Is 1080p HD more detailed than 4K? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 35 Old 07-31-2014, 11:22 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 330
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Is 1080p HD more detailed than 4K?

Maybe this have been posted here before and in that case Im sorry.

Stumbled across this HD vs 4K test that I think got some interesting results.
But also read through the thoughts from people in the comments, the GH4 theory is interesting imo and I would love to se a similar test with more 4K cameras to see which benefit from 4K and which are just bad at HD and so on.

https://vimeo.com/95296467

(Regarding the two cameras in the test I still would concider upgrading to 4K for the lack of moire but keep the 2.5K for the DR.)
Mattias Burling is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 12:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
flintyplus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: yeovil somerset
Posts: 1,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Well i have given my comment on the Vimeo comments[chris hull].That says all i need to.
flintyplus is offline  
post #3 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 12:21 AM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northridge, CA
Posts: 452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 228 Post(s)
Liked: 119
Note that the GH4 is still an 8-bit camcorder using compressed images. If you shoot 4K with very high-quality video, like a Red Epic Dragon or a Sony F55, there's no compromise. You shoot with a GH4, what you get is a very good $1700 DSLR that can also do video. Not even remotely a good example of what 4K can do.

Having said that, the K is rarely the most important factor that governs picture quality. I think you can make good cases that exposure range, freedom from motion artifacts, black level detail, the ability to handle bright highlights, and colorimetry are all equally important factors.

I guarantee you, if you took a "mere" 2K Arri Alexa and put it up against the Panasonic GH4, the Alexa would look better under all conditions. But it costs about 30 times as much, so you'd expect it. As a $1700 camera, the Panasonic is fantastic. Representative of 4K? Not really.
Mattias Burling likes this.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #4 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 12:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ungermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 3,838
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 29
The HDV cams were 1080 in theory but resolved only about 600 lines. It is 2003 again.
Ungermann is offline  
post #5 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 12:55 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 330
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 19
I agree totaly with you Marc and I don't think you need to go so far as the Alexa to make that example.
My experience from shooting with the AX100 at the same time as BMCC was that the lower resolut bmcc was better, IMO of course.
The tests from Mark on this forum showed the same with the bmpcc, again IMO of what is the nicer image.

Also in my Sony shootout its clear that there is a big difference between 1080p AVCHD and 1080p AVCHD, for example the FS100 imo beats the a6000 and A7 regarding overall image quality let alone the other benefits of it being a "real" video camera.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #6 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 12:57 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 330
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by flintyplus View Post
Well i have given my comment on the Vimeo comments[chris hull].That says all i need to.
Im sorry but your comment didn't exactly bring anything to the discussion.
Did you even watch it?
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #7 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 02:55 AM
Member
 
P&Struefan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 26
To answer the subject's question, generally speaking, no. For the same amount of money, I've never seen any 1080p footage from one camera that comes even close to 4K footage from another camera. If one has enough resources and can afford an Alexa, he certainly can have a Red epic or even a Canon C500 plus all the necessary 4K attachments and get a higher resolution and detailed image at true 4K level. The only thing that sets back a 4K image as compared to a high-quality 1080p one is economics rather than technical.

The 1080p image coming out of cameras like the Sony EX1R or Canon XF300/305 beats the 4K image from my Oppo Find 7 and my friends' Samsung Galaxy S5 in terms of apparent resolution and detail in all conditions but the very static scenes. The thing here is how many Oppos or Samsungs can anyone of the two cameras buy? While I believe my AX100's 4K image is more detailed than the 1080p image from either of those cameras. Is it still better than the 1080p from the Alexa? Maybe and maybe not but this is not the point. I'd simply go get the Epic with that kind of money and make sure I get the true 4K.
P&Struefan is offline  
post #8 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 03:42 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 0
My cents..

HD doesn't always mean HD. My phone doesn't film as good as a BMPCC.

I will compare my BMPCC with my AX100.

One shoots HD 4:2:2. One shoots UHD 4:2:0. The AX100 produces a sharper image and great amount of detail.
It lacks the punch in the image I get from the BMPCC giving me a more pleasure to shoot with the BMPCC.

