Should Pentax Focus Their Limited R&D Resources On "Stills" Cameras?

beli_delfin · 09-12-2020, 09:16 AM

From the market point of view it is wise to have both, stills and video capable camera. You can serve still photographers and video-oriented ones with one product, thus lovering costs. But more important is technology. For example Panasonic use video for DFD focusing, 4k/6k photo, selectable focus point, etc. In fact, video capabilities are necessary for pixel-shifting, pixel-averaging, scene recognition and so on. Video capabilities are so to say byproduct of internal capabilities of camera. Not to develop and exploit video capabilities would be serious research disadvantage for Pentax.

Lord Lucan · 09-12-2020, 01:01 PM

Originally posted by Flubber

I do think video features are absolutely essential from a market standpoint if you want to sell cameras on any larger scale.

Exactly this : Joe Public buying a camera or anything else is looking at how many "feature" boxes are ticked when he compares models. Even if the feature is not implemented particularly well (he probably would not know that), and even if he never uses the feature more than once in a blue moon (if ever), or even if he can't be bothered to read the instructions how to use it when he gets home.

I am thinking of the story that many (most?) people who bought a DSLR worried themselves sick about which model had the most exposure and focusing modes that the salesman rattled on about, but after they got it they only ever used the green button setting.

So Pentax needs to keep that video feature, though I have no use for it.

Flubber · 09-12-2020, 01:21 PM - **1 Like**

You're exactly right. It's the same reason why people buy 190mph motorcycles and cars, even though there are very few places on earth where you'll ever get near that speed legally, and even though only a microscopic minority have the skills to actually make full use of all that power. They just think it's cool to have the potential ability to go that fast, and the bragging rights that come with owning such a machine.

Can't help but post this for a bit of fun:

You Tube

**disconnekt** · 09-12-2020, 05:29 PM - **1 Like**

If they do a "high quality" 1080P alá 1080p video that can do 10-bit, 4:2:2, up to 120fps recording, I think that will please that group of people who want a video option but really dont want or care about 4k, but do want some wiggle room for editing if they decide to do videos for youtube and/or stream on Twitch.

texandrews · 09-13-2020, 09:31 AM

Originally posted by Flubber

You're exactly right. It's the same reason why people buy 190mph motorcycles and cars, even though there are very few places on earth where you'll ever get near that speed legally, and even though only a microscopic minority have the skills to actually make full use of all that power. They just think it's cool to have the potential ability to go that fast, and the bragging rights that come with owning such a machine.

Can't help but post this for a bit of fun:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LidF1gF3YQ

I. Loved. This. Video.

Flubber · 09-13-2020, 09:43 AM - **1 Like**

Hahaha, I am glad you enjoyed it. I hope none of the people got hurt, of course - but it did make me chuckle to watch these knuckleheads attempt to show off.

**Serkevan** · 09-13-2020, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by Flubber

Hahaha, I am glad you enjoyed it. I hope none of the people got hurt, of course - but it did make me chuckle to watch these knuckleheads attempt to show off.

I have to say that the majority of the times someone is being completely reckless while driving it's a dude in an expensive car. It's almost mathematical

.

Flubber · 09-13-2020, 12:01 PM

Some of these drivers looked like rich kids as well - so the car was probably bought by mom and dad. They don't take care of them in the same way when they haven't worked hard to afford them.

BigMackCam · 09-13-2020, 02:55 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Flubber

Some of these drivers looked like rich kids as well - so the car was probably bought by mom and dad. They don't take care of them in the same way when they haven't worked hard to afford them.

My Mum and Dad bought me my first car... a very-well-used, somewhat-worn but perfectly solid and well-running Citroën 2CV

BUT... I had to pay for my insurance, road tax, fuel, maintenance, any servicing that couldn't be done at home, repairs etc. It taught me both the privilege, and running costs, of owning my own transport. Ever since, I've never taken a single car I owned for granted... even when my finances allowed for something much nicer (though nothing so nice as these folks with the Lambos etc.)...

