[beetee]

I don't mean to ask this question in a way that is seen by this Forum as anathema, but what compromises are made to the K-1 II because it has video capability? In other words, if video were removed entirely, what things could Pentax put into a K-1 III camera if video were removed entirely? I use my Pentax cameras almost exclusively for still shots. Perhaps 99% of the video that I shoot is done adequately and easily with my iPhone. I'd rather have the option of a bigger sensor than anything else for my astrophotography; I'd happily take 45 or 50 Mpx. If the choice came down to 45-50 Mpx or video (whether 4K or not), I'd take the 45-50 Mpx over the video every day. I'd be interested to see how much the inclusion of video compromises other features in these cameras; it's trying to do too much in a single camera body, in my opinion. (For people needing video professionally in a camera, like at weddings, why not just have a dedicated video camera in addition to your still camera? The more that you put into any one camera body, the less that it can do all the things really well, no?)

I suggested wanted to point out again it was NOT my intent talk about EXISTING PRODUCTS... but about ideas and wishes for new FF DSLR.

There were none, zero, zip, NULL, NIL, sacrifices made in favor of video on the K-1II.

Actually its the other way around,
if you want faster bus, faster buffer, faster burst, faster af, faster darkframe-substraction, and actually all the things that are important for an outstanding stills performing camera...
You would normally have better video on it too.

Because despite the sensor... it just comes down to the capabilities of the chipset and its internal bus(es) what your camera can do in a certain amount of time.
Its just like saying, do you think, my car could go faster if i change the car-radio?

It just doesnt matter if you make small changes or add a small part to the firmware.

So you should actually welcome a stills camera that is capable of recording 6K to 8K,
and good video-AF
because that would bring with it:
Capability to save faster, so a faster cardslot format - so you can do endless stills bursts...
better noise-reduction(dark-frame subtraction needs cpu-time also),
better stills AF-C
etc. etc.

and despite all that - pentax video functions are a bit of a stub anyway,

which really does not take away anything from the stills capabilities of this camera.
there was and is not much too it in pentaxland. no Log, no option to choose bitrate, no choice between bitrate/fps scenarios etc. lagging video-af

there have been no major changes to pentax video for ... *sigh* ... AGES...

and looking at the sales number- .. i would say this is a failure.
because companies dont exist out of pure love for their brands, and all the millenials and the new photo-addicts always look at the complete specs list.

and if ricoh sells no pentax bodies and no pentax glass, chances fade away we see any upgrades ... be it glass or camera.


What took away the most, I guess, was implementing:
-additional firmware functionality so you can shovel around info tiles on the main-lcd.
-GPS and NFC(which they took away so they did not compromise the GPS signal I guess)
(they even had to break their production and design principles, and nearly kept that frugal chassis design, thx god, thats gone now.)

SO the answer to what you are essentially asking IMHO oppinion can only be:
No there was no sacrifice made to have video in the K-1II.

[cometguy]

There were none, zero, zip, NULL, NIL, sacrifices made in favor of video on the K-1II.

Because despite the sensor... it just comes down to the capabilities of the chipset and its internal bus(es) what your camera can do in a certain amount of time.
Its just like saying, do you think, my car could go faster if i change the car-radio?

SO the answer to what you are essentially asking IMHO oppinion can only be:
No there was no sacrifice made to have video in the K-1II.

Well, I'm asking what additional hardware is needed to facilitate video in a DSLR camera, vs. no video/movies.
My K10D camera has no video/movie capability, and I've never considered that a short-coming in it.
Roughly 99% of my video/movie shooting is done with my iPhone, not my D800 or my two K-3 II cameras that can do movies.
This is not comparable to a radio in a car, as to how fast it can go, because cars are huge; if cars were the size of DSLR cameras, a radio might be a factor as to how fast it can go.
A DSLR camera is a small device considering what it can do -- considering how much hardware is packed into its frame.
We know that there are space constraints, because Pentax had to decide whether to put GPS/Astrotracer or built-in flash into its cameras (but not both). Dual card slots take more space; an articulating screen takes more space.
If you don't have video/movie capability in a DSLR camera, you don't have need for sound-recording hardware and for microphone jacks or headphone jacks, and you don't have need for additional buttons/switches to turn video on and off. So in addition to these things that I've just listed that I *know* are add-ons, I'm wondering what other "internal bus(es)" or other hardware have to be inserted to handle video instead of still imaging only.

