# Do you use 4K video?



## docsmith (Sep 15, 2018)

I was reading another thread that was essentially stating that Canon has epically failed because of its handling of 4K video.

Maybe this is true. But, have been listening to talk about 4K video for a good number of years here on CR. I still haven't seen "the 4K future" happen. On a personal level, my previous cable provider, Comcast, still delivers 720 which is upsampled to get 1080i (we just cancelled, but not because of that, more that the rates kept creeping up yet we were watching more and more of Netflix/Amazon Prime).

While my TVs are still 2K/FHD, I have several tech friends who own 4K tvs. Now and again, I ask them about content and I have yet to hear content as anything more than just sporadic and that most of what they watch is 2K/FHD. I bought a new monitor.....Benq sw2700....not 4K. Also, I am sure many of you know, you need a video card capable of 4K. My computer has a new solid video card in it, which is not 4K. 

So...when is this "future proofing" going to become relevant? We have been talking about 4K for what, about 5 years? I am beginning to think Canon, yet again, has it about right.

There are high end professional applications that will want/need 4K, but most of the world is 2K, and will remain there for the foreseeable future.

That is likely a controversial statement. Feel free to debate it (I really do not have a horse in this race), but I actually thought it would be more interesting to poll CR and see how many of us are using 4K either personally or professionally and, if so, how much? You can vote for two entries, of course, I was thinking 1 for personal and 1 vote for your professional use.

BTW...I did look, but if I missed a similar poll, please let me know and I'll take this one down.


----------



## Valvebounce (Sep 15, 2018)

Hi Doc. 
Wow 1 in 10 votes, 1in 7 voters use 4K. 
I don’t think it is worth me upgrading to 4K,  I don’t think my eyes are 4K any more! 

Cheers, Graham.


----------



## Bennymiata (Sep 16, 2018)

My customers always want their videos on a DVD, so obviously they aren't worried about ultimate quality.
My computer is 4K capable, but no-one wants it.


----------



## dak723 (Sep 16, 2018)

An extremely small percentage of people can make a hell of a lot of noise. They also enjoy saying things like, "epic fail," and "Canon is *******." Plus a lot of them are Sony trolls or plants, in all likelihood.


----------



## bhf3737 (Sep 16, 2018)

There is nothing wrong with using 4K for recreational or professional use-cases. I often use it for recording classic concert music video in multi-camera setting, using dedicated video cameras. Never used a DSLR or mirrorless for that purpose because of image quality (poor codec, color, etc.), record duration limits, heat and focus (breathing, etc.) issues. 
Those who whine for 4K and no crop in full-frame, must first understand that the camera has been designed to have the operator stay behind and not in front of the camera! And those who scream for 120p should first understand that professional takes are the most pleasing when taken, processed and played back in their natural time.

Sadly, some click-bait-info-tainment personalities review video features of cameras as if you must always operate the camera by staying in front of it and they present video of skateboarders and ducks in pond as the benchmark!


----------



## Zeidora (Sep 16, 2018)

... and the results above are rather skewed towards video given people who hang out here. So population statistics will be even lower.


----------



## docsmith (Sep 16, 2018)

Zeidora said:


> ... and the results above are rather skewed towards video given people who hang out here. So population statistics will be even lower.


Yep....and it will be interesting to see what the final split is. It started off very skewed to never using 4K. But right now, another trend, which is the two ends of the spectrum, you either use 4K or you don't. 

And it is human behavior to assume other people behave similar to yourself.....we'll see...only 20 people have voted so far. Hopefully we'll see more.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 16, 2018)

I shoot 4K on the rare occasions that I use my iPhone for video. Since it is permanently stuck with a wide-angle lens, I can use the extra resolution to give very clean 1080p or 720p output when I crop in editing. I don't have 4K on any of my real cameras, and don't miss it, since the G7X II can zoom in, and the DSLRs can accept longer lenses.