Downscaled the AX100 image is sharper than the BMPCC but I can sharpen up the image from the BMPCC to achieve the same result.
Something which is important is NOT to just downscale, it's HOW you downscale. I'm currently into finding out correct algorithms for this purpose.

Compare AX100 to RED Epic in 4K the AX100 produces a sharper image but this is something you can achieve in post with RED as well.
I'm not saying AX100 is better. I'm saying it produces a sharper image internally (post in camera).

Of my own experience with AX100 users, this is the best thing since sliced bread and we watch footage straight out of camera. Maybe for this
league of ppl, the AX100 gives a better result regardless if it lacks DR or anything else. Over saturated images.

When it comes to scaled down from 4K I would say that the detail level is incredible.... if your HD camera sucks.
Yes, the image is crisp and detailed but this is possible with a good camera as well which is working in HD only.

What you get from downscaling 4K to HD is a good picture. Looking at the $2000 (or GH4 $1700 etc) price tag of the AX100, I don't know any camera that
actually can compete with it in downscaled HD resolution, which is a pure HD camera based on price.

What I mean is that pure HD camera producing the same quality is usually very expensive but also bring more features.

You can't create something better than 1920x1080 unique pixels in 1920x1080. You get close with UHD 4K downscaled.
You can get close with BMPCC but it also delivers more than just resolution.

// A
aholck is offline  
post #9 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 05:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
flintyplus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: yeovil somerset
Posts: 1,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
Im sorry but your comment didn't exactly bring anything to the discussion.
Did you even watch it?
Yes,i am saying basicaly what aholck says,i have downloaded 4k footage and rendered it to 1920x1080 on disc and the overal picture especialy the resolution is far better and higher than footage sourced from 1920x1080P camcorders and cameras i have ever seen.
flintyplus is offline  
post #10 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 05:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
xfws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,454
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 26
I have a problem with this test showing still images of newspapers.

They're video cameras.
xfws is offline  
post #11 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 06:03 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 330
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by flintyplus View Post
Yes,i am saying basicaly what aholck says,i have downloaded 4k footage and rendered it to 1920x1080 on disc and the overal picture especialy the resolution is far better and higher than footage sourced from 1920x1080P camcorders and cameras i have ever seen.
Ok thats not what you said in the comment at all but ok.

Me personally I dont agree. I think for example the in camera downsample of the C100 looks much better than downscaled 4k from a 4K camcorder.
I think the wide DR makes the 2.5K from the BMCC much more pleasing than downscaled 4K from a gopro.
I also think the s35mm sensor in the a6000 1080p gives a much more esthetic image than downscaled 4K from a smartphone.

And I find it hard to belive that if 1080p cameras can vary in how good their 1080p looks, that all 4K cameras somehow delivers identically good images.
I think those that step into a camera store and buying any old camera that has a 4K badge expekting it to look Hollywood will get disappointed.

I think we are gonna see alot of good and bad 4K in all price brackets the following year.

Last edited by Mattias Burling; 08-01-2014 at 06:48 AM. Reason: EDIT: Changed the typo of BMPCC to BMCC
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #12 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 06:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,191
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
Ok thats not what you said in the comment at all but ok.

Me personally I dont agree. I think for example the in camera downsample of the C100 looks much better than downscaled 4k from a 4K camcorder.
I think the wide DR makes the 2.5K from the BMPCC much more pleasing than downscaled 4K from a gopro.
I also think the s35mm sensor in the a6000 1080p gives a much more esthetic image than downscaled 4K from a smartphone.

And I find it hard to belive that if 1080p cameras can vary in how good their 1080p looks, that all 4K cameras somehow delivers identically good images.
I think those that step into a camera store and buying any old camera that has a 4K badge expekting it to look Hollywood will get disappointed.

I think we are gonna see alot of good and bad 4K in all price brackets the following year.