[beetee]

Sorry, I dont want this to sound rude, but it seems you either dont know what you are talking about
or you dont know how things are made these days.
There are smartphones from very small makers which dont cost more than 100bucks. (with win-margin calculated into the price-tag)
Those devices have so much more crammed onto small space in some ways,
including speakers, GPS, sensors, temp sensors, headphone jack, wifi-bt unit exshetera exshetera and rec vids in 4k...

I know the saying :
Pennies add up to pounds,
but the pennies adding up to the pounds,
which make producing a DSLR a heavy lift for Ricohs PENTAX branch,
do come from elsewhere but for sure not from having an additional position on some mode dial.

Interestedly I read how you were able to ignore, that I made clear,
that having this radio in your car would only possibly make it go faster and not slower.

This car-radio-comparison anyway is ridiculing the matter, admitted,
but your assumptions on the other hand are a bit far off from reality. TKIF...

Even if you now say, you carry around 4 different flagship cameras and you only record videos with an overpriced apple-phone...
how does that fit your assumptions? and why does it matter? I dont have any clue and I already can imagine what the answer(s) will be.

I actually dont have a clue what your question was about anyway since its beating a dead horse,
since RICOH upping the video-bitrate in the KP
already seems to signal, that they finally have accepted that video IS a thing considered by many
(even if its not true for 'cometguy') ... other (potential) Pentaxbuyers.

(many pentaxbuyers, think, PENTAX produces the cameras especially for them, why so? no clue...)

Nonetheless, I dont know, you and I myself am more watching the forums than writing here, but If I would know better,
I would be tempted to say you are trolling, and trying to put a bee into the (RICOH-PENTAX)bonnet, for whatsoever reason.

(because, the only reaction on a camera which would not only be behind in terms of video but completely leave it out, I can Imagine,...
Would be: Now PENTAX completely lost its mind and its last non-hardcore-customers... from like everyone in the industry.
Those are nice thoughts somehow .. but thoughts dont always have to become words on a forum you know?

Especially when the initiator of the thread CLEARLY STATED:
THIS IS ABOUT NEW IDEAS and NEW TOPICS ... for an UPCOMING FULL FRAME FLAGSHIP...

You are ridiculing the idea of the thread, by coming up with an age old back-and-forth topic thats special to PENTAX(forums)
even the dinosaurs already chewed on what you are suggesting, ...
This sounds like all this "We dont need a fullframe and it will not be a success anyway" that was so present before the Pentax K-1 came.

---------- Post added 01-27-21 at 01:53 PM ----------

C'mon people I am sure we can do better than: "hey, lets leave out vids"... (!!!LOL) I am 100% sure this is not a new idea. *sigh*

[reh321]

I don't mean to ask this question in a way that is seen by this Forum as anathema, but what compromises are made to the K-1 II because it has video capability? In other words, if video were removed entirely, what things could Pentax put into a K-1 III camera if video were removed entirely? I use my Pentax cameras almost exclusively for still shots. Perhaps 99% of the video that I shoot is done adequately and easily with my iPhone. I'd rather have the option of a bigger sensor than anything else for my astrophotography; I'd happily take 45 or 50 Mpx. If the choice came down to 45-50 Mpx or video (whether 4K or not), I'd take the 45-50 Mpx over the video every day. I'd be interested to see how much the inclusion of video compromises other features in these cameras; it's trying to do too much in a single camera body, in my opinion. (For people needing video professionally in a camera, like at weddings, why not just have a dedicated video camera in addition to your still camera? The more that you put into any one camera body, the less that it can do all the things really well, no?)

The question is interesting, but it is probably an exercise in futility.
How many of us would have guessed many of the real improvements in the K-3iii?

