[ScooterMaxi Jim]

Well it sounds like you are smitten with the K-3 and no rational arguments are going to sway you LOL! So go ahead and enjoy the K-3, but remember that the camera is the smallest part of the equation. Best of luck with the rest!

Languishing, I am sure you can make it work if you are determined, but you should be aware that Flores is a very talented pro (especially on the stills end of things) and I think he's giving you the right advice up at the top.

Really, if you plan to work in film professionally none of the combo stills-based cameras are great. Think long and hard about separate tools for the differing tasks, and recognize that a few years down the road it is likely that most paid jobs will be specifying 4k video. Of greatest importance is your investment in lenses which are long term, as opposed to the body, processor and sensor technologies that move on fairly rapidly.

You are just starting out, and you shouldn't make these decisions on the assumption that you won't be behind the camera when you get into the business. It's a good idea to understand and work in all aspects of the business - especially starting out.

[grispie]

Of greatest importance is your investment in lenses

kind of why i came up with the idea of buying a cheap K01 for now combined with 28/50mm prime. you can learn so much with this regarding video and use the saved cash on e.g. audio solution, maybe fun stuff like a small slider... & the decision on brand investments is pushed forward a bit. Over time, the price of a k3 will go down...
But then again, he points out that he also wants more in photography. Seen TCS review? K3 is great cam for combining photo & video.
I understand very well his heart says yes! Mine says: there is my K20D replacement! :-)
I agree with Jim: be careful with investing in lenses. buy only what you need to begin with & select them carefully

Now i'm off, have to order a k3

[languishing]

Languishing, I am sure you can make it work if you are determined, but you should be aware that Flores is a very talented pro (especially on the stills end of things) and I think he's giving you the right advice up at the top.

Really, if you plan to work in film professionally none of the combo stills-based cameras are great. Think long and hard about separate tools for the differing tasks, and recognize that a few years down the road it is likely that most paid jobs will be specifying 4k video. Of greatest importance is your investment in lenses which are long term, as opposed to the body, processor and sensor technologies that move on fairly rapidly.

You are just starting out, and you shouldn't make these decisions on the assumption that you won't be behind the camera when you get into the business. It's a good idea to understand and work in all aspects of the business - especially starting out.

I've found out that many students to the university im applying to usually use DSLRs for their work.. but when it comes down to the professional cameras for certain videos that they make they will be using the cameras provided by the school. So, this camera is basically just for my own personal use as well as my portfolio, etc.

[TomGarn]

I had hopes for the K-3 to make a come back in Video - Pentax had failed for the last 4 years.
They have lost so much time ... or forgot it, spit on it, or simply didn't manage to start competing
with other brands: Canon, Panasonic, Olympus and Sony.

Professional Video is expensive ... so I still hoped I could some day use my four lenses by Pentax
in one of their future Video-DSLRs- That would make it affordable to do small dirty videos for the
web and not for broadcast purposes .... It almost looked as if the K-3 could be a winner ...

Still for photo-needs I got me a K-7 withsome terribly oldfashioned amateurish manual video-controle
apocalypse on board - full of noise and moire all over every contrast shape and border - but I used it
for training purposes to find good ways do make it handy and easy to work with - finding ways to have
easy and minimum-weight: grip sound and light, etc.... to be ready one day for the ultimate Pentax Body
to solve all past problems about technical and management faults ...

The K-7 had a wonderful Video Shake Reduction - that was maybe the only real big thing at all then.
I was able to shoot with a manual 200mm tele freehanded, leaning against the wall or from the windowsill.
Doing documentaries quickly you mostly can't use a tripod - so DSLR-shaking has to be smoothened the
most possible way. The K-7 did that very successfully.

Well ... the K-3 now seems to have a poor and shockingly disgusting SR: (Watch starting at 07:42)

You Tube

You Tube

---

Last edited by TomGarn; 11-06-2013 at 05:10 PM.

[languishing]

I had hopes for the K-3 to make a come back in Video - Pentax had failed for the last 4 years.
They have lost so much time ... or forgot it, spit on it, or simply didn't manage to start competing
with other brands: Canon, Panasonic, Olympus and Sony.

Professional Video is expensive ... so I still hoped I could some day use my four lenses by Pentax
in one of their future Video-DSLRs- That would make it affordable to do small dirty videos for the
web and not for broadcast purposes .... It almost looked as if the K-3 could be a winner ...

Still for photo-needs I got me a K-7 withsome terribly oldfashioned amateurish manual video-controle
apocalypse on board - full of noise and moire all over every contrast shape and border - but I used it
for training purposes to find good ways do make it handy and easy to work with - finding ways to have
easy and minimum-weight: grip sound and light, etc.... to be ready one day for the ultimate Pentax Body
to solve all past problems about technical and management faults ...

The K-7 had a wonderful Video Shake Reduction - that was maybe the only real big thing at all then.
I was able to shoot with a manual 200mm tele freehanded, leaning against the wall or from the windowsill.
Doing documentaries quickly you mostly can't use a tripod - so DSLR-shaking has to be smoothened the
most possible way. The K-7 did that very successfully.

Well ... the K-3 now seems to have a poor and shockingly disgusting SR: (Watch starting at 07:42)
Pentax K-3 Hands-On Field Test - YouTub

I've noticed that aswell...

