[repaap]

A brilliant example, why (not we, me or you)but much more the brand "PENTAX" or "Ricoh-Imaging",
should seriously think about becoming way better in VIDEO:

- way higher bitrates
- FullHD @120p
- 4k @(at least 30p)
- better video AF-C(better AF.C even for OVF shooting would also be welcome)
- log feature...
- Tilt'n'swivel display to become STANDARD.
- other memory media or shoot/record to a harddisk directly via USB-C

People who have a bit of money(and therefore buy some ILC instead of a compact) weigh in everything they read of, in some mag.
And admit it or not... who wouldnt love to have better video... oh god forbid... you might use it.

Since I bought my Sony RX100 IV, i am really getting into video... bought a chinese gimbal for it
and a rode mic...
(for recording externally, cause that darn little clicker aint got a mic-in. - actually the only backdraw i can see so far in this compact digital)


And now I am doing some really cool stuff with "Da Vinci - Resolve" which is the best - i say THE BEST video editing software for enthusiasts...and pros(up to some point i guess).
(!!! BTW --> Cross-platform--- Linux, Windows, Mac) Video Editing Software EVER!!
--- ITS also free as in "free beer"... (without the pro-features... and its already very pro without them).. just grab it, - watch a short tutorial... its so godd... easy and understandable very unlike some dubious applications that cost a goldmine and just make you feel puzzled when trying around.

Since the KP already has a bit better video-bitrate... I can only encourage everybody who also owns a KP and a DC or PLM lens... to buy yourself one of those cheaper chinese gimbals...
You will have so much fun with video so smooth and without any shake...


geez, i gotta stop,

the bottom line is:

People just buy into or want something because they THINK "GOSH THAT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE"... not because they need it.
and...(looking at myself) later on, they might fall in love with what they got, promote it and spread the word.


Cause i wrote about "DaVinci Resolve"
....Blackmagic came to my mind... Those guys really make some decent video gear and stuff...
since everybody seems to start cooperating now... (panasonic, leica, sigma ... Samsung...Fuji)..

IMHO Ricoh-Imaging should really consider searching for help .. talking about video... And when i take a look who and what is there... Blackmagic would be the best partner in crime for sure.

stick with what you got for video. why to waste R&D for that when they can have great camera instead. video is okay for K-1. if one needs better, just get an actual video oriented system. really.

[normhead]

Since I bought my Sony RX100 IV, i am really getting into video... bought a chinese gimbal for it
and a rode mic...

I used to teach video, so been there, done that, not interested. If i want to get back to video, I'll buy a camera designed to do video. Not everyone wants half baked video added onto a still camera as an after thought. Right tool for the job and all that.

[H.Abendsen]

So man made sapphire lenses?

beam me up scotty finally. transparent aluminium... wasnt that the star trek movie where they travelled back in time and had to save a whale?
--> Transparent aluminum | Memory Alpha | FANDOM powered by Wikia

---------- Post added 10-17-18 at 12:41 PM ----------

I used to teach video, so been there, done that, not interested. If i want to get back to video, I'll buy a camera designed to do video. Not everyone wants half baked video added onto a still camera as an after thought. Right tool for the job and all that.

Yep... and not everybody is willing to spend a fortune on dedicated video gear,
Especially when they already bought a 2.000 dollar ILC camera...
...wait... *looking at the date* .yep its 2018 - almost 2019... a gimbal is all you should need to do decent semi-professional video these days... thats my honest oppinion

Not every car with a sportive motorization and look is made to take part at nascar or Formula 1, still it makes fun to drive a round or two with your BMW M3 at the nürnburg-ring or at some hobbyist racing track.

you may find logic in what you say about dedicated video gear and may also be right(when you talk about the pro-sector) but people dont care... YOU DONT CARE. EXACTLY THAT was my point.
thats the essence of what I am saying here:

A brilliant example, why (not we, me or you)but much more the brand "PENTAX" or "Ricoh-Imaging",
should seriously think about becoming way better in VIDEO

you admitted yourself.. you dont need your K-1.
still you bought it. BECAUSE ITS A FULL FRAME.

and people will buy a PENTAX with 4k like it would be chocolate hotcake thats for free, even if it costs a bit more than 2000 bucks.
people didnt believe in K-1 still it was and is a huge success... everybody who works for Ricoh-Imaging honestly admitted that they never expected that they would sell so much units und that they understimated the markets demand for it.


Thats what I want to say. (BTW: You are not the market - the market is the market.)

[normhead]

a gimbal is all you should need to do decent semi-professional video these days... thats my honest oppinion

But how many actually want to do video? That's the question. My answer based on that type of response based on my own experience would be "no one". My answer to the question to "do you want better video capability? Would be "no, and if you can make the camera cheaper by leaving it off, please do so." I'm not the only one who feels this way.