[Serkevan]

Especially when the initiator of the thread CLEARLY STATED:
THIS IS ABOUT NEW IDEAS and NEW TOPICS ... for an UPCOMING FULL FRAME FLAGSHIP...

Frankly speaking: that's an exercise in futility. The camera will be what it will be. Unless you also think that Ricoh makes the camera for you.

[noelpolar]

If Pentax are designing the next FF K for me (an ageing pentaxian... I guess).... then it will have a 10MP sensor (ageing eye sight) and.... a really loud shutter (age related hearing loss).... maybe a house and car key finder (maybe a glasses finder as well)..... be fluro orange..... and maybe a one touch "yes dear" button that sounds sincere.

PS... if it had a anti snoring noise cancelling function.... then.... well.... they could charge leica prices for it.... and no video will be needed.... because a burst of 4 images is likely to capture all action.... and audio isn't needed.... mostly because it would be out of sync anyhow.... and any names spoken would be wrong initially.

[pinholecam]

Regress it to K-0
Market it as "Pure photographer's tool"

No IBIS
Fixed LCD
No GPS

As small a FF DSLR as possible (MZ5n sized if possible )
Dedicated focusing screen (or equivalently good focusing aid like superimposed LV on OVF, etc)
Looks like a Spotmatic, ME Super for even MZ5n.
24mp


Pentax wants be be the company holding up the "Purer than thou" / "Make DSLR Great Again" flag and "this is the way.

[beetee]

Frankly speaking: that's an exercise in futility. The camera will be what it will be. Unless you also think that Ricoh makes the camera for you.

What you say is just 100% misconception.
I know a lot of salesmen, visited Photokina and talked to reps... and believe it or not...

The makers DO listen to what the customers say.
(otherwise pentax wouldnt have dared to go FF - they themselves didnt believe in the success of the K-1 until they saw people go after it like it was hotcake)
Also keep in mind that RICOH is an openminded company with app ¥70.000 billion net income and PENTAX is their 'cultural heritage' prestige-project.

It seems that they just stepped over a certain point, where they realised that,
(!! despite some members in here stated over and over that AF in pentaxland would be sufficient, and no one would need video or faster cards... ??!!)
leaving AF and video behind will not lead them anywhere.
Most likely because they may watch other platforms also ... (like other forums and reddit or so)

And the discussion about it is dead, since the K-3III ups the game in exactly that 2 points and marks the realization of where they were mislead.

And no RICOH does not make the camera especially for YOU or me...

it produces cameras for the majority of their customers, and so:
it totally makes sense to state wishes on what you would appreciate in a new DSLR...

If you find a majority of people that are with you... and you guys state often enough what you want,
you may get what you want.

It just seems that the forums doesnt represent a majority of pentax-users any more, because i always see the same people writing in here.
(app 6-8 people always seem to reign hype posts, and their sayings are mostly the same over and over.... )
It seems a certain few members in here just want to be right on everything and wanna look like they could forecast everything, and that is not going to lead anywhere.
So you could at least try to spread a bit more positivity before you go down the same road, Serkevan.


But friendly statements/suggestions (with or without reasoning) --from more than one user!-- may help to pull our beloved K-mount into the future.

[Markovo]

I wouldn't change anything in K-1. I love it as it is and I plan to grow old with it. Maybe it will last longer than me....

[northcoastgreg]

I actually dont have a clue what your question was about anyway since its beating a dead horse,since RICOH upping the video-bitrate in the KP

If Ricoh/Pentax uped the bitrate on the KP that's because the hardware in the camera supported it, not out of any belief that video specs were going to sell cameras. That sort of thing might work for companies like Panasonic and Sony, who have the technological clout to compete among consumers for whom video specs are important. Pentax simply does not have the resources to compete in that market and likely never will. For that reason, they have tended to user older sensor and processor technologies that don't support high-end video specs, probably to keep their oameras from getting too expensive (remember, they can't leverage economies of scale like Canon, Nikon, and Sony). The older sensors are just as good in terms of image quality and newer sensors, but they lack some of the bells and whistles that allow for better video and LV AF performance.

