's like saying you want to compare the taste of Coca Cola, the actual soda itself, to an can of Pepsi, just the aluminum can. It is a confusing topic and technical. Just so you know, AVCHD footage can be an MP4 file.
this is a great tutorial test shoot. I just want to point out that PRORES has an additional advantage when grading the footage. it will hold up much better than AVCHD. however if you won't be grading in post and you like the image out of the camera, then your conclusions are sufficiently accurate. Cheers
thank you! this was a great logical explanation....i hated the avchd with my pana x920...i want to buy a used c100 but i didn't know really what to expect....but now you did a good point out: the codec is not so responsable of degrading an image more than other variables...the true is that it's better to have a good sensor with a bad codec rather than a bad sensor with a good codec...in fact i compared also some shot between d7000 (mov H264) and the Panasonic x920 (mts AVCHD), on paper the x920's file are much larger files, but when i charge them on premiere the poor dynamic range of the pana loses a lot against the nikon: you can touch more the parameters but you don't have nothing to play with...instead the mov files are very delicates but if you keep a light hand on them the sensor grabbed at least something to work on...anybody who wants to make a comment on this is welcome, i am still learning
Don't having a 10bit output means don't using the full potential of PreRes. ProRes 422 HQ, 422, 422 LT and 422 Proxy are all compatible with 10 bit. The quality of your HDMI output and of your recorder really matter. I shoot in ProRes with a Blackmagic Camera (10bit) and the results are really better than those footages.
Sehr gut, Danke! Great comparison piece and your conclusions are as I suspected. I have shot on FS700 with Samurai for some time now and find it difficult to see the difference between internal and external image quality. What I'd really like to get my hands on is the Odyssey 7Q. While they are yet to add a compressed 4k (the FS700 raw being massive) they seem to have a flavour of 1080 which is sampled down from the 4k image. There's an appreciable improvement in sharpness and colour rendition as compared with the AVCHD. Its a bit on the pricey side though. Anyway, keep up the good work and best wishes from Scotland!
Hi, it is a very interesting comparison and I would agree with your final statement. Thing is, TV- Stations in Europe are asking for 4:2:2. 50mb, there is no choice if you want to sell your productions to broadcasters. Best Hartmut
Where are you getting your information from? All flavors of ProRes are 10bit (except for ProRes 4444 & ProRes 4444XQ which are 12bit). So you're not going from 10bit to 8bit when you go from ProRes HQ to ProRes 422, you're just getting a lower bit rate.
I just watched a very informative video about Sony XAVC codec. It's definitely a better codec for professional use. Their codec is able to outperform ProRes by using smaller file sizes. In fact, most of the major TV networks are using Sony codes. Go to Sony Professional UA-cam channel. You will find a video about this subject, and why it's better. They are able to achieve the same level of picture quality with lower file sizes. Great video presentation, thanks.
I've had the same problem with blocking artifacts on Prores 422 and it was very annoying - many thanks for taking the time to explain why the in-camera compression can often create a better image in certain circumstances. I have now ditched 422 and only use HQ. To be honest though the only time I absolutely use external recorders now is when I am chromakeying - and want the 10bit 422 that the camera cannot record internally - although I would be interested to know whether that is such an advantage as I imagine!
You definitely have an advantage using HQ for Chromakey. I made some Testkeys from Greenscreenmaterial that i shot and the Prores HQ resolves fine details like hair a bit better. But: The AVCHD Key was also pretty good! And without A-B Comparison and to the average viewer the result would be absolutely fine as well. The most important thing is a good (even) lighting on the Screen and clean separation from your actor. If the light is bad, the difference in internal and external footage would probably be more severe. If i find the time I might upload the greenscreentest as well.
That's good to know. You're absolutely right about lighting - I always use false colour to make sure of no hotspots etc and it always keys great (even in Premiere), but I never knew for sure how much the 10bit output contributed to that. To be honest if Prores resolves hair better I will always use it because some of my clients have crazy hair! Thanks for your response and a great video.
kurtenbachfilm Actually to give the best test, why didn't you shoot at Uncompressed then compress it in post production so you can transcode it easily. And, you can Losslessly compress the footage using 7zip (PPMd Ultra). So each video is identical.
