AVCHD lite (720p) versus Motion Jpeg on the Lumix TZ-7

[mommalyze]

What is MPEG1?

[ghough12]

@mommalyze Hi mpeg1 was the first "codec" used to compress audio and video down to 1.6Mbps for use with vhs recording equipment. It was also the foundation for the first generation of mp3 audio recording. With DVD's a higher bit rate was needed do hence mpeg2 was developed to deliver the required bit rates whilst maintaining small file sizes.

[mommalyze]

What cameras use AVCHD?

[kevinwong530]

@mommalyze

panasonic lumix

[mommalyze]

That is funny. The Mjpeg is so choppy. I am thinking about buying a Kodak Camera that uses this type of video. Is it easier to edit and capture stills at least?

[ghough12]

@mommalyze This is f probably down to the frame rate (30fps) recording and a project timeline of 25 fps. YT converts back to 30 fps so there is a lot of mismatch here.

[gharibhanif]

THis looks like a place in Doncaster. Is this right?

[ghough12]

@gharibhanif Na its Horwich in Greater Manchester

[TheSfoilerStudio]

x.v. color?

[diozent]

mjpeg has better sound

[ghough12]

@diozent Technically mjpeg is inferior as it is only sampled at 16Khz whereas avchd is sampled with CD quality 44Khz.

[kojinmalia]

@diozent your ears are dying:/

[muhammadtaimur]

I have ZS3 aswell. AVCHD is a very good format, both in terms of high quality and small file size.

[BigEric42]

Thanks for an excellent demo (yet again!) and I also appreciate your reasoned conclusions (with which I agree). It was alao nice to see The Crown roundabout... and remember RA Feretti's ice cream... Regards from an alumnus of Horwich (Chorley New Road) County Primary School (Infants' Division). Pure nostalgia (including the grey on grey weather!)

[vwlover94]

Ive also heard that the audio sounds better in AVCHD too

[ghough12]

@vwlover94 this is correct, the mjpeg uses only 16K for audio bit rate where avchd uses cd quality at 44k

[jevries]

Where the AVCHD lite codec really fails is with panning and action shots. I have an LG mobile phone that has a much lower resolution shooting Divx movies but the motion is way better. No jitter.

[donnyab]

I am trying to learn image processing at the minute. Is it much more difficult to code MJPEG than say just Jpeg itself. I presume there are no actual motion aspects to the code as such - it is just spitting out a sucession of Jpeg images ?

What is the frame rate being used ?

[ghough12]

@donnyab Correct Mjeg is one of the oldest forms of digital motion picture, as you say a stream of full frame images. Each image is a complete frame of information. In this case 60 frames per second.

[donnyab]

@ghough12 Could I ask you another question - I don't actually own a camera, when you record the video in MJPEG and upload it to the computer is it stored as a series of still image files or is it stored as one complete file which the software can then decode/play back

[ghough12]

@donnyab Exactly that, the whole sequence is a complete file. In the post edit program you can single out each individual frame of the sequenece. So for example in an action sequence you can select to within 1/60 second the position of the action. The resolution being dependent upon the original file = 1280 x 720 pixels.

[jh3835]

seems like mjpeg is pulsating during moving objects. avchd has a smoother flow and seems more colorful.

[ghough12]

@jh3835 this is apparent only on youtube original file is really smooth.

[paulogazola]

Honestly, I haven't seen big difference in sharpness - only that AVCHD seems to me like BLURred a little. And, the sensation that the "bluriness" is compatible (in the same direction) with the action/movement. So, to me the sensation of movement is more fluid in avchd than in mjpeg. Mac (=imovie) doesn't work directly with avchd, and converting EVERY video I made is a very boring task. If mjpeg could make 60 fps, no doubt that I'll gambit the fluid-movement feature.

[jt663]

U should do a side by side comparison

[GNYBerlin]

Just got the TZ-10 and have been wondering about the two video settings. Thanks for putting this together.

[ghough12]

@GNYBerlin yes the addition of mjpeg allows you to create quick videos which edit a lot easier than acvhd and are much more suited to any video which complex movements or highly detailed environment. Avchd does not, imho, treat this well.

