Pentax K-3 Video Discussion

grispie · 11-11-2013, 06:08 AM

Originally posted by TomGarn

When I first tried my K-7 I fell of my seat watching the incredible phantasy of green, red, purple
fillings in all contrast-boarders on the sunny buildings and even the landscape, not talking of the
intense coloured noise in most of the darker parts of the picture. This was a complete No-Go-Codec

and what when you saw the K5? did it have the same issues to you?

TomGarn · 11-11-2013, 06:33 AM

No idea ... I had skipped the K-5 in my mind though.
You tell me about it ?

grispie · 11-11-2013, 06:40 AM

Originally posted by TomGarn

No idea ... I had skipped the K-5 in my mind though.
You tell me about it ?

sorry, I can't :-) But i saw some movies made with it. thought it had a nice film render over it. despite the lack of manual controls, because they are getting cheap i still might get one.

kenyee · 11-11-2013, 08:18 AM

Originally posted by TomGarn

I (of course) had the Pana Lumix GH3 in my mind - one year old - that goes up to 72 Mbit

The GH3 actually does higher actual res video than the 5DmkIII and D800 because it uses all the sensor's pixel's and downsizes it to 1080p. Other sensors sample every N lines.

21 Mbit/sec wouldn't be that bad if it were IBP frames, but I doubt the K-3 is doing that

gambadilegno · 11-11-2013, 08:25 AM

my pentax was, k100 , k20, k7, k5 I was very angry about k7 because only 30p and NO MANUAL SETTING---I was belive , K5 was tons better... nothing..THESAME quality of K7 , ok..this time with 25p , BUT...1920 non so incisive, bad dettail like a normal 720P... a big mountani of MOIRE' and agin ..grrrrrrrrr!!!!! NO MANUAL SETTING....little 3 years LATER , her the k3....!!!
ofcourse every body are afraid.... HOW good are the videos quality MORE of the k7/5 (same quality).... ?!? because, is normal to have MORE quality...and this is the BIG question , because..the risiko is , buy and only later undrstand , the quality video of k3 , are thesame or more bad of the k7/5 !!!
I'v see the MOV video her few post ago....WHER IS the 1920 HD quality????? no details...moire' like 4 years ago...aliasing also...
better wait the next pentax...or change the k5 fot this k3 (x video ofcourse...) is a bad idea ? (money is money...)

TomGarn · 11-11-2013, 11:27 AM

I do share most of your anger - but Pentax has been trying hard to make a turn,
but one could doubt they could ever catch up with the other big brands, after all
this time ... while the others have moved further on ...

+ They did understand the importance of good sound on board very well though.
-- They forgot what they can do better in terms of SR
-- Up to now they have not been shure about a "movable monitor" which is a must
on every videocamera. They again didn't catch up with the train leaving the station.

A new firmware might help, or a hack ... but that russian guy never ever cared for
Pentax and Falk Lumo (Forum Member) who had a good tool to soften the negative
results of the mjpg-codec on the K-7 gave up as well ... and I doubt Pentax will give
energy to their few customers who want their K-3 fixed later on - they never did that
intensely before with firmware ...
It's a sad story if you still pray to our fallen god Pentax. RICOH might take over the
power of some sleepers in Pentax burocracy if they could only regain hot numbers,
sales, hopes, and other good news to make sense and fire for further recovery.

I saw some videos the K-3 did now - not bad - but not in any way great or worth
mentioning - they just arrived at the usual middleground - not reaching a GH2 yet.
So I guess you are right - let's wait for a K-1 ... but this would mean that customers
now could be proud of their K-3 to support the energy for RICOH improvements ...

I feel I have to shut up now, just care about something different, to make helpful
believes and positive energy grow higher so they may progress in the future.
Weeping for Pentax won't help much ...

johnmflores · 11-11-2013, 12:39 PM - **1 Like**

Youtu.be

Some initial observations here:

What Blog is This?: Testing the RICOH PENTAX K-3 HD Video Image Stabilization (AKA Shake Reduction, SR)

grispie · 11-11-2013, 01:52 PM

thks, this is helpful. kinda like what i see.
only nbr 6 on your list of initial impressions causes some concern. it is something i noticed on the K01 as well. too much detail can cause the image to breakdown...
I didn't see any disturbing jello. or maybe i missed it..

falconeye · 11-11-2013, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

Some initial observations here:

Nice, your son wears a Nürburgring shirt. Sweet

Class A · 11-11-2013, 05:30 PM

Originally posted by TomGarn

MJPEG may have more of whatever - but it's just a codec with lots of aliasing bad informations.
When I first tried my K-7 I fell of my seat watching the incredible phantasy of green, red, purple
fillings in all contrast-boarders on the sunny buildings and even the landscape, not talking of the
intense coloured noise in most of the darker parts of the picture. This was a complete No-Go-Codec

I'm not a video expert but it appears to me that you are judging the K-7's sensor (noise in the shadows) and its subsampling approach (colour artefacts) rather than the codec.

