# 4K 15 FPS



## scoobert (Nov 20, 2012)

is 15 fps in 4K worth anything? or will it be all choppy? 
looking at the gopro3 and thats the top resolution for video.
i am just thinking cropping that down to 1080P would get rid of some of the fish eye factor that these cameras display. 
the other option is 2.7K at 30 fps.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 20, 2012)

scoobert said:


> is 15 fps in 4K worth anything? or will it be all choppy?
> looking at the gopro3 and thats the top resolution for video.
> i am just thinking cropping that down to 1080P would get rid of some of the fish eye factor that these cameras display.
> the other option is 2.7K at 30 fps.



For time-lapse shooting 4K @ 15fps could be useful.


----------



## scoobert (Nov 21, 2012)

their target is to record in 4K not timelapse it.
they offer cinema 4K as well at only 12 fps.
its a microsd card limit.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 21, 2012)

scoobert said:


> their target is to record in 4K not timelapse it.
> they offer cinema 4K as well at only 12 fps.
> its a microsd card limit.


You missed his point. 15 or 12 FPS will look choppy like a time lapse video. If you like the old time movie look, its usable. Even 24fps is a bit choppy.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 21, 2012)

scoobert said:


> their target is to record in 4K not timelapse it.
> they offer cinema 4K as well at only 12 fps.
> its a microsd card limit.



???


----------



## scoobert (Nov 21, 2012)

ok, but 24 frames is what standard tv is now???


----------



## sandymandy (Nov 29, 2012)

There is 24fps or 25fps.


----------



## Jesse (Nov 29, 2012)

TV in North America is 30fps.


----------



## Jay Khaos (Nov 29, 2012)

24 isn't choppy, its the most normal looking to the eye. 60fps viewed on a screen with a high enough refresh rate looks more fluid like a home video... almost looks worse. That's subjective though I guess. Most productions are filmed at double the FPS the final product will use, so that they have the freedom to do slow-mo without loss. 

4K at 15 fps is pointless. It's a spec acheived purely for marketing benefit if you ask me. And even if it got 4K at 24fps, with the IQ of the GoPro, you'd be better off scaling up the resolution of DSLR video taken at 720p. Id be willing to bet the IQ will still be as good or better. 

4K = 9.something megapixels by the way.


----------



## DJP (Nov 29, 2012)

scoobert said:


> is 15 fps in 4K worth anything? or will it be all choppy?
> looking at the gopro3 and thats the top resolution for video.
> i am just thinking cropping that down to 1080P would get rid of some of the fish eye factor that these cameras display.
> the other option is 2.7K at 30 fps.



I just did a quick search on youtube, this is 4k at 12fps downscaled to 1080p GoPro Hero 3 Black 4K Driving Test 12fps converted via Cine Form The quality is good although the 2.7k is more usable. But I am pretty sure the gopro has different field of view settings so you can change it to get less of a fish eye effect.


----------



## dr croubie (Nov 29, 2012)

DJP said:


> I just did a quick search on youtube, this is 4k at 12fps downscaled to 1080p



thanks for the link, but wow that looks horrid, not just the fisheye effect but it really does look choppy (esp the beginning with cars going across the screen).
It might have some 'artistic' uses, like a lensbaby, pinhole, or expired film, if you're into that. But i wouldn't buy one expecting it to be any good.


----------



## DJP (Nov 29, 2012)

dr croubie said:


> DJP said:
> 
> 
> > I just did a quick search on youtube, this is 4k at 12fps downscaled to 1080p
> ...



The choppyness is a problem, but because the frame rates are customisable it is more suited to timelapses etc where you then conform the video to playback at a smooth frame rate. The 2.7k setting is very nice, I just wish i was getting one. Also the 720p at 120fps is a very good feature allowing really good slo mo, would be worth it for that as well as the versatility and size of the camera


----------



## 87vr6 (Nov 29, 2012)

oh no, something that only costs 400 dollars and produces superb video isn't perfect? You mean I can't replace my canon C300 with this? 

:

God, give some people an inch and they want a mile...


----------



## ChrisAnderson (Nov 29, 2012)

87vr6 said:


> oh no, something that only costs 400 dollars and produces superb video isn't perfect? You mean I can't replace my canon C300 with this?
> 
> :
> 
> God, give some people an inch and they want a mile...




I don't think that's what people are wondering about, it's that this particular feature doesn't seem to have any feasible application. If you want to do a timelapse, there's a feature on the camera specifically for that. The 4k framerate is too low to do anything with, and nobody I know can actually view native 4k anyhow.


----------



## dmills (Nov 30, 2012)

It may be an option for people that want to set it up at an event on a tripod and pull stills from it? 4k is about the resolution point where I'd be thinking it's nice to have wide-angle stills that record a 'strategic angle' or position at an event. Especially if it's an angle or position that I won't have the chance to go near very often. (If that makes sense?)


----------



## natureshots (Nov 30, 2012)

You should get a 1dX and a 15mm sigma fisheye from 1952 with butter rubbed all over the lens. Then you just have to tape the shutter button and voila you have basically the same thing. Who says canon doesn't have 4K under $10K?


----------



## natureshots (Nov 30, 2012)

After I get my 1dx/GoPro I really need a 11" 8K TV for my living room with a 600Hz refresh rate. TVs like that really tie the room together.


----------



## titokane (Nov 30, 2012)

Depending on the type of motion being filmed (slower/less complex would be better), the 4K mode could potentially be time-stretched in post-production into perfectly usable footage. Same concept behind the HDR workflow in Magic Lantern.


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 13, 2012)

What can you watch 4K video on? Seriously!!!! I'm not about to shell out $10000 for a tv to go with a $400 camera...

That said, I have a GoPro3 black on order and can't wait to play with it... but I just can't see myself going past 2K video.... my first planned filming when it comes will be to put it on a stunt kite and capture motion-sickness inspiring video


----------



## Mantanuska (Dec 13, 2012)

Ok, so 15 FPS isn't ideal for standard video applications, but wouldn't this FPS setting allow for improved low light if they set it up right? All the other gopros had a slowest FPS of 30 as far as I know, and the one thing that has kept me from using them is their low light performance. 

Technically, if there is a 15 FPS setting now, they should be using a 1/15 shutter speed, giving one stop more exposure from what they would have at 30 fps. 

I guess the question is if they actually have the firmware set up that way or not.


----------



## emko (Dec 13, 2012)

hjulenissen said:


> Jay Khaos said:
> 
> 
> > 24 isn't choppy, its the most normal looking to the eye. 60fps viewed on a screen with a high enough refresh rate looks more fluid like a home video... almost looks worse. That's subjective though I guess.
> ...



Yea that's why they want to record/show films in 48fps like the hobbit.


----------



## Axilrod (Dec 13, 2012)

Don Haines said:


> What can you watch 4K video on? Seriously!!!! I'm not about to shell out $10000 for a tv to go with a $400 camera...
> 
> That said, I have a GoPro3 black on order and can't wait to play with it... but I just can't see myself going past 2K video.... my first planned filming when it comes will be to put it on a stunt kite and capture motion-sickness inspiring video



4K on a 1080p display still looks better than 1080p on a 1080p display, it's not like you have to have a 4K monitor to see the difference.

As for the GoPro, I'm pretty sure they just threw it in there to make the specs look better. But I'll take 2.7K all day.


----------

