[Uluru]

I don't care about the Ricoh logo. But the video mode, while improved in certain areas (making it catch up with competitors) was completely ruined in other areas (turning what was better than what competitors had to offer into something that is worse). ..

There is NO way I'd buy a K-3. If I had to buy a new Pentax, I'd buy a K-5. I'd even spend more on a K-5 than a K-3. I can list about 15 cameras I'd rather have than the K-3, and maybe 2 or 3 that I'd rather have than the K-5....

Before you fix all things properly, sometimes you need ruin a few that worked seemingly well.
I think we have a migration to an all new imaging platform and all new level of performance, and that the K-3 was an intermediate step — not the definitive answer.
The lack of new cameras (K-mount and mirrorless) since October last year may indicate that the team is readying not only the new hardware, but the new software too. Give them a few months.

[LaurenOE]

I see the thread came back to life. Good to hear from you again LaurenOE.

Thanks.
I've got to keep a low profile these days.
Sometimes I can be "over the top" and in my present position that doesn't bode well.



---------- Post added 06-29-14 at 10:38 PM ----------

I don't care about the Ricoh logo. But the video mode, while improved in certain areas (making it catch up with competitors) was completely ruined in other areas (turning what was better than what competitors had to offer into something that is worse). And those improvements seem to have cost them work and money (more components etc.), while the parts that ruin the camera has also cost them time and money. Just carrying over from the K-5 would have resulted in a much better camera. Basically the K-5 is IMHO a great run and gun video camera for handheld usage, while the K-3 can only be used in very controlled shoots, with the camera locked down ideally.


There is NO way I'd buy a K-3. If I had to buy a new Pentax, I'd buy a K-5. I'd even spend more on a K-5 than a K-3. I can list about 15 cameras I'd rather have than the K-3, and maybe 2 or 3 that I'd rather have than the K-5.


To be fair the trend of f***ing up the video function started with the K-01 and K-30. Not sure who is to blame.

Well, since this thread is about "fixing" the Ricoh logo on the back of the K3, I have to give Ricoh credit for what they may have done inside.
Since we are talking about video, I will chime in here.

Yes, I LOVED the mJpeg/AVI of the K5 and it was beautiful.
No issue there.
I don't like .MOV format at all.

However, my K5 cameras would overheat in stand-by, and I had little control over manual settings.

With the K3, I NEVER have to worry about overheating and I can make instant changes to exposure while on a shoot.
I use my K3 cameras almost daily for location shoots, and I have ZERO issues with them.
Yes, I use them in a "Cinematic" way, on sliders and jibs and not as action cameras, but then again, I did the same with the K5.

So while I miss the mJpeg, I'm ok with everything else.
I personally don't see the major gripes calling the K3 video a failure.
Not even close.

So in terms of this thread, the only thing that I think deserves a fix for the K3 is the little gaffer's tape to an otherwise awesome tool.

[kadajawi]

@LaurenOE: That's why I said they fixed some things (overheating sensor, manual controls, improved the sound by allowing manual gain and monitoring, and added a codec that allows for long shoots without needing a ton of memory cards), and ruined others (no shake reduction, crop the sensor even further, no more MJPEG which allows for the very best quality this side of 10 bit h264, raw and ProRes etc.). And for your style of shooting the improvements are more important. But I ask you, couldn't you do the same job with a Canon? Or Nikon? Or Sony? Or better yet Panasonic? Some have better codecs. Some have flip out screens. Some have focus peaking. Some even have great working video AF. Some have 4K resolution. Some go beyond 8 bit video. Some have a very, very flexible lens mount that lets you mount literally everything you can look through.

The frustrating bit is that they could have left on the shake reduction - it still works in liveview! The algorithms are still there! Yes, there may be disadvantages to using it, they could put a warning in the manual or on screen. They could have left on MJPEG - the camera still does MJPEG, but limited to timelapse videos. And when users demanded these features, Pentax did... erm... nothing. Heck, there is, to my knowledge, still a video related bug in the K-5 and K-3 that they haven't fixed.

@Lauren: Do you have the DA 50 1.8? If yes, you can maybe test it (I've tested it with several K-5, a K-3 (but since then firmware updates were released for the K-3), and several DA 50 1.8). In video mode (without recording) and with a fixed aperture you change the focus from one end to another. At some point the brightness should change, and you can actually hear and see the aperture change. Move back, and it moves back to the other position. Sometimes this also happens while recording a video.