I agree with this - not all 4K cameras are alike - but the BMPCC (the Pocket Camera) is not 2.5K. You mean the BMCC. And for the BMPCC, as far as I have seen, you need to shoot RAW to get both max "HD" resolution, good color, and the max DR. Which is fine, but not trivial.
markr041 is online now  
post #13 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 06:26 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post
I agree with this - not all 4K cameras are alike - but the BMPCC (the Pocket Camera) is not 2.5K. You mean the BMCC. And for the BMPCC, as far as I have seen, you need to shoot RAW to get both max "HD" resolution, good color, and the max DR. Which is fine, but not trivial.
I'm sure he made a typo. He has both of them

Max HD resolution is an incorrect statement but to get max DR, you are correct.
The sharpness difference is actually due to meta tags in the DNG which "forces" most interpreters to sharpen it up in post as well as putting the ASA you shot (which is irrelevant) as well as color temperature.

Prores allows you to sharpen the content with actual available data but unseen at first glance. Same thing with the colors.

I believe it's because of strict Apple Prores 422 HQ rules while RAW doesn't have to follow any rules.

// A
aholck is offline  
post #14 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 06:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,874
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 71
A 2mp looking better than an 8mp image, I don't think so. If my GH4 4K videos did not look better than my 1080p videos I would have returned it.

4K UHD screen shot from my GH4 video
jogiba is online now  
post #15 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 06:44 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 330
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post
I agree with this - not all 4K cameras are alike - but the BMPCC (the Pocket Camera) is not 2.5K. You mean the BMCC. And for the BMPCC, as far as I have seen, you need to shoot RAW to get both max "HD" resolution, good color, and the max DR. Which is fine, but not trivial.
Yea, of course its my BMCC that shoots 2.5K, at home I just call them "Big" and "Small"

I also think its easier to get the maximum out of the pocket via raw or at least for prores you need that extra inch in nailing the exposure which isn't as critical in raw.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #16 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 06:46 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 330
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by jogiba View Post
A 2mp looking better than an 8mp image, I don't think so. If my GH4 4K videos did not look better than my 1080p videos I would have returned it.

4K UHD screen shot from my GH4 video
Thats not what we are saying really, at least not me. Its more in the terms of a 5mp picture from a Leica with a sweet lens is going to look better then the 16mp DNGs I get out of my Nokia.

EDIT: Now this was extreme like the good old "alexa" example but it applies imo to lower ends of both still and video cameras as well.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #17 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 06:53 AM
Member
 
David Harry's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Hi Mattias.

It's a very interesting subject, but there are a lot of variables to consider.

When talking about perspective, such as size of subject with regard distance and framing etc. Plus, playback scenarios such as screen size and distance from screen etc. Then there is a good argument for saying that there is no subjective difference between the two.

But, when you take into account things such as actual resolved resolution of the sensor, then the subjective differences can change. Plus, probably the biggest impact on judging down converted 4K, but not the only consideration, is how the downscale is achieved with whatever downscaling technology is implemented. In fact, it's probably the downscale technology that is the single biggest deciding factor as to wether or not to use 4K for HD. This is why I would disagree with that particular video test, as there were differences that the tester didn't seem to pick up on.

Unless you are using a proper high end HD camera, there is a very good chance that you are not resolving full HD from its sensor. But if you shoot 4K and downscale to HD, even with a camera that is 4K but does not resolve 4K. There will still be way more than HD resolution to resolve from its sensor. And depending on the scaling method used, there will be full resolving of the HD resolution.

If you were shooting for HD and used a high end HD camera, then this would probably make more sense for the extended production workflow. There have been a few HD cameras that the film industry had no problems adopting, due to their outstanding picture quality and rosolving of resolution. Sony is probably most noted for this with maybe the Sony/Panavision Genesis being the most notable http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genesis_(camera)

Personally, if I were shooting for end to end HD and had the option to use a HD camera that could resolve the detail. I would choose that over a 4K camera. Even if the only real advantage was an easier pathway through the extended post workflow, through to delivery.

