[PentaxPoke]

I think that people that compare camcorders with DSLR video don't really understand how limiting camcorder technology is, and what a major breakthrough DSLR video really is. The significance boils down to sensor size. Some people make such a big deal about FF vs. APS-C. The advantages that FF has boils down to sensor size, and the DOF possibilities due to that sensor size. A FF sensor has about twice as much area as an APS-C. But an APS-C sensor has over 18 times as much area as the best consumer HD camcorders costing $1000! Look at this figure in the following link. The CMOS used in $1000 Sony camcorders, is smaller than the smallest sensor on the page:
File:SensorSizes.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



For example, the Sony Exmore CMOS sensors are 1/2.88" format. That is less than 20 square mm. Anyone know what the "Academy format" standard is for 35mm movie film? 22mm x 16mm. Compare that to APS-C and you will see why people are so excited about DSLR video.

---

Last edited by PentaxPoke; 02-08-2010 at 11:44 PM.

[Steve Beswick]

The 550D/T2i offers full HD 1080p @ 24, and 30fps, and 1280x720p at 60P. Starting to sound a bit like the 7D. Price is $899.00 with the 18-55mm zoom, and it also offers a 1/8" audio input, manual exposure control, and it's also PAL friendly with 25p and 50p.

...All wrapped up in a housing so cheap you will long for the build quality of a Brownie Six-20!

Sorry, it was too easy to resist.

[nosnoop]

Video on DSLR's are waaaay overrated and means completely nothing to me.

Oh no, it means A LOT TO YOU, if you care about Pentax.
Because it will dictate how well the Pentax model will sell, and how well Pentax will survive as a brand. Yes, HD video is THAT important in terms of DSLR sales.

The lack of HD video is one of the major factors as to why Sony has fallen from #3 to #6, market share from 10+% to ~2% in Japan in less than 2 years.
If K-7 and K-x did not have HD video functions, they would not have achieved the current 10% market share.

[Wheatfield]

You know what? I'm sorry I brought it up. I was hopeful that I wouldn't find this kind of attitude here. I guess I was wrong. Keeping ones mind open to the idea of new technology is important. relying on the "Status quo" is ridiculous, and short sighted.

You need a thicker skin.
I suspect that there are a lot of people who would like Pentax to catch up to what it's competitors are doing WRT still photography, which is the primary purpose of these cameras, before they expend their efforts on making them into video camera.

[falconeye]

I think that people that compare camcorders with DSLR video don't really understand how limiting camcorder technology is, and what a major breakthrough DSLR video really is. The significance boils down to sensor size.

PentaxPoke, you are right. Even after the following extra detail ...

Current dSLR video only uses a (small) fraction of all sensor cells found on their sensors. Called subsampling. This doesn't limit their DoF capabilities but it does limit overall image quality and low light capabilities.

E.g., the K-7 uses 1/6 of all sensor cells, the 5DmkII slightly more, most likely 1/3, and all entry level dSLRs I am aware of use less than the K-7, incl. the K-x.

Therefore, on the one hand, dSLR sensors should be scaled to 40% (linear dimensions) for a fair size comparison with camcorders (24% when comparing with a 3 chip camcorder). And even when doing so, dSLRs win hands down.

On the other hand though, this shows how dSLR video currently is at its infancy. When developped to its full potential (supersampling all sensor cells), video with system cameras (some of them being dedicated video cams of course) will blow everything else out of the field.

I believe this is at the root of the current dSLR video hype. It is a hype in the video community.

A hype which has nothing to do with the still photographer community, of course, and can be ignored by them.

[Jodokast96]

Rock, I wasn't specifically calling you a jackass. But this guy said it best

My video camera has interchangeable lenses and cost a lot less than 50K. I can also get adapters to use Nikon, Canon EOS or Pentax lenses as well. If DSLRs were better video cameras than a video camera why does Canon still produce prosumer cameras like the XL and GL series (probably have newer names in HD)?