TaoMaas · 09-14-2020, 10:37 AM - **2 Likes**

I know we're getting side-tracked here, but when my dad talked to me about getting my first car, he asked what I'd like. I told him, "I want something really old...or something really new. I don't want the same car that everyone else has." He said, "You better look for something old."

I ended up with a 1940 Chevy Master Deluxe with about 30,000 original miles on it. It had belonged to a little old man in town who had gotten too old to drive.

PiDicus Rex · 10-15-2020, 12:56 PM

Yawn,... Stretch,...... The Bear Has Been Poked.

Okie, who wants to tell me why it's okay for someone to wander in to the Video part of the forum and create an Anti-Video Thread.

If I was to go post in the Stills area the reminder that ALL single plane sensor cameras use technology that was created for VIDEO, not Stills, people would be all upset and go on with the Anti-Video whinging we see in the creation of this whole thread.

The video part of the Forum exists to help those people who do video, to get the best possible results out of the video functions of their Pentax bodies. Just as it is not my place to tell people that they should not be able to do stills, it is no one elses place to tell us we should not be able to have video functions.

It's high time the "Stills Only" whingers crawled back under a rock and let those of us who enjoy creating video on our Pentax cameras and Lenses share information without the continual bullying and active campaigning to limit our enjoyment and creativity.

Yes, some of us have noted the loaded wording of previous surveys, and how some surveys have enabled the Stills Only crowd to 'provide feedback on functions they don't want', allowing them to campaign against other parts of the community.

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

Take out video from the future new Pentax bodies, charge even less for them, sell more bodies, increase market share...

That worked so well for the Nikon and Canon models with no video,... so well that they were quietly dropped and quickly forgotten.

Now, just speaking to any Pentax researchers or engineers who may be reading the forum, here's the list of firmware fixes that need to be made, for all bodies from 2012 onwards.

- Functional Recordable HDMI output that stays at the same frame rate and frame size that the user selected to record at, with No Overlays. Clean Feed Out is ESSENTIAL
- Reactivate True Mechanical IBIS
- Focus Peaking on the LCD during recording.
- Re-enable the option to record in Mjpeg at a minimum of 80mbits for HD
- Raise the data rate of the h.264 to a minimum of 50mbits for HD

For any New body to be released to market from 2020 onwards, all of the above, plus,.
- 4K at 24p, 25p, 30p, 48p, 50p and 60p fps, Data Rate minimum of 120mbits, but up to 200mbits.
- Higher priced top tier models, like the replacements for the K-3, K-1 and 645Z, should also have and option to switch the Audio Jack from 'Mic Level' to 'Line Level'.

Yes, you can add a statement in the manual for owners to know they will need to use a high Quality SD-XC card, but it would be better to support an XQD Card instead.

BigMackCam · 10-15-2020, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by PiDicus Rex

Yawn,... Stretch,...... The Bear Has Been Poked.

Okie, who wants to tell me why it's okay for someone to wander in to the Video part of the forum and create an Anti-Video Thread. FFS!

If I was to go post in the Stills area the reminder that ALL single plane sensor cameras use technology that was created for VIDEO, not Stills, people would be all upset and go on with the Anti-Video whinging we see in the creation of this whole thread.

The video part of the Forum exists to help those people who do video, to get the best possible results out of the video functions of their Pentax bodies. Just as it is not my place to tell people that they should not be able to do stills, it is no one elses place to tell us we should be able to have video functions.

It's high time the "Stills Only" whingers crawled back under a rock and let those of us who enjoy creating video on our Pentax cameras and Lenses share information without the continual bullying and active campaigning to limit our enjoyment and creativity.