Apparently the K-5 uses 63.12MBit/s for 1080/25p so maybe it is even the quality of the codec that allowed you to see all those sensor and subsampling artefacts?

Originally posted by TomGarn

-- Up to now they have not been shure about a "movable monitor" which is a must
on every videocamera. They again didn't catch up with the train leaving the station.

Isn't their FluCard solution even better than an articulated monitor?

If streaming to an external monitor (e.g., smartphone or tablet) works well then I'd say that beats an articulated monitor easily.

fuent104 · 11-11-2013, 06:12 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Class A

If streaming to an external monitor (e.g., smartphone or tablet) works well then I'd say that beats an articulated monitor easily.

I think articulated monitors and wifi are solutions to two different (and perhaps overlapping) problems. Articulated monitors are great for the operator, especially when the camera is placed in a difficult space, e.g. against the wall or on the floor. The wi-fi monitor approach is good for other people who want to see the image, but perhaps not as useful for the operator. Unless he uses a wifi device for operating, which sounds like a really bad idea, unless the wifi works perfectly. I wouldn't trust it while operating, though.

johnmflores · 11-11-2013, 07:10 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by falconeye

Nice, your son wears a Nürburgring shirt. Sweet

Umm...I don't have a son. Although I'd like to ride/drive the Nürburgring someday...

Oh, I figured it out. That's my godson...
http://www.whatblogisthis.com/2012/12/family-candids-with-pentax-k-01.html

TomGarn · 11-11-2013, 07:44 PM

Originally posted by Class A

... it appears to me that you are judging the K-7's sensor (noise in the shadows) and its subsampling approach (colour artefacts) rather than the codec.
Apparently the K-5 uses 63.12MBit/s for 1080/25p so maybe it is even the quality of the codec that allowed you to see all those sensor and subsampling artefacts?

That may be true ... then it must have been a very bad sensor ... (crying and same time laughing smiley)
I have only heard the K-5 is as bad as the K-7 so I didn't even care to look closer anymore... About video
Pentax had a turn-round with the K-3 lately - the first attempt towards a video DSLR worth noticing at all.

But now I am running out of hopes for the K-3. I wanted to train on the K-7, get all the right equipment ...
and then later on eventually skip to K-3 ...

Singing my last sad songs here, I promise, just to end this dream ...

johnmflores · 11-11-2013, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by Class A

Isn't their FluCard solution even better than an articulated monitor?

If streaming to an external monitor (e.g., smartphone or tablet) works well then I'd say that beats an articulated monitor easily.

There's bound to be more latency with the FluCard than a built-in articulated monitor.

osv · 11-11-2013, 09:59 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Dave L

does K-30 allow you to autofocus again while shooting? If not, K-3 is an advance (even if it's slow to re-autofocus).

professional videographers don't typically use autofocus while shooting, because the momentary loss of focus while refocusing is very distracting.

so autofocusing while shooting isn't a desirable feature... you need to learn how to shoot without using it.

without autofocus, how do you keep the subject in focus when zooming and such?

first, you need a parfocal or even a varifocal lens... with a lens like that, say on a cheap camcorder for instance, you zoom all the way into the furthest corner or area that you are shooting, and momentarily hit the autofocus push-to-focus button.

with a real video camera lens, you'll then be able to zoom back wide, and still be in focus for most/all of the zoom range, without using the autofocus functionality.

