Dear Inspire 2 pilots,
Is there any difference between H264 and H265? Is 265 sharper?

H.264 is commonly referred to as MPEG-4 AVC, was adopted around 2003, and is a mainstream video compression format.

H.265 is a more current (adopted circa 2013) successor to H.264. It delivers the same video quality as H.264 AVC at only half the bit rate. It support up to 8K video and 300 fps.

Click this like to see the Wikipedia link to H.265

The two previous posters have answered technically. However, the practical difference for YOU, is that you will not be able to benefit from the advancements in compression technology, as statistically speaking, you are unlikely to have a computer that can decode the h.265 stream efficiently or at all.

So stick to h.264 till at least the end of 2017.

Mike-the-cat Posted at 2017-4-20 17:11
The two previous posters have answered technically. However, the practical difference for YOU, is that you will not be able to benefit from the advancements in compression technology, as statistically speaking, you are unlikely to have a computer that can decode the h.265 stream efficiently or at all.

So stick to h.264 till at least the end of 2017.

Mike (and others): for those of us with some decent computing power and wanting to shoot the highest quality without paying for the pro codecs, would you say that the quality difference between h264 and h265 is worth the transcoding time?  Say, at the end of a day of shooting throwing all the h265 files into Adobe Media Encoder and doing an overnight render to ProRes 422 for editing?  I've got a fully souped up 27" Retina iMac that has no problem editing real time with 4K h264 files from my Inspire 1, even with color correction added.  About to upgrade to I2 and debating spending the $$ for ProRes Codec vs just shooting h264/h265.  Thanks for your insight

Flightgeist Posted at 2017-4-24 09:11
Mike (and others): for those of us with some decent computing power and wanting to shoot the highest quality without paying for the pro codecs, would you say that the quality difference between h264 and h265 is worth the transcoding time?  Say, at the end of a day of shooting throwing all the h265 files into Adobe Media Encoder and doing an overnight render to ProRes 422 for editing?  I've got a fully souped up 27" Retina iMac that has no problem editing real time with 4K h264 files from my Inspire 1, even with color correction added.  About to upgrade to I2 and debating spending the $$ for ProRes Codec vs just shooting h264/h265.  Thanks for your insight

The cost / value trade off would vary from person to person but if you care for quality, get the ProRes or CDNG license.

I have a MacPro with a 6Core Xeon processor and dual GPUs and it still doesn't playout h.265 at 4K smoothly Things won't get better until the next gen of Intel processors, Kaby Lake or later incorporate h.265 decoding into their innards. You can as you suggest, transcode everything up to ProRes but its from an 8bit 4:2:0 . source. I mean it works but you are down 2 bits from ProRes.

With the workflow you propose working with CDNG is workable and gives you far superior grading options.

Now this is not to say you cannot get marvellous footage on h.264 itself. shot under good light. It really depends on how fussy you are (or your clients) about little details, what you want to do in post and how much time you are willing to spend. If you just want cuts edits with minimal grading, stick with this and focus on flying and photography skills.

However, since I suspect you want to experiment with colouring and different looks, and  If you keep your I2 for say two years, I'd say bite the bullet and get those licenses, you won't regret it. Especially since you have an I1 Raw already and are familiar with the Raw workflow (easier on the I2).

Mike-the-cat Posted at 2017-4-24 15:50
The cost / value trade off would vary from person to person but if you care for quality, get the ProRes or CDNG license.

I have a MacPro with a 6Core Xeon processor and dual GPUs and it still doesn't playout h.265 at 4K smoothly Things won't get better until the next gen of Intel processors, Kaby Lake or later incorporate h.265 decoding into their innards. You can as you suggest, transcode everything up to ProRes but its from an 8bit 4:2:0 . source. I mean it works but you are down 2 bits from ProRes.

okay, thanks for the info.  I am mostly shooting for stock.  My I1 is actually not raw, I have just been shooting h264 and have had a lot of good results grading with some custom LUTs.  I want the I2 mostly for increased stability (and therefore ability to shoot with 45mm lens better), battery redundancy, front view camera, etc.  I'm pretty sure 99% of the clients who buy my stock wouldn't know the difference between the h264 image and the ProRes, but I would know, and that alone almost makes it worth it.

Flightgeist Posted at 2017-4-25 12:28
okay, thanks for the info.  I am mostly shooting for stock.  My I1 is actually not raw, I have just been shooting h264 and have had a lot of good results grading with some custom LUTs.  I want the I2 mostly for increased stability (and therefore ability to shoot with 45mm lens better), battery redundancy, front view camera, etc.  I'm pretty sure 99% of the clients who buy my stock wouldn't know the difference between the h264 image and the ProRes, but I would know, and that alone almost makes it worth it.

Got you mixed up with the OP ...
To your point about stability. Seriously, I had the sense the Inspire 2 is a lot more stable with the 15mm already but its with the 45mm where it really shines.
You'll really enjoy this bird with that lens!