Rather than calling fellow members whingers, it might be better (more polite, certainly) to simply ask the mods if they could move the thread out of the video section? That would make sense, since the OP's thread really isn't about video - rather, it's asking whether Pentax should concentrate on stills photography. Folks replying in this thread probably didn't realise which forum it was posted in. I certainly didn't when I last posted in it...

PiDicus Rex · 10-15-2020, 01:20 PM

BigMackCam - There is absolutely no way this thread was created in the video part of the forum without the OP realizing it.

To suggest such is folly.

Perhaps it's time the Mods recognize that this sort of Anti-Video stuff has been going on for a long time, and it should have been stopped a long time ago.

BigMackCam · 10-15-2020, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by PiDicus Rex

BigMackCam - There is absolutely no way this thread was created in the video part of the forum without the OP realizing it.

To suggest such is folly.

With respect, I didn't suggest that... what I said was, "folks replying in this thread probably didn't realise which forum it was posted in". I made that assumption based on the fact that I myself hadn't noticed it was in the video forum. Most folks, I'd imagine, just look at the thread titles on the home page or in "Today's threads". That's what I tend to do...

I've asked the mods if they feel the thread should be moved, but obviously it's their decision, not mine

EDIT: ... and easy as that, the thread has been moved. Thank you, moderators!

**Serkevan** · 10-21-2020, 01:01 AM - **2 Likes**

Mike, count me in with those who didn't realize the subforum it was in

.

I don't think it's about restricting functionality as much as it is about not spending effort on features that won't really be appreciated by most of the user base. As I said before, they can probably implement decent video at a decent data rate without a lot of issues, but getting into dedicated video features (and that includes firmware for older bodies, unfortunately) is probably more trouble than it's worth.

10-15-2020, 12:56 PM	#41
PiDicus Rex Pentaxian Join Date: May 2013 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 1,359	Yawn,... Stretch,...... The Bear Has Been Poked. Okie, who wants to tell me why it's okay for someone to wander in to the Video part of the forum and create an Anti-Video Thread. If I was to go post in the Stills area the reminder that ALL single plane sensor cameras use technology that was created for VIDEO, not Stills, people would be all upset and go on with the Anti-Video whinging we see in the creation of this whole thread. The video part of the Forum exists to help those people who do video, to get the best possible results out of the video functions of their Pentax bodies. Just as it is not my place to tell people that they should not be able to do stills, it is no one elses place to tell us we should not be able to have video functions. It's high time the "Stills Only" whingers crawled back under a rock and let those of us who enjoy creating video on our Pentax cameras and Lenses share information without the continual bullying and active campaigning to limit our enjoyment and creativity. Yes, some of us have noted the loaded wording of previous surveys, and how some surveys have enabled the Stills Only crowd to 'provide feedback on functions they don't want', allowing them to campaign against other parts of the community. Originally posted by Fenwoodian Take out video from the future new Pentax bodies, charge even less for them, sell more bodies, increase market share... That worked so well for the Nikon and Canon models with no video,... so well that they were quietly dropped and quickly forgotten. Now, just speaking to any Pentax researchers or engineers who may be reading the forum, here's the list of firmware fixes that need to be made, for all bodies from 2012 onwards. - Functional Recordable HDMI output that stays at the same frame rate and frame size that the user selected to record at, with No Overlays. Clean Feed Out is ESSENTIAL - Reactivate True Mechanical IBIS - Focus Peaking on the LCD during recording. - Re-enable the option to record in Mjpeg at a minimum of 80mbits for HD - Raise the data rate of the h.264 to a minimum of 50mbits for HD For any New body to be released to market from 2020 onwards, all of the above, plus,. - 4K at 24p, 25p, 30p, 48p, 50p and 60p fps, Data Rate minimum of 120mbits, but up to 200mbits. - Higher priced top tier models, like the replacements for the K-3, K-1 and 645Z, should also have and option to switch the Audio Jack from 'Mic Level' to 'Line Level'. Yes, you can add a statement in the manual for owners to know they will need to use a high Quality SD-XC card, but it would be better to support an XQD Card instead. Last edited by Sandy Hancock; 10-15-2020 at 01:50 PM. Reason: Masked obscenity