11-11-2013, 11:27 AM	#426
TomGarn Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Hamburg Posts: 339	I do share most of your anger - but Pentax has been trying hard to make a turn, but one could doubt they could ever catch up with the other big brands, after all this time ... while the others have moved further on ... + They did understand the importance of good sound on board very well though. -- They forgot what they can do better in terms of SR -- Up to now they have not been shure about a "movable monitor" which is a must on every videocamera. They again didn't catch up with the train leaving the station. A new firmware might help, or a hack ... but that russian guy never ever cared for Pentax and Falk Lumo (Forum Member) who had a good tool to soften the negative results of the mjpg-codec on the K-7 gave up as well ... and I doubt Pentax will give energy to their few customers who want their K-3 fixed later on - they never did that intensely before with firmware ... It's a sad story if you still pray to our fallen god Pentax. RICOH might take over the power of some sleepers in Pentax burocracy if they could only regain hot numbers, sales, hopes, and other good news to make sense and fire for further recovery. I saw some videos the K-3 did now - not bad - but not in any way great or worth mentioning - they just arrived at the usual middleground - not reaching a GH2 yet. So I guess you are right - let's wait for a K-1 ... but this would mean that customers now could be proud of their K-3 to support the energy for RICOH improvements ... I feel I have to shut up now, just care about something different, to make helpful believes and positive energy grow higher so they may progress in the future. Weeping for Pentax won't help much ... Last edited by TomGarn; 11-11-2013 at 07:22 PM.

11-11-2013, 07:10 PM - 1 Like	#432
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361 Original Poster	Originally posted by falconeye Nice, your son wears a Nürburgring shirt. Sweet Umm...I don't have a son. Although I'd like to ride/drive the Nürburgring someday... Oh, I figured it out. That's my godson... http://www.whatblogisthis.com/2012/12/family-candids-with-pentax-k-01.html Last edited by johnmflores; 11-11-2013 at 07:17 PM.

11-11-2013, 07:44 PM	#433
TomGarn Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Hamburg Posts: 339	Originally posted by Class A ... it appears to me that you are judging the K-7's sensor (noise in the shadows) and its subsampling approach (colour artefacts) rather than the codec. Apparently the K-5 uses 63.12MBit/s for 1080/25p so maybe it is even the quality of the codec that allowed you to see all those sensor and subsampling artefacts? That may be true ... then it must have been a very bad sensor ... (crying and same time laughing smiley) I have only heard the K-5 is as bad as the K-7 so I didn't even care to look closer anymore... About video Pentax had a turn-round with the K-3 lately - the first attempt towards a video DSLR worth noticing at all. But now I am running out of hopes for the K-3. I wanted to train on the K-7, get all the right equipment ... and then later on eventually skip to K-3 ... Singing my last sad songs here, I promise, just to end this dream ... Last edited by TomGarn; 11-11-2013 at 07:51 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Now that official K-3 specs are released, how good for video?	jake14mw	Video Recording and Processing	20	10-14-2013 12:56 PM
Pentax Optio WG-3 video download challenge	Eric Z.	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	2	09-06-2013 06:33 PM
With HDMI out & 3.5mm stereo mic in the K-01 is better than the K-30 for video	jogiba	Pentax K-01	2	05-22-2012 01:52 PM
Spot one! robertstech.com discussion on K-01	hcc	Pentax K-01	18	02-08-2012 07:22 AM
Short Movie - Robot Warriors + Discussion on DSLR for Video	tiny	Video Recording and Processing	2	06-21-2010 12:29 PM

11-11-2013, 06:08 AM	#421
grispie Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 1,199	Originally posted by TomGarn When I first tried my K-7 I fell of my seat watching the incredible phantasy of green, red, purple fillings in all contrast-boarders on the sunny buildings and even the landscape, not talking of the intense coloured noise in most of the darker parts of the picture. This was a complete No-Go-Codec and what when you saw the K5? did it have the same issues to you?

11-11-2013, 06:33 AM	#422
TomGarn Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Hamburg Posts: 339	No idea ... I had skipped the K-5 in my mind though. You tell me about it ?

11-11-2013, 06:40 AM	#423
grispie Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 1,199	Originally posted by TomGarn No idea ... I had skipped the K-5 in my mind though. You tell me about it ? sorry, I can't :-) But i saw some movies made with it. thought it had a nice film render over it. despite the lack of manual controls, because they are getting cheap i still might get one.

