I have a lot of respect for you guys that edit in 2.7k or 4k. I always edit my footage in Pinnicale Studio and for me, life is way too short to wait for the clips to render in such high res. I typically make speed and color changes and then add audio. It just isn't worth it for me to spend the time required to edit above 1080p.
Here is what I'm using and doing.
Video typically starts as one clip.
I'm using The newest Pinnacle Studio Ultimate.
Computer is Dell Desktop with Intel I7-4770 3.4GHz 24GB ram running Win 10 64bit
Everything is strictly for my own fun and entertainment.
So far the only justification for 2.7k [for me] is a larger screen grab for stills, but that can be done by just shooting a still to begin with.
What is everyone else doing? Is it worth the extra time for rendering?

I edit in 1080p
It's not that easy for me to edit in 4k because my PC can't handle it very well (time for an upgrade)
But I think it's always better to have a higher res video if possible

I would say that if you have a Phantom 4 pro that shoot a comfortable 4K better use it. Than only use 4K to digitaly zoom on certain footage without loosing to much resolution. Edit the rest in 1080p.

I use Premiere Pro to edit and Media Encoder to render - always in 2.7K.
A typical 5 mins finished project with audio, colour correction, speed and transitions will take around 35mins to render on my AMD FX-6300 with 16GB RAM and cacheing to SSD. Not a new or particularly powerful PC, but since youtube happily plays 2.7k and higher, and most new devices can play it, works for me.

I have a fast computer and a 4k monitor. 1080p doesn't look good enough to me. Also, even if 1080p currently is somewhat of a resolution standard for most people, it will be seen as obsolete in a few years when 4K monitors and TVs are widespread. Just like DVD resolution 720x480 pixels looks sub par today, at least for quality videos. So it makes sense to me to make use of the maximum image quality in 4K and make it more future proof in my video collection.

BUT... Making your own videos should be fun. If 2,7K is tedious to edit, don't bother right now, have fun, be creative instead. It's not like you will get a gold medal or something for putting up with 2,7K.

Hi, depends what its for,like you say if its just for your personal usage stick with what you are doing, as said above 4k is here, but not everyone has this option to view 4k footage yet, it wont be long before everything will be viewed in 4k tv's computers etc. By then rendering will be a lot faster!
1080 is just fine.

Is it worth the extra time? That question can only be answered by you. I purchased a 4K drone to use the 4K capabilities.

I often shoot video for friends who want to view it on thier tv.  Some, believe it or not, don't even have a computer.  Since a disc is really the only way they can see it, I shoot in 1080 and then edit in Nero and burn to blueray.  I don't know any other media that I can create video on that has the ability to play a higher resolution in that kind of situation.  I sure wish I did, because the difference between dvd or blueray vs. the higher resolutions the Phantom can do is pretty big.

Kneepuck Posted at 2017-3-9 04:37
I often shoot video for friends who want to view it on thier tv.  Some, believe it or not, don't even have a computer.  Since a disc is really the only way they can see it, I shoot in 1080 and then edit in Nero and burn to blueray.  I don't know any other media that I can create video on that has the ability to play a higher resolution in that kind of situation.  I sure wish I did, because the difference between dvd or blueray vs. the higher resolutions the Phantom can do is pretty big.

What about streaming on Youtube from a smart phone through Chromecast? Saves you some time.

AntBatt13 Posted at 2017-3-9 08:44
What about streaming on Youtube from a smart phone through Chromecast? Saves you some time.

They want to watch it on the big screen, and don't even have internet or a cell phone.  Stuck in the past, but hey,  maybe that's not such a bad thing.