But none of this takes anything away from the fact that the subject is still very interesting, if not only for the fact that it is a source for a good argument

Cheers,
Dave.
David Harry is offline  
post #18 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 07:01 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 330
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 19
What intrigued me was the question of in-camera scaling from 4K beating the 4K in post downscale in the production camera, should one then just shoot 1080p from the beginning.
I believe I see a great difference in the 2.5K in my BMCC downscaled to 1080p. But is that because of the greater resolution, that the HD has skipped lines or done a bad downscaling, maybe it was that BMD was fixing with the new debayer.
And if I expand that thought to other cameras one can ask if a camera is good at 4k or just bad at HD and so on.
It becomes a bit more complexed compared to just HD vs HD. And yes one must also consider the method for downscaling.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #19 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 07:25 AM
Member
 
David Harry's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Hi Mattias.

I don't use BM myself, so don't know what they do for scaling, although I am very familiar with AX100. The 100 doesn't line skip or crop, it uses the full sensor and squeezes it down. Although this method produces a brilliant HD picture, it doesn't beat its 4K image being scaled in post.

Here is an AX100 test for resolution differences between its internal 4K scaled to HD compared to its 4K being scaled in post.

http://youtu.be/ABmAFPiXeVw?list=UUY...nvosy5wMRpeIww

Cheers,
Dave.
David Harry is offline  
post #20 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 07:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,874
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
Thats not what we are saying really, at least not me. Its more in the terms of a 5mp picture from a Leica with a sweet lens is going to look better then the 16mp DNGs I get out of my Nokia.

EDIT: Now this was extreme like the good old "alexa" example but it applies imo to lower ends of both still and video cameras as well.
I agree a 4K video from a smartphone will not look as good as a 2K video from an Alexa but 4K 100mb/s videos from my GH4 look better than my GH4 1080p videos even in 200mb/s mode, I bet 4K videos from the Sony A7s look better than A7s 1080p videos also.
jogiba is online now  
post #21 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 07:59 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 330
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Yup, your probably right, but whats interesting to me is in which cameras is it so, and how does Camera Xs 4K compare to Camera Ys Hd.
My suspission is that the line isnt always clear.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #22 of 35 Old 08-01-2014, 08:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,874
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Sony makes a 1080p version of the AX100 called the CX900 .




CX900 vs AX100 screen shots :
Sony CX900 1080p
Sony AX100 4K UHD




Last edited by jogiba; 08-01-2014 at 08:29 AM.
jogiba is online now  
post #23 of 35 Old 08-02-2014, 12:59 AM
Senior Member
 
Philip_L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 318
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Hi

What a lot of people seem to forget is video is about capturing movement, not static images. A lot of resolution talk and comparisons comes from looking at static images here which isn't what video is about.

There is also the issue of motion blur due to the way modern displays work (LCD, OLED), so the higher frame-rate you can through at these the better.

So 1080P at 60fps is a sample rate of 60Hz and 4K at the moment is a sample rate of 30 to 24Hz, a half or less of the sample rate of 1080/60P. It is the sampling rate that creates the illusion of motion, more samples, more realism and and clearer motion. The aim for modern 4K/8K broadcast systems is 120Hz, so consumer 4K is far from what it is meant to be. Hardware constraints and the need to get us to buy more stuff means 4K arrives half-baked.

When you factor in that the size of most TVs and typical viewing distances often means 4K resolution can't really be resolved by the eye fully, but the sampling rate can, 1080P at 60Hz can look much more pleasing.

We can put this into raw numbers. 1080P at 60Hz displays a total of 124.4 million pixels a second, 4K at 30Hz is 248.8 million pixels a second (so only double the picture information despite it being marketed as 4 times the resolution) and at 24Hz is not much more than 1080P/60 at just 199 million pixels a second. Consider that 4K is harder to compress real-time so those extra pixels are not holding as much real detail until codecs and hardware improves, it would not be any surprise to see 1080P at 60fps actually looking better.

Not until next year when 4K arrives at decent frame-rates and improved encoding with higher bit-rates will people realise just how poor 4K is on these first generation consumer camcorders. You can be sure the manufacturers will be all too keen to point this out too, they like nothing more than us replacing our equipment every 12 months.

