Pal or ntsc ?

Thanks Videostock. The guy doing the guide to the camera said NTSC gave a better quality which is why I asked.

Cheers.

In my opinion "better quality" - needs to be qualified to understand his thinking - otherwise it's not possible to agree nor disagree with the statement.

Anyway not sure how you would shoot HD in NTSC. You could shoot HD at 30fps but 30fps and NTSC are two different things.
It's all academic anyway - just shoot and pond5 will sell it! - "HD and be there" or maybe now "4K and be there - with a large memory card" ;-)

In terms of image quality PAL is better than NTSC because NTSC has less lines and because of color encoding/modulation accepted errors:

"When compared to PAL in particular, NTSC color accuracy and consistency is sometimes considered inferior, leading to video professionals and television engineers jokingly referring to NTSC as Never The Same Color, Never Twice the Same Color, or No True Skin Colors, while for the more expensive PAL system it was necessary to Pay for Additional Luxury. PAL has also been referred to as Peace At Last, Perfection At Last or Pictures Always Lovely in the color war. "(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTSC)

Cheers!

ionescu read this information about the color accuracy between PAL and NTSC on the internet and we all know they can't print anything that isn't true on the net. But pray tell why you have more inferior ntsc clips than you have in superior pal clips????

@Videostock50 "Anyway not sure how you would shoot HD in NTSC. You could shoot HD at 30fps but 30fps and NTSC are two different things." The same could be said of 25p and PAL.

Here is the video of the guy explaining why to set to NTSC at 22:22

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4AoejbgW9Q

Pity he doesn't explain why he said what he said - I don't know anything about AVCHD so can't help.

I notice that someone commenting on his video wrote this:

<<<<Why change to NTSC? If you are shooting in Germany or Europe, we use PAL. Moreover, 50P and 60P shooting is both at 28Mbps so there is no benefit from choosing NTSC either for quality or usefulness in Europe.>>>>

I'm no expert, but I wouldn't worry too much about quality difference between the two frame rates (25p and 30p). All my clips are in 25p, because the cameras I used recorded 25p and I live in Europe.

Now I'm thinking of buying the GH4, which gives the option to shoot in either 25p or 30p (and a lot of varieties, and of course 24p). What I have understood so far, is that it's relatively easier to convert 30p into 25p than vice versa. Yet, I have read conflicting articles on the internet about this.

25p has worked well for me thus far, and switching to 30p requires all the input I can get. For me personally, it's nice to have everything in the same frame rate, so that argues against changing. But if it is indeed easier to convert 30p into 25p than vice versa, I might actually switch.

Do European (and other '25p areas') buyers shy away from 30p, and do Americans prefer it? Or does the framerate not matter as much in the end? Hope you can share your thoughts on this!

I also often think about this theme. Last not least i think for the buyer it shouldn't be important if clips are in NTSC 29.97 or in PAL 25, because in their video software they all can convert it as they want. I don't have specialized knowledge about these standards and technics, but as i understand in the main thing and practice it's last not least only a very little different of the speed.
In my camcorder as also in my video software i have the choice of both outputs and frame rates, but to be true i don't see a difference.

You're probably right that it's easy to convert both framerates Stefan. I'm wondering if the end result of either of the converted frame rates is better than the other. From 29.97 to 25fps you'll have to lose parts of the frames, whereas vice versa you'll have to add information to existing frames.

I'm probably going to continue to shoot 25fps, even in 4K. That way I'll have my entire workflow in the same frame rate, and I won't have to worry about converting when mixing older and newer material.

For me it depends on the type of motion. I personally prefer 60P, as I can slow it down, easily, and if needed would be able to convert to any lower frame rate for realtime without requiring interpolation. The only time it matters a lot as I've found (even in clips I've messed up but sold anyway somehow) that faster pans, bird's wings flapping, etc, it creates a stuttery or judder effect I don't' care for. But then I don't like native 24P, either, as I prefer to reproduce reality as opposed to the supposed "cinematic" frame rates.

Sadly the AX100 doesn't shoot 4K 60P, nor does the GH4, at least not without that goofy base thing. If either one had 60P 4K, it would have been a shoe-in.Higher to lower makes sense in frame rate or resolution. Going the other way is high art and requires interpolation to make it look (or sound) right.