11-11-2013, 08:18 AM	#424
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	Originally posted by TomGarn I (of course) had the Pana Lumix GH3 in my mind - one year old - that goes up to 72 Mbit The GH3 actually does higher actual res video than the 5DmkIII and D800 because it uses all the sensor's pixel's and downsizes it to 1080p. Other sensors sample every N lines. 21 Mbit/sec wouldn't be that bad if it were IBP frames, but I doubt the K-3 is doing that

11-11-2013, 08:25 AM	#425
gambadilegno Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 8	my pentax was, k100 , k20, k7, k5 I was very angry about k7 because only 30p and NO MANUAL SETTING---I was belive , K5 was tons better... nothing..THESAME quality of K7 , ok..this time with 25p , BUT...1920 non so incisive, bad dettail like a normal 720P... a big mountani of MOIRE' and agin ..grrrrrrrrr!!!!! NO MANUAL SETTING....little 3 years LATER , her the k3....!!! ofcourse every body are afraid.... HOW good are the videos quality MORE of the k7/5 (same quality).... ?!? because, is normal to have MORE quality...and this is the BIG question , because..the risiko is , buy and only later undrstand , the quality video of k3 , are thesame or more bad of the k7/5 !!! I'v see the MOV video her few post ago....WHER IS the 1920 HD quality????? no details...moire' like 4 years ago...aliasing also... better wait the next pentax...or change the k5 fot this k3 (x video ofcourse...) is a bad idea ? (money is money...)

11-11-2013, 01:52 PM	#428
grispie Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 1,199	thks, this is helpful. kinda like what i see. only nbr 6 on your list of initial impressions causes some concern. it is something i noticed on the K01 as well. too much detail can cause the image to breakdown... I didn't see any disturbing jello. or maybe i missed it..

11-11-2013, 04:56 PM	#429
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by johnmflores Some initial observations here: Nice, your son wears a Nürburgring shirt. Sweet

11-11-2013, 05:30 PM	#430
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by TomGarn MJPEG may have more of whatever - but it's just a codec with lots of aliasing bad informations. When I first tried my K-7 I fell of my seat watching the incredible phantasy of green, red, purple fillings in all contrast-boarders on the sunny buildings and even the landscape, not talking of the intense coloured noise in most of the darker parts of the picture. This was a complete No-Go-Codec I'm not a video expert but it appears to me that you are judging the K-7's sensor (noise in the shadows) and its subsampling approach (colour artefacts) rather than the codec. Apparently the K-5 uses 63.12MBit/s for 1080/25p so maybe it is even the quality of the codec that allowed you to see all those sensor and subsampling artefacts? Originally posted by TomGarn -- Up to now they have not been shure about a "movable monitor" which is a must on every videocamera. They again didn't catch up with the train leaving the station. Isn't their FluCard solution even better than an articulated monitor? If streaming to an external monitor (e.g., smartphone or tablet) works well then I'd say that beats an articulated monitor easily.

11-11-2013, 06:12 PM - 1 Like	#431
fuent104 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,356	Originally posted by Class A If streaming to an external monitor (e.g., smartphone or tablet) works well then I'd say that beats an articulated monitor easily. I think articulated monitors and wifi are solutions to two different (and perhaps overlapping) problems. Articulated monitors are great for the operator, especially when the camera is placed in a difficult space, e.g. against the wall or on the floor. The wi-fi monitor approach is good for other people who want to see the image, but perhaps not as useful for the operator. Unless he uses a wifi device for operating, which sounds like a really bad idea, unless the wifi works perfectly. I wouldn't trust it while operating, though.

11-11-2013, 07:57 PM	#434
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361 Original Poster	Originally posted by Class A Isn't their FluCard solution even better than an articulated monitor? If streaming to an external monitor (e.g., smartphone or tablet) works well then I'd say that beats an articulated monitor easily. There's bound to be more latency with the FluCard than a built-in articulated monitor.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-11-2013, 09:59 PM - 1 Like	#435
osv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: So Cal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,080	Originally posted by Dave L does K-30 allow you to autofocus again while shooting? If not, K-3 is an advance (even if it's slow to re-autofocus). professional videographers don't typically use autofocus while shooting, because the momentary loss of focus while refocusing is very distracting. so autofocusing while shooting isn't a desirable feature... you need to learn how to shoot without using it. without autofocus, how do you keep the subject in focus when zooming and such? first, you need a parfocal or even a varifocal lens... with a lens like that, say on a cheap camcorder for instance, you zoom all the way into the furthest corner or area that you are shooting, and momentarily hit the autofocus push-to-focus button. with a real video camera lens, you'll then be able to zoom back wide, and still be in focus for most/all of the zoom range, without using the autofocus functionality.