Full HD vs 4K

[mavicpro@2018]

I have filmed and edited a lot now with my MA2, have tested most settings and came to the conclusion that Full HD lasts a long time anyway for my part. Has 50 "4K TV and 27" ditto data screen. For normal flight (filming) I have a very hard time seeing any difference compared to the higher resolutions. The editing will also be much easier plus I can use all settings in the drone as 4X zoom as an example.
What do you guys think are 2.7K and 4K overrated? ?

 

[Sheppie]

I have filmed and edited a lot now with my MA2, have tested most settings and came to the conclusion that Full HD lasts a long time anyway for my part. Has 50 "4K TV and 27" ditto data screen. For normal flight (filming) I have a very hard time seeing any difference compared to the higher resolutions. The editing will also be much easier plus I can use all settings in the drone as 4X zoom as an example.
What do you guys think are 2.7K and 4K overrated? ?

Agree 100%

 

[My Drone Adventures]

I always film on 4K. I see the advantage in the ability to crop the video in editing for effect, to remove an element I did not notice in flight or to correct for some jello or other flight issues you may notice in productions.

While I have not noticed it in the Air 2, I did notice a visual difference in my P3A and Evo. I assume they did not have as refined algorithms or bit rate for the lower resolution. Never flew the P4P in 1080 so can comment if it had quality Full HD.
My old Bebop clearly had quaility issues between 1080 and 720 records.

 

[SmilingOgre]

I've read numerous articles stating that you need a very large screen viewed very closely to see the difference. I see or maybe believe I see a difference just on my 25" computer monitor. I film in the larger resolutions. Plenty of space on the sd cards and plenty of hp on the pc so why not.

 

[Yandows]

Shoot in the highest resolution possible for the application. With higher resolutions you get better color accuracy as the imager can sample the image with finer detail.
A bunch of tiny points will get the colors of a wooden door better than a few big points, which would have to average out the scene.

 

[volition]

As stated above. Higher resolution is useful for crops and the like.

Yep it”s most likely better quality too but only 0.0005% - conduct blind tests and I am yet to see anyone consistently pick the difference.

 

[hpilot]

I wouldn't consider filming in anything but 4K. I have a 4K 13" laptop and I can tell the difference even on that screen. Remember, if you have a high-quality TV like my Sony 75" 4K, it has an exceptionally good upscaler, and will make HD look much better than it actually is. You can even edit 4K on a tablet, so I see no good reason not to shoot in 4K. Years from now you will be happy you did.

 

[WithTheBirds]

If you think 1080 is all you need then great- that’s all that matters. There are advantages with the smaller less demanding files.

4K is demonstrably better if you have the hardware and demand quality over convenience.

 

[jagraphics]

Accordiing to Sony R&D ( wil have t dig out the technical paper) on small screens IE less than 70 inches 4K isn't going to make any difference. (and that is without up-scaling) With up scaling on modern TV's it won't make any difference at all in domestic environments. 99.999% of Drone footage shot by DJI Mavics doesn't need to be 4K. Most streamed video is 1080p the number of people who can receive Netflix at 4K is frighteningly small percentage of the population and most of them will be watching on sub 70 inch screens. (or screens with very good up-scaling)

In the mean time it is worth watching this

 

[Olav van Gerven]

The question to ask in this case is, where do you want to publish? If you put your videos on youtube or facebook, HD will be enough. The majority of people that watch the clips do this from tablets, phones or other small-screen devices. They will not see the difference between HD and 4K. For the few that project on big screens watching YT-clips, well, they will live with HD.

For the editing-process it is a bit different. To process 4K accurately you need the bigger screen and powerfull processors as well as RAM. If you don't have that, editing in 4K is close to torture. If you like that, have fun, if you don't like it, don't film in 4K.

I personally film in 2K with 50 fps. This gives me the opportunity to fly at higher speeds and then reduce the speed of the video down to 1080i with 25 fps. At the same time, I can zoom in while editing a little withour losing to much quality. All in all, it is a balance between what you want and what you can. For now and the next few years (i guess) I can live with HD.

 

[hpilot]

Accordiing to Sony R&D ( wil have t dig out the technical paper) on small screens IE less than 70 inches 4K isn't going to make any difference. (and that is without up-scaling) With up scaling on modern TV's it won't make any difference at all in domestic environments. 99.999% of Drone footage shot by DJI Mavics doesn't need to be 4K. Most streamed video is 1080p the number of people who can receive Netflix at 4K is frighteningly small percentage of the population and most of them will be watching on sub 70 inch screens. (or screens with very good up-scaling)

In the mean time it is worth watching this

I disagree. I can see the difference on my 13' laptop, my 32' computer monitor, and my 75' TV. Even on YouTube, I can tell the difference 100% of the time between HD and 4K content. I will seldom watch a show on Prime Video if it is not 4K (and HDR preferably). I remember so many people saying with a straight face they could not tell the difference between SD and HD. Here we go again...However, I will grant you that the MA2 4K video is not that great.

