I have been getting used to my action 4 for a while now and have noticed 1080p is useful for battery life, small file size and becuase it supports 240fps

4K supports up to 120fps the same as 2.7K, so i wonder do you feel like recording in 2.7K is rather pointless ?

My opinion is that recording in 2.7K is not directly pointless especially if you plan to export in 1080p and want a little room for zoom.
Also there are some/many people uploading videos in 1440p on youtube. Also you will save some storage space but still keep good quality with 2.7K compared to 4K.
Below 1080p is more pointless since the quality for 2024 standard is 1080p for most screens.

Have a look at this message from DJI:
https://forum.dji.com/forum.php? ... 310&pid=3104717
The background: All the Osmo Actions have sensors with an optical resolution of 4000x3000 pixel. With activated lens correction and stabilization only 3000 of the 4000 horizontal pixel are used for picture creation, at least with my Osmo Action (1). So for 4K the image has to be upscaled. In my opinion it might bring better results do capture in 2,7K and convert this in the post to 4K. Blowing up a picture from 3K to 4K adds a lot of interpolated pixel, which blows up the files too. But I never compared this because I'm not interested in 4K. I can't see any difference between 2K and 4K under a normal distance of view (2 times the screen diagonal, for a 55" screen e.g. 2,8 m).

johansenfoto Posted at 8-11 21:55
My opinion is that recording in 2.7K is not directly pointless especially if you plan to export in 1080p and want a little room for zoom.
Also there are some/many people uploading videos in 1440p on youtube. Also you will save some storage space but still keep good quality with 2.7K compared to 4K.
Below 1080p is more pointless since the quality for 2024 standard is 1080p for most screens.

Also there are some/many people uploading videos in 1440p on youtube...

There is a special reason why: With 1080p Youtube gives you the older AC3-Codec and a relativ small video bandwith. Beginning with 1440p you get the VP09 encoder and a larger bandwith. The VP09 encoder has 2 times the efficiency of the AC3. Especialy for action videos with fast movements this makes a big difference.

4K seems like a definite preset, but i`d like to narrow down to just 2 resolutions, so i`m really left deciding between 1080 and 1440

on my DJI i can record 240fps in 1080, but i think 120fps would almost always be high enough, can anyone think of a use case for 240fps being necessary

The fastest action i record is either go karts or motorcycle racing

240fps might work nicely if there is some kind of crash.

we all know 1000fps is where we need to be but one day next decade

Helmut Ruch Posted at 8-12 01:04
Also there are some/many people uploading videos in 1440p on youtube...

There is a special reason why: With 1080p Youtube gives you the older AC3-Codec and a relativ small video bandwith. Beginning with 1440p you get the VP09 encoder and a larger bandwith. The VP09 encoder has 2 times the efficiency of the AC3. Especialy for action videos with fast movements this makes a big difference.

Yes I was actually planning to write that aswell, but left it out.
But thank you for letting people know.
Few years ago 1080p shot at 60 fps would also get vp9 codec, but they changed it to only be resolutions from 1440p and higher.

TBH, I like 2.7K a lot.
For me this is the right balance between resolution and filesize.
And with a lot of these smaller lens camera systems, the extra resolution is not needed because the lens is the limiting factor, not the sensor resolution.