[pTom]

As we know , video capture is simply just a continuous chain of photos in certain standard photo sizes of TV or movies screen (FullHD, DVD, VGA ). Generally, video requires more complex technologies to produce than photo , thus video camera is much more expensive than photo camera. There was a boundary between videographer and photographer based on the devices they used.

Ten years ago , no one never thought of shooting video with photo camera until, I remember , just right after I got a famous video camera - Canon HV20, Nikon D90 started the revolution to break the boundary of photography in 2008 . Canon quickly followed later . Since, their video-capable DSLRs have been continuously improved and been widely used not only by photographers but also videographers. Sony and Pentax have been always at their tails as same as they had been late to enter the age of digital camera. Currently, Panasonic surprisingly beats both leaders - Nikon & Canon - with the amazing Lumix GH2 . Maybe, next time Panasonic will use the same sensor as Pentax K-5 to make sure to be a new king of the new world videophotograhpy.

I thought the best videophoto camera should have been Pentax K-5 if they could have improved the movies function from the phenomenal K-x. The low noise in photo will result the low noise in video, isn't it? Maybe Pentax engineers couldn't overcome some problems , maybe Pentax still hold a last card for this year - Who knows ?

I believe that all camera manufacturers have been racing to produce a true pro camera for the world which doesn't distinguish pro photo camera or pro video camera. Then , people can use it as the Swiss Army knife like modern smartphone (iPhone, HTC,.. ) with IQ photo, HD video shooting included. And then, there will come the day the photo frame has moving pictures as Harry Potter's author dreams. Do we not love that scene ?

Will Pentax strike the world again with new K-Z1 soon ? ( I named it to remind me my great Pentax film Z-1 which was stolen after few months of use ). If it happens I will give my favourite video camera- Canon HV20 to my daughter as a toy

At this moment, I wonder if Pentax engineers can upgrade firmware for Pentax K-5 so that we can use auto focus with movies shooting. It definitely helps videophoto cameramen a lot . In returns, there will be more than a lot of "THANK YOU, PENTAX" - a BIGGER SLICE of market share .

Thanks for long reading.

[kenyee]

upgrade firmware for Pentax K-5 so that we can use auto focus with movies shooting. It definitely helps videophoto cameramen a lot

No, it helps consumers (aka noobs) use a videocam

Most pros who use DSLRs or high grade videocams use something called a focus puller to go from one defined point to another. If they added this kind of feature (select two points, start at one then go to the other), I'd definitely agree. Not sure the lens focus position can be set like that though (no absolute positioning...only relative positioning in lens motors)...

Focus pullers are friggin' expensive...$500-600 for a good one. Sigh.
As are rails, stabilizer rigs, audio recording devices, microphones, lights, etc...

[eddie1960]

No, it helps consumers (aka noobs) use a videocam

Most pros who use DSLRs or high grade videocams use something called a focus puller to go from one defined point to another. If they added this kind of feature (select two points, start at one then go to the other), I'd definitely agree. Not sure the lens focus position can be set like that though (no absolute positioning...only relative positioning in lens motors)...

Focus pullers are friggin' expensive...$500-600 for a good one. Sigh.
As are rails, stabilizer rigs, audio recording devices, microphones, lights, etc...

Thanks for pointing this out. Every time i read the no AF in video what will pros think.... I'm baffled.
there are DIY alternatives to the expensive focus puller on the web , but you are right a top flight one is expensive.
And If a pro is shooting video for production as good as the K% is i will bet money they are shooting a FF like the 5d mk2, cost is less of a factor for these guys, a 5 d with several primes and l zooms is still way less expensive than a RED with 1 lens (mind you it's output is nowhere near as good as a RED)

[jolepp]

There was an article in a local newspaper about a new movie about to hit theatres here. This had been shot with two Canon 5Ds, with a shoestringy budget. The director tells that not having to worry about the cost of film was a big factor; she explains that they composed the 1.5h film from some 40h of raw footage. The artistic experimentation with actors and different versions of scenes would have been way too costly with film (40 * 3600 * 24 means about 3.5 million frames, that is about 100k 36 frame cans worth of film ). Apparently the quality is plenty good too to be fit for a big screen (trailer: http://www.dvdplaza.fi/trailerit/toista.php?tr=HyvaPoikaTlr&id=1790&k=13&m=5&h=516).

---

Last edited by jolepp; 03-29-2011 at 07:40 AM.