Very practical review... would have been nice if you pushed the footage in grading cause thats where the real value or ProRes shows up. Thanks for sharing.
very interesting, thanks. At about 4:00 when u freeze frame I can see some vertical pattern artifacts in the prores HQ, in the top right. I guess they are produced by the sensor itself and not by the codec of choice, because I can kind of see them less noticeably in the AVCHD part too, probably blurred out..
but anyways, great comparison, 2 years i never pulled the trigger buying a recorder. now youve proved me right. considering the c100 mk2 is 5500. so my C100 has dropped its value straight down from 7500 to 3000 lol 2 years 4500 loss, canon is insane
It is not so clear. My colleague says, The C100 Mark II will work differently than the original C100 and it will interpolate 4K chip signal (3x8MPx total 24MPx) The question is how (HW lanzos smoothing interpolation ?, original color?). It is evident preparation for 4K, but Canon did not allow for the owners of this camera at least 4K / QHD output for ext. recording. Also, it will probably play more resolution in luminance aand there could be slightly higher color fidelity, but it may be worse too. It will eat more batteries, the question is also a fan etc.
There's one avenue that remained unexplored which is very important, thats the amount of data left for post production, think off grading or VFX, there the extra data of AVCHD vs ProRes 42 becomes apparent. Often when I shoot for green screens I even abandon ProResHQ for RAW (depending on the lighting on the screens).
Very interesting and helpful. I was looking for such comparison. Thank you. I shoot for broadcast, my last film was shot on canon mark 3 with the c 100 mk2. internal only. Today i'm thinking to get me an external recorder for the sake of better and easier color grading in post.
Very good review video. Sad that many devices are choosing AppleProRes to record on. Cineform and MXF are good mastering formats. Cinema projection requires MXF now. It speaks volumes. There is a way to convert 8 bit to 10bit dithered so you can have more colour data into the extra 2 bits. A time consuming thing to do and only worth it for awkward clips with dark stuff going on or if your getting banding.
Excellent comparison. I use the Atomos Samurai for the high quality monitor, waveform and vectorscope, the codec improvement is nice, but I only use it for the times when I want the "best" quality out of the camera (C100) It is impressive how well the AVCHD works, too bad the C100 does not output 10 bit as well, I think that would have made external recording much more important than it currently is.
Additional note: the C100 MkII, is a nice improvement, but without 10 bit output, or a better internal codec, there is really no point to upgrade, for me.
Excellent video, for editing AVCHD is ok but color grading makes it fall apart. It will be interesting to see how higher bitrate AVCHD or H.264 in the 50 mbit for 1080p holds up. For me the lack of support of Prores on Windows makes it an even bigger issue. Prores should be available on PC editing software but it is being kept at bay by Apple so they have a reason to get Macs for many years. I for one use Cineform and the Prores hacks on windows are ok but not ideal.
Intraframe codecs like Apple Pro Res seem less risky and more reliable; as long as an image looks sharp enough, I'll know that motion and changes won't mess it up at any point throughout.
Man.... some of these shots just Amazed me for some reason. I stopped listening to you at some points and really took in the beautiful scenery. :P but very informative video. Thanks :P
It's astonishing how much of a difference intelligent, considered narration makes. I really enjoyed watching this and it was very helpful too. Well done.
miroslavponc Thank you! ;-)
+miroslavponc
Absolutely agree, awesome video damnGerman. Great sly sense of humour too
+miroslavponc thank you very much it was very interesting!
I'm using a Canon AX30 / Atomos / 1080i60 / HDMI out / ProRez 422
With motion or panning I'm getting razor thin black lines
Have you ever experienced that? Wondering if your shooting in 1080i or maybe 30 or 24? Outstanding video TY
Really astonishing how enjoyable was to watch this quantity of information
Just stumbled on this. Excellent overview about some sometimes tricky production choices. Even in 2023 editing in AVCHD feels so much freer than dealing with gigantic files with little quality gain. The next video needs to look into grading the different codecs. Thank you!