My computer is a 5K iMac that is almost 4 years old now. It can display 4K and leave room for other stuff, so it works well for editing. My actual TVs are 1080p and 720p, and would not benefit from higher resolution giving my viewing distances and source options.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 16, 2018)

I don't do video, so, of course, I don't do 4K either. The poll is flawed because it does not take people like me into account, and there may be a lot of us that don't do video at all.


----------



## docsmith (Sep 16, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I don't do video, so, of course, I don't do 4K either. The poll is flawed because it does not take people like me into account, and there may be a lot of us that don't do video at all.


???

Wouldn't you "never use 4K video" either as a pro or a consumer?

Perhaps, for your intent, it would have been better to have a category for "video, 2K only" and "no video whatsoever"....but, for my intent, never using 4K video is never using it. Regardless of the reason.

Also, I assume you watch television, do you watch 4K? Or are you 1080i/p?


----------



## The Supplanter (Sep 16, 2018)

dak723 said:


> _An extremely small percentage of people can make a hell of a lot of noise_. They also enjoy saying things like, "epic fail," and "Canon is *******." Plus a lot of them are Sony trolls or plants, in all likelihood.



So true about that!


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 16, 2018)

I don't use video - or, more exactly, I have shot less than 5 minutes in the 13 years I have been using DSLRs. 
Correction - I video's a friend's wedding as a favour so he could show it to his mother who was ill and unable to attend. 

I live in a major UK city and he major UK supplier (British Telecom) trialled 4k only last year. I am not aware of much content for 4k streaming to make it worth my while.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 16, 2018)

never capture any video, except very occasional, very casual 20 sec clips with iPhone. Don't even know what res it is set to.

tv = 1080, almost never watch.

monitor = 4k. love it. for stills content. rarely watch videos on it, and if so youtube windowed in some low res. no video/graphics card, CPU with integrated Intel graphics unit drives 4k monitor just fine. don't play 3D games. 


imaging gear: i want a choice of "pure stills cameras" unfettered by any video recording shenanigans, whether 2k, 4k or 8k. not interested in high fos either. 5-8 fps without full, uncompromised Af tracking are fine with me. i think, large majority of Canon "non-dedicated video" camera purchasers would take a less expensive, 100% stills- oriented camera over "hybrid" model.


----------



## The Supplanter (Sep 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> never capture any video, except very occasional, very casual 20 sec clips with iPhone. Don't even know what res it is set to.
> 
> tv = 1080, almost never watch.
> 
> ...



That's the key. I want that _choice _too, and I think many consumers do. Oh, I long for that day, but we know it is not coming.


----------



## Zeidora (Sep 17, 2018)

To clarify, don't do video of any kind, don't have a TV, but own a 4K computer display for still editing and layout.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Sep 18, 2018)

Sorry there wasn't a tick box for "What is video"!

I bought stills cameras for taking stills - perhaps I am weird?


----------



## ethanz (Sep 20, 2018)

65% don't use 4K (the poll is setup strangely, so that is my calculation). Given that most people on here are more advanced users than the average consumer, I'd say its even less for the average consumer. And yet, 4K 'is an absolute necessity or Canon failed.'


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 21, 2018)

After a few years on CR as others have said, there are vocal 4K screamers but they don't represent anything close to a majority. For novices like me video is challenging but I'm really appreciating my 1DX2 video capabilities. I now use a 4K TV to initially cull my shots and view video. I find it excellent for comparing similar shots taken in bursts to get the best and with two hands on the camera and a front button dedicated to enlarge/view I can fly though the shots much faster than on the computer. No recovering a delete though>

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 21, 2018)

johnf3f said:


> Sorry there wasn't a tick box for "What is video"!
> 
> I bought stills cameras for taking stills - perhaps I am weird?



You thought it was a stills camera or does it actually not do video? If you don't care for video no reason to use but it in my case I've shot 4K60 and enjoyed looking at the still images of, for example, cedar waxwing flight, and it was pretty educational. 4K video paused on a 4K TV makes a pretty nice image.