Note to Avforums moderators, save us a lot of time next year and just copy all the posts about the GH4 and AX100 with a find and replace and change the model numbers to GH5 and AX200

Regards

Phil
Philip_L is offline  
post #24 of 35 Old 08-02-2014, 04:08 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 330
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 19
IMO frame rate is also a matter of personal taste. 60fps is not better than 25 or 24 because the lack of motion blur, again Imo.
So once again, its more complex than just spec vs spec.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #25 of 35 Old 08-02-2014, 05:38 AM
Member
 
P&Struefan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 26
I agree with Phil on the limitation of consumer 4K at the moment. Since I have had the AX100 for about a month now I've almost always locked the shutter down at 1/50 when shooting in 4K (even 1/25 on a few occasions) and been careful with the camera movement yet I've still noticed flickers and judders from time to time. I could apply a touch of blurring effect in post to some of the footage and make the playback look quite acceptable but could also do nothing about some. It's kind of silly to have a camera capable of capturing phenomenal static detail only to take some of that away afterwards to make the video more pleasant to watch.

I think this new consumer 4K thing (Sony AX100, Panasonic GH4, BMPC and numerous cellphones) is all about a trade-off in temporal resolution for a spatial resolution gain. Some people will like one thing or the other more depending on many factors.

For myself and my paying clients we've been kind of hooked on 4K despite the temporal downside. PP work has so far been effective to some degree at lessening the annoying temporal effects but this takes so much computation time. It would definitely have been better if I had gotten the shooting right (50p/60p) in the first place.
P&Struefan is offline  
post #26 of 35 Old 08-02-2014, 07:26 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 0
I think 4k is much more detailed
ergun is offline  
post #27 of 35 Old 08-02-2014, 08:34 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,025
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1036 Post(s)
Liked: 1147
Quote:
Originally Posted by jogiba View Post
I agree a 4K video from a smartphone will not look as good as a 2K video from an Alexa but 4K 100mb/s videos from my GH4 look better than my GH4 1080p videos even in 200mb/s mode, I bet 4K videos from the Sony A7s look better than A7s 1080p videos also.
And that's the way to remove the 10,000 variables that make this question virtually unanswerable.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #28 of 35 Old 08-02-2014, 01:49 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 330
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
And that's the way to remove the 10,000 variables that make this question virtually unanswerable.
Its not mandatory for an interesting discussion to have a definitive answer or conclusion.
Its like the old is camera X better than camera Y, it can be fun to discuss but most people know that there is no camera in the world than in every aspect is better than another. Simply because you have to take personal taste into consideration.
If we take the GH4 as an example it was the 200mbit 1080p that I thought look good from the beta testers and not the 4K.
Ever since I decided that the camera wasn't for me I haven't payed much attention to it so today my opinion might change, or not , knows.
Its not right or wrong, just different tastes.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #29 of 35 Old 08-02-2014, 02:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,874
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked: 71
1080p from the GH4 looks ok on a 22-24" 1080p monitor but on a 30" 1600p or 4K UHD TV it looks softer compared to 4K UHD (3840x2160) or cinema 4K (4096x2160) . Even 4K UHD 2160p from smartphones looks better than 1080p.
Cropped image from a 1080p Oppo Find 7 smartphone youtube video:


Cropped image from a 4K UHD 2160p Oppo Find 7 smartphone youtube video :


jogiba is online now  
post #30 of 35 Old 08-02-2014, 08:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Paulo Teixeira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,693
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 33
The GH4 is actually a 10 bit 422 camera. You just need something like the Atomos Shogun and attach it to the GH4 through HDMI.

"Compare AX100 to RED Epic in 4K the AX100 produces a sharper image but this is something you can achieve in post with RED as well.
I'm not saying AX100 is better. I'm saying it produces a sharper image internally (post in camera)."
Where are you getting your information from?

My Youtube page:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

My Flickr page:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Paulo Teixeira is offline  
Reply Camcorders
Gear in this thread - 1080p by PriceGrabber.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off