[GNYBerlin]

@ghough12 So the advantage of AVCHD is just that it looks sharper as it does here in your test. My previous camera (Canon Elph) caused me many headaches with flicker on movements and small detail. I guess that might be the same with very high contrasty or moving images in the AVCHD setting?

[ghough12]

@GNYBerlin absolutely correct, the compression program which takes the sensor output and converts it to the camera file uses very sophisticated routines to predict movement etc but for commercial cameras these routines are basic ones. It gives a very useable solution to recording to memory card instead of tape. Its a case of testing to see what it doesn't like in AVCHD and then shoot in mjpeg when you have to do these scene types. Good luck with your vids in Berlin

[GNYBerlin]

@ghough12 Thank you for all that detailed info. I'll play around with the camera some more and see what makes most sense for my videos. The last one I had to shoot on an HDV camcorder since the Elph passed out on me. But the next one I've already shot on AVCHD Lite. We'll see...

[reinierocks]

can't tell the difference; a dark cloud has moved a little bit on top left while shooting MJPEG, so the image looks a little bit darker, however sound quality is way better in AVCHD lite mode

[ghough12]

@reinierocks Yes the audio bit rate in mjpeg is only 16Khz whereas in avchd its 44Khz sampling so the higher frequecies should sound better.

[mrrandom177]

thanks for this graham. i have the same camera but haven't carried out comparison shoots like this.

in the above clips the AVCHD footage plays much smoother than the mjpeg footage. however, imo the mjpeg footage appears more natural especially in the cloud detail...... sky in the the AVCHD looks blown out.

enjoying your "real world" comparrison tests. though im sure non locals may wonder if it ever stops raing in't north west ;-)

[ghough12]

@mrrandom177 Yes, i prefer mjpeg when there is detail or high contrast in the scene, The low bit rate of the avchd codec just doesn't do it for me in this situation. And... doesn't it always rain around Manchester?

[xxxBurnin]

Which do you prefer using in a concert? AVCHD or JPEG?

[ghough12]

@xxxBurnin On balance the avchd would be the best choice as its got a higher audio bit rate = better quality sound and longer recording time - not limited to the 2Gb file size 8minutes of mjpeg clips. For highly detailed scenes i still prefer mjpeg.

[justerjuster]

i stand corrected : )

lovely camera

[justerjuster]

also in JPEG the sound is in MONO only. AVCHD is stereo...

[merlinthegray1]

@justerjuster Actually mjpeg is stereo but the bit rate is only 16Khz as opposed to 44Khz of AVCHD lite

[justerjuster]

"Yes its a limitation of windows fat32 file system it can only do 2 Gb files so in mjpeg this runs out at about 8 mins, so you would get 4 clips on yoyr 8gb card.

thanks for viewing. Graham"

thats not true unfortunatly,, the time limit is a stupid memorycard EU-tax regulation, my 8 gb card takes about 1 hour in AVCHD, but i can only rec 29 minutes minutes in a singel shot. in US you can record until your out of memory.

[NoDoSwLa]

I've looked the video up because i've just bought a tz10 and wanted to see if there's a compare vid.

motion jpeg looks better. point 3 is right though. the house in the middle is sharper and more outlined, car to the right is sharper, grass isn't that blurry. Sky has more contour. avchd lite only is brighter and more blurry.

But with my 8 gig sd-card avchd lite can record 30 minutes, motion jpeg only 8.

So I'll stick to the avchd lite. Good enough anyway

Thanks for upload

[ghough12]

@NoDoSwLa Yes its a limitation of windows fat32 file system it can only do 2 Gb files so in mjpeg this runs out at about 8 mins, so you would get 4 clips on yoyr 8gb card. Also mjpeg needs at least a class 6 card, avchd will record on a class4 without any problem as its bit rate is less than this.

thanks for viewing. Graham

[YOUCANNOTDENY]

You can upload AVCHD Lite onto YouTube? DAMN IT I'VE BEEN USING MOTION JPEG....

[ghough12]

@YOUCANNOTDENY yes, it is possible to upload the h264(mpeg4) however theis demo clip was rendered to a wmv format so both formats could be compared directly. Thanks for viewing.