Jack


----------



## docsmith (Sep 21, 2018)

ethanz said:


> 65% don't use 4K (the poll is setup strangely, so that is my calculation). Given that most people on here are more advanced users than the average consumer, I'd say its even less for the average consumer. And yet, 4K 'is an absolute necessity or Canon failed.'


The poll is open for a few more days, but the trend has been the same since the first day. 

A quick summary, as of right now 45 people voted. 41 voted in the "consumer" portion and 18 voted in the "professional" portion. For my thoughts, I combined the "never and rarely" categories as I would assume 4K is not an important to these people and the "sometimes and often" categories as these people would likely value 4K capabilities in their camera.

On the consumer side:

Never ( 27 votes) + rarely (6 votes) = 33 people of 41 (80.5%) where 4K is likely not important to them
Sometimes (3) + often (5) = 8 people (19.5%) where 4K is likely important to them
Professional side:

Never (12 votes) + rarely (1) = 13 of 18 (72.2%) do not use or minimally use 4K in their professional lives. What is interesting, is if we assumed the people that did not vote fall into this category, it would actually be 40/45, or 88.9%, do not use 4K in their professional lives (which would include non-professional photographers/videographers).
Sometimes (2) + Often (3) = 5 people of 18 (27.8%) who voted in this category where 4K is likely important to them in their professional lives. Again, if we assume the people that did not vote in the professional category did so because they do not use 4K in their professional lives, this would be 5/45 or 11.1%.
Next, I will point out that 5 people sometimes/often use 4K professionally, and 8 as a consumer, these likely overlap. Maybe not all people using 4K professionally also use it as a consumer, but I am thinking most do, so maybe 4 of the 8 people who use 4K as consumers were pros also using it (again, skewing the data a bit considering forum members). Which, if you remove them, drives the consumers using 4K numbers down to less than 10%

I did leave 4K a bit vague and this was intentional (sorry for any confusion), but really, I wanted to see if people were using it at all vs just in their photography lives. For example, there are certain photography youtubers that make a huge deal that 4K is needed for their broadcasts. Based on this, maybe it isn't so critical.

So, a few conclusions, at least my thoughts:

4K is a niche market. If you go with these numbers, 10-20%. But, this is likely high compared to general populations or even general photographers as this forum likely skews toward people passionate about photography/video/technical gear, are technically oriented themselves, and that have enough resources to invest in technical gear. I am actually a bit surprised here, I really wonder how small the actual 4K market is.
Professionally, 4K is a bit more important. People are using 4K, but it is still around 1/3rd. I am sure a few non-professional photographers voted here (which was fine), then this would be a bit higher (separate "pro only" poll would be needed for this). And, of course, there will be professional markets where 4K is likely critically important.
All that, and it becomes really easy to see why Canon is not emphasizing 4K to the extent some would say is needed. It is simply not a feature being used by a majority of their customers or (likely) professionals. Even years after we started talking about 4K, it still hasn't arrived. This might be why we have not seen a follow up to the 1DC.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 21, 2018)

I'm still in the very early stages of getting into video, but the single biggest plus for me at the moment that I see for 4K is to be able to zoom and pan in post and still have HD quality.

The poll is also not differentiating between 4K and HD which would give numbers relating to video per se. CR is not a very videocentric site. 

Jack


----------



## stevelee (Sep 21, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> I'm still in the very early stages of getting into video, but the single biggest plus for me at the moment that I see for 4K is to be able to zoom and pan in post and still have HD quality.
> 
> The poll is also not differentiating between 4K and HD which would give numbers relating to video per se. CR is not a very videocentric site.
> 
> Jack



Yes, I always shoot 4K when doing video with my iPhone 6S. I can zoom in during post and make up for the fixed wide-angle view of the phone camera. I can zoom in a lot (300%?) and still get stunning 720p video. 720p is plenty for most internet purposes and looks just fine on TVs under 55" from normal viewing distances. (It is the broadcast standard for OTA for many stations. Others use 1080i, which is equivalent in information. Before compression for cable or satellite, either looks quite good.) And 1080p allows maybe 200% zoom, and usually that is more than enough to crop in post.