But if the only difference between a Red One and a DSLR is the sensor size, don't you see something fundamentally wrong with that? You can get good funtionality in a $1000 camcorder, and have been able to for a long time. You can get a good sensor size in a $1000 DSLR. Yet it takes a minimum of 20x that to combine the two? Sorry, I'm not drinking what the marketing tells me to. Yes, video in a DSLR may be in it's infancy, but none of the technology is.

[Nass]

DSLR technology, though still in it's infancy, is taking media gathering to new and exciting levels. Feature films will be depending on them soon enough as well. Lucasfilm recently performed tests with the 5DII and 7D and transferred the footage to 35mm with surprising results. Lucas is planning to use DSLR's in places that cannot accommodate the F35 in his next feature. I dare any of the other consumer offerings in the "VIDEO CAMERA" realm to compete with that.

Interesting aside, that's going back to the old days. I don't know how many people are aware that the most exciting parts of Indiana Jones Raiders of the Lost Ark were shot on 35mm cameras. That whole scene where they take those mine carts is all just a bunch of 35mm stills added together. Also, how many people know that photoshop was actually created by Lucasfilm as well, for use in film. Perhaps Indy again, I can't remember specifics.

That's why I have to just laugh at all these people who seem hellbent on rejecting all things digital or different/unusual or PP with photoshop or HDR or Video on their cameras. Really, all these arts have always been intertwined to a certain degree. The future is undoubtably digital, plain and simple. Some folk just need to get with the programme and look beyond their own little narrow interests =)

---

Last edited by Nass; 02-09-2010 at 05:35 AM.

[Peter Zack]

I agree with Wheatfield, We often enter into these heated discussions and it's actually good (with the exception of name calling which is uncalled for and just reflects badly on that poster).
These strong points of view add fuel to the discussions otherwise we'll all sit around and look at purdy flower pictures.

Pentax Poke has a point and there are going to many who see this just the same as the move from Fim to Digital. Somehow turning their beloved DSLR's into "toys" that lower the percived value/status of a still camera.

As for video in a DSLR, I've noticed lately that news companies are using them a bit at media scrums, just yesterday a reporter was recording video with a DSLR and some politician. He could get in the fray much closer with the much smaller camera than his video colleagues.

I'm on the fence with this development. I shot video for 4 years, 20 years ago for a commercial company, doing commercials and so on with BetaCams. Not having to lug a 20 Lb body all day has it's advantages as well as the added pluses of DOF etc. But my primary use is still going to be still shots.

My only real concern is the sensor itself. Using it as a video camera all the time has got to shorten the life of that sensor. There's no were for the heat to go in that small mirror box. Maybe that's not an issue but in a much bigger Pro vid cam, heat can be more easily controlled. I just don't need my still camera with rows of dead pixels.

[RJRock]

Interesting aside, that's going back to the old days. I don't know how many people are aware that the most exciting parts of Indiana Jones Raiders of the Lost Ark were shot on 35mm cameras. That whole scene where they take those mine carts is all just a bunch of 35mm stills added together. Also, how many people know that photoshop was actually created by Lucasfilm as well, for use in film. Perhaps Indy again, I can't remember specifics.

That's why I have to just laugh at all these people who seem hellbent on rejecting all things digital or different/unusual or PP with photoshop or HDR or Video on their cameras. Really, all these arts have always been intertwined to a certain degree. The future is undoubtably digital, plain and simple. Some folk just need to get with the programme and look beyond their own little narrow interests =)

Just to clarify since some may not understand. The 35mm mentioned above was a modified STILLS camera (if memory serves it was a Canon). They used a variation of Stop-motion, called Go-Motion (timed exposure while the model is moving) that was developed for Dragonslayer so they could get natural looking motion blur. The film gate was modified, and they built a custom film cartridge to hold enough Vista-vision film for several seconds....

In response to another poster: The thickness of my skin is irrelevant. I guess I was expecting a level of maturity that is missing from many other forums. Yes, the majority are, but, I was seriously annoyed at the response I received.