Ps: My K-5 overheats all the time... I wish there was an easy way to remove dead pixels... like record a dead pixel video, let some software analyze it and then apply a dead pixel filter in Premiere... same as dead pixel reduction works on Lightroom, for example.

[Uluru]

@LaurenOE: That's why I said they fixed some things (overheating sensor, manual controls, improved the sound by allowing manual gain and monitoring, and added a codec that allows for long shoots without needing a ton of memory cards), and ruined others (no shake reduction, crop the sensor even further, no more MJPEG which allows for the very best quality this side of 10 bit h264, raw and ProRes etc.). And for your style of shooting the improvements are more important. But I ask you, couldn't you do the same job with a Canon? Or Nikon? Or Sony? Or better yet Panasonic? Some have better codecs. Some have flip out screens. Some have focus peaking. Some even have great working video AF. Some have 4K resolution. Some go beyond 8 bit video. Some have a very, very flexible lens mount that lets you mount literally everything you can look through.
...

This is my very quick observation, to help put your feet on the ground.

The K-3 was meant for 2012. But the Ricoh management stopped it then, and wanted it for the 2013. That meant a shift from an updated Prime 2 to a whole new Prime 3. New chip means a whole new imaging processor and tons of new software that needed to be developed for it. For a camera like the K-3, still image capability always has a priority over the video massaging. Say, I'd take Pentax K-3 over any Panny or Sony or Canon for stills because I find their stills to be mediocre at best.

But you, however, complain about Pentax video because you want video first and foremost.
Users got what could be done in the first iteration of the Prime 3. Stills are not lacking, and that is what matters first. If you were the project manager that must deliver a new product that satisfies 90% of users now and 10% later, you would do the same.

---

Last edited by Uluru; 06-30-2014 at 04:20 AM.

[johnmflores]

AFAIK the SR was a major cause of the overheating. That's why they turned it off for the K-3.

I recently went to an event and debated what camera to take - K-3 for great stills/compromised video or the Panasonic GH2 for great video/compromised stills. I ended up with the GH2 and shot good video and just ok stills. The GH-4 was the perfect cam for this situation but I don't have one...yet.

[LaurenOE]

@LaurenOE: That's why I said they fixed some things (overheating sensor, manual controls, improved the sound by allowing manual gain and monitoring, and added a codec that allows for long shoots without needing a ton of memory cards), and ruined others (no shake reduction, crop the sensor even further, no more MJPEG which allows for the very best quality this side of 10 bit h264, raw and ProRes etc.). And for your style of shooting the improvements are more important. But I ask you, couldn't you do the same job with a Canon? Or Nikon? Or Sony? Or better yet Panasonic? Some have better codecs. Some have flip out screens. Some have focus peaking. Some even have great working video AF. Some have 4K resolution. Some go beyond 8 bit video. Some have a very, very flexible lens mount that lets you mount literally everything you can look through.

The frustrating bit is that they could have left on the shake reduction - it still works in liveview! The algorithms are still there! Yes, there may be disadvantages to using it, they could put a warning in the manual or on screen. They could have left on MJPEG - the camera still does MJPEG, but limited to timelapse videos. And when users demanded these features, Pentax did... erm... nothing. Heck, there is, to my knowledge, still a video related bug in the K-5 and K-3 that they haven't fixed.

@Lauren: Do you have the DA 50 1.8? If yes, you can maybe test it (I've tested it with several K-5, a K-3 (but since then firmware updates were released for the K-3), and several DA 50 1.8). In video mode (without recording) and with a fixed aperture you change the focus from one end to another. At some point the brightness should change, and you can actually hear and see the aperture change. Move back, and it moves back to the other position. Sometimes this also happens while recording a video.

Ps: My K-5 overheats all the time... I wish there was an easy way to remove dead pixels... like record a dead pixel video, let some software analyze it and then apply a dead pixel filter in Premiere... same as dead pixel reduction works on Lightroom, for example.

Could I do the same job with Canikony or others?

Possibly, to no.

With the Pentax K3, I can have several cameras (I shoot with three) and I can start and stop the cameras with a single Pentax remote.
This is critical, as often I am the only person on the shoot.

I know the Nikon D7000 couldn't do that, because I had one once.
Not sure of the Canon or others.

Regardless, the Pentaxes are weather sealed in a meaningful way, and often times I am doing shoots outdoors.

