Re: H.265 vs H264H .... If you're not seeing any performance issues, then why worry about it? I would expect that live viewing at full resolution will be worse, but for most people that's not the main way that they use Camect.
Using H.265 should not save much in terms of storage, but it will save bandwidth usage between the camera and Camect. It also should not take up a lot more resources to process, but H265 implementations tend to not get used as much, and thus to have more variability in their quality. We have seen some cameras from well-known brands that don't work at all if you use H.265. So, do be aware that there's probably an increased chance of bumping into camera bugs this way -- but if it's working for you, no specific reason not to use it.
We use MKV simply because it's capable of handling more formats than mp4 can, so it's the format of choice unless we're sure that we have a situation where we are sure that mp4 is okay.
VLC is the player we recommend because it's a fully-featured player and available for all platforms. Given that VLC is available, we prefer not to make an operation like export far more expensive (by encoding the timestamps directly in the video stream) simply because some players don't support subtitles. We haven't played a lot with quicktime ourselves, but some users have reported other issues worse than this, e.g. use of a lot more cpu such that video would not play smoothly on a less powerful machine, vs playing fine in VLC on the same machine.