10-15-2020, 01:25 PM	#44
BigMackCam - Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 18,745	Originally posted by PiDicus Rex BigMackCam - There is absolutely no way this thread was created in the video part of the forum without the OP realizing it. To suggest such is folly. With respect, I didn't suggest that... what I said was, "folks replying in this thread probably didn't realise which forum it was posted in". I made that assumption based on the fact that I myself hadn't noticed it was in the video forum. Most folks, I'd imagine, just look at the thread titles on the home page or in "Today's threads". That's what I tend to do... I've asked the mods if they feel the thread should be moved, but obviously it's their decision, not mine EDIT: ... and easy as that, the thread has been moved. Thank you, moderators! Last edited by BigMackCam; 10-16-2020 at 01:40 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax Medium Format Resources: 645 & 6x7 Cameras and Lenses, 645 & 6x7 Accessories	Adam	Pentax Medium Format	9	02-12-2017 03:38 AM
K-S2 Imaging Resources Sample shots posted - Imaging Resources	dyoon153	Pentax K-S1 & K-S2	6	03-31-2015 12:00 PM
For Sale - Sold: 2 18-55mm kit lenses ("L" and "AL II" version)	dgaies	Sold Items	5	12-28-2009 07:58 AM

09-12-2020, 09:16 AM	#31
beli_delfin Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 380	From the market point of view it is wise to have both, stills and video capable camera. You can serve still photographers and video-oriented ones with one product, thus lovering costs. But more important is technology. For example Panasonic use video for DFD focusing, 4k/6k photo, selectable focus point, etc. In fact, video capabilities are necessary for pixel-shifting, pixel-averaging, scene recognition and so on. Video capabilities are so to say byproduct of internal capabilities of camera. Not to develop and exploit video capabilities would be serious research disadvantage for Pentax.

09-12-2020, 01:01 PM	#32
Lord Lucan Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: South Wales Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,174	Originally posted by Flubber I do think video features are absolutely essential from a market standpoint if you want to sell cameras on any larger scale. Exactly this : Joe Public buying a camera or anything else is looking at how many "feature" boxes are ticked when he compares models. Even if the feature is not implemented particularly well (he probably would not know that), and even if he never uses the feature more than once in a blue moon (if ever), or even if he can't be bothered to read the instructions how to use it when he gets home. I am thinking of the story that many (most?) people who bought a DSLR worried themselves sick about which model had the most exposure and focusing modes that the salesman rattled on about, but after they got it they only ever used the green button setting. So Pentax needs to keep that video feature, though I have no use for it.

09-12-2020, 05:29 PM - 1 Like	#34
disconnekt Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Riverside, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,577	If they do a "high quality" 1080P alá 1080p video that can do 10-bit, 4:2:2, up to 120fps recording, I think that will please that group of people who want a video option but really dont want or care about 4k, but do want some wiggle room for editing if they decide to do videos for youtube and/or stream on Twitch.

09-13-2020, 09:31 AM	#35
texandrews Moderator Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Baltimore Photos: Albums Posts: 3,092	Originally posted by Flubber You're exactly right. It's the same reason why people buy 190mph motorcycles and cars, even though there are very few places on earth where you'll ever get near that speed legally, and even though only a microscopic minority have the skills to actually make full use of all that power. They just think it's cool to have the potential ability to go that fast, and the bragging rights that come with owning such a machine. Can't help but post this for a bit of fun: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LidF1gF3YQ I. Loved. This. Video.

09-13-2020, 09:43 AM - 1 Like	#36
Flubber Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2020 Posts: 150	Hahaha, I am glad you enjoyed it. I hope none of the people got hurt, of course - but it did make me chuckle to watch these knuckleheads attempt to show off.

