T3i/600d (H.264 vs Raw) Awesome results!

[Edgar Matos]

Excellent. No pink frames, no skipping, no bird poop. 0 Problems. If the camera is happy, I'm happy.   

[deleted.account]

Ok, could you say what settings you used? :-) Did you shoot 720P h264 or 1080P, we know 720P h264 is pretty shocking? What raw resolution did you shoot at and upscale to 720P? Did you shoot 24fps or lower to get higher resolution?

Had you compared 1080P h264 scaled to 720P vs raw upscaled to 720P?

There's a big difference in detail in your example but just how much is that atributed to raw versus badly captured h264, there's a difference in contrast and saturation between the two as well which can affect perception,  personally on the fence at the moment having tested 550D at 960x408 24fps feel like sticking to 1080P h264. :-)

[CFP]

The description sais:

Memory used: Sandisk Extreme SDHC 45MB/s
Raw resolution: 960x544
H.264 resolution 1920x1080
Camera settings: Global draw off, HaCKeD mode on, Pic quality SRAW, FPS over drive off.

But the most important information is missing: Did you count in the increased cropfactor? Did you change the focal length?
Or did you simply recorded RAW and H.264 with the same focal length and cropped the H.264 to match the RAW?

Anyway, something is wrong with your comparison. The 600D is soft, yes, but it is not that bad!

[Edgar Matos]

"But the most important information is missing: Did you count in the increased cropfactor? Did you change the focal length?
Or did you simply recorded RAW and H.264 with the same focal length and cropped the H.264 to match the RAW?"

You're right. I was in such a hurry for a upcoming film festival I'm attending to, so I forgot to mention some details.

First: I shot raw, then I zoom-in in order to match the focal length. 1920 is a huge different in resolution if you compare it to 960 (resolution, no detail)  so I set the composition to 720.

second: The H.264 picture style where standard 0,0,0,0. no grade in post, zero sharpening. The only thing I did with the raw footage was ... crap, my photo shop is in spanish and I don't remember the english options so I'll translate. DNG processing set the matiz to 0, clarity +100, recovery +100. finish   

and third: I just arrived from the film festival bringing with me a writing award and 3 phone numbers of the sexiest girl I found, So... Yeah mother f**´†u†¨¬…ø“ˆ“øˆ“©®ß¢¶•π GOOOOOD! that-feel-gooood!

[Cumulus]

Nice video! I dig the wipes; great way to show the difference.
Congrats on the award and the number!

[Robbe]

The description sais:
Memory used: Sandisk Extreme SDHC 45MB/s
Raw resolution: 960x544
H.264 resolution 1920x1080
Camera settings: Global draw off, HaCKeD mode on, Pic quality SRAW, FPS over drive off.

Is this the settings for "T3i Raw video test 5 (H.264 vs Raw)"-video?
Been trying with same card and settings on my 600D with latest nighly and can only record 10sec.
And what have "Pic quality SRAW" to do with RAW-video recording?

[CFP]

And what have "Pic quality SRAW" to do with RAW-video recording?

The "Pic Quality" setting is the most important setting

Setting it to "SRAW" and rebooting the camera increases the size of the shoot_malloc buffer.
Or in other words: It allows you to record continuous with higher resolutions (Without affecting the image quality!).

And @ Edgar Matos: You still didn't answer my question

You didn't count in the increased cropfactor, didn't you?

Anyway. H.264 is way better than raw in terms of aliasing, moiré and sharpness. Only he dynamic range is way worse than with raw.
Your test doesn't show this so I'm sure you did something wrong (No offence  ) ...

[Edgar Matos]

You're very observative  @ CFP. But yes, changed the focal length before recording in H.264 in order to match the raw crop factor.

Regarding aliasing and moire, I don't know if the h.264 is better (If I have to guess, I would say maybe yes) But I shoot this test in order to compare latitud and color. Now, the sharpness of the raw footage is definitely better. Without mention that raw can handle a grading level that h264 just can dream of. I never intended to compare the overall image of both "codecs" in this test. Maybe, if 12 or 10 bits recording is unlock I can start comparing the quality in a fair way. Until then, the only questions that remain is: aliasing and moire. Maybe I should run some chart tests, but don't get you hope so high. After all, it is the t3i we're talking about.

Maybe I should start playing with the t4i