With the K-3iii, that looks to change. That camera seems to be using significantly updated hardware, which is why, apparently, it will support 4,000k at 30fps. That's quite a leap -- but it's based largely on using newer sensors and, I would assume, better processors. Something else to take note: this K-3iii will be far and away Pentax's most expensive APS-C camera in quite some time. So it would appear that high-end video isn't entirely without cost. Luckily, more expensive hardware also supports some other things, like higher burst rates, faster all-around performance, and possibly better AF --- so there are pluses even for those who don't care about video (which I suspect are the vast majority).

[beetee]

If Ricoh/Pentax uped the bitrate on the KP that's because the hardware in the camera supported it, not out of any belief that video specs were going to sell cameras. That sort of thing might work for companies like Panasonic and Sony, who have the technological clout to compete among consumers for whom video specs are important. Pentax simply does not have the resources to compete in that market and likely never will. For that reason, they have tended to user older sensor and processor technologies that don't support high-end video specs, probably to keep their oameras from getting too expensive (remember, they can't leverage economies of scale like Canon, Nikon, and Sony). The older sensors are just as good in terms of image quality and newer sensors, but they lack some of the bells and whistles that allow for better video and LV AF performance.

With the K-3iii, that looks to change. That camera seems to be using significantly updated hardware, which is why, apparently, it will support 4,000k at 30fps. That's quite a leap -- but it's based largely on using newer sensors and, I would assume, better processors. Something else to take note: this K-3iii will be far and away Pentax's most expensive APS-C camera in quite some time. So it would appear that high-end video isn't entirely without cost. Luckily, more expensive hardware also supports some other things, like higher burst rates, faster all-around performance, and possibly better AF --- so there are pluses even for those who don't care about video (which I suspect are the vast majority).

I guess you may be right somehow, but if you think about it,

consider that the KP hardware actually may also have been less capable than the K-3/K-3II(8.7fps stills) for instance and i feel the K-3 was a bit more responsive.
But maybe I am wrong I had the KP only for a short test for about half an hour or so.
There also was a video on youtube from pentax/japan where some photog close to ricoh actually talked that they considered nice video (also in low light)would be a good thing to have and they upped the framerate for that reason.

AFAIR, it was Albert Siegel. Wait. Here:

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

[normhead]

My guess is 42 MP, flippy screen, taking advantage of the K-3iii processing engine to push the FPS to 8 with a 20 shot buffer. Also it will have the K-3iii 100 focal points and tracking. And the ultra bright glass developed for the K-3iii viewfinder will be employed.

Essentially a Pentax D-850 a few years later with a few fewer FPS, pixel shift and IBIS.

[northcoastgreg]

AFAIR, it was Albert Siegel. Wait. Here:

Yes, the KP video does look reasonably well at high ISOs (which is what the video contends), but that's because the under-powered h264 compression the camera uses makes the video look like it has been subjected to loads of noise reduction. Video shot at ISO 100 doesn't look so great, but video at ISO 1600+ might gain from it.

[luftfluss]

My guess is 42 MP, flippy screen, taking advantage of the K-3iii processing engine to push the FPS to 8 with a 20 shot buffer. Also it will have the K-3iii 100 focal points and tracking. And the ultra bright glass developed for the K-3iii viewfinder will be employed.

Essentially a Pentax D-850 a few years later with a few fewer FPS, pixel shift and IBIS.

Pentax's take on a D850 would be great, even if "late".

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

[reh321]

My guess is 42 MP, flippy screen, taking advantage of the K-3iii processing engine to push the FPS to 8 with a 20 shot buffer. Also it will have the K-3iii 100 focal points and tracking. And the ultra bright glass developed for the K-3iii viewfinder will be employed.

Essentially a Pentax D-850 a few years later with a few fewer FPS, pixel shift and IBIS.

The one place the Nikon D850 did ‘poorly’ was at higher ISO settings - not likely to be a problem for Pentax.