Hi, just curious, why are you and other people only using 2560x1440 and 2560x1080 and not the higher resolutions like 2592x1944 or 2560x1600?
Wouldn't the latter two have even more pixels/data/information?
Generally, on a 2K camera, if you select a resolution that is 2560 wide, then you get the full detail available from the sensor. The difference is only a difference in height, which means that on the lesser heights, part of the sky and part of the dash is cropped off the image.
Most people use 16:9 aspect ratio, the shape of standard TV screens, but the sensor is taller than that, so most people are using a cropped resolution, some people prefer a more cropped resolution of 21:9 (Cinema screen aspect ratio), and a few people like to use the full sensor height, giving a 4:3 tall aspect ratio similar to old SD resolution CRT TV screens or digital photo cameras.
How tall you
need your image depends a bit on your vehicle, how high you mount your camera, and how high your road signs and traffic lights are. With a tall vehicle, like a bus, you quite likely want to point the camera down a bit to record the road just in front of the vehicle, and then you need the extra height of 4:3. With a low vehicle, or with the dashcam mounted on the dash, 21:9 aspect ratio will likely record everything you want. If your location has overhead traffic lights, as in parts of the USA, then you likely want a higher aspect ratio than in countries that have all the traffic lights at low level.
The advantages of using a lower height are that you either save on storage requirements, so can store more video on your memory card, or, if you use the same bitrate for the lower height as for the higher height, then you will get higher image quality due to less compression.
You did mention
2592x1944, which is actually a slightly wider image, the standard 2560 has a few pixels cropped off the edges. There is no loss in detail of the lower width resolutions, just that the image is not quite as wide. The difference is so small that it is not really significant though, we very rarely need the last few pixels of width since they tend to be the most motion blurred, so the least useful pixels. I'm not sure why Viofo doesn't offer a 2592x1080 resolution to make best use of the sensor, but that is not a standard monitor resolution, while 2560x1080 is.
