4k video

Discussion in 'Digital Video' started by pandy43k, Feb 8, 2014.

  1. pandy43k macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    #1
    Hi,

    looking into filming some home videos, and would like to do this in 4k, apart from buying a 2-3k camera, is there a cheaper way of doing this? or am i better just buying a good 1080p camera for now?
     
  2. Menneisyys2 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    #2
    If you don't mind using a phone for this, I'd certainly wait for the Samsung GS5 announcement - it's about two weeks from now. It's likely to have both 4K and OIS.

    Currently, the only "cheap" way of recording 4K is using the Samsung Note 3. It, however, doesn't have OIS and has a recording limitation of 5 minute. Hopefully the GS5 fixes these issues too.

    LG's next high-end phone is also rumored to support 4K recording. Nothing is certain as yet, though.

    Of course, you can also go the GH4 way but it's already in the 2.2k+ region and it's certainly an overkill for "simple" home videos - after all, you'll also need an external HDMI recorder to record its 4:2:2 / 10-bit stream to make full use of its capabilities. (The built-in encoder only records into 4:2:0 / 8-bit)

    Unfortunately, Apple is highly unlikely to add 4K recording into the iPhone 6 - they're lagging 2-3 years behind the competition, video recording-wise.
     
  3. acearchie macrumors 68040

    acearchie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    #3
    Is there any motivation behind wanting to record 4k?

    1080p on a decent video camera is going to be better than 4k from a camera phone...
     
  4. pandy43k thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    #4
    i was looking at the note 3 4k sample videos and comparing them to my iPhone 5 1080p on my rMBP and the note videos look much better evan on youtube. i know its not true 4k but it does look much better especially on the retina screen. and i figure i might as well record in the best quality at the time so it will look better in the future when 4k is more widely available.

    i don't really want to go away from my iPhone, I'm invested in the eco system and it works well with my mac. But i don't believe the iPhone 5s will give me any improvement in video over my 5 and i know we are some way off the iPhone 6 i can't see it containing the ability to film in 4k as apple don't seem to focused on the video part of the iPhone camera. At the same time i can't justify spending 100's or 1000's on a dedicated camera.

    so its looking like a samsung handset is the cheapest/most efficient way of doing it?
     
  5. AcesHigh87 macrumors 6502a

    AcesHigh87

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Location:
    New Brunswick, Canada
    #5
    Personally I would spend the money on a good 1080p Camera and not worry about 4k right now.

    Yeah, the GN3 will shoot 4k but only in resolution, the bit rate isn't really 4k which seems like a waste to me. Especially with the kind of limitations given the sensors on phones.

    Sony is launching a 4k camcorder at $2000 and that's considered very cheap for 4k. You certainly won't find a true camera for under $1000 that will shoot 4k.

    I think considering VERY few people have 4k displays you're better off buying a good quality 1080p camera and upgrading to 4k later when more people will be able to actually see it.

    Just doesn't seem worth it to get a phone and shoot the resolution of 4k but not the bitrate.
     
  6. Menneisyys2 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    #6
    Being much more future proof, assuming decent quality.

    Yup, in areas like DR, lens swapping (if possible), optical zoom etc., dedicated cameras will always be better. Nevertheless, the Note 3 has excellent video footage - the 4K resolution is indeed made use of (see the framegrabs at http://connect.dpreview.com/post/3690994318/samsung-galaxy-note3-first-look-review , in the chapter "Video"). If you don't shoot "pro" video (to make money of it), "only" family stuff, then, the Note 3 may be more than sufficient. If you can live with the lack of any kind of IS and the 5-minute cap, that is.
     
  7. puckhead193 macrumors G3

    puckhead193

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Location:
    NY
    #7
    I wouldn't worry about HD going away for a long time. If you must have 4k what about Gopro hero 3+ black. I think you could get some really great creative home videos from it. Esp if you have kids.
    Also think about your computer, currently can your computer handle editing 4k?
     
  8. pandy43k thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    #8
    I have a 15" rMPB high end so editing it will be ok. the footage from the GN3 looks really good on the retina screen, you can tell the difference between 1080p and the GN3 4k. would that difference be less so with a £300 - £400 1080p camera rather than the iphone camera?

