I have terrible compression artifacts, in some circumstances, with my x3 camera, especially when filming close to trees and grass. Filming 1080p in NTSC seems to help, with the increased bitrate, but 4K can be awful. I would consider upgrading to the x5 but am not sure if those same issues are still there, with the 60mbps max bitrate.  What's the latest consensus from x5 users?

I'm also interested in the answer to this.

Not worth it for video... sadly... selling mine the moment X5R is out, if not sooner

please refer to the camera comparison here  http://www.dji.com/products/compare-xcamera

Have you got any examples you can show us.........I can't believe you get artefacts at the bitrates you are talking.......
I would like to help if I can, but I would need the original file to see what you are talking about.
If you upload something short to Vimeo and allow downloading we can have a look at the file.....

DJI-Tim Posted at 2016-2-22 08:53
please refer to the camera comparison here  http://www.dji.com/products/compare-xcamera

Thanks for the link, Tim. The specs don't tell me how the codec holds up in certain circumstances, hence the request for end users' thoughts after real world use...

Harb Posted at 2016-2-22 09:05
Have you got any examples you can show us.........I can't believe you get artefacts at the bitrates  ...

Thanks Harb, but the images were so poor I think I deleted the source. I'll have another look and post if they're still available.  Even in the Soft custom mode the sharpness was too much which may have contributed to the noise. But, honestly, when I was passing close to trees, the footage was unusable due to the blockiness caused by compression. If there are any other variables I can change, I'd be delighted to hear...

According to the specs Tim posted, the x5 has lower bit rates at certain resolutions.... At 1080p the x3 is listed as 45mbps, and the x5 40mbps.....

It is a bit of a garbage in garbage out scenario though, images/videos with less detail to start with will get more heavily compressed. The lenses and higher res sensor from the x5 should result in a much sharper original feed before it gets compressed, and even with the same bit rates as the x3 should still result in better video. I would look on google (or maybe someone on here might share some) for for x5 vs x3 comparison original footage from camera that you can download and see for yourself. There is plenty on youtube, but you're also getting youtubes added compression. And other things to take into account, is the user can do a lot more wrong with the x5, so bad footage could be user or equipment induced.

Riley-NZL Posted at 2016-2-24 00:31
According to the specs Tim posted, the x5 has lower bit rates at certain resolutions.... At 1080p th ...

Yes, that makes sense, although a few people have said the difference in quality isn't enough to justify the cost.

I'm continuing to experiment with my X3 settings and think that 2.7K at -2 sharpness may be best way forward. This seems to give enough detail to work with with less compression noise due to over sharpening in camera.

The quest continues...

JerryLaurence Posted at 2016-2-24 20:53
Yes, that makes sense, although a few people have said the difference in quality isn't enough to j ...

Would be great if they could unlock higher bit rates with an update, but it could also be hardware limited.

The real advantage of the X5 is low light performance, and the ability to change lenses for different FoV's

I am really struggling to understand why they made such a camera as the X5 but then crippled it with a very low bitrate MPEG encoding. Such a camera should have been Prores or DNxHD capable, and we still could have used SD cards.