Thread: Sony AVC .m2ts Bitrate Questions

So for some reason 16,000kbps is the highest you can choose and it will let you however it never actually renders in 16k. Even if your source files are as high as 17k you end up with a final product of 14,500-15,000, I am pretty sure if I look closely I can notice the difference in the drop of bitrate. If I choose MainConcepts you can get an actual higher bitrate in .MTS but it does not look as good as the Sony AVC codec (my source files are AVC). So whats the dealio??

Something that's bugged me too Mr Floyd. Only Sony will know the answer.....

Originally Posted by Archie

Something that's bugged me too Mr Floyd. Only Sony will know the answer.....

At least I'm not alone!

Vegas will render whatever number its told, the source media doesnt matter. I can have a 4,000kbps file and render it as 15,000kbps.
Did you select Constent? Cuase Veriable will decide what needs to use alot of information(higher bit rate) and what doesn't need alot of(lower bit rate).
If you can tell the difference between 16bits to 17bits, your probably to close to the screen. Lol

What version are you using?

I'm using 10.0e

No not when it comes to AVCHD, 15k is it's cap I have tried everything. Maybe not MainConcepts but with the Sony codec it's capped, there is no option for VBR just "Bit rate (bps)"

Vegas will render whatever number its told, the source media doesn't matter. I can have a 4,000kbps file and render it as 15,000kbps.

It may be true that Vegas will do that but there is no point choosing a higher bit rate than your original footage. You won't gain anything by doing that except a bigger files size. You won't improve the image by choosing a higher bit rate than the original footage.

Did you notice Solo619 that this post is from August last year.

Yeah, but, I'm loosing 2,000kbps! 17K source files!

15k is it's cap I have tried everything

No it's not.

Perhaps the 2k you are loosing is on the sound side !

Very good point MB!! I down-render from 5.1 to stereo!

Yeah, Midnight Blue's probably right... I expect that the 2mbps has gone to the audio.

By the way, you can actually achieve better (more efficient) encodes in post than the camera can achieve in real-time. I use proper h.264 encoding (very slow) to achieve the original file quality (24mbps) with bitrates as low as 3mbps!