    I agree a dedicated video camera will always give better results, but I don't want to be spending a lot on a camera that wont be used all that much, but on the same hand if say a £400 1080p camera will give me results much greater than my iphone can produce it may be worth it

    im mainly thinking videos of the kids, dog etc. nothing special but I want it in good quality so it will stand the test of time.
     
  9. salacious macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 15, 2011
    #9
    are you asking if a £400 Dedicated made for purpose camera, is going to be better than your 'added camera but not dedicated' phone..

    really...
     
  10. Menneisyys2 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    #10
    Actually, since the iPhone 4, all iPhones have had excellent video recording capabilities WRT image quality; most importantly, sharpness and lack of moire.

    In this regard, they're considerably better than a lot dedicated cameras and most P&S digital cameras or, particularly WRT moire, DSLR's (that is, not camcorders).

    Again, this only applies to resolution / moire. In other areas like DR, a DSLR will always be better. Also, the audio is inferior to almost everything else, it being not stereo, let alone 5.1.

    Nevertheless, I've found the video recorder mode of all iPhones sufficient for family shooting, particularly when I can use a tripod.

    ----------

    Well, I'm not sure a, in 4k, 12/15 fps GoPro 3+ BE can provide as good footage as the 30 fps Note 3. It's just too choppy.

    Of course, the two have different strengths and weaknesses. The GoPro is - if you don't mind the, particularly in 1080p60, very low battery life w/o the battery add-on pack - an excellent action camera, the best WRT mounting on one's forehead or chest. And it's truly UWA, unlike the Note 3.
     
  11. dringkor macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    #11
    I wouldn't worry about home video of your kids and dog being "future proof" or "standing the test of time." In the future, the important thing about the videos you shoot and edit now will be their content and the fact that you have them, not whether they were recorded in the most bleeding edge format of the day.

    I have edited home movies of my family from 10 years ago now. It was recorded on an old (even at the time) 8mm analog Sony handycam in 4x3 aspect ratio. Of course I converted it to digital and edited it and have it on Blu-ray now. The quality is just terrible: it's grainy and jittery, the colors in low light scenes are washed out, and the audio is hissy and thin. But I love it. I don't even notice the quality when watching it, because it's just wonderful to even have video of my family from so long ago at my fingertips.

    Besides, when you show all the videos you edit today to your kids years from now, the outdated video format will be part of the charm. "What, you only recorded us in 2D 4K? How '10s!"

    Don't worry too much about the camera you want to buy. Just go out there with the camera you have and shoot. And be present and enjoy these moments with your family, because they'll never come this way again.
     
  12. AcesHigh87 macrumors 6502a

    AcesHigh87

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Location:
    New Brunswick, Canada
    #12
    Stating that the 4k from the Note 3 is better than the 1080p on an iPhone is pretty much redundant. Both are phones and have about the same sensors; therefore they'll get about the same nitrate which means the resolution is obviously going to make a difference.

    Now then, if you compared the 4k video from a Note 3 to 1080p from a proper camera the difference would be much less obvious. My main camera is a DSLR (Nikon D3200) which isn't even designed for video and I'd still take it over a Note 3 for video. Removable lens, far greater depth of field, better sensor, etc. Plus the 1080p won't be as heavily compressed.

    If you want purely video, there's honestly no reason to go with 4k right now. The Note 3 is really the only affordable 4k (The GoPro will do it fine but you'll never get clean audio) and honestly its not worth it if you ask me. Unless you wanna drop $2000 for the new Sony 4k coming out you're not gonna get true 4k anyway so better offer going 1080 for now and upgrading later.

    Lastly, you would be surprised how much of a strain 4k would put on even a computer as powerful as yours. 4k is very GPU intensive. Also, what do you plan to edit on? If it's home movies I sense that you aren't planning on using pro level editing software (I apologize if I'm wrong) which may not support 4k.

    This really is just all my opinion, take it for what you will. The way I see it though if you think the iPhone is sufficient for shooting home movies a dedicated 1080p camera (or even a decent DSLR) will be even better, even without 4k.
     
  13. acearchie macrumors 68040

    acearchie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    #13
    In fact it’s the opposite. Far shallower depth of field.
     
