2.7k Vs 4k

LionsGripp

LionsGripp

Lion's Grip
Hey everyone. I know we just finished talking about 30 v 60fps, but now I'm trying to decide between 2.7k and 4k. As I understand it the GoPro 4 black offers:

4k @ 30fps
2.7k @ 60fps
1080 @ 120fps

I'm thinking that 2.7k @60fps is ideal, unless I know for a fact that I'm using slowmo. Just wanted to see what everyone else thinks.
 
The 4k seems really good to me so far I haven't had a chance to edit any of my 4k footage yet but it seems decent.
 
It's down to how many people can watch in 4K. Some top end computer monitors do it, and there are TVs out there, but how many people watch YT on TV as a rule? However, there are laptops out there with screens that at least meet 2.7K
 
4K is wasted on YouTube. It would be far better for them to up the bitrate of 1080p but 4k is a buzz word people like to see.
 
It's not for a Hero 4 but a Hero 3 Black but it helped me decide which setting was best to use. As the others have said 4K is a waste on YouTube. But for a really sharp image 1080p 30fps, 1440p 30fps and 2.7k 30 fps are considered the cleanest modes. For slowmo 1080p 60 fps is good. The other modes have probably improved for the Hero 4 Black.

Link for video modes
 
Not many folks can watch 4K content, or even 2.7K content. Hell, the monitor on my PC is still 1680x1050 which is below 1080p...

1080p content is all you need right now, and will still be mainstream for a few years I am sure before the PC and TV hardware gets up to snuff.

With that out there, 2.7K @ 60fps > 4K @ 30fps. Those extra frames really make the difference if you want to slow things down!
 
I think it comes down to how long you want your content to be relevant.
4k is predicted to own 10% of the tv market by the end of the year and it will only grow faster from there.
Think of it this way, how often do you find yourself watching a video in SD (think 480p or less on Youtube) quality and thinking it looks bad?
Probably all the time if you're anything like me and yet just a few years ago SD was the standard with HD only starting to get market share.
If you want your content to stay relevant for the next 5+ years then shoot 4k, oh and as internet speeds increase Youtube will improve their encoding so rest assured that one day Youtube will be able to show 4k at proper bitrates :)
 
YouTube won't re-render what you upload now, as they didn't with the enabling of 60fps.

Lack of 4K doesn't make your content any less relevant with time.
 
To try and use 4k for youtube will do nothing for you other than eat of your memory card while riding and cause extra large file sizes to transfer, edit, and upload. There will not really be any gain from it. I've actually recently started using 720p @60fps instead of 1080p because I've noticed on youtube you cannot tell a difference. Also I can record more and render times are hetter. I just use high bit rate and vivid color settings with it and it looks great.
 
SwissMotard said:
YouTube won't re-render what you upload now, as they didn't with the enabling of 60fps.

Lack of 4K doesn't make your content any less relevant with time.
Click to expand...
I thought they did, based on a comment made by RJ who had uploaded vids at high specs before 60fps came in?
 
SwissMotard said:
YouTube won't re-render what you upload now, as they didn't with the enabling of 60fps.

Lack of 4K doesn't make your content any less relevant with time.
Click to expand...

I thought that they did with the 60fps videos.
I certainly think that sub 4k videos won't stay relevant for as long as 4k+ videos will.
1080p has been a great standard but it's well and truly time to move on.
 
Lurch said:
I thought they did, based on a comment made by RJ who had uploaded vids at high specs before 60fps came in?
Click to expand...
I believe there was a very narrow window where it happened, but it was only a few weeks long. Anything uploaded before then was locked at 30fps as Google encoded it and threw away the original video.

Looking at "stats for nerds" RJ does not have 60fps video before this 60fps window existed.
 
honestly for the most motovlogger viewers... quality isn't really something important unless you're recording really bad quality lol.. anything above 720p at 60p and over is great.. personally me if i had your cam i would be recording at 1080 with 120fps just because of battery efficiency as apposed to recording in 4k
 
4k is the future and will give extra life to your videos.
Also shooting in 4k but rendering in 1080 @ 60 is also doable (dependant on hardware) thus allowing digital zooms to look much cleaner.

If I had the gear I would use it.
 
i m happy with 1080p 30fps. would do 60fps but my pc can t handle it and i think the lighting is more important and makes for better vids than some more fps xD

i only render with full bitrate now so a 10 min vid is over 2,5 gb and i think that is the way to go too. since youtube murders the quality again anyway xD
 
That's something far too many people ignore, 30fps gives you a far better image because of the longer exposure time possible.

2.7k30 is the sweet spot for me at the moment, it looks noticeably better than a 1080p30 source once edited and processed to a 1080p30 output.
 
Riding Japan said:
i m happy with 1080p 30fps. would do 60fps but my pc can t handle it and i think the lighting is more important and makes for better vids than some more fps xD

i only render with full bitrate now so a 10 min vid is over 2,5 gb and i think that is the way to go too. since youtube murders the quality again anyway xD
Click to expand...

What do you mean by full bitrate? It's pointless rendering above the bitrate of your source material.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top Posters Past 30 days

Winners Video

Website Supported by Ipswich SEO

Latest posts

Back
Top