[bag2223]

hello i just got this camera and in avchd playback on computer it makes a weird noise and i cant hear but it

[leroilightning]

It's interesting that grass always appears blurred even in HD recordings. I wonder why that is. Does it require 1080p do you think? Although I wonder if it's more to do with compression or the fact it's shot on a small camera (the flip type HD camcorders seem to do the same thing - even on 1080p). Comments?

[leroilightning]

In this video, the car motion was stuttering on mjpeg vs avchd lite. The colour and brightness were definitely stronger in avchd but I noticed the blue of the sky came out on mjpeg but was perhaps '\over staturated or over exposed on avchd.

[datsan88]

Hello pal,

could anyone tell me what it means when the say "AVCHD" format is "more difficult to edit"?

Basically i am thinking of getting either Panasonic TZ8 or TZ10, one is MJPEG and the other is AVChd. I definitely need to do editing on PowerDirector (popular video editing program). Does MJPEG file and AVCHD both load into the Power Director or similar video editors? wht does it mean when they say AVChd is "more difficult to edit" than MJpeg? appreciate help!

Thanks.

[MasterGravitron]

I have a DMCTZ5/15, that one only has M-jpeg.

Unfortunately You-tube is not really a suitable place to tell the image quality, as the H.264 codec it uses automatically removes allot of the noise that may have been in the image.

The thing that is not so wonderful about AVCHD is that is is a proprietary standard, and a new one at that. Yea i know M-jpeg is also not a industry defined standard too, but it has been around to settle down on mostly the same version.

[strawberrysubmarine]

Remember that MJPEG is much easier to edit than AVCHD...

[arex82]

If I had only seen this vid a little sooner :(

I went to a Muse concert and mistakenly had mine on mjpeg - a fellow fan had hers on AVCHD lite and her vids came out cleaner in both appearance and sound.

If its quality youre after, dont even bother with MJPEG...

[ghough12]

Well yes and no! the camera can focus quicker in motion jpeg as it has more frames to do it with and less intensive rendering means the processor can do focus quickly. If there is a lot of subject movement or you are panning quickly then in this situation mjpeg will give a less pixellated picture. If your pictures look a little more saturated and noisy, just back them off a little in your edit program. The nikon and canon pro dslr use mjpeg as their output AVCHD can be aweful in some situations

[arex82]

i see.. good information!! yet still, judging by this vid and the comparison between mine and hers.. AVCHD appears to be superior.. at least in a live concert situation.

go to my channel and see a video from the concert, then visit her page and check one of her vids.. dont forget to click 720 ;)

she's in my friends list, her username is flipflopip

you'll see what i mean. and thanks again for the information!! Cheers!

[MasterGravitron]

I watched both videos of Unnatural Selection. the AVCHD dose seem to have slightly better sound, but the camera is notability struggling to focus on the lead singer. and although its very hard to tell the image quality as you weren't seated in the same area, i would wager the M-Jpeg has just a tad more detail, but that might just have been the better focus .

[itsabomberscope]

the mjpeg seems to have better detail in it. Very cool.

[romanitrafic]

great stuff about fz38, actually ur reviewes made me buy one today. i did not understood the video mode manual iso from the user guide, do you know if there can be selected manually an iso lower than 400 while filming? 10x

[ghough12]

Actually ISO 400 is the lowest manual setting in the motion picture setting. To use lower than this just set your dial to M or A or S or P and you can set the iso using the quick menu push button ans joy stick. I prefer to use the M setting which allows you to set aperture and shutter whilst being ablke to see the exposure scale on screen. If you are filming fast moving subjects then select a higher shutter speed (say 1/250) and the adjust the aperture to bring the exposure correct. Helps?

[romanitrafic]

@ghough12 yes it helps, i was just wondering about the sensitivity on video record mode, i usually use M for photo with iso between 80-100, shutter above 1/10 with noise reduction on -2 and on day light or flash at night. I compared samples with my friends canon 450d and they look great. thanks again

[ghough12]

Glad I could be of some service. Graham

[UrbanTenant]

What is the file extension used by each format?

