Data assimilation is the process where reservoir models are calibrated using dynamic data. The goal is to reduce uncertainties related to reservoir properties for more assertive model-based forecasts and decisions. The use of 4D seismic data as input to this process allows model properties to be updated so that dynamic changes are better represented in the entirety of the reservoir. However, in many cases, the higher the number of grid blocks, the more time consuming are the models' simulation. Thus, the balance between the fidelity of models and simulation runtime in a project is crucial in the planning of activities. The objective of this work is to discuss the impact of using grids with different resolutions and explore options to incorporate 4D seismic maps in data assimilation and production forecast. Through a real field application, we evaluate the use of two grids with different vertical and lateral resolutions, using the Ensemble Smoother with Multiple Data Assimilation (ES-MDA) method. The available high-quality seismic data, applied to a Bayesian inversion, generated 4D impedances that helped identify important dynamic changes that happen at intermediate layers of a thin reservoir (averaged 25 m thickness), located in Brazil. Thus, we also evaluate two approaches for models updating with 4D seismic data: treating the entire reservoir as a single interval, and considering a greater vertical resolution by adding information at intermediate layers. Overall, well production misfits between posterior models and observed data were considerably reduced when assimilating seismic and production data simultaneously, presenting even smaller errors than production data only cases. This happened for both grids. By adding further 4D information at intermediate layers with the use of two maps, we observed (in both grids) that posterior models could predict important reservoir behaviors, such as the gas trapping in the deeper interval. The coarser grid presented lower well production data misfits compared to the refined grid, but showed to be insensitive to the use of different seismic data in data assimilation, resulting in alike models. Furthermore, the posterior models for the coarse grid presented similar behaviors when performing production forecast, which indicates that the uncertainties may be underestimated in these cases. The refined grid presented slightly greater production misfits but was more sensitive to the different 4D seismic inputs. In this grid, an increased ensemble variance was observed between the posterior models, which is also observed in the long-term forecasts. Also, the most refined grid yielded estimates of acoustic impedance changes visually closer to the observed data than those obtained from the coarser grid. As a real case application, the definition of the best procedure is not straightforward. Results suggest that both grids can be used depending on the project's objective. The coarser grid is a good option for short-term studies, since it is able to properly represent the near future with much cheaper models. The refined grid may be suitable for long-term decisions, because it better represents models' uncertainties and provides safer risk analyses.