[monochrome]

@RGlasel I'm not suggesting Pentax leap to direct competition with Canon - Canon has too much corporate knowledge for anyone except Sony to compete on their level - but far too many potential buyers won't even consider Pentax because the video is so bad. Not just the reputation, like with AF - the video is simply not even Good Enough.

As far as 5D, my daughter experimented with 5D's for broadcast network news. The producers liked the color profile but the ergonomics of pulling focus and stabilizing were such a pain that the videographers couldn't achieve reliable technical quality. Network-wide the Operations Producers (driven by my daughter) convinced the News Division EP's to bring the the Sonys out of the closet. The network wrote an emulator to mimic the Canon color profile, though.

AF is better than the reputation suggests. Video is worse.

---

Last edited by monochrome; 04-19-2017 at 08:45 PM.

[surfar]

Horse walks into a bar.Barman says Y the long face.....Horse says I won a race but they only shot the video with a Pentax!

[Uluru]

Neither have I, but that doesn't mean we're in line with the market. Until February I agreed with you. After my experience with real-world observation I have made a 180 degree turn.

Pentax is missing the market.

Or establishing its own? (Art and Wellbeing).
Never underestimate the strength of human spirit to find ways to resist the mindless consumerism.

[mee]

Horse walks into a bar.Barman says Y the long face.....Horse says I won a race but they only shot the video with a Pentax!

That joke is terrible.. so terrible it made me laugh.


I think you need to rein it in and put that lame joke out to pasture...

[surfar]

Meee 2222...

[geomez]

Am I content with the Pentax DSLRs I own? YES
Am I content with Pentax having garbage video? YES
Will I buy the next gen Pentax DSLR with garbage video within the next two years? YES
Would I like the ability to take decent video the few times a year I feel the need? YES
Do I think that having garbage video from a $1,500+ "professional" camera helps, hurts, or has no effect Pentax camera sales? HURTS

I get better video from my smartphone (new LG G6 ~$650) and I seriously doubt video is a priority for their smartphone division.
I get better video from my previous smartphone (Samsung Galaxy S5 $250 new on ebay) and I seriously doubt video was a priority.
I get better video from my 4.5 year old Canon S110 point and shoot.

Like I said, Pentax DSLRs work for me, though I do believe that their video performance is unacceptable for 2017 given the cost of their cameras and the customers their marketed to considering many if not most of those customers would like to shoot high quality video.

[leekil]

I'm a photographer, not a filmmaker, but I occasionally want to film something, and would prefer better video capabilities than Pentax currently provides.

[Uluru]

Similarly we can ask why the sheer image quality in other cameras cannot exceed the image quality and uniqueness obtainable with a Pentax camera? To get with a Leica camera similar output I get with a Pentax camera, I must use a lens that is 3x worth the Pentax camera and its lens. So what Pentax does right to make that possible even with not so stellar or expensive optics?

I mean, Leica would kill to have Pentax imaging pipeline as their own, because their output would then be unbelievable.

We can also ask why the usability and design of other cameras cannot approach the sophistication of use of a Pentax camera? How difficult is that for other manufacturers? It appears to be very simple, but still they don't do it.

If the video can be improved or not, we don't really know; but I do not believe for a moment that Ricoh Imaging is so stupid not to implement better video specs if it could be implemented in current tech and not have some side-effects. There may be issues that in the end affect the entire imaging pipeline, and the image quality suffers. Too little information, but what Pentax does in the still image area, is industry leading.

[thibs]

Hey guys, you might still want to re-read the statement. It was said (as before) 'Not a priority'. It never was.
They never said 'we will not better it while we are at it' or whatever. Keep calm.

But it is clear that those who wants competitive video should elsewhere. Is that really a surprise to anyone?

If they wanted to get to video in any otherway than just for checking specsheet boxes (more or less what they do now although I agree it could be better) they would need to (at least):
* spend quite a number of yens and time on developing correctly video features
* get to use the corresponding sensor (which might actually decrease the photo quality) from Sony and pay the corresponding price
* change their suppplier for chipset (SocioNext) for whatever (in-built or else) but it would imply a huge change since they would not be able to reuse large chunks of code they do reuse now
* offer accessories and lenses oriented to video users
* (probably forgetting some...)

then cross fingers and hope the market isn't already taken (it is IMO).

They are stuck, for now, with socionext and not optimal sensors (for various reasons). It is way to risky. Unfortunately.
They might have done it if MILC was a good chunk of their marketshare. But in the current state of things and with DSLRs ? No way.
(and I'm sorry about that for video guys, really).

[RobA_Oz]

Ricoh would probably be better off going into the medical imaging market, but they probably have a no-compete clause after the acquisition of Pentax from the asset-stripper Hoya. Have you seen the amount of money medical specialists and institutions spend on that stuff? Boy, have Pentax missed out there!

Sorry. Is this off-topic, too? I could have sworn this was a thread about the K-1 bringing new users to the Pentax brand. Maybe I missed something.

