Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

I got the link to this 8k youtube video of NYC shot with an 8k red camera from helicopters.
I was unable to view it at 8k with my computer but I was able to view the youtube in 4k. I think my internet download speed speed is about 35-40 mbps and I needed about 50mbps to view it in 8k.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN3uF3990Q0

I was able to download the video in both 4k and 8k as mkv files with the free 4k Video Downloader software, I just couldn't watch the downloaded 8k version on my computer or on youtube.

However I was able to extract a single frame of the video at the 39 second point using ffmpeg free software.

For those of you who wonder what 8k video frames look like, below are an 8k 7680x4320 frame (33MP), a 4k 3840x2160 frame (8MP) and a side by side comparison of deep crops of both, the 8k crop on the left. Note the 8k crop was downsized to be the same number of pixels as the 4K frame, for a fair comparison.

8K single frame

(Download)

4K single frame

(Download)

Deep 100% crop 8K on left, 4K on right

(Download)

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I can't say I see much of a difference. 8K is very useful for film production, because it allows editorial choices to be made in cropping a scene for 4K output. I do that now with 4K to 1080P jobs. Final Cut Pro ingests my 4K footage and enables me to perform a Ken Burns effect to "zoom" video in post, or "cut crop" down to 1080, or just convert the 4K straight to 1080. (4K downsampled to 1080P is sharper and more detailed than 1080P from the camera.)

But 8K broadcast? 8K streaming? Meh. We're at a point of rapidly diminishing marginal returns on expenditures. It will surely happen, but the need is weak.

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

There's a bit of increased sharpness and color rendition with the 8K but not much. Would have like to be able to compare a portrait or closeup shot rather than a landscape though. The 8MP 4K stills are not there yet quality wise to compete with 20MP stills from most cameras. Maybe the 32MP stills from 8K video might be acceptable as portraits, closeups, sport shots, etc. If so it may change the way we take still pics in the future.

I recently shot a handheld (a bit shaky) 30 fps test 4K video in bright sunlight with a 1/160 shutter speed.

https://vimeo.com/347845438

I was already at iso 80 and f8 and increasing the shutter speed let me capture a blue rather than washed out sky. There was no negative effect on the video quality that I could see, contrary to the much quoted rule of setting the video shutter speed at 2x the fps. With higher shutter speeds, 8K video might capture some fantastic action shots and sports shots as single frames.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

When I first got my GH4, I did a lot of testing. I like the filmic look for storytelling, and the video look for training. So I use 24 fps for 4K "film," and 30 fps for video. From my notes:

24 fps, 1/25 second or 360° shutter angle: dreamy, fluid, with drugged like motion
24 fps, 1/50 second or 180° shutter angle: extremely close to the look of real 24 fps film

30 fps, 1/30 second or 360° shutter angle: less dreamy, less fluid, than 24 fps at 180°
30 fps, 1/60 second or 180° shutter angle: looks like TV, only better
30 fps, 1/125 second or 90° shutter angle: minimal jerkiness with a baseball bat swing
30 fps, 1/250 second or 45° shutter angle: made me feel nervous watching a bat swing
30 fps, 1/500 second or 22.5° shutter angle: visibly jerky
30 fps, 1/1000 second or 11.25° shutter angle: I would never use it.

The trade-off seems to be that you can get great stills, or natural film/video looks, but not both at the same time. I've pulled stills from video for promotional use before. Here are three from our movie, SAGE.

When I first got my GH4, I did a lot of testing. I like the filmic look for storytelling, and the video look for training. So I use 24 fps for 4K "film," and 30 fps for video. From my notes:

24 fps, 1/25 second or 360° shutter angle: dreamy, fluid, with drugged like motion
24 fps, 1/50 second or 180° shutter angle: extremely close to the look of real 24 fps film

30 fps, 1/30 second or 360° shutter angle: less dreamy, less fluid, than 24 fps at 180°
30 fps, 1/60 second or 180° shutter angle: looks like TV, only better
30 fps, 1/125 second or 90° shutter angle: minimal jerkiness with a baseball bat swing
30 fps, 1/250 second or 45° shutter angle: made me feel nervous watching a bat swing
30 fps, 1/500 second or 22.5° shutter angle: visibly jerky
30 fps, 1/1000 second or 11.25° shutter angle: I would never use it.

The trade-off seems to be that you can get great stills, or natural film/video looks, but not both at the same time. I've pulled stills from video for promotional use before. Here are three from our 2018 48-Hour Film Project movie, SAGE. It's a 7-minute story of a young alcoholic lesbian woman seeking redemption. My twins and friends created it; I just filmed half of it and did some post.

Deliberate 1/25 Second 24fps scene (they're supposed to be drunk)

(Download)

1/60 @ f/4, open shade, ND8 filter

(Download)

1/60 @ f/4

(Download)

User ID

For single frame/still images from burst,
while 8K may be too resource hungry and
4K not quite what it takes for still, Lumix
offers 6K. I get 18MP images at 60FPS.

Dr.Nikon Loc: Honolulu Hawaii

The 8k has an advantage .. , I have 300 mp ..quite fast ..anyway .. this is my look at it in 8K ..

8K .., with etc.

(Download)

rmm0605 Loc: Atlanta GA

Frankly, the 4K looks PDG (pretty damn good). Not sure the extra pixels pay for themselves.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

It would be nice if the 8k cost more, "but not much." I'm satisfied with whatever I have now.

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

I really can't see much use for 4K or 8K video except for frame grabs of things like fast moving things, i.e.: lightning, birds in flight, wildlife, etc.

I shoot 4k video for the above and a 3840x2160 frame (8MP) yields quite a nice sized image.

8k frames at 7680x4320 (33MP) would be quite spectacular! However, storage space and the processing power to display and extract frames might be a little frightening!!

bwa