Me and some others here have talked about it lately, so I made this video about IF you can see the difference between 4K in Osmo Action (and others)
and a DSLR upscaled from 1080p

Thanks for sharing.

AlanHd Posted at 11-28 06:41
Thanks for sharing.

Thank you for watching

Many people forget that a very critical factor is the lens.
It has a certain resolving power that is not talked about very often.

Oh and yes, I recognized the Nikon instantly.
It has a very good video quality.

Montfrooij Posted at 11-28 09:43
Many people forget that a very critical factor is the lens.
It has a certain resolving power that is not talked about very often.

Yes that is true, a bad lens will give 8K looks like 1440p almost

Montfrooij Posted at 11-28 09:44
Oh and yes, I recognized the Nikon instantly.
It has a very good video quality.

Only was the bad lightning, but you can also see in the dark areas for the less noise

johansenfoto Posted at 11-28 12:48
Yes that is true, a bad lens will give 8K looks like 1440p almost

Exactly.
Too bad, most of the small lenses really don't deliver.

johansenfoto Posted at 11-28 12:49
Only was the bad lightning, but you can also see in the dark areas for the less noise

Exactly, plus Nikon has a nice color profile.

Montfrooij Posted at 11-28 12:58
Exactly.
Too bad, most of the small lenses really don't deliver.

That is true, quality costs

Montfrooij Posted at 11-28 12:58
Exactly, plus Nikon has a nice color profile.

I like it also, only wish I could afford one of the mirrorless in Z-series for lighter camera to bring along on most trips

Hello there johansenfoto. Good day and thank you for posting this interesting video that you have filmed and created. Great work and thank you for your support. .

johansenfoto Posted at 11-28 13:34
That is true, quality costs

I think the size could also be a limiting factor.

johansenfoto Posted at 11-28 13:35
I like it also, only wish I could afford one of the mirrorless in Z-series for lighter camera to bring along on most trips

If you have some to spare, you could go for a D750.
Sometimes they are sold cheap.
That is what I did at least.
So you get the best Full Frame sensor they have and good video quality too.

Montfrooij Posted at 11-28 23:52
If you have some to spare, you could go for a D750.
Sometimes they are sold cheap.
That is what I did at least.

D750 is old, I have D610 that came out about the same time and the video quality on that one is terrible.

My next FX will be D780 or maybe Z6 II but not next year either.

johansenfoto Posted at 11-29 01:58
D750 is old, I have D610 that came out about the same time and the video quality on that one is terrible.

My next FX will be D780 or maybe Z6 II but not next year either.

The D750 is a big step up from the D610.
I had the 610 and that was horrible (video wise).
The 750 is 100% better videowise.

thanks for sharing and why I love my other camera better in ways.

Montfrooij Posted at 11-29 02:11
The D750 is a big step up from the D610.
I had the 610 and that was horrible (video wise).
The 750 is 100% better videowise.

I also heard back in the days that D750 was good for video, but I need a camera that can shoot 4K + is newer technology. Because after I bought D7500 I hate using my D610 because it's not great using anymore for pictures.

johansenfoto Posted at 11-29 04:06
I also heard back in the days that D750 was good for video, but I need a camera that can shoot 4K + is newer technology. Because after I bought D7500 I hate using my D610 because it's not great using anymore for pictures.

True, it does not do 4K.
But it is a big step up from the D610
Especially in the video department.
I am not sure if I want to go the Z road yet.
It seems great for video though.

Montfrooij Posted at 11-29 04:23
True, it does not do 4K.
But it is a big step up from the D610
Especially in the video department.

The only reason I have FX is for good ISO for taking pictures of northern lights, and D610 vs D750 is from same year and not a big difference on high ISO.
D7500 is my daily camera, but it's also great for video, but a bit big with my Sigma 18-35mm on it.

But I will see in a year or so what I will buy, I love DSLR, but it seems like mirrorless is the way to go in a few years. Only if I could afford a good Sony mirrorless.

johansenfoto Posted at 11-29 06:51
The only reason I have FX is for good ISO for taking pictures of northern lights, and D610 vs D750 is from same year and not a big difference on high ISO.
D7500 is my daily camera, but it's also great for video, but a bit big with my Sigma 18-35mm on it.

There won't be much difference in noise between all the current FX sensors I guess.
For me it was more about the video that was much better. (and I use that a lot)
I have got 4 prime lenses, since I don't like the weight and the quality of the FX zoom lenses.
I tried a couple, but that was not my thing.
Plus my primes get to 1.8 or 1.4, which is super handy in low light situations.
The other day I tried a 24-70 f/2.8, and even though it was handy, I still prefer my primes most of the time.
So I returned it.
It is just way too heavy and the image quality is not as good as my primes.

Montfrooij Posted at 11-29 07:22
There won't be much difference in noise between all the current FX sensors I guess.
For me it was more about the video that was much better. (and I use that a lot)
I have got 4 prime lenses, since I don't like the weight and the quality of the FX zoom lenses.

Nothing can beat primes when it comes to quality. My favorite is my good old 50mm f/1.8 that I use for portraits most of the time.

johansenfoto Posted at 11-29 07:27
Nothing can beat primes when it comes to quality. My favorite is my good old 50mm f/1.8 that I use for portraits most of the time.

I have the
20mm f/1.8
35mm f/1.8
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8

I don't use the 35 too often (because of my preference for 20 or 50mm I guess) but they are all great lenses and don't weigh a lot.

2 downsides : changing lenses an no VR (that is handy in video mode)
I have started to like the slower process of primes, since I think about my shot before pressing the shutter. Which leads to fewer images, but more keepers.
Only very sometimes I miss a shot, but hey......
Nothing is perfect.

Montfrooij Posted at 11-29 07:32
I have the
20mm f/1.8
35mm f/1.8

20mm is great for most landscape, i used a lot my 14mm.

johansenfoto Posted at 11-30 03:12
20mm is great for most landscape, i used a lot my 14mm.

Yeah that 14mm is a beast and wonderful lens, but the 20mm was more flexible for me. So I kept that one.
I can use the 20mm for 'normal' shooting better, without the super wide angle that distorts subjects close by.