jimmy462 wrote:
I argued years ago the need for 8K for, amongst other things, the abilities it brought to 4K creation/production/consumption to shoot wider and pan and zoom within the frame.
When you mention pan and zoom within the frame, it makes me think about the way that Ken Burns does this with the still images in all of his 'films'. I had never really thought about how he executes the process, but if I had to guess he's doing this in-computer rather than with a mechanical setup.
8k might not be necessary for the delivery of content, but I can see where it would be very useful in content production.
coralnut wrote:
When you mention pan and zoom within the frame, it makes me think about the way that Ken Burns does this with the still images in all of his 'films'. I had never really thought about how he executes the process, but if I had to guess he's doing this in-computer rather than with a mechanical setup.
8k might not be necessary for the delivery of content, but I can see where it would be very useful in content production.
The "idea of having a larger canvas to work with" is, of course, nothing new, it's nice being able to afford oneself that added flexibility to apply some short pans or tracking shots or ązooms after-the-fact of one's shooting. Part of the allure that drew me to experiment and play with Panasonic's S1 and GH6 these past several years was their open-gate (i.e. full sensor) 6K which allowed for reframing and some simple "camera moves" for 4K output in "post". Shooting 8K for 4K delivery kicks that up a notch and actually allows one more latitude in considering their shot/acquisition.
Case in point...there's an active field of Swallows and Flycatchers zipping around where I'd love to acquire some 60P slightly slow-mo footage. Currently trying to hand track individuals at 600mm at 6K (with above cameras) yields limited success...too many missed shots, very short and few usable clips, background rolling shutter jello from fast whip pans, and the labors-in-culling in post "sifting for gold", and high trash-shot rates are all "joy killers" and "time wasters". Shooting wider at 400mm (with cropping assumed later) and allowing for less manual labors in trying to track individuals yields better DoF and higher in-focus success rates with less onsite labors, more joy, less wasted time for my/one's expenditures. Enter 8K for 4K abilities and now I can consider shooting that field even wider at 300mm or even 200mm or lower/wider still (?! ), maybe not physically tracking at all (mitigating BG rolling shutter) while shooting, getting extra DoF and higher in-focus hit rates, all from "backing off" and giving myself lots more crops and pans and zooms to consider in post! And this all applies when shooting at the long end...with frame-filling subjects one does not have to suffice with the original shot when shooting 6K/8K for 4K (or HD), one can post zoom or punch-in onto the Owl's eyes, or the Falcon's meal, or zoom/track the butterfly's probings, and on...no camera-pan pixel dithering to worry about with a locked-down shot!
And I could go on...
"Poo-pooers" and "naysayers" need not apply, ha! I say, "let one's imagination run amok!", there's creative possibilities to be had that we take the time to look and consider. Sometimes solutions stare us straight in the face!
In the real world, over a mixed bag of video projects (mainly short art films, music videos and corporate video), I've used 8k twice in the last couple years. I'd rather gather more footage, longer takes, slow motion, etc than fill up my drives with 8k, especially if I know that cropping in post won't necessarily "fix" a shot.
If you do a lot of slow motion, you're going to run into issues with 8k, as you'll top out at 8k60 on the Z8. Using post processing to further slow down footage has limits.
If what you're looking for is a tight shot of a moving object like a bird, there isn't a replacement for just doing it for real and tracking it by hand on a good tripod and video head. Using post processing to move the frame has limitations and will never quite match the feel of a hand operated camera. You can use warp stabilizer to auto frame based on an object's movements, but that also tends to have an unnatural feel to it.
), maybe not physically tracking at all (mitigating BG rolling shutter) while shooting, getting extra DoF and higher in-focus hit rates, all from "backing off" and giving myself lots more crops and pans and zooms to consider in post! 
And this all applies when shooting at the long end...with frame-filling subjects one does not have to suffice with the original shot when shooting 6K/8K for 4K (or HD), one can post zoom or punch-in onto the Owl's eyes, or the Falcon's meal, or zoom/track the butterfly's probings, and on...no camera-pan pixel dithering to worry about with a locked-down shot!