I personally don't think Pentax can compete in video after years of neglect. The question becomes, will the users they get by creating video be more than the value of the customers they lose, because the price is higher. Not to mention, that Pentax has said the biggest hold up for better video is the availability of a new sensor. Now that is a real reason relayed by company brass, not conjecture about what might be.

If you look at it honestly, adding cost for video is a financial risk for Pentax. We've had many here assert that adding video would increase Pentax sales. But, when you consider that any video Pentax could implement cheaply would not be cutting edge, (because no one makes cutting edge sensors available to them, not even Stony) or mature, based on their video efforts so far, it's unlikely they could inspire switchers from more mature video platforms just for video. Personally, I'd just buy something from Panasonic.

People don't seem to understand the pickle Pentax is in because their volume is so low, they have no clout in the sensor market. They get the crumbs.

Like myself, I suspect Pentax follows the philosophy, do a few things well rather than everything half assed.

---

Last edited by normhead; 10-17-2018 at 01:25 PM.

[MMVIII]

The FF debate is really a version of Goldilocks and the Three (or Six) Sensor Formats.

The range of ILC sensor sizes from 1" to micro 4/3rds to APS-C to full 35 mm to crop 645 to full 645 etc. etc. create a bathtub curve in trade-offs. Most photographers might agree that a 1" sensor may be "too small" to get clean images. And most photographers might agree that a full 645 sensor may be "too large" to carry. But the middle sweet spot depends on each photographer's tastes -- whether lighter weight and reach is sweeter than low noise and shallow DoF.

Personally, I love the K-1 but then I'm more of a wide-to-normal FoV photographer who doesn't mind carrying 7 kg of camera and lenses on an all-day hike. But I can see why others would prefer tiny lenses on a tiny body with a tiny sensor.

Exactly. I don't know what FF-naysayers should be. Maybe there is a common group with those, who complain that K3+ is not given the full attention anymore? I like the K-1 and considered it for professional (read: in my job) use, but must say for my personal needs the obvious increase in weight, bulk and price of according lenses was a major constraint that was evident before they were announced.

Who says that Ricoh could not have gone the path of Fuji with APS-C in DSLR and brought the 645 to competitive level, pricewise, sizewise, performance wise, instead of the K1? But as you said, photoptimist, the larger sensor is not mainstream, thus also the processing pipeline would have to be adapted and it would have it's price.

Reading here sometimes really gives the impression that anything that happens is just comented negatively. In most cases that is just natural and rarely (yes, there might be some posters) the complaints come from the same people. Some decisions suit sometimes these individuals more, sometimes others. And it seems to be an unwritten rule of the whole internet, that everyone has to comment on new developments, even if he newer was in the target group for that. Porsche has a new sportscar? Fail, I need more space in the trunk...

[Gianclaudio]

Wishful thinking: I hope Pentax makes a 85mm 1.8 in the near future, too. Or at least reduce the price of the 77mm ltd. Nowadays, an used 77 is more expensive than a new 85 1.8 from Sony...... ��

[beholder3]

If you look at it honestly, adding cost for video is a financial risk for Pentax.

I do not believe the issue is increased cost/price for the end product.

Probably the problem is a much more widespread one: capacity limitations and following tradeoff decisions.

If they plan to bring out a new camera at time X they have a fixed amount of R&D capacity to spend overall. As you can see even on forums there are literally thousands of different personal wishes out there, which feature people want with few little consensus items. Out of them they have the capacity to develop 10 while not doing 990.


So the question is not IF a users would want "video" improved. The question is "do you want video improved at the price of dynamic range staying the same and AF not improving a lot?". If you get one thing, you wont get others.

And with Pentax the message has been surprisingly clear: they do not see video as any priority, so anyone placing his private top priority on this makes a poor personal decision to buy a Pentax camera, no less than anyone who values optical viewfinders buying a Sony and waiting for them to offer one tomorrow.

[MMVIII]

I do not believe the issue is increased cost/price for the end product.

Probably the problem is a much more widespread one: capacity limitations and following tradeoff decisions.

If they plan to bring out a new camera at time X they have a fixed amount of R&D capacity to spend overall. As you can see even on forums there are literally thousands of different personal wishes out there, which feature people want with few little consensus items. Out of them they have the capacity to develop 10 while not doing 990.


So the question is not IF a users would want "video" improved. The question is "do you want video improved at the price of dynamic range staying the same and AF not improving a lot?". If you get one thing, you wont get others.

And with Pentax the message has been surprisingly clear: they do not see video as any priority, so anyone placing his private top priority on this makes a poor personal decision to buy a Pentax camera, no less than anyone who values optical viewfinders buying a Sony and waiting for them to offer one tomorrow.

