Hello DJI why not 8K video? 30 or 24 fps? The processing power exist

Why 8K video?
Very few people have the equipment needed to edit 8K video.
No-one has an 8K screen.
How often has anyone said that 4K video just isn't enough?
8K video is a marketing gimmick to suck in gullible buyers that automatically assume that more must be better.

I would like to see 2.7k with faster interval.

Vlas Posted at 5-6 07:20
I would like to see 2.7k with faster interval.

I would also like to see this too!

I'd rather want to see 2.7k 120fps

Hi, Niknik. We apologize for any inconvenience caused. We care much about your feedback on our product, I've transferred your feedback to the appropriate department. Thanks for your advice.

8K? Do you know that PC monitors sold to be 4K are actually not? Try to configure a PC that processes 8k video, what price does it take?

8k would be a nightmare to handle.

Who needs 8K
Mega large files and terrible to edit.
The lens is probably not even capable of resolving that amount of resolution!

him7403 Posted at 5-6 09:12
I'd rather want to see 2.7k 120fps

That however would be a welcome feature!

Labroides Posted at 5-6 06:47
Why 8K video?
Very few people have the equipment needed to edit 8K video.
No-one has an 8K screen.

it was made to attract Autel Evo 2 clients .{:4_

Montfrooij Posted at 5-7 02:24
Who needs 8K
Mega large files and terrible to edit.
The lens is probably not even capable of resolving that amount of resolution!

Moontfroij,


You say: "The lens is probably not even capable of resolving that amount of resolution!"


As a matter of fact 8K video is 7680 × 4320 pixels. This is 33MP.
MA2 sensor is 48MP. And this is the resolution which MA2 lens can handle.


8k is useful if you want to do zoom-ins in post-processing.


Mirek

Mirek L Posted at 6-11 17:13
Moontfroij,

It would still be the same bitrate though

I had 8K once. Spent it all on hookers and cocaine.  

Mirek L Posted at 6-11 17:13
Moontfroij,

I'm not talking about pixels on the sensor.
That is (mostly) marketing.

The amount of detail the lens can resolve is usually not high enough to get to those levels.
It takes high end DSLR glass that can resolve this amount of details.
So you are effectively getting more data, but it is not more details.
Just as if it was slightly blurred.

Montfrooij Posted at 6-14 12:19
I'm not talking about pixels on the sensor.
That is (mostly) marketing.

So, if I understand you correctly, what you are saying is that 48MP sensor in MA2 is a bit of a gimmick since its capabilities cannot be fully utilized because of the small camera lens.
In other words, smaller sensor (12MP), which is required for 4K videos, would have sufficed without loss of picture quality, right?

Mirek

Mirek L Posted at 6-15 06:22
So, if I understand you correctly, what you are saying is that 48MP sensor in MA2 is a bit of a gimmick since its capabilities cannot be fully utilized because of the small camera lens.
In other words, smaller sensor (12MP), which is required for 4K videos, would have sufficed without loss of picture quality, right?

Just google for 'resolving power of a lens' and see what I mean.

I have not tested the M2A, but my logic is that when an big and heavy DSLR lens does not have enough resolving power to even get to the amount of detail needed for 36MP BACKGROUND INFO , I have my doubts about a cheap small M2A lens that is distorted by default and needs a lot of post correction (done in the drone by DJI when converted to jpeg).

Mirek L Posted at 6-15 06:22
So, if I understand you correctly, what you are saying is that 48MP sensor in MA2 is a bit of a gimmick since its capabilities cannot be fully utilized because of the small camera lens.
In other words, smaller sensor (12MP), which is required for 4K videos, would have sufficed without loss of picture quality, right?

It's not a true 48mp sensor it's a 12k Quad Bayer Array sensor, same as the one I have in my phone, just bigger.

More pixels doesn't necessarily = better quality images.