09-13-2020, 11:53 AM	#37
Serkevan Site Supporter Join Date: May 2019 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,758	Originally posted by Flubber Hahaha, I am glad you enjoyed it. I hope none of the people got hurt, of course - but it did make me chuckle to watch these knuckleheads attempt to show off. I have to say that the majority of the times someone is being completely reckless while driving it's a dude in an expensive car. It's almost mathematical .

09-13-2020, 12:01 PM	#38
Flubber Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2020 Posts: 150	Some of these drivers looked like rich kids as well - so the car was probably bought by mom and dad. They don't take care of them in the same way when they haven't worked hard to afford them.

09-13-2020, 02:55 PM - 1 Like	#39
BigMackCam - Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 18,745	Originally posted by Flubber Some of these drivers looked like rich kids as well - so the car was probably bought by mom and dad. They don't take care of them in the same way when they haven't worked hard to afford them. My Mum and Dad bought me my first car... a very-well-used, somewhat-worn but perfectly solid and well-running Citroën 2CV BUT... I had to pay for my insurance, road tax, fuel, maintenance, any servicing that couldn't be done at home, repairs etc. It taught me both the privilege, and running costs, of owning my own transport. Ever since, I've never taken a single car I owned for granted... even when my finances allowed for something much nicer (though nothing so nice as these folks with the Lambos etc.)...

09-14-2020, 10:37 AM - 2 Likes	#40
TaoMaas Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: Oklahoma City Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,492	I know we're getting side-tracked here, but when my dad talked to me about getting my first car, he asked what I'd like. I told him, "I want something really old...or something really new. I don't want the same car that everyone else has." He said, "You better look for something old." I ended up with a 1940 Chevy Master Deluxe with about 30,000 original miles on it. It had belonged to a little old man in town who had gotten too old to drive.

10-15-2020, 01:05 PM	#42
BigMackCam - Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 18,745	Originally posted by PiDicus Rex Yawn,... Stretch,...... The Bear Has Been Poked. Okie, who wants to tell me why it's okay for someone to wander in to the Video part of the forum and create an Anti-Video Thread. FFS! If I was to go post in the Stills area the reminder that ALL single plane sensor cameras use technology that was created for VIDEO, not Stills, people would be all upset and go on with the Anti-Video whinging we see in the creation of this whole thread. The video part of the Forum exists to help those people who do video, to get the best possible results out of the video functions of their Pentax bodies. Just as it is not my place to tell people that they should not be able to do stills, it is no one elses place to tell us we should be able to have video functions. It's high time the "Stills Only" whingers crawled back under a rock and let those of us who enjoy creating video on our Pentax cameras and Lenses share information without the continual bullying and active campaigning to limit our enjoyment and creativity. Rather than calling fellow members whingers, it might be better (more polite, certainly) to simply ask the mods if they could move the thread out of the video section? That would make sense, since the OP's thread really isn't about video - rather, it's asking whether Pentax should concentrate on stills photography. Folks replying in this thread probably didn't realise which forum it was posted in. I certainly didn't when I last posted in it...

10-15-2020, 01:20 PM	#43
PiDicus Rex Pentaxian Join Date: May 2013 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 1,359	BigMackCam - There is absolutely no way this thread was created in the video part of the forum without the OP realizing it. To suggest such is folly. Perhaps it's time the Mods recognize that this sort of Anti-Video stuff has been going on for a long time, and it should have been stopped a long time ago.

10-21-2020, 01:01 AM - 2 Likes	#45
Serkevan Site Supporter Join Date: May 2019 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,758	Mike, count me in with those who didn't realize the subforum it was in . I don't think it's about restricting functionality as much as it is about not spending effort on features that won't really be appreciated by most of the user base. As I said before, they can probably implement decent video at a decent data rate without a lot of issues, but getting into dedicated video features (and that includes firmware for older bodies, unfortunately) is probably more trouble than it's worth.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search