As far as camera companies putting this technology in a camcorder body; I have to say this is highly unlikely. Canon, JVC, Sony, Panasonic, still have a huge profit machine in both their camcorder and DSLR/Pocket shooter products. I don't think any of them would jeopardize either of their divisions to make the "ultimate hybrid product" That is why Red is so popular. Large sensors and high resolution are the main advantages to Red. Those advantages come at a serious price though. This is where larger sensor DSLR's can close the gap.

[Jodokast96]

So it's immature to disagree?

[pingflood]

...All wrapped up in a housing so cheap you will long for the build quality of a Brownie Six-20!

Sorry, it was too easy to resist.

The Rebels may seem cheaply built (and when I use one I feel the same thing) but history so far has shown that they actually take a lot of abuse and hold together quite well.

[Steve Beswick]

The Rebels may seem cheaply built (and when I use one I feel the same thing) but history so far has shown that they actually take a lot of abuse and hold together quite well.

C'mon man, build quality is the last leg I have to stand on!

[gazonk]

I really didn't think I was being that touchy. I've been shooting for over two decades myself, and have always had to rely on a second system to get the stills I needed. Regardless of what anyone says, I feel that video on a DSLR is one of the greatest ideas ever conceived. Whether in ENG, EFP, or digital cinema, the advantages of having a dual capable camera are too numerous to discuss.

I'm with you! While still photography is my main hobby, video is something I only do for keeping memories from trips with the kids etc. - some things, like the movements and voices of kids, simply require video. I've been happy to use a small mini DV camera for that up to now. But I'm increasingly frustrated with (a) having to carry my DV camera on trips, even if it's small and (b) the picture quality when played on our HD TV. I don't mind if it's still quirky to use, my next DSLR is going to have video, even if I'll just use it for occasional clips on holidays.

Pentax introduced their first video capable DSLR just some months ago, I would be surprised if they're not already testing improvements to their video technology.

What, in your opinion, are the main drawbacks of video on the K-7, btw? If the price drops, I'm considering upgrading from K10D, and video would be one of the reasons for upgrading.

[RJRock]

So it's immature to disagree?

No, it's not immature to disagree. It's how the disagreement is presented.

[jogiba]

I'm with you! While still photography is my main hobby, video is something I only do for keeping memories from trips with the kids etc. - some things, like the movements and voices of kids, simply require video. I've been happy to use a small mini DV camera for that up to now. But I'm increasingly frustrated with (a) having to carry my DV camera on trips, even if it's small and (b) the picture quality when played on our HD TV. I don't mind if it's still quirky to use, my next DSLR is going to have video, even if I'll just use it for occasional clips on holidays.

Pentax introduced their first video capable DSLR just some months ago, I would be surprised if they're not already testing improvements to their video technology.

What, in your opinion, are the main drawbacks of video on the K-7, btw? If the price drops, I'm considering upgrading from K10D, and video would be one of the reasons for upgrading.

The #1 feature needed on all VDSLRs is an EVF like the one that Epson is making and will be on the new VDSLRs this year.
Epson starts mass production of high-end EVF panels: Digital Photography Review

TOKYO, Japan, October 2009 – Seiko Epson Corporation ("Epson", TSE:6724) today announced that it has begun volume production of a new high-temperature polysilicon (HTPS) TFT color panel for electronic viewfinders. Measuring just 0.47 of an inch (1.2 cm) diagonally, the new panels offer SVGA (800 x RGB x 600) resolution in red, green and blue for a total of 1.44 megapixels.
The new panels are targeted at camera manufacturers for use as electronic viewfinders in mid- to high-end digital single lens reflex (DSLR) cameras.

Competition in the digital camera market has reached a fever pitch. Companies are launching new products with higher resolutions and more features at even lower prices. In recent years, more and more consumers have been switching from compact cameras to SLR units in pursuit of better performance and image quality, driving the need for smaller and thinner DSLR cameras with video and other features.
Epson's new panels meet this need and open a whole world of possibilities for DSLR cameras.