I use avchd most of the time even when XAVC S is available. XAVC S uses almost double the bit rate compared to AVCHD (50 mbps vs. 28 mbps), yet I cannot notice the difference while playing the video.
This is the most clear, in-depth, well done, accurate comparison I have ever seen. The AVCHD implementation that Canon has done is brilliant, miles ahead of AVCHD consumer camcorders. Thank you very very much for taking the time to do it. I'm a broadcast engineer and I agree completely on your points. Thanks again for the effort.
Thank you for the excellent analysis and highly informative video.
Thanks for the video. You are the best parenthetical narrator I've come across on UA-cam.
This was awesome. Clear, concise, really fantastic. I like how you brought this down to a really practical level and analyzed it. I especially liked how you explained the difference between intra and inter frame codecs. That was always a murky area for me.
+moreapropos Thank you very much!
All these many years later....THANK YOU!
The best AVCHD vs. ProRes comparison on the web, hands down. The most informative and complete. Thank you so much.
Great work, thanks for that analysis, funny and right to the point.I think you summarise this perfectly. For the most important projects, where the intrinsic value is higher, use the HQ and AVCHD for the smaller work. Thanks again.
Thank you so much for taking the time to do this. Very useful.
I appreciate the in-depth analysis and clean narration! Great video, thanks for making it.
This was just about the most excellently put together, pleasant to listen to comparison video I have ever seen on youtube. Thank you!
Lol "I made this highly artistic shot of the ground." I lost it
that was so hilarious! XD
This is what I call a great Video. Professional, good voice, super informative. Great job. Thanks for sharing.
Thank you so much! :)
Thank you SO much for this thorough side by side look between AVCHD v ProRes formats. I wish more folks did reviews like this. Was wondering how much quality I'd be losing with the C100 & if ProRes (which the industry is raving about) was worth the upgrade. You've answered my question!
Danke! This was the best comparison that I have yet seen of the intenral vs external codecs. I am so on the fence about purchasing an external recorder for my c100. I see a lot of macro-blocking and am hoping to get rid of that. This is quite helpful.
I recently got my C100 mkii + atomos ninja blade and I'm so happy to have found your video. The level of detail combined with passion for what you do made this video very enjoyable. Thank you for sharing your work as this has helped me understand the codecs a little bit better. Good luck with all future videos :)
Thank you for a superb presentation. Very simply put and yet very intelligently narrated. Danke!
This video was extremely informative for me. I have been considering an Atomos Ninja (for my current C100) or Shogun (protect for future 4K) purchase hoping it would open doors to greater flexibility in post. Seeing how well the AVCHD holds up in comparison, as well as the downside and cost of additional storage to accommodate huge ProRes files, has convinced me to wait. Thank you !!
Very, very helpful, especially if you want to learn about compression algorhythms. Very well presented and well thought and observed. Gratulation für die Mühe!
Thanks for the most professional presentation. Wish prores HQ was much, much better, but this comparison shows that it is "slightly" better.
Thank you, very informative. I looked for a long time to find a video that would explain the difference between the two codecs
This is an excellent video - your narration is spot-on and very helpful to explain what's happening. I kind of wish now that I hadn't just sprung $400 for a Atomos Ninja Star and CFast card...but se la vie. Superb video.
+Scotty Turner Thank you!
Love this very detailed and thorough comparison. Thanks so much for posting it!
Fantastic, excellent, informative video. Thank you very much. Learnt a lot (and about the C100 camera).
Thank you very much!
Thanks a lot!! So far the best comparison video I've ever searched on UA-cam, very clear and obvious.
Thank you!
Thank you for this demonstration. I have both the C100 and the Ninja2 and this information confirms my same findings and I would have the same resolve for usage.
Really nice comparison video. Exactly the info I was looking for.