It's also common for me to finish a shoot, grab the camera, and move right into still photography as the talent is still there and I can always use extra creative artifacts.

I also have TONS of Pentax glass, and the SMC-A series of lenses are perfect for cinema.

There are many benefits to using a Pentax on a shoot.
Since I am a Pentaxian, why would I research what a Canikony does unless there was something egregious or fantastic to sway me?

I agree with the things Pentax took away, but the things they added make up for it in my opinion.

---------- Post added 06-30-14 at 10:09 AM ----------

This is my very quick observation, to help put your feet on the ground.

The K-3 was meant for 2012. But the Ricoh management stopped it then, and wanted it for the 2013. That meant a shift from an updated Prime 2 to a whole new Prime 3. New chip means a whole new imaging processor and tons of new software that needed to be developed for it. For a camera like the K-3, still image capability always has a priority over the video massaging. Say, I'd take Pentax K-3 over any Panny or Sony or Canon for stills because I find their stills to be mediocre at best.

But you, however, complain about Pentax video because you want video first and foremost.
Users got what could be done in the first iteration of the Prime 3. Stills are not lacking, and that is what matters first. If you were the project manager that must deliver a new product that satisfies 90% of users now and 10% later, you would do the same.

Exactly.
As a tool for what I do, the Pentax K3 is the perfect tool.
As a Pentaxian, I am invested in the Pentax system so I have incentive to work around some shortcomings.

[kadajawi]

This is my very quick observation, to help put your feet on the ground.

The K-3 was meant for 2012. But the Ricoh management stopped it then, and wanted it for the 2013. That meant a shift from an updated Prime 2 to a whole new Prime 3. New chip means a whole new imaging processor and tons of new software that needed to be developed for it. For a camera like the K-3, still image capability always has a priority over the video massaging. Say, I'd take Pentax K-3 over any Panny or Sony or Canon for stills because I find their stills to be mediocre at best.

But you, however, complain about Pentax video because you want video first and foremost.
Users got what could be done in the first iteration of the Prime 3. Stills are not lacking, and that is what matters first. If you were the project manager that must deliver a new product that satisfies 90% of users now and 10% later, you would do the same.

I see. The weird thing is that SR still works in video mode, you just can't record it. (LiveView is stabilized.) So at least some of the software is there. Enabling MovieSR was probably easier, there's a function for that in Prime 3. But sadly it's so bad it's useless. And while Sony has a much better implementation, it is still useless.

I don't really buy the heat excuse. Olympus has a heavily stabilized sensor, and it shoots video just fine. Haven't heard about heat issues, and their cameras stabilize video much more than Pentax could ever do. Sony is going to use the same system. Isn't it possible that sensors have in general improved a lot in terms of heat? After all, Sony is LiveView only, so are all the mirrorless cameras. That the sensor is working all the time is common these days. The sensors have to be optimized for that. And even IF heat is a problem, just give me the choice to shoot with SR. I can still deactivate when it gets too hot (or just live with it, because stabilization is more important to me).

Actually when I earn money with my camera it's through stills. Video is just a hobby for me at this point. However I had no problem with clients when I was shooting with a *istDs with 6 MP. The quality was more than good enough. I'd be very surprised if a GH3 or GH4 wouldn't fulfill my needs for commercial photography. When I shoot for fun I want good low light performance.

@Lauren: That remote thing is interesting. I didn't know about that, and no clue how the other brands are. Otherwise, your investment in Pentax glass etc., yes of course. But say what if you could simply have everything you have for Pentax, but for Canon, Nikon or Panasonic. For someone who hasn't invested in a system yet I don't see many (except for the remote thing and the weather sealing) reasons why you'd buy Pentax. On the other hand having a flip out screen is useful (I often wish I had one!). Having higher bitrates is useful. Magic Lantern is useful. Higher resolution is useful. Better codecs are useful.

---

Last edited by kadajawi; 06-30-2014 at 12:51 PM.

[LaurenOE]

@Lauren: That remote thing is interesting. I didn't know about that, and no clue how the other brands are. Otherwise, your investment in Pentax glass etc., yes of course. But say what if you could simply have everything you have for Pentax, but for Canon, Nikon or Panasonic. For someone who hasn't invested in a system yet I don't see many (except for the remote thing and the weather sealing) reasons why you'd buy Pentax. On the other hand having a flip out screen is useful (I often wish I had one!). Having higher bitrates is useful. Magic Lantern is useful. Higher resolution is useful. Better codecs are useful.

