To me, Mjpeg is limited because it doesn't really shoot true 24/25p, only 30p. Also when I did tests on it, it did well on low iso/low light, but didn't do as well on HIGH iso and low light. Way more FPN on high iso/low light on the GH1. Never tested the GH2.

Hi,

I make test with the option Mjpeg FPS for make 25 fps. Media info show me the file is 25fps and the time limite get up of 3 minutes. But when put 25 fps and 2K resolution. The mjpeg mode 's instable ...

I' dont know if mjpeg is really progressive scan... Media info don't show me type scan.... But I think it's...

Somebody had testing Mjpeg in 2k at 25fps??

The Mjpeg mode is very interesting for edit on a little configuration like a Macbook unibody or core duo. And the 2K for stabilisation, fake travelling and others tricks... But I need real 25p for Pal use...

Thanks

@Manoosh, drop this search string in google you will find all the mjpeg topics on PV

2k mjpeg site:www.personal-view.com/talks

Hi,

Today I test Mjpeg mode with this: 2432x 1366 like BCC ( black magic) Frame rate :25 E1 Quality = 512 E1 Table = 6 E2 Quality = 420 E2 Table = 28 E3 Quality = 420 E3 Table = 26 E4 Quality = 486 E4 Table = 8

I test too AVCHD with "Final Bloom cluster9" by @Driftwood HBR mode only

I can record short clip under 1min with Mjpeg mode on Sand disk Extreme 45MB/s 32 go

Two first screen shot are native 2,5k .MOV and 1080 .MTS Others are compression in Apple Proress422hq with media encoder

I see big difference betweew two mode, but I can't say who is the best...

My bitrate get down with this settings: E1 Quality = 400 E1 Table = 24 E2 Quality = 200 E2 Table = 36 E3 Quality = 175 E3 Table = 48 E4 Quality = 150 E4 Table = 4

Bitrate around 60mbps but WHen I record I have the error message " speed card"

I don't realy understand what I do. But I hope

Somebody?

Compare it with low quality 1920x1080 still photo.

@humpman If I compare my shot it's dirty. Lot of noise and less details.

@nereo I understand what you say, and your patch in 2k is really so good. But when I put your settings with the resizing in 2428.1366 I have a bitrate around 140mbs but sometimes when I record I have the error speed writing message. I need more faster card for continue my test.

The canon 1DC have a mjpeg in 300mbs for 4K . I think the half to GH2 is may be possible with bitrate around 150mbs this old codec can make a good job...

I need to find a method for move settings table and quality. I see lot posts in PV but nothing specific.

May be somebody have link or other information for the settings and all about of Mjpeg?

Thanks for your reply

@Manoosh I've experimented with AVCHD vs MJPEG, have read all the posts between Andrew Reid and others, a while back, where the discussion became very heated. In the end, I decided that Andrew was right, AVCHD/H.264 is a modern CODEC that is still being worked on by the manufacturers, and which gives the best IQ. In good-light situations, however, MJPEG looks better, more detail, straight out of the camera. But I have found that a little post-processing of the AVCHD (H.264) footage brings it to MJPEG look, with more sharpness.

About bitrates (I hope I don't get flamed). I have never seen a huge visual difference between high bitrate and stock bitrate from these cameras. I DO NOT disagree that it is there, but not obvious to me. I can just speak for myself. The same is true with the MJPEG quality look-up table tweaks. I believe the reason you can't see a big difference is that the compression is happening after the camera makes a decision on what an image will look like; that is, has made its first compression pass. If the camera throws out a lot of color information before sending it to file-compression (and I think these cameras do), then it really doesn't matter if you have a high bit-rate or low bit-rate on what I'll call the second pass compression. Admittedly, I'm shooting out of my arse here. But if anyone want to education me then they need to show me a video shot both with a stock camera, and that camera with a hack, without post processing, where I can see the difference. I have spent hour and hours looking at this kind of footage. I shoot a bunch myself. I can only see difference if I look very hard. Again, I know it's there intra-frame, artifact improvement, but not so much general IQ.

If you really want high dynamic range, Black magic or Magic Lantern Canon RAW are where you want to go. They have high bitrates because they're saving RAW data from the camera sensor. I can see a HUGE difference between the RAW video I shoot on my EOS-M, for example, and the H.264 video it produces from the factory. The reason is that the RAW video isn't really video at all, but un-compressed raw still images from the sensor.

But before you jump into RAW know this: you lose resolution, the work-flow is tedious, difficult requires lots of storage and a powerful PC. For most work, it is not a good way to go. It is ONLY good if you want high dynamic range and are prepared to pay a huge price in time for it. A Panasonic camera will already give you a great image that is easy to get, work with, store, etc.