The experts will abstain a reply by insisting that neither is better than ProRes, RAW, or whatnot. I'd bet that most consumers won't notice the difference, other than that XAVC-S will consume memory cards more slowly. Very possibly, XAVC is the format that Sony would like to be the standard for 4k Blu-ray, if it every appears, since it may use less optical disc space than MP4 for the same IQ. Trouble is, we don't have native 4k video capture at 60mbps to compare properly, since the GH4 captures at 100mbps, and compression to 60mbps would entail IQ loss anyway, a fate of all MP$ or other "lossy" formats. Sony might argue that XAVC-S delivers essentially the same perceived IQ at 60mbps that MP4 delivers at 100mbps. Other than branding, the only way one could know is to do a side-by-side test of XAVC-S and MP4, to see whether their is a quality difference, or whether one supports grading or editing better or easier than the other. Or why is there MOV if MP4 will do, and so on. Sort of asking why the world needs Nikon lenses if Canon makes ones with a slightly different mount.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |