Video

Exactly what I was thinking. I still have no idea what the differences are.

I personally HATE the warped fish-eye look of action cameras and 360 cameras, but if you want to get more in than just what is right in front of you, pick a wide angle view you like.

Yes, it is a normal throttle - slow to fast.

I believe these were all recorded as 380 videos in 8K mode. Keep in mind, that is 8K for the entire 360 image - front, back, left, right, up and down - so the resolution of each "view" is closer to HD.

If you plan to reframe in to "normal" videos, I think the 8K makes a noticeable improvement compared to the 5.7K reframes of the X3/X2. I have not had any overheating messages yet, but I expect it will have the same issues the X2/X3 had when it is hot outside. Last year, I tried to walk from the entrance of an Orlando hotel over to a bus pickup point, and the camera overheated within minutes of being out in the August Florida heat. I am curious to know if the X4 does better, maybe with that thermal grip thing added.

When I went from X2 to X3, there were some cases when I liked the look and colors of the X2. When I went from X3 to X4, I think overall the X4 is better but there are still times when you may prefer the colors of the X3. As to resolution, in all my tests, the X4 has looked better other than colors being different. There are many missing features in the X4 (it won't work with the GPS remote, or Apple Watch) which were things I used, so until those are added, X4 may not be a good choice if you rely on GPS data or a remote.

It got too cold for me to ride shortly after I got this bike, but I expect to take it out soon and see what else I can find. It felt okay at my height, but I need to run it with the motor off and see how it feels to actual pedal it for an extended time.

I have much to learn! I normally use this camera for walking around theme parks and capturing everything going on, so I don't have to spend my vacation looking at a screen or through a lens. I have used it on some bike and scooter rides, and may try to do more of that this year.

Not in this mode, but I think it has some single lens modes that do 60. All my video experience has been HD at 30fps, but now with phones doing 4K and 60fps, I may have to switch up.

Thank you for this. I was considering buying the cam and was searching if non fish eye is possible.

I had hoped it was just a renaming of LINEAR. I did not think to test those modes against the X3.

I will be getting rid of my X3 soon, but will try to do some more requested comparisons before that happens.

I have been using Medium, which I think is the default, and suggested by various "Use these settings on your X4" CZcams videos I watched. I need to set it up somewhere and record the same footage at all different sharpness levels. I've never done that, and just blindly use settings these CZcamsrs suggest.

The CZcamsrs that show "best settings for your X4" seem to have differing opinions. Many say Low, so it can be sharpened later in an editor if needed, some say Medium. We should get them all in a video chat and let them discuss and debate why they choose such settings. I generally run at factory defaults unless I have a specific reason to change.

@@subethasoftware What worries me is that X4 low sharpness may be losing detail, permanently, which can't be recovered later in editing. That seemed to be what I saw in the one brief test I've seen on CZcams. If that is true, it would be better to set it to medium in camera and soften it in editing, if desired. I know some videographers use low sharpness on every camera, but as there is so much AI processing going on inside the X4, it might not be the best choice - until someone proves that it is. I'd do the tests - but I don't have the camera...

@@Ozpeter Valid. I had left it at default, which is Medium, but someone mentioned it looked overly sharp in one of my other videos, so I checked the setting, and just set it to the same level to match the X3. Default makes more sense for comparison videos, I think, since that’s how the vast majority of users will probably be using this thing. When I get my next bit of time, I have another series of comparisons folks have suggested, and I’ll try to do some X4 to X4 comparisons like this as well.

@@subethasoftware Your time is much appreciated!

@@Ozpeter Even though I’ve been using digital cameras since 1996 (over 200,000 images in my galleries currently), I still claim to know little about photography. I just want to turn it on, and shoot. I only do manual stuff when trying to get non-blurry stuff on a roller coaster, or better night shots. I really need to dive in to the X4 a bit and see what sharpness I should be using. With “experts” saying Low, and others saying Medium, it’s hard to know what to use without doing testing.

The X4 has the plastic lens protector on in all of my videos, and none on the X3. I did this because 'it comes in the box" and the tutorial in the X4 on startup tells you how to install them, so I thought that was a fair comparison - X4 "as it is" versus X3. And, because I was afraid of messing up my new X4. I've already bonked it on a doorway because it's "just a bit taller" than I am used to. Weird.

After having the X2 and X3, I like the X4 so much better. Reframing from the higher 8K 360 source looks much better to me than what the X2 and X3 could do. But I just turn it on and click record - I don't mess with manual settings and such, which - like any camera, I guess - is what you really need to do to get the best video from a camera.

Unclear to me. It is supposed to use less storage than 8K, but be almost as good. That's why I am doing the tests. I believe it still gave me the "low light, use 5.7K" warning when I did the 5.7K+ test.

It's a newly added mode in a recent firmware of the X4 that claims to be 5.7K resolution but offer somehow improved image vs a normal 5.7K image. Insta360 says: "Close to 8K image-quality but with a smaller file size. 5.7K+ is not suitable in low light conditions." It takes up a middle ground of storage space between 8K and normal 5.7K and does not offer any frame rates about 30, just like the 8K setting.

@@canyonblue737-8 We need to learn more details. At first I assumed it was 5.7K with a higher internal bitrate, but I recall checking and seeing them about the same. (I was hoping to be able to tell what mode something was recorded in via the Insta360 desktop app, but it does not show 5.7K+.) Since 5.7K+ gives the "low light" warning, just like 8K, I think it must be doing something on the front end -- maybe recording the "8K" mode and downsizing in the camera or something? I sure wish they'd actually tell us what it does.

In daylight, the X4 looks substantially better after reframing to me than the X3. In low light conditions, like this test done in the evening, I really just see brighter colors.

