Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Just a question
#1
Who NEEDs 8K video?

Or in other words - what could be the percentage among camera owners?
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#2
Just another question: Are there already 8k displays available?
#3
(02-13-2020, 10:20 AM)Klaus Wrote: Who NEEDs 8K video?

Or in other words - what could be the percentage among camera owners?

Currently, it makes a product future-proof and novel in the same time.

To your question - downsampled 8K footage looks better than 4K internal recording. The same way, downsampled 4K to 1080p looks cleaner than shooting directly 1080p.
#4
(02-13-2020, 10:31 AM)JJ_SO Wrote: Just another question: Are there already 8k displays available?

https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/shop/del...ccessories

(02-13-2020, 10:43 AM)faint Wrote:
(02-13-2020, 10:20 AM)Klaus Wrote: Who NEEDs 8K video?

Or in other words - what could be the percentage among camera owners?

Currently, it makes a product future-proof and novel in the same time.

To your question - downsampled 8K footage looks better than 4K internal recording. The same way, downsampled 4K to 1080p looks cleaner than shooting directly 1080p.

Still, how many photo camera owners are shooting even 4K on a regular basis?
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#5
How many photo camera owners have the computer computing power to edit 4K video?
And how many "4K" video cameras actually give good quality source files?
#6
(02-13-2020, 10:59 AM)Klaus Wrote: Still, how many photo camera owners are shooting even 4K on a regular basis?

Or even: how many photo camera owners are regularly shooting video at all?
Editor
opticallimits.com

#7
(02-13-2020, 11:07 AM)Brightcolours Wrote: How many photo camera owners have the computer computing power to edit 4K video?
And how many "4K" video cameras actually give good quality source files?

Matt Granger put an unboxing video of such a machine on YT, as he apparently thinks the future is 8k. Just that the MacPro in his specs + a nice non-Apple monitor + a thunderbolt server were 25 grand.

It's not the computer alone, video streams need fast and big bandwith.
#8
It's not about what you need, now or in the future, it's about being better, and bigger, and faster than your competition.

1080p is still the standard at the moment, and it is good enough for most people, and most screens. 4K and 8K are to me like DVD-Audio and SACD: they are better than what they are replacing, but they are simply overkill.

To put it in another way: we are discussing formats that have little to no benefits for most TV under 65-70 inches, while people are increasingly watching TV shows and movies on their cellphones.
#9
The "future" argument is fine but once again - how many people shoot video on the photo camera? 20%? I can't really imagine that it's more than that.

The thing is - the EOS R5 looks great but how much of the price that you are going to pay goes into the hardware enabling it to do 8K? And why are 80%(?) of the EOS R5 users "forced" to pay for this? Ok, because they got "no choice" (if you just want IBIS and the supposedly better sensor) but still. I reckon that the processing power required for 8K (over 4k) costs north of $500.
Well, maybe the rumored R6 will be just about that.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#10
I find your question a bit useless. You're also convinced that 24 MP are enough for almost everybody, right? 

I do sometimes take videos although I like my stills better. Much better... crappy sound, shaky camera, AF is running towards some mildly interesting spots - so, nothing to show other people. But for me it's a bit fun. And along the way to few photographs I'm actually happy about, I shot sooo much crap. Low res film, now high res digital, but still as crappy as from a 110 camera, sometimes.

If you ask "how many do videos?" I'd answer, the most owners with video capable cameras at least played once or twice with that red record button. How many of them became serious and produced something wort looking at? No idea. But it's exactly the same with photography - only few people do "serious" art work, pay their bills with their work. The rest of us likes to have fun - so what?

Although I wouldn't buy a camera because it can do 8k, I also would not hesitate to buy one with 8k capabilities as an addendum to otherwise great stills capacities. I think the manufacturer overhype it - here I can understand your question "who needs that nonsense anyway?"  Any by fulfilling the specs for 8k - that doesn't say anything about the video quality. 4k Fuji with 15 fps... 4k Nikon with superbly sound because of cheap pre-amp... 4K with a super crop.

To me it simply doesn't matter.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
5 Guest(s)