[Steve.Ledger]

First I have to admit that I didn't buy the Q for video recording, I have a HD camcorder for that - but all the same I'd like to get the best out of the Q when I do shoot a clip.
So far the results have all been a bit meh..

What I find is that all video results are a bit soft, well actually a LOT soft compared to a still shot of the same scene with the same settings using the same lens (the 01).
I've tried various apertures, exposure compensations, AF and MF and used focus peaking in MF and even tripod mounted - nothing seems to get me a sharp(er) scene.

Anyone played enough with the Q in video mode to give some tips on the best way to get reasonably sharp video using the Q because to be honest, my smartphone does better than the Q

[VisualDarkness]

I can't say that I find it soft as long as there is enough light.
Mountain Rock Shrimp eating by the surface - YouTube

And with a Pentax DA* 300mm F4 with an adapter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9hCGe3n3Wc&feature=share&list=UUe3aHxZE2GzYxe-s-z6pIvg
I find this one really impressive for such a small camera!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHca-QXlbr0&list=UUe3aHxZE2GzYxe-s-z6pIvg&ind...z6pIvg&index=2

[Steve.Ledger]

Thanks but yeh, I've seen lots of YouTube vids for Q examples..
Unfortunately YouTube's re compression means that you never see what the original file looks like,
What I'm looking for are tips from people who are completely satisfied who will share their settings and can perhaps attach a 5 second clip here rather than show me a YouTube sample?

[chemtech]

Those are some great video's you have done Visual Darkness. You've given me some inspiration to try out some video with the Q
.
What tripod did you use to get that smooth action on the moon, if you don't mind me asking?

Edith

[VisualDarkness]

Thanks but yeh, I've seen lots of YouTube vids for Q examples..
Unfortunately YouTube's re compression means that you never see what the original file looks like,
What I'm looking for are tips from people who are completely satisfied who will share their settings and can perhaps attach a 5 second clip here rather than show me a YouTube sample?

I can check if I can find anything.

Those are some great video's you have done Visual Darkness. You've given me some inspiration to try out some video with the Q
.
What tripod did you use to get that smooth action on the moon, if you don't mind me asking?

Edith

I have a quite heavy Giotto MT 9170 that works pretty good for this. The weight really helps reducing vibration and wind resistance but the tripod got a few things messing up its otherwise great value.

The locks for the leg angle is really flexible and I've read that they are made of plastic, most likely true, making the upper joints way too flexible. This is most troublesome when you have a heavy setup on it and you composed the shot only to see the leg angle joints flex a tin bit when you take your hands off the camera, missing up the composition. This does not happen every time but you have to learn its quirks to avoid it.
The outer parts of the twist locks are made of weak rubber and shows cracks after some use, I have only noticed cosmetic damage though.

So if you get it really cheap it's a nice buy but other heavy tripods deserves a look too! My brother's light weight one is much harder to use for this as it's too easy to accidentally move the whole tripod slightly when shooting and vibration and wind resistance get much worse with the lack of weight. I did get mine very cheap used as the seller had a brutal description and pic on an auction sight and I put in a bid in blindness.

I got a FEISOL CB-50DC Ball Head that I can recommend to everybody, it's a wonderful tool! The only thing is the shallow hard to grip friction knob that tends to almost get stuck when cold but other that it's perfect for me and solid as a rock.

[chemtech]

I got a FEISOL CB-50DC Ball Head that I can recommend to everybody, it's a wonderful tool! The only thing is the shallow hard to grip friction knob that tends to almost get stuck when cold but other that it's perfect for me and solid as a rock.

Thanks, for the info! I have the Giottos MT 9360 and it is a heavy sturdy beast, the leg joints stay in place nicely, but the center column tends to sink slightly over time. I've been looking for a good head replacement since the used Slik head that I use weighs as much as the legs I was very interested to hear about your experience with the FEISOL cb-50DC ball head and I intend to research it further. Sounds like a winner!

Thanks, again!
Edith

[Steve.Ledger]

Anyhoo - back on (my) topic regarding the Q and best video settings..

So far my personal best results have been by using;

Tripod mounted Q
SR off
F3.2 to F5
Multi-segment metering
AF with Spot focus


Is this about it?

[ChrisJ]

Those are some great video's you have done Visual Darkness. You've given me some inspiration to try out some video with the Q
.
What tripod did you use to get that smooth action on the moon, if you don't mind me asking?

Edith

That's not panning it's how fast the Moon moves through the shot, the Moon moves it's own diameter every 5 minutes.

Full Moon with sound | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Just the Raw footage strait from camera using a cheap Sigma 70 - 300mm lens at 300mm (1650mm with the crop factor)

A surprising fact is that the Moon moves at twice the speed of sound!

Chris

[ChrisJ]

Anyhoo - back on (my) topic regarding the Q and best video settings..

So far my personal best results have been by using;

Tripod mounted Q
SR off
F3.2 to F5
Multi-segment metering
AF with Spot focus


Is this about it?

Video is a lot more complicated than shooting stills, and I am far from being an expert, but the quality depends a lot on the the resolution you set in camera.

