I am regularly asked whether 8K makes sense for normal productions. The answer is sometimes surprising: Yes — even if the final product is only delivered in 4K.

The 8K Paradox

8K means 7680 × 4320 pixels — four times as many as 4K. Very few screens can currently display this in full. And yet, we shoot certain projects in 8K, even if the final video ends up in 4K. Why? Because 8K provides more room during editing. I can reframe tighter without losing quality. I can stabilize without visible cropping. I can make cuts after the fact that were not planned during the shoot. This is not a luxury — it is flexibility that is worth real money in post-production.

What is required

8K means massive amounts of data. One hour of 8K RAW can quickly cost 1–2 terabytes. This places demands on storage, computers, and workflow that should not be underestimated. Those who do not have the setup — or do not need it — are still perfectly fine with 4K. For web videos, social media, and most corporate formats, 4K is absolutely sufficient.

The cameras setting the standard today: RED Komodo 8K, Canon EOS R5, Sony Alpha 1. All three deliver what I described above — at different budget and workflow levels.

My Conclusion

8K isn't for every shoot. But it is a tool that creates options. And I would rather take too many options into the edit than too few.

Best regards,
Sascha Manke