----------



## Random Orbits (Sep 21, 2018)

docsmith said:


> The poll is open for a few more days, but the trend has been the same since the first day.
> 
> A quick summary, as of right now 45 people voted. 41 voted in the "consumer" portion and 18 voted in the "professional" portion. For my thoughts, I combined the "never and rarely" categories as I would assume 4K is not an important to these people and the "sometimes and often" categories as these people would likely value 4K capabilities in their camera.
> 
> ...



I would like to try shooting 4K video, but the bitrate for the 5DIV is too high. I don't take many videos -- just mainly of kids concerts, plays. etc. I do record audio separately and then mix it to go with the video, but my computer is getting long in the tooth and I don't have any 4K video editing tools.

It is ironic that even in this day and age that when I make the edited videos of plays available to others about half of them still want it as DVDs as opposed to blu-ray.


----------



## ethanz (Sep 21, 2018)

Random Orbits said:


> I would like to try shooting 4K video, but the bitrate for the 5DIV is too high. I don't take many videos -- just mainly of kids concerts, plays. etc. I do record audio separately and then mix it to go with the video, but my computer is getting long in the tooth and I don't have any 4K video editing tools.
> 
> It is ironic that even in this day and age that when I make the edited videos of plays available to others about half of them still want it as DVDs as opposed to blu-ray.



If you don't have any 4K editing tools, why does it even matter if the 5D4 bitrate is too high?

You have a blu-ray burner? I've never burned a blu-ray, unfortunately. I just got my first player only a few months ago... lol

It does seem like quite a waste to make HD videos and then burn them to a DVD, but that is the easiest and most widely used media still. I say this as I just shot a wedding in 4K, edited it to HD, and burned it onto a DVD. I will provide an HD file copy though.


----------



## Random Orbits (Sep 24, 2018)

ethanz said:


> If you don't have any 4K editing tools, why does it even matter if the 5D4 bitrate is too high?
> 
> You have a blu-ray burner? I've never burned a blu-ray, unfortunately. I just got my first player only a few months ago... lol
> 
> It does seem like quite a waste to make HD videos and then burn them to a DVD, but that is the easiest and most widely used media still. I say this as I just shot a wedding in 4K, edited it to HD, and burned it onto a DVD. I will provide an HD file copy though.



It matters because if it wasn't too high, I would have upgraded the tools to edit in 4K. At 500 Mbps, it'd take 225 GB to record an hour of video. I'd rather not go back to the days of swapping HDDs like floppy disks. It becomes much more expensive to keep multiple copies for to preserve redundancy.

Yes, I've had a blu-ray burner for years. I still buy physical discs rather than stream movies.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 24, 2018)

iMovie will edit 4K video. I don’t use it since I have FCP X, but you don’t need to spend the extra money just to edit 4K if you have a Mac with enough memory and storage.


----------



## mensaf (Sep 24, 2018)

I do. I switch over to manual focus and it's usually on a 24p timeline. I rarely export in 4k, it's just nice to have the ability to recompose a shot, especially if it's a run and gun interview or something along those lines. I thought I'd be buying the EOS R, but now I'm holding off and might just scrape some pennies together and pull the trigger on the first cheap 1dx mkii I find and run that into the ground.


----------



## ethanz (Sep 24, 2018)

Can't go wrong with the 1dx2.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 24, 2018)

ethanz said:


> Can't go wrong with the 1dx2.



Oh how I recall all the negative comments in reviews but then I starting seeing footage and wondered if it could really be that bad!

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 24, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> Oh how I recall all the negative comments in reviews but then I starting seeing footage and wondered if it could really be that bad!
> 
> Jack


Those that own and use it love it, spec sheet jockeys and eternal "I'd buy it but..." blowhards will never understand.


----------

