theprisoner6666
lvl.3
Hong Kong
Offline
|
Since buying my Mavic Pro I've also been experimenting with 2.7K vs UHD on D-cinelike 30p (I much prefer the smoothness of 30p compared to full 4K 24p, even when using the 180 degree shutter rule, 30p just looks smoother...but that's a different topic anyway!. To me it boils down to this: UHD is a tiny bit sharper, but has much more noise and flicker; 2.7K is a tiny bit softer, but waaaayyy less noise and near zero flicker. I have Neat Video and the Film Poets profiles for each res, and while they do a good job, the NR needed on UHD to get rid of the noise and flicker, even on ISO 100, takes away the extra sharpness anyway, so 2.7K looks better in the final result due needing less NR. If you pause a frame pre-NR, then yes, UHD shows a tiny bit more detail on my 5K iMac screen, especially on close together straight lines; but post-NR, then 2.7K is a winner for me due to needing less NR, and thus retaining more of its sharpness. NV has sharpening built in, but a) it's easy to create halos, and b) to eliminate DJI's built in NR you need to make sharpening +1 anyway, so do you really want to add even MORE sharpening to an already over-crispy noisy image?!!
My pennies worth anyway, but of course everyone is different. The OSMO is a different ball game though as the X3 doesn't seem to suffer from noise and flicker as much at UHD, so I always shoot at this res, then mix the Mavic and OSMO footage together in FCPX and export at 2.7K. I think exporting at 4K can make the Mavic's 2.7K footage a little soft and it's more noticeable in comparison to the OSMO sections. |
|