You can't expect the video quality to be the same as stills as even the highest video resolution on a Q is 1920 pixels X 1080 pixels, around a third of what you get with stills.

Video is further complicated by the file type, the Q gives you .MOV format which is not a ready to run video, though some video editors can convert on the fly so it appears to be. The .MOV format, as I understand it, is just a container for the video frames, to run and export it as a video format file it has to be converted into a streamable format such as MP4 or similar, a format that has the built in ability to show you the frames one after the other at the frame rate you set, which will often degrade the resolution even further.

If you export the video to YouTube it sets the resolution even lower for bandwidth and file size reasons, Vimeo imposes less restrictions.

My video of the Moon on YouTube is definitely not the same as I can view it on my computer or even my TV, not even close.

And I haven't gone into other considerations such as bit depth and Mp/second which gets even more complicated. Rest assured that your Q can show you all that your monitor and TV is capable of, albeit at the lower resolution.

Any video experts out there?? I, for one, need one.

Chris

[Steve.Ledger]

Thanks Chris,

You can't expect the video quality to be the same as stills as even the highest video resolution on a Q is 1920 pixels X 1080 pixels, around a third of what you get with stills.

Yes of course, however the 1922x1080 frame detail could be much better than it is.
Please compare (if you have access) the 1080p videos output by some smartphones such as the Samsung Galaxy with the Q. The difference is huge, even though the sensor is much smaller and just 8Mp on the phone.

...... the Q gives you .MOV format which is not a ready to run video, though some video editors can convert on the fly so it appears to be. The .MOV format, as I understand it, is just a container for the video frames, to run and export it as a video format file it has to be converted into a streamable format such as MP4 or similar, a format that has the built in ability to show you the frames one after the other at the frame rate you set, which will often degrade the resolution even further.

Not sure what you mean by "not ready to run video"? The MOV container is an Apple Quicktime format and is playable by almost all players for the PC (Mac) and on modern TVs, I do this all the time.
(Unlike the .mts format of high definition digital video camera recorders, AVCHD (Advanced Video Codec High Definition which needs a PC with some grunt to play smoothly)
The MOV files the Q produces are encoded using the H.264 codec (AVC1) at a bitrate of around 14000kbps, certainly high enough for quality video and perfect for uploading to YouTube if that's what you want as google recommend H.264 encoded files (though my questions in this thread are not about youtube)

I shall persevere and see what I can come up with, I must admit to being spoiled by my HiDef Panasonic camcorder (which outputs crystal sharp 1080p .mts)

Cheers

[ChrisJ]

Thanks Chris,


Yes of course, however the 1922x1080 frame detail could be much better than it is.
Please compare (if you have access) the 1080p videos output by some smartphones such as the Samsung Galaxy with the Q. The difference is huge, even though the sensor is much smaller and just 8Mp on the phone.


Not sure what you mean by "not ready to run video"? The MOV container is an Apple Quicktime format and is playable by almost all players for the PC (Mac) and on modern TVs, I do this all the time.
(Unlike the .mts format of high definition digital video camera recorders, AVCHD (Advanced Video Codec High Definition which needs a PC with some grunt to play smoothly)
The MOV files the Q produces are encoded using the H.264 codec (AVC1) at a bitrate of around 14000kbps, certainly high enough for quality video and perfect for uploading to YouTube if that's what you want as google recommend H.264 encoded files (though my questions in this thread are not about youtube)

I shall persevere and see what I can come up with, I must admit to being spoiled by my HiDef Panasonic camcorder (which outputs crystal sharp 1080p .mts)

Cheers

Try opening a .MOV file in most (not all) video editors, it has to be rendered first.

Chris

[Steve.Ledger]

I do Chris, I have no problems at all (PowerDirector, Premier Elements, VideoPAD and AVS VE all support H.264-encoded QuickTime (.mov). In fact, the AVS VideoRemaker will edit the MOV files without re encoding, very useful when you need to trim without lossy re-encoding.
But alas, this is off topic again...

Interesting that no-one yet has any constructive comments on topic.
To re state: Does anyone have any recommended camera settings which produces the best (cleanest/sharpest) video result from the camera when using the PENTAX Q and the 01 lens

Thanks

[crewl1]

I can't comment on settings since any video I take with the Q I just use the default factory settings.
It is fine for my use.
I am curious to see how poor in comparison to your phone the Q video is, do you have examples posted anywhere that I could see?

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

[Steve.Ledger]

No, nothing posted which are examples directly off the devices.
Defaults are significantly less pleasing that manually setting the camera, same with the K-01 I find.
I suppose I'm expecting too much.. Was just hoping that otehrs had spend more time fiddling to leverage the best results.
Never mind.. Thanks anyway

BTW: Nice shot of the hummingbird.

[VisualDarkness]

The problem is that there isn't much fiddling possible other than the basic ISO, aperture and shutter speed and all of them have different optimal settings depending on the subject. So I guess the lack of feedback simply is due to the fact that there isn't much feedback to give.
Other than checking for sharpness peaks in the lenses and changing the basic settings all feedback I can give is that the quality you get what you get and if it's not enough you'll have to search elsewhere.