  14. salacious macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 15, 2011
    #14
    thats probably the biggest lie iv even known.

    you have obviously never shot with a decent lens.

    and a dedicated camera at the same price is alot better than the iphones camera, if it looks better its because the person shooting with it is alot better than you.
     
  15. Menneisyys2, Feb 10, 2014
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2014

    Menneisyys2 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    #15
    BS. I know a lot more about iPhone video recording than you, I'm afraid. I've even published several comparisons of iPhones to P&S cameras WRT video resoltuion.

    1, iPhones deliver true 720p (iPhone 4, iPad2, iPod touch 4) / 1080p (iPhone 4S+, iPad 3+, iPod touch 5+) resolution. Unlike most non-camcorder cameras, which, true input sensor resolution-wise, in no way can come close to the 1080p true resolution of the output file.

    2, they don't have moire / aliasing effects. Unlike most ILC's and DSLR's.

    No matter what lens you use on your digital camera, it won't magically increase true video resolution or remove aliasing.

    Note that

    1,
    I've been talking about non-camcorder digital cameras. Camcorders are, on the other hand, generally, much better suited for video recording and also deliver considerably better resolution / less moire than their stills-optimized digital camera peers.

    2, I only elaborated on resolution and moire/aliasing, in which iPhones (or, for that matter, WRT resolution, the Note 3) is much better than most digital cameras. I'm perfectly aware of the higher DR of DSLR's / ILC's / advantages of using different lens / lack of OIS in iPhones, making handheld shooting preferable using dedicated cameras.
     
  16. AcesHigh87 macrumors 6502a

    AcesHigh87

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Location:
    New Brunswick, Canada
    #16
    That's basically what I meant, I just didn't word it properly. My main point was the the variation in DoF possible is greater. Basically that you are capable of having shallow DoF while also being able to go out to infinite which is basically all phone cameras will do.

    But thank you for the correction. It was my intention but I worded it incorrectly so I appreciate the clarification.
     
  17. sjschall macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    #17
    +1000!
     
  18. pandy43k thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    #18
    having thought about this now i agree, i think i got too wrapped up in quality rather than what i was actually filming.

    one last question, am i better off sticking with the iPhone camera or going with a £150 - £200 dedicated camera, am i going to see any real difference? ( i know ill get optical zoom)
     
  19. AcesHigh87 macrumors 6502a

    AcesHigh87

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Location:
    New Brunswick, Canada
    #19
    Just my opinion but here is what I would deem the pros and cons to a dedicated camera over an iPhone.

    Pros:
    - Better DoF
    - Dedicated Storage that you won't have to offload as much
    - Better Zoom
    - Better Audio
    - No accidental vertical footage
    - Manual focus (depends on the camera)

    Cons:
    - Cost (Since you already own an iPhone)
    - Having to carry a dedicated camera around to capture moments
    - weaker auto-focus (depending in the camera)

    With that said, my opinion, would be to acquire a decent 1080p camera (personally I like Sony and Canon cameras) for your main shooting but don't be afraid to use your iPhone as a backup in case you don't have your camera on you. As people said, the content matters more than the quality.

    The main reason I say this is because of the quality increase (better bitrate, bigger sensor, etc) but also because of the amount of content you can get. Your iPhone has a limited amount of space (8, 16, 64, whatever GB amount you have) and a lot is dedicated to things other than video. This means your internal storage will fill up pretty fast and you'll be dumping footage a lot.

    Being able to have dedicated SD cards for a video camera that can be swapped out easily and dumped less often will mean that you won't accidentally run out of space and miss something. In times gone be we could slap new film or a new tape into the camera to get more. We can't do that now but we can put a new SD card in on the fly. You can't do this with an iPhone and if you're away from your computer you can't dump footage.

    The iPhone has a good camera, I will never say it doesn't. I love my iPhone camera and if my SD cards were full or my batteries dead or I didn't have my camera on me, what have you, I would use it as a backup. However I would hate to miss footage because of only using my phone.
     
  20. Menneisyys2 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    #20
    Also don't forget IS - something very important if you can't shoot stabilized (e.g., from a tripod). While the 5s' electronic stabilization isn't bad, it's still not as good as true optical stabilization used in most, even cheap, camcorders.
     
  21. handsome pete macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    #21
    You're confusing "best quality" with "highest resolution." They're not the same thing.