[zapp]

Encouraging insights:
Lenses:
Not wasting effort on gimmicks:
Ricoh Seeks New Platforms for Photography's Future | PDN Online

So they sold at least two K1 cameras
One to me and one to someone else...

[Kunzite]

Ricoh would probably be better off going into the medical imaging market, but they probably have a no-compete clause after the acquisition of Pentax from the asset-stripper Hoya. Have you seen the amount of money medical specialists and institutions spend on that stuff? Boy, have Pentax missed out there!

People are endlessly looking at what Ricoh/Pentax doesn't do, or doesn't do well, or doesn't do well enough (for some arbitrary standards). Very few seems to be interested in what they're doing.
The quote above - why not adding space exploration if we're at it? They surely can do it, it's not rocket science... oh, wait...
Ricoh is involved - even through their Pentax brand - in areas like factory automation and non-consumer photography/imaging. Quite lucrative areas.

[mecrox]

It isn't just professional, paid shooters. Pentax is simply not paying attention if they think they don't need video.

My son owns a retail athletic store. He builds reputation and loyalty by picking two or three high school lacrosse games a week, taking photos and video clips and posting them on his website and YouTube, and live streaming the entire game using Periscope on Twitter from his phone, tripod mounted. He uses a GoPro on a player during warmups. He's really creative with this technology - he'll try anything a few times and move on if people don't respond. The response has been astonishingly positive. People seek him out to compliment him - and ME if they know the association.

In only ten weeks he has purchased a 70D, 7D, 24-70, 70-200/2.8 L, 300/4 L and a cheap 15 - all Canon. Add the highest spec iPhone available x2. He posts stills during the game to Instagram connected to his phone by WiFi, uploads made-in-camera GIF's to Twitter, posts highlight clips real-time to YouTube linked from his phone. The camera > phone transfers are fast - they happen during 3 minute times out - and the camera jpeg development is routine now.

His partner runs camera two doing 100% stills for the website, which he edits in Lightroom overnight.

None of this work is truly professional quality and the gear isn't pro level except maybe the 2.8 zoom, but it gets the job done, video and still. He outright refused my offer of my new-ish K-3, or use of the K-1, because he would just have to buy video gear anyway. He has posted stitched panos from his phone of an entire empty football stadium at sunset. The Periscope streams are from a phone on a tripod - kids and parents (and even competitors and coaches) eat this stuff up!

I won't even start with my daughter's wedding, and she didn't even want video - but now the have a drone . . . . I have to use my K-01 to take grandchild clips - which is fine for that task - because it's the best video Pentax I have. 5 years old . . . .

FWIW, he also does this at local college lacrosse games that actually have national exposure. He says all the video shooters use Sony A7 with a LCD Loupe and chest stabilizer. If Pentax was any good at all we could do the same. He doesn't care whether the still shooters use Nikon or Canon because video is what people consume, not stills.

Wow, fascinating to hear. Thank you. My partner's son makes big use of his top-of-the-range iPhone to upload/stream stuff at events where his own biz has some sponsorship involved. And one can see the impact of it all by checking out photography channels on YouTube and seeing how much is now devoted to video, vlogging and all the rest. Younger people are growing up with this stuff all around them and won't settle for less - that's been clear for a long while now. And look how much equipment gets sold off the back of it! I guess that's the mixed-media future of the "old" camera market. Done right, it's probably a much more lucrative future than the old stills-only market. Many more companies and small businesses buy, for a start.

Sorry if this is off-topic. I'm just saying thanks for the story. Obvs the topic of the thread brings good news but I guess many of the replies indicate how much the market for imaging equipment is changing under our feet.

[LennyBloke]

The title of the post drew me in - it's quite an achievement to pick up half your sales from non Pentax sources - we should celebrate this!

If video is so popular why don't we have a video gallery on this (the biggest) Pentax forum? Unless we do and I haven't noticed it

[geomez]

Ricoh isn't winning market share and isn't exponentially increasing profits by not firing on all cylinders and without being competitive.
Sony just overtook Nikon as #2 in the camera market by delivering massively on nearly every aspect of the camera excluding an OVF.
They're beating everybody on just about everything (A9) in a very short time span.
Would Ricoh fly up the market share ladder if they spent on trying to make every aspect of their camera better than the competition?
No one knows, but the proof is in the pudding.
I love Pentax and am a die hard user, promoter and supporter (which is why I'm shutting my mouth after this comment), but I'm not gonna blindly say "stop complaining, good enough is good enough."
It's not. I swear Pentax is a nerd brand which is why I love it, but nerd brands don't win. What headline reads better, "Pentax introduces camera with lightning fast, crazy accurate AF" or, "Pentax introduces camera with Pixelshift, which increases dynamic range and sharpness when used with a tripod with a completely still subject"?
Which reads better, "Pentax introduces camera with gorgeous lossless 4K video", or "Pentax introduces camera with Astrotracer, which when mounted on a tripod uses GPS to move the sensor with the rotation of the earth to prevent star trails"?
I know what works for me and what works for us, but that nerdy stuff doesn't influence the market, the media, not the public. Don't believe me? Just look around.