[lister6520]

That's what I meant. A K mount camera will only ever take K mount lenses (or medium format ones...). A EF mount camera is more flexible. And a mFT mount will take anything. Basically what I wanted to say was that if Pentax gets the firmware right for video use, squeezing the most out of the hardware as possible, giving as many video centric features as they can, it would be great and could draw in people coming from other systems. The only issue is that the K mount is kind of limiting. What if someone has Canon glass, but wants to use it on a K-3?

In what way are the mFT and EF monts more flexible? Does it mean that you can mount lenses of other mounts and still have auto-iris, autofocus and auto exposure? How is this achieved, are there 'intelligent' adapters with all the contacts and a chip to translate the protocol of those third party lenses to the ones used by the ED mount and the micro 4/3?

[PiDicus Rex]

In what way are the mFT and EF monts more flexible?

They're shorter from flange to sensor, so you can get adapter to fit longer mounts lenses to them.

But you need Full Manual lenses or Active Adapters to do it properly - with a cheap mechanical only adapter, you need to use lenses that have a mechanical Iris - such as K and KA lenses - an EF lens has no Iris ring, the Iris is still in the lens, but can only be controlled from the body, so EF on MFT means the Iris is wide open all the time. K on MFT, Iris can be closed.

What if someone has Canon glass, but wants to use it on a K-3?

Then their final product is going to look just like everyone elses, and it won't stand out from the crowd.

My point boils down to this - I think K-Mount lenses are more flexible because they can be used on other cameras with adapter rings.
And if it means we have to own Pentax cameras to use our lenses, I'm okay with that

And, lets not forget, Classic 'Full Frame' lenses designed for film SLR's, are effectively " 4K " lenses, so K on MFT for GH-4 would be interesting, and cost effective.

[kadajawi]

I was thinking along the lines of what if Pentax updated the firmware of the K-3 and turned it into a serious filmmakers tool. Then the mount would be not so ideal.


"Clearly the purist section of the photography industry wants to take us back to the stone age. Video quality has been very low down the list of priorities at Canon and Nikon over the years. And Olympus, and Fuji."
Dear Nikon... » EOSHD.com


Found something interesting, again Nikon related, but these