True. But I think this can be seen even simpler. If you imagine that for Ricoh the main question is simply: is there an imaging sensor and processor available that can offer better video specs? Followed by the question: can we use it for our entire lineup (APS-C, FF, 645)? And then the cost come into consideration. And here it is about priorities: if the most suitable and available processor does not support video to it's best they probably would still use it and not look for another solution at this moment (see Ricoh GRIII). I am convinced, that as soon as there will be a new pipeline available all formats will get faster updated than anyone might have thought, and probably natural progression will bring better video anyway. Maybe not what some might hope, but would someone still be surprised that Ricoh stickes to it's core competence and video is available if it does not complicate things?

[repaap]

but still, there are several things what you have to fix for video. I like it just the way it is, and many would be happy for even less. Then again, I would be willing to get an actual video camera to get things properly done, if needed and my skills would allow it. It is just recently when most camera brands are coming up with improved video. Like Nikon and fujifilm, but they try to compete with sony. still many says that if you want FF video, Sony A7 III is better. IF you think about it, they have spent A LOT to come up almost even AND these are not cheap camera anyway. not to mention rest of the cost.

besides smaller sensor is more than enough for video anyway.

and If you compare m4/3 pro video cam(blackmagick for example) and GH5 there are already lot of difference, talk about global shutter alone... not to get to bigger cameras. that is IF one is interested of video. this thing has been discussed several times. why to keep on bringin it up again and again.

besides, when K-1 came up it was already known that Pentax is not in to video, it is there just for what it is. now this thread is about DFA*85, which is coming up. and is exciting thing as it is already..

[Rondec]

I do not believe the issue is increased cost/price for the end product.

Probably the problem is a much more widespread one: capacity limitations and following tradeoff decisions.

If they plan to bring out a new camera at time X they have a fixed amount of R&D capacity to spend overall. As you can see even on forums there are literally thousands of different personal wishes out there, which feature people want with few little consensus items. Out of them they have the capacity to develop 10 while not doing 990.


So the question is not IF a users would want "video" improved. The question is "do you want video improved at the price of dynamic range staying the same and AF not improving a lot?". If you get one thing, you wont get others.

And with Pentax the message has been surprisingly clear: they do not see video as any priority, so anyone placing his private top priority on this makes a poor personal decision to buy a Pentax camera, no less than anyone who values optical viewfinders buying a Sony and waiting for them to offer one tomorrow.

I guess the thing to me is that there are a couple of things that they could do relatively easily to make video better -- include focus peaking and allow for mechanical SR with video operation. Both of those features are operational with live view so it could be done. As for 4K or things like that, a lot is going to be dependent on what updated PRIME engine looks like and what features in it they choose to activate, along with what sensors they use for their newest cameras. I don't know that any of their current cameras use a sensor that can shoot 4K video.

[zapp]

I think Pentax has a clear idea what they will show at some point and not care in detail about all forum wishes that actually ask them to make something similar to, as good as, ....
There will be some years of suffering (since Ricoh took control) and afterwards we will see what they have really been working on. Quite typical for a copany with limited resources that has to take a deep breath before a major development is presented.
With next year´s annversary, the time of suffering may be over soon - this also implies that suffering is the hardest right now :-) There are a couple obvious paths to follow for Pentax. The real surprise will most likely be that they really worked on something interesting and are ready to deliver after announcement.

[Kunzite]

@zapp:
I hope you're right. There are some hints that you might be right... I just don't dare to raise my hopes, preferring to be pleasantly surprised instead

[beholder3]

They are slow, but when they do something it is very good.

Years people complained about a missing teleconverter. Then it came and it was excellent.
Years people complained about a missing FF camera. Then it came and it was excellent.
Years people complained about a missing long tele zoom. Then DFA 150-450 came and it was excellent.
Years people complained about a missing top level prime. Then DFA*50 came and it was excellent.
Years people complained about a missing set of cheap primes. Then DA 50 and DA 35 came and they were excellent and cheap.
Years people complained about a missing allround zoom better than the da 18-135. Then DA 16-85 came and was excellent.
Years people complained about a missing non-screw-drive kit lens. Then DA 18-50 RE came and it was exactly what was asked for.

[Trickortreat]

They are slow, but when they do something it is very good.Years people complained about a missing teleconverter. Then it came and it was excellent.Years people complained about a missing FF camera. Then it came and it was excellent.Years people complained about a missing long tele zoom. Then DFA 150-450 came and it was excellent.Years people complained about a missing top level prime. Then DFA*50 came and it was excellent.Years people complained about a missing set of cheap primes. Then DA 50 and DA 35 came and they were excellent and cheap.Years people complained about a missing allround zoom better than the da 18-135. Then DA 16-85 came and was excellent.Years people complained about a missing non-screw-drive kit lens. Then DA 18-50 RE came and it was exactly what was asked for.

OK people! Lets start complaining. It seems its the only thing that will make Pentax move!

[Kunzite]

OK people! Lets start complaining. It seems its the only thing that will make Pentax move!

Don't say that even as a joke.
The only thing complaining for the sake of complaining do is to annoy people, and if it would impact Pentax' speed it would delay things.
There's no successful case in which such complaining achieved anything good.