Congrats to you for providing such a useful comparison - I just bought a Ninja Star and was also experiencing the same disappointment as you. It just goes to show what a great job Canon have done with their C100-ii and the supposedly 'terrible' AVCHD codec. I think I (too) will just be using the Prores HQ for really important interviews/things (and for colour-banding issues eg clear blue skys/green-screen where 4:2:2 will make a noticeable difference). Other than that, I don't think it will be worth the premium in hard-disk space for me.
Wow, I've been in the game for almost 20 years and have seen many do technical pixel peeping and getting it wrong, your video comparison however, is probably the best I've seen (with exception to the Zacuto series) and so, congrats and thanks for your time.
Thank you!
Fantastic comparison and great information. Thank you for taking the time to share this!
Hey! Super Video! Ich komme von der Fotografie und war bisschen verwirrt von all den Atomos gewrabbel. Ich dachte es sei ein muss! Jetzt verstehe ich die Unterschiede! Danke!
Excellent analysis. Thank you. Before I found your video, I did similar tests and came to the same conclusion.
thank you thank you thank you thank you!!
I have been noticing this myself when working with the c100 mk2 and ninja blade ext recorder with a color artist on a job. We thought I was doing something wrong since I couldn't see a difference between internal recording and external recording at 220mb prores 422. This video explains why. I thought I was crazy.
Thank you for taking the time to do this very nice comparison! :-)
A huge advantage in using ProRes is when trying to color correct and color grade. ProRes hold together very well when doing heavy grading where as AVCHD falls apart quickly. When doing any serious work I always shoot in ProRes.
I'm more impressed with your detailed analysis of the video than even the results. Any chance of comparing MP4 to AVCHD? You seem to be able to spot the deferences better than any other poster on youtube.
David Grim I agree.
David Grim zxs
I tried to do one test on my gh4 with its codecs: mov, avchd, mp4, all intra, and it seems to me that mp4 is best with details
Although all intra goes to 100-200 bitrate.
MP4 is a container, not a codec. It's like saying you want to compare the taste of Coca Cola, the actual soda itself, to an can of Pepsi, just the aluminum can. It is a confusing topic and technical. Just so you know, AVCHD footage can be an MP4 file.
Wow. That was really good. Articulate, precise, concise, simple. Thank you.
Great information. Thank you for taking the time to put this together.!!
Excellent comparison and comments! Thank you.
Very...VERY good sir. You have definitely nailed it on this toot.
Super professional comparison. Well done ;) And a great telling voice. Thanks!
Very good analysis! Deep and elegant. Congratulations and thanks for the info
This video is wonderful. It is both well put together and well narrated.
Such a detailed and well explained video. Thank you so much for the time you spent.
Very interesting, and, as you say, quite surprising in many ways. Excellent video, and very informative.
Perfect, just the comparison I was looking for. Thanks.
Thanks so much for creating this comparison. This is extremely helpful.
awesome testing !! so well made and thanks for taking the time to do so !!
I wished that you had done a dynamic range side by side though :)
Thank you for a detailed review and some nice tests!
Thanks man!, nothing better than a good German giving explications, great video. :)
Thank you for making this very clear comparison. I guess the real advantage of the ProRes will be in color grading.
This was really informative. You should do more of these.
A fantastic video. I learned so much within a very concise time. Thank you!
Very well done and very helpful. Thank you for your professionalism.
this is a great tutorial test shoot. I just want to point out that PRORES has an additional advantage when grading the footage. it will hold up much better than AVCHD. however if you won't be grading in post and you like the image out of the camera, then your conclusions are sufficiently accurate. Cheers
Excellent information, very thorough and to the point. many thanks.
Thanks so much. I've been looking for this for this.
Thanks for your work! Please make such comparison for other formats!
thank you! this was a great logical explanation....i hated the avchd with my pana x920...i want to buy a used c100 but i didn't know really what to expect....but now you did a good point out: the codec is not so responsable of degrading an image more than other variables...the true is that it's better to have a good sensor with a bad codec rather than a bad sensor with a good codec...in fact i compared also some shot between d7000 (mov H264) and the Panasonic x920 (mts AVCHD), on paper the x920's file are much larger files, but when i charge them on premiere the poor dynamic range of the pana loses a lot against the nikon: you can touch more the parameters but you don't have nothing to play with...instead the mov files are very delicates but if you keep a light hand on them the sensor grabbed at least something to work on...anybody who wants to make a comment on this is welcome, i am still learning
this saved me a whole lot of pixel peeping. I will be doing a test with my FS100 footage shot with AVCHD as well as prores 422HQ soon.