I use an LCD monitor on set, as a flip-out screen would still be useless on the end of my camera Jib or moving along a slider - and Pentax knows this.

There are enough people at Pentax that get it right enough for me, to continue my loyalty and choice of their tool.

Ultimately it goes back to why I would tape up "Ricoh" on the back of the camera.

There is something in a Pentax that makes it so. There are enough little things that are unique that regardless of specifications or offerings from other camera makers, there is something that keeps me with a camera that looks and feels like a Pentax.

Just like folks can't understand why I would tape over Ricoh, there are people who can't understand why I would stay with a tool that doesn't suit them or have all latest specifications.

Just like Philip Bloom, I believe a camera is more than a spec sheet.

[derekkite]

Are you using an IR remote Lauren?

I do agree with you about Pentax. My shooting is far different from what you do, but I found with the K-5 that it demanded technique and skill, and as I learned those things it rewarded me amply. The K-3 is better, much better, and the K-3, DA*300 and 1.4 TC are remarkably good. There is a location that I visit frequently and often see wildlife, but the light and distances are difficult. I have gotten good shots previously, but very few. Somehow with what I have in my hand I can get those shots now. What has changed? Not sure. When I shoot in those situations and compare it to what I experienced with the K-5 I get the impression that some engineer in Japan has a spot just like this and is designing what he needs to get the shots he wants. I know that many are not seeing their needs filled, but I am. And they have gotten my cash as a result.

Is there something else on the market better? I don't know, maybe. The other day I had this on a tripod wading through wet grass taller than me. I got soaking wet. Everything just works for me in those situations.

[LaurenOE]

Are you using an IR remote Lauren?

I do agree with you about Pentax. My shooting is far different from what you do, but I found with the K-5 that it demanded technique and skill, and as I learned those things it rewarded me amply. The K-3 is better, much better, and the K-3, DA*300 and 1.4 TC are remarkably good. There is a location that I visit frequently and often see wildlife, but the light and distances are difficult. I have gotten good shots previously, but very few. Somehow with what I have in my hand I can get those shots now. What has changed? Not sure. When I shoot in those situations and compare it to what I experienced with the K-5 I get the impression that some engineer in Japan has a spot just like this and is designing what he needs to get the shots he wants. I know that many are not seeing their needs filled, but I am. And they have gotten my cash as a result.

Is there something else on the market better? I don't know, maybe. The other day I had this on a tripod wading through wet grass taller than me. I got soaking wet. Everything just works for me in those situations.

Yes, the IR remote can start/stop the video recording. The wired remote too.
Having the remote start and stop feature enables me to run several cameras from a single location. When I need greater distances, I use the Cactus V5.

Yep. The K3 is definitely a "Pentax".

[Metricman1]

Sorry folks if it seems a bit immature, but I am tired of the dissonance and being reminded who my/our new master is.

I tried for a few weeks, to get used to it, but I can't.



I used a sticker in case I ever want to undo it.

I am going to try and print Pentax on the little stickers, but for now, black is good enough.

I know, I know. I should be more "grown up" but I am a die hard Pentaxian.

I learned on a Honeywell Pentax. Owned several Asahi Pentax offerings. My first digital slr was a Hoya Pentax and my K3's are Ricoh Pentax. I also owned several Ricoh slr's and was happy with them. I think the important thing for all of us to keep in mind is that through the decades someone has cared enough to keep Pentax alive. It's your K3. You purchased it and not one of the others which is truly what matters. I'm enjoying this thread because it is a discussion about a name and not the quality of Pentax. It means Pentax is alive. Our opinions and grumblings about a name badge just demonstrates a part of what makes us Pentaxians. WE ARE Pentax because we choose not to follow the rest. Sorry Canon and Nikon, WE are not for sale.

[Prakticant]

While Pentax K-5 IIs box design brought a touch of a luxury to my home, Ricoh K-3 box looks quite cheap

-----

Few of many more boxes that will find new owner

[jbinpg]

I don't shoot with the box.

[stevebrot]

While Pentax K-5 IIs box design brought a touch of a luxury to my home, Ricoh K-3 box looks quite cheap

-----

Truly? The box my K-3 came in is similar in appearance to the box (early 2007) my K10D came in. Did you buy your K-3 gray market?


Steve

[LaurenOE]

It looks like Ricoh fixed the K3II...although I will hold my breath until it hits the stores.
Nice touch.