[ghough12]

.mov for mjpeg and .mts for avchd

[ROOSTER1067]

looks like horwich,small world

[ghough12]

Absolutely right, the Crown Pub.

[HauntKettle]

@ghough12 The video on the TZ7 is so so much better with a class 6 card by the looks of it, thinking about getting one over the DMC FZ38 [The compact] then perhaps in the summer gettin the Canon EOS 500D

What's the TZ7 like in relatively low light, e.g. indoor situations, as i see the exposure time only goes up to 1 second

[ghough12]

I have used the TZ7 to film a restaraunt party with very dim light, just overhead downlighters. The resulting video was absolutely fine - I just used the iA setting and let the camera do its own thing. To get the best results, as with all these compact, small sensor cameras, you need better light than conventional video cameras. It's a trade off of compactness and fantastic stills quality versus poorer low light video. Hope this helps. Graham

[HauntKettle]

@ghough12 Thanks a lot mate :)

Have decided on the DMC FZ38 [The bridge] it's like the TZ7's big brother, but with more DSLR style features, will be nicer for taking night photos as well as video :) -- Will hopefully be gettin a Canon EOS 500D later this year, DSLR with 1080p filiming, oooh!

[ghough12]

@HauntKettle Yes I have the FZ38 and its an excellent camera. I also have the nikon D90 and D5000 with 1080i movie but the results are now where near as good as with the TZ7 or the FZ38 or the GH1. There is virtually no control with the canon or the nikon during filming!

[promoloco]

Thanks for your videos, I upload videos with my ZS3 that quality, but if I go with quality, if you are fluent pause and low quality, as you do? agradeceria specifications, catch avchd high quality lite, medium or low? the climb into your computer and use that program, what are the input properties, which render, etc tec, excuse my poor English, thank you very much in advance.

[12claws]

Can you help me? I have the dmc-fz35, and I cannot for the life of me figure out how to get the AVCHD video off of the camera and into my computer! The included software won't allow it, and the instructions just stink (IMHO)> THANKS for any assistance with this.....very frustrated right now!

[ghough12]

If you use the photofunstudio which came with the camera, then if you place your sdhc memory card with the avchd files on it into your card reader attached to your pc, then photofunstudio will detect the card and the files. If you have the default icon set, to show both viseo and stills then you should see the video. You can preview it or import it into your computer. If you do this the file is converted to an m2ts file which is much easier to edit in most programs. Hope this helps. Graham

[PS3CoDFailures]

The main difference is the sound and Color.. Also the HUGE difference is the AVC is smoother by far look at the cars when they pass by avc smooth and mjpeg you can see them jump as they pass by

[MrPisster]

The main difference seems to be the colors "pop" more in AVCHD.

[Mr2moresleeps]

Hmm hate to be that guy, but I think the motion Jpeg had better fall off in the shadows and looked a little less Crushed in the blacks. I have a GH 1 so I will do these tests and scope it. Also the exposure was less blown out look at the blue in the sky in the MJP stuff. The AVCHD stuff is all blown out in the sky, I have noticed this before . The AVCHD does look 'good" but is it accurate? Thanks for doing this :)

[SophieCalifornia]

It's a pain in the ass, i can't even upload any of my videos I've shot on my Panasonic Lumix onto YouTube! Does anyone know how to do it...? Otherwise I have to convert all the files to MJPEG

[hughrobertwright]

I have just managed to upload an AVCHD video from a Lumix FT1.

You need to use the PhotoFun Studio HD software (supplied with the camera) to capture the AVCHD video files from the SD card to hard disk. Then upload the ".m2ts" file it created to YouTube.

[0therfucker]

I've uploaded several AVCHD Lite videos taken with ZS3 or TZ7. .MTS files. Had no problems at all.

[ghough12]

I think it must be youtube recompression as the raw file before upload is smooth and only shows the judder on the motion jpeg clip. Convert avchd to avi format to ease the editing process.

[BHShaman]

Know of any free software to do so?

[snakemonkey1]

ha ha nice one watched this 10 times and over and both seem to have judder and slight blur but that could be due to youtube but overall great video i will be uploading some footage 2moz and yes the avchd format is a pain in the @#$%ss!!