Don't having a 10bit output means don't using the full potential of PreRes. ProRes 422 HQ, 422, 422 LT and 422 Proxy are all compatible with 10 bit. The quality of your HDMI output and of your recorder really matter. I shoot in ProRes with a Blackmagic Camera (10bit) and the results are really better than those footages.
Great comparison! I have found the same. Interested to see if the C100 II will have much changes in the image quality in the AVC and MP4 codecs.
Nice test, and it makes sense. The C100 takes a higher internal source from the Digic processor and goes directly into 8 bit mpeg ..
Sehr gut, Danke! Great comparison piece and your conclusions are as I suspected. I have shot on FS700 with Samurai for some time now and find it difficult to see the difference between internal and external image quality. What I'd really like to get my hands on is the Odyssey 7Q. While they are yet to add a compressed 4k (the FS700 raw being massive) they seem to have a flavour of 1080 which is sampled down from the 4k image. There's an appreciable improvement in sharpness and colour rendition as compared with the AVCHD. Its a bit on the pricey side though. Anyway, keep up the good work and best wishes from Scotland!
Where you do see a difference is when you begin to do color grading,. other than that, the internal AVCHD of the camera is pretty.
I LOVED THIS...I FELT THE AVCHD LOOKED BETTER THAN THE MP4, BUT IT WAS A LOWER BIT RATE
Hi, it is a very interesting comparison and I would agree with your final statement. Thing is, TV- Stations in Europe are asking for 4:2:2. 50mb, there is no choice if you want to sell your productions to broadcasters.
Best
Hartmut
Fantastic. That'll save me a lot of money not buying an external recorder. And that girl is beautiful!
Where are you getting your information from? All flavors of ProRes are 10bit (except for ProRes 4444 & ProRes 4444XQ which are 12bit). So you're not going from 10bit to 8bit when you go from ProRes HQ to ProRes 422, you're just getting a lower bit rate.
Amazing analysis 💯
Thanks for the comparison. Very useful.
the benefit using prores is more easy to edit in application
avchd is almost same with h.264, its finishing codec
CMIIW
Thank you for sharing this, I highly appreciate it.
I just watched a very informative video about Sony XAVC codec. It's definitely a better codec for professional use. Their codec is able to outperform ProRes by using smaller file sizes. In fact, most of the major TV networks are using Sony codes. Go to Sony Professional UA-cam channel. You will find a video about this subject, and why it's better. They are able to achieve the same level of picture quality with lower file sizes. Great video presentation, thanks.
Thanks for sharing your work! Super helpful
Thank you so much for this. It was so helpful to me.
I've had the same problem with blocking artifacts on Prores 422 and it was very annoying - many thanks for taking the time to explain why the in-camera compression can often create a better image in certain circumstances. I have now ditched 422 and only use HQ. To be honest though the only time I absolutely use external recorders now is when I am chromakeying - and want the 10bit 422 that the camera cannot record internally - although I would be interested to know whether that is such an advantage as I imagine!
You definitely have an advantage using HQ for Chromakey. I made some Testkeys from Greenscreenmaterial that i shot and the Prores HQ resolves fine details like hair a bit better. But: The AVCHD Key was also pretty good! And without A-B Comparison and to the average viewer the result would be absolutely fine as well. The most important thing is a good (even) lighting on the Screen and clean separation from your actor. If the light is bad, the difference in internal and external footage would probably be more severe.
If i find the time I might upload the greenscreentest as well.
That's good to know. You're absolutely right about lighting - I always use false colour to make sure of no hotspots etc and it always keys great (even in Premiere), but I never knew for sure how much the 10bit output contributed to that. To be honest if Prores resolves hair better I will always use it because some of my clients have crazy hair!