​@subethasoftware I know 8k 30fps video is output at 2.7k after reframing what is 5.7k 60fps video output at after reframing?

@@brianmagicman3556 When I reframe 8K 360 on the X4, it defaults to exporting at 4K. For 5.7K+ and 5.7K, the export default is HD just like the X3/X2/etc.

@@subethasoftware I've seen videos that say 8k 30fps only output at 2.7K (or am I missing something) ???

@@brianmagicman3556 The exported file will be 4K. Wide angle fish-eye lenses will never be comparable to a “normal” lens so all you can say is the X4 exports more active resolution (visibly so, visible better) than the X3/X2 did from 360. The file export will be a 4K file, but just like the X2/X3 “HD” output is not really HD, this is not really 4K - just the image size.

Yeah, the X4 is the one with the much greener grass. This is why I keep doing different tests in different lighting conditions. For the daylight tests, I really think the X4 won across the board. For this "more in the evening" tests I really like the X3 better some of the time.

Looks like I did the first tests (intersection) starting at 7:55pm. Sunset was officially around 8:15pm, and the other tests (along the path) started around 8:08pm. Much like how some X2 footage looked better to me than the X3, I think the same case can be made for X3 versus X4. But overall, I am so used to the improved user interface and features I don't think I could go back to my X3 at this point.

I forgot I also did a single lens test, at the end of all these, around 8:25pm. It is much darker video. I will get that posted soon.

@@subethasoftware That is really odd that the X3 is better in low light. I guess you need to run this same test in better light to see if that reframe video was an anomaly. I don't think it was though. I've seen some "unprocessed" video of the X3 vs. X4 and it showed the same sharper quality on the signs and such for the X4. Good to see some tests though. Its the first thing I do with my cameras also to get some kind of baseline.

Thanks to the resolution improvements with the X4, I am expecting to mostly record 360 video. With the ONE X2 and X3, I would usually just record single lens since the reframed 360 was pretty poor. With X4, I think the reframed video is "good enough" but if I really want to record something with better resolution and lack of warping, I'll just use my phone for that.

I have not had it out since last year. It is now starting to warm up, so I will be getting the bike out of storage and do more testing with it.

In single lens mode, the FOV setting (vertical or horizontal video, too) will be what is put in the MP4 file. For 360, the file that is recorded looks like two fish eye circles, and the field of view is just synthetic by the editing software. I can just walk around and record 360, then export it in all these different modes.

@@subethasoftware Thanks, very helpful. Now if I can only figure out why I'm getting worse battery life with 8k 30 than with 5.7 30 with my new x4

@@lancairdriver I would expect any larger format would have worse battery life simply from having to do more I/O to the memory card, writing out more data. Larger file, more work. Maybe that should be a test. Lens cap on, so it's encoding the same "screen", and record for 45 minutes in 8K, 45 minutes in 5.7K, 45 minutes in 5.7K+, etc. and check the file sizes. The estimates given by Insta360 are just estimates, and we should see a much smaller file when recording things that are not moving, versus recording motion/action footage.

We are in a world where folks actually seem to enjoy looking at warped video where all the buildings are curved, etc. A year or two ago, I did some walk thru videos of Universal Orlando using one of the fish-eye modes. It really does capture a lot more of what is "going around" but I'm so old school I still have a hard time "liking" warped video like that.

Someone posted something (maybe on REDDIT) that made it sound like you had to have a player/TV/etc that supported it to see any advantage? I can clearly see it changes the colors, but maybe it’s like HDR or something - you have to have something that supports this format to really see what it does? I don’t know if I should enable it on all my exports, or not, at this point.

It was popping up on my app. But not no more

@@donm8555 It's still there but I think they moved the option to a different location. I forget exactly where it is now off-hand, but it's there somewhere. Also, they added DolbyVision to the Studio desktop application as well.

I did both tests - one shooting both in single lens mode and exporting, and the other shooting both in 360 then reframing and exporting. I think this video is the Reframed 360 one, so that is what you see when you record 360 and export flat later.

Please explain “16 wheels”?

Oh! Size, not number of wheels. Duh.

Nope - you need to get new batteries, new charger, no mic adapter, new quick reader (apparently). Sigh. At least with the batteries we see why - larger and more power. I am not sure why they couldn’t make the clip on mic adapter compatible. The GPS remote currently does not work with the X4 either. (Well, it sorta does, but it is not listed as compatible and the screen does not update - it does start/stop video though.)

There may be a mistake in these videos. I initially recorded an 8K pass, then a 5.7K+ pass, then a 5.7K pass. A few of my recordings were incomplete, since the REC button the X4 seems to behave differently - a delay, perhaps, and I’d push it twice, cancelling the recording. But this #1 might have been the 5.7K+ pass and #2 is the normal 5.7K. I thought I could tell from Insta360 Studio but I don’t even know what to look for - same frame rate and resolution, of course.

Also see the Single Lens one I just uploaded. It looks awful :(

The X3 exporting reframed video only does 1080HD. I think you can customize and export a larger size, but my understanding is you only get about 1080HD anyway so it’s not helping. I do like the idea of comparing single lens X3 4K with reframed 360 4K from the X4. I’ll try that! If the X4 reframed can compare to X3 single lens, that’s huge.

I do not know what the default is on the X4, but it also has the Low, Medium and High setting. It’s possible I have my X3 set to Low or something, and the X4 defaulted to something higher. I was trying to leave the X4 “generic” but I need to check that. I think I need to redo all these tests, anyway, and add some new ones folks have suggested.

I needed to see it with my own eyes. All the expert users know how to set manual settings and stuff, and always get results far better than what I get when I just turn the camera on and click record.