 

[hpilot]

The question to ask in this case is, where do you want to publish? If you put your videos on youtube or facebook, HD will be enough. The majority of people that watch the clips do this from tablets, phones or other small-screen devices. They will not see the difference between HD and 4K. For the few that project on big screens watching YT-clips, well, they will live with HD.

For the editing-process it is a bit different. To process 4K accurately you need the bigger screen and powerfull processors as well as RAM. If you don't have that, editing in 4K is close to torture. If you like that, have fun, if you don't like it, don't film in 4K.

I personally film in 2K with 50 fps. This gives me the opportunity to fly at higher speeds and then reduce the speed of the video down to 1080i with 25 fps. At the same time, I can zoom in while editing a little withour losing to much quality. All in all, it is a balance between what you want and what you can. For now and the next few years (i guess) I can live with HD.

" This gives me the opportunity to fly at higher speeds" huh? You can edit 4K easily on an iPad - you don't need to spend $4,000 on a computer.

 

[Dave Maine]

The most important issue in this debate is how close you are to the viewing screen and it’s resolution. The human eye itself has a resolution limit, beyond which it will not perceive any difference. If your viewing situation supports viewing the 4K image inside the limits of the eye’s resolution, the difference is quite obvious. If it is outside, you will not be able to see any difference. There is a intermediate zone where a little difference an be noticed. Your viewing distance and display resolution determine whether or not 4K is useful or not.

Opinions given without specifying the viewing conditions are pointless. All that is really being said is that in that particular environment it doesn’t matter. This has been studied a lot for still images as well. 300 dpi is a standard for printing still pictures as well. In point of fact, that number is good only for viewing prints10 inches from the viewer. Prints viewed from greater distances need far less resolution to be perceived as sharp.

 

[Harkness]

What a fascinating discussion. First of all the MA2 can't film in 4k, and what your eye perceives is all that matters. My eyes think 2.7k 60fps looks the best. Everyone is different. Go with what looks good to you.

 

[Sheppie]

Sorry, I just don't see the difference.

 

[Pushkur]

I like 4k 30fps for some shots,but
2.7 60fps when lots of turning maneuvers are involved.
I have a 4k 85" tv ,and it's easy to see the difference between 4k and Hd,unless your viewing from far.
4k TV's are meant to be viewed ideally from around 3/4 meters.
As for editing,my skills are very limited,I'm still using imovie?

 

[Pushkur]

The question to ask in this case is, where do you want to publish? If you put your videos on youtube or facebook, HD will be enough. The majority of people that watch the clips do this from tablets, phones or other small-screen devices. They will not see the difference between HD and 4K. For the few that project on big screens watching YT-clips, well, they will live with HD.

For the editing-process it is a bit different. To process 4K accurately you need the bigger screen and powerfull processors as well as RAM. If you don't have that, editing in 4K is close to torture. If you like that, have fun, if you don't like it, don't film in 4K.

I personally film in 2K with 50 fps. This gives me the opportunity to fly at higher speeds and then reduce the speed of the video down to 1080i with 25 fps. At the same time, I can zoom in while editing a little withour losing to much quality. All in all, it is a balance between what you want and what you can. For now and the next few years (i guess) I can live with HD.

I always look for 4k on You tube,whether it's drone film or travel (my fav) ....
total eye candy ?
You tube 4k quality is brilliant on a 4k tv,compared to the rubbish Netflix dish out ,supposedly in 4k.
Now days people have a smart tv,so I'm not sure your correct about most viewing You tube on a phone or iPad.
Shops selling 4k TV's use You tube videos to demo, because of the quality.

 

[Dale D]

I have filmed and edited a lot now with my MA2, have tested most settings and came to the conclusion that Full HD lasts a long time anyway for my part. Has 50 "4K TV and 27" ditto data screen. For normal flight (filming) I have a very hard time seeing any difference compared to the higher resolutions. The editing will also be much easier plus I can use all settings in the drone as 4X zoom as an example.
What do you guys think are 2.7K and 4K overrated? ?

Like everything else in life, the more the better, and for me, that includes PIXELs. With higher Rez images I have more leeway to edit, crop, and the image is sharper to my eye.

 

[Olav van Gerven]

" This gives me the opportunity to fly at higher speeds" huh? You can edit 4K easily on an iPad - you don't need to spend $4,000 on a computer.

If you have one...

 

[chuckm]

I split the difference and shoot in 2.7K.