Thanks for your response and a great video.
kurtenbachfilm Actually to give the best test, why didn't you shoot at Uncompressed then compress it in post production so you can transcode it easily. And, you can Losslessly compress the footage using 7zip (PPMd Ultra). So each video is identical.
Really well made comparison. Thank you!
great review- one thing ive found is the prores is a night and day when you do heavy color grading (AE coloristaII w 32 bit for example)
Very practical review... would have been nice if you pushed the footage in grading cause thats where the real value or ProRes shows up. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for the clear and informative video!
Fantastic! We need more people like you in the world :D thank you
Great video, thanks for that. I have same experience and I use Prores 4:2:2 just for greenscreen shots.
very interesting, thanks. At about 4:00 when u freeze frame I can see some vertical pattern artifacts in the prores HQ, in the top right. I guess they are produced by the sensor itself and not by the codec of choice, because I can kind of see them less noticeably in the AVCHD part too, probably blurred out..
but anyways, great comparison, 2 years i never pulled the trigger buying a recorder. now youve proved me right.
considering the c100 mk2 is 5500. so my C100 has dropped its value straight down from 7500 to 3000 lol 2 years 4500 loss, canon is insane
It is not so clear. My colleague says, The C100 Mark II will work differently than the original C100 and it will interpolate 4K chip signal (3x8MPx total 24MPx)
The question is how (HW lanzos smoothing interpolation ?, original color?). It is evident preparation for 4K, but Canon did not allow for the owners of this camera at least 4K / QHD output for ext. recording. Also, it will probably play more resolution in luminance aand there could be slightly higher color fidelity, but it may be worse too.
It will eat more batteries, the question is also a fan etc.
There's one avenue that remained unexplored which is very important, thats the amount of data left for post production, think off grading or VFX, there the extra data of AVCHD vs ProRes 42 becomes apparent.
Often when I shoot for green screens I even abandon ProResHQ for RAW (depending on the lighting on the screens).
Excellent info - thanks very much!
excellent video.. thanks. got the answers i was looking for.
Very interesting and helpful. I was looking for such comparison. Thank you. I shoot for broadcast, my last film was shot on canon mark 3 with the c 100 mk2. internal only. Today i'm thinking to get me an external recorder for the sake of better and easier color grading in post.
Very good review video. Sad that many devices are choosing AppleProRes to record on. Cineform and MXF are good mastering formats. Cinema projection requires MXF now. It speaks volumes. There is a way to convert 8 bit to 10bit dithered so you can have more colour data into the extra 2 bits. A time consuming thing to do and only worth it for awkward clips with dark stuff going on or if your getting banding.
It's heartbreaking that this is your only tech video on the channel. What i've learnt from this one video alone...
Thank you for your work! Very useful information.
Thank you very much for the video! super useful!
Excellent comparison. I use the Atomos Samurai for the high quality monitor, waveform and vectorscope, the codec improvement is nice, but I only use it for the times when I want the "best" quality out of the camera (C100) It is impressive how well the AVCHD works, too bad the C100 does not output 10 bit as well, I think that would have made external recording much more important than it currently is.
Additional note: the C100 MkII, is a nice improvement, but without 10 bit output, or a better internal codec, there is really no point to upgrade, for me.
Excellent video, for editing AVCHD is ok but color grading makes it fall apart. It will be interesting to see how higher bitrate AVCHD or H.264 in the 50 mbit for 1080p holds up. For me the lack of support of Prores on Windows makes it an even bigger issue. Prores should be available on PC editing software but it is being kept at bay by Apple so they have a reason to get Macs for many years. I for one use Cineform and the Prores hacks on windows are ok but not ideal.
Intraframe codecs like Apple Pro Res seem less risky and more reliable; as long as an image looks sharp enough, I'll know that motion and changes won't mess it up at any point throughout.
Man.... some of these shots just Amazed me for some reason. I stopped listening to you at some points and really took in the beautiful scenery. :P but very informative video. Thanks :P
That was a really good unbiased explanation!
Thank you,? Very well thought out and explained. Cheers, great video.