    "Future-proofing" is a battle you can't win. Technology is always getting better. I wouldn't buy into a spec in its infancy when you can certainly get better overall quality with current specs, and you'd likely save some money too. Especially for something like home videos.

    Besides, 1080 material scales well and is a digital format. It's already future proof.


    It only shoots 4K at a lower frame rate (15fps I believe).
     
  22. Menneisyys2 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    #22
    The Note 3 has excellent IQ for casual uses in 4k mode. (Of course it's not a $10.000 camera, IQ-wise.)

    4K is here (or will be in about half a year). It's unlikely we'll have another, even better, consumer(!) video format in the, say, next 3-4 years. That is, it's already worth preferring 4K-capable cameras to plain 1080p ones if video is important. And not, you can't resolve missing detail from 1080p video, no matter how you try to scale it.

    Yup, 12/15 fps, just like the predecessor. Hopefully this year's model will shoot 30 fps...
     
  23. handsome pete macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    #23
    Of course it's here but at this stage in the game it's not really worth it. And I question whether it'll be worth it for the foreseeable future. For home video it's fine, but the average consumer isn't going to see much benefit. It's the 1080 vs 720 debate all over again.

    And no, you can't resolve detail that wasn't there to begin with, but it scales perfectly fine. I doubt many will see a vast difference.
     
  24. salacious macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 15, 2011
    #24
    oh god, this is ridiculous, just get a decent 1080p handheld camera, your iphone will not beat it in anyway aslong as you get the right camera.

    4k wont be commercial for another 2-4 years.

    YOU ARE FILMING HOME VIDEOS!! not producing professional content.
     
  25. HobeSoundDarryl, Feb 12, 2014
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2014

    HobeSoundDarryl macrumors 603

    HobeSoundDarryl

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2004
    Location:
    Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
    #25
    OP, if you are still paying attention to this thread, you're asking a biased group. The people at this site tends to go with whatever Apple has ordained as THE WAY. Right now, that's 1080p for video. Apple seemed to cling to 720p for much longer than much of the rest of the industry and right up to the point at which Apple finally embraced 1080p, this crowd argued passionately for 720p: "720p is good enough", "the chart", "I can't see the difference (so you can't either)", "1080p is just a gimmick" and on and on.

    Then, Apple did embrace 1080p and that whole 720p argument seemed to evaporate overnight. No one argued about Apple's 'mistake' in going to a gimmick resolution, the chart, and on and on. It's always the same here: seemingly 5-10% offering objective input, 85%-95% arguing for whatever Apple has chosen as THE WAY… right up until Apple shifts and then the new THE WAY becomes the way.

    Home video or not, you get ONE chance to record what will become increasingly precious movies over time. Like some others share in this thread, I've got home movies shot on crappy VHS camcorders, 8mm and on- even old silent reels. While it's great to have them on demand now, I wish I could take my 2014 camcorder back in time and reshoot the same scenes in with today's hardware. I'd love to see long-since gone relatives in rich clarity. Some dear relatives passed before it was easy to record sound on home video and how I would love to hear their voices again. One doesn't get a second chance to capture those kinds of memories.

    So my answer is not the THE WAY answer. My answer is: if you can afford it, buy the best quality video recorder you can get. If that's 4K, then get 4K. The family memories you capture with it can only be captured now. You won't be able to come back in the future and re-shoot these memories at richer resolutions. If your TV or Apple equipment can't max out 4K right now, so what... down-convert it for what you can display but keep a master version for when the rest of your hardware catches up.

    The day will arrive when Apple moves on from 1080p to 4K. In doing so, this crowd will go right with them and the "1080p is good enough" and similar arguments will vanish much like the "720p is good enough" arguments did. Then 8K will become the "gimmick", "4K is good enough" and the whole argument chain recycles… until Apple rolls out an iDevice that shoots 8K.

    Since cost is part of your question, there are <$2K camcorders that shoot 4K. Maybe go in with some others and share the camera? If you don't need to shoot often, maybe you can find a local shop that will rent you one when you need it? Do searches for refurb(ished) to possibly save some money. Take a job at an electronics store with a good employee discount or find a friend in that kind of situation and buy it through them.
     

Share This Page