[eddie1960]

%d is becoming the cam of choice for low budget, great for guys shooting docs
but not as easy to use as a larger cam, but compared to the fixed lens lower price prosumer HD cameras it's much more flexible
I have a friend using the Sony HD prosumer camcorder and even though it is AF he always shoots mf for the control. If the 5D existed when he started his project it is likely the route he would have gone
IT was a big deal when they shot a house episode with one a couple of years back, now they shoot so much this way it's normal

[Spotmatic]

I don't care about video and would rather have a better buffer etc. in the camera.

[pTom]

@kenyee, thanks for pointing another way of AF even though it's not practical for me.

@jolepp, thanks for the lead , i watched that trailer , the movie seems have more "drama" with strong effects of DOF .

Now I see that movie producers with short budget projects have seen the benefits of Video-capable DSLR as well as many (wedding) videographers already applied . There will be more cases to show up somewhere else later soon if not fews years later.

@Spotmatic , "better buffer, etc " ... yeah , it's good to have it in ... my video for a strings of strobe effects (editing). Any improve in photography can be used and improved in videography too. Because simply they are sisters ("same blood - film" , not "in-law" ). Many pro video cameramen come from photography field. I believe that when (if) you need a video camera to shoot motion , you still prefer K-5 doing well that shot too. It's same as using mobile phone with good photo shoot instead of carrying another compact photo camera.

Just think a nice video is an album of nice photos put in order we want to "share". How about the motions of music video "My Heart Will Go On" from Titanic ? To me, it's a perfect album of the beautiful perfect photo shots . I still re-watch that scene when it repeats in Television.

@eddie1960, I know that many video people almost prefer MF but they won't exclude AF . It can be a "God's hand" in many cases of "actions" in which objects are very difficult for tracking. That's is the main reason, i think, why Panasonic emphasises the very fast focus feature in GH2. They can do it because Pana is more specialised in video field than Nikon, Canon .., is that right ? Now Pana takes the lead after recognised that the age of Video DSLR is coming. We will see more "breakthroughs" after Pana put big investment in DSLR field.

---

Last edited by pTom; 03-29-2011 at 05:09 PM.

[eddie1960]

Given that Pana was in the video field probably 20 years befor their first still camera you may be right

I used to sell a lot of pana video cams they were always excellent, still camera wise meh

[Spotmatic]

What I am really saying is that I could do without video in a DSLR. I may be the only one though.

[pTom]

I used to sell a lot of pana video cams they were always excellent, still camera wise meh

Oh .. ! Did you sell Pana - NV-M5 (VHS) or M4 too ?

[eddie1960]

after my time, i left that world 6 years back

[pTom]

What I am really saying is that I could do without video in a DSLR. I may be the only one though.

I don't think you are the only one. It's normal (50% ). Sorry for misunderstanding that you don't like video.
More buffers is great request which could be come from the only you

[kenyee]

many cases of "actions" in which objects are very difficult for tracking. That's is the main reason, i think, why Panasonic emphasises the very fast focus feature in GH2

They emphasize it because consumers want their videocams to AF and they're targeting consumers w/ that P&S.
If action is hard to track, you seriously think AF is clever enough to magically track and read your mind?
1DmkIII owners complain a lot and the menu settings are a full page or two and that's the best AF DSLR system. I doubt the consumer GH2 will do better at tracking action.

Just saying it's not the magic bullet you think it is...

If you get a chance, become a fan of Pentax on Facebook. They've been posting some behind the scenes of a video shoot using the K-5. You'll see the gear I mentioned...focus puller, slider, matte boxes, shoulder stabilizer, etc. Probably at least a few thousand dollars of support gear and we haven't even included the audio part of it...

[creampuff]

What I am really saying is that I could do without video in a DSLR. I may be the only one though.

This is not a criticism of you but from my observation the view you've expressed is typical among the older demographic of photographers. They are usually pretty set in their ways and are slower to new innovation and change. There is always going to be a convergence of features of still imaging and video and having video on the K-5 is a marketing must have when matched to competing products from other manufacturers. Video does open up more creative possibilities and have a wider demographic and user appeal. We all use our cameras differently and the wide feature set and customizability the K-5 offers makes it is all things to all people. So if you just wanna shoot stills, that's fine but if you want to shoot video clips, that's fine too.

[acrollet]

The low noise in photo will result the low noise in video, isn't it?

I'm not sure about this - the k-x has great noise performance for photos, but I find it to be fairly noisy for video in low light. (and by low light, I mean indoors at night, not pitch black by any means...)