I was thinking about buying the black magic pocket cine camera.. but the white spots when there's light fixtures is a con - aswell as the short battery life span & sd cards I have to buy when space runs out ugh.. the k-x looked perfect for video..imo

[languishing]

Also avoid the terrible shake-reduction? cause in k-x it seemed normal doing handheld footage like in my first video example.

[johnmflores]

A monopod is your friend.

[Ayoh]

Thats a cumbersome workaround and should not be necessary in the first place. It also does not help with the permanent 4/3rds sized image sensor crop in video mode.

Unless Pentax fix the k-3 video mode the logical choice it to use a different brand if you are serious about video.

A monopod is your friend.

[TomGarn]

I never ever used a monopod - and I don't want to run around with to much ballast.
A tripod is OK for certain scenes ... if really needed.
But a handheld DSLR needs some good SR, because manual controles and pushing
buttons spread all over ... distracts more than on most other camerabodies. Right ?
I do call that "micro-shakings"

I don't like Canons so much - but that company 60D I'm running around with - I mostly
use a Tamron 17-50 / 2,8 (VC) that manages at least half of the SR space a K-7 can
manage so greatly

... if you know what I want to say ... I'll try again:

It feels as if the safe area of the K-7 SR is double as vast as in that Tamron VC glass
(Vibration Compensation) ... but that Tamron VC at least works very well and I feel it is
better than any bullshit movie SR ....

Why did they do this again to us ?

[johnmflores]

Unless Pentax fix the k-3 video mode the logical choice it to use a different brand if you are serious about video.

If you are serious about video, you don't handhold your shots unless you are going after the cinema verité look.

[Ayoh]

So in the history of filmmaking no one has or ever wanted to hand hold a camera to get the shot? Got it. Let's just keep being apologetic on behalf of Pentax and rationalize away their poor design choices (especially ones which could be fixed in firmware with some minimal effort under customer pressure).

If you are serious about video, you don't handhold your shots unless you are going after the cinema verité look.

[TomGarn]

hahaha ... you got that most clear enough, Ayoh ... ;-)

Btw:
Tripods (maybe monopods) you need to use for quiete interviews, calm panning and zooming across the landscape,
details in macro, etc. But if you run around as a ENG-cameraman you mostly do it from your shoulder, which can be
shaky also, but OK ... if you are relaxed and clean enough on that day.

All handheld camcorders can be a drag in longer interviews. You will find relief in shoulder rigs, a monopod or - a tripod
of course. And whenever you are out of wide angle this is a must anyway.

[johnmflores]

So in the history of filmmaking no one has or ever wanted to hand hold a camera to get the shot? Got it. Let's just keep being apologetic on behalf of Pentax and rationalize away their poor design choices (especially ones which could be fixed in firmware with some minimal effort under customer pressure).

Watch a hundred hours of television/film and tell me how much of it is shot handheld. You'd be lucky to see 15 minutes of handheld footage in that time.

hahaha ... you got that most clear enough, Ayoh ... ;-)

Btw:
Tripods (maybe monopods) you need to use for quiete interviews, calm panning and zooming across the landscape,
details in macro, etc. But if you run around as a ENG-cameraman you mostly do it from your shoulder, which can be
shaky also, but OK ... if you are relaxed and clean enough on that day.

All handheld camcorders can be a drag in longer interviews. You will find relief in shoulder rigs, a monopod or - a tripod
of course. And whenever you are out of wide angle this is a must anyway.

ENG is one situation where good shake reduction is a real help, but that's also a situation where dSLRs in general aren't really the right tool for the job due to poor AF, lack of built-in ND filters, overheating, lack of sophisticated audio controls/monitoring, etc... TomGarn, do you shoot a lot of shoulder-mount/ENG type stuff? Is that why you are disappointed in the lack of mechanical SR?

[Ayoh]

Look, you don't seem to understand the issue. Regardless of whether you do not use SR in your shots because you think one should only use monopods and tripods (or what they do on TV) is not the point. The new camera has gone backwards in terms on SR functionality compared to an old model. The k5 already had good video image quality and effective SR. The new k3 has useless SR and a permanent crop in video mode reducing angle of view. This is stupid. Even if you use a tripod or whatever to do things the "serious" way you still lose functionality for no good reason. Why deny basic logic like a brand evangelist and rationalize away needless limitations? It is not for your own good.

It is better for the company if customers are critical and demanding, so that they are under pressure to make better products.

Watch a hundred hours of television/film and tell me how much of it is shot handheld. You'd be lucky to see 15 minutes of handheld footage in that time.



ENG is one situation where good shake reduction is a real help, but that's also a situation where dSLRs in general aren't really the right tool for the job due to poor AF, lack of built-in ND filters, overheating, lack of sophisticated audio controls/monitoring, etc...

[johnmflores]

Look, you don't seem to understand the issue. Regardless of whether you do not use SR in your shots because you think one should only use monopods and tripods (or what they do on TV) is not the point. The new camera has gone backwards in terms on SR functionality compared to an old model. The k5 already had good video image quality and effective SR. The new k3 has useless SR and a permanent crop in video mode reducing angle of view. This is stupid. Even if you use a tripod or whatever to do things the "serious" way you still lose functionality for no good reason. Why deny basic logic like a brand evangelist and rationalize away needless limitations? It is not for your own good.

It is better for the company if customers are critical and demanding, so that they are under pressure to make better products.

So what kinds of videos do you shoot where the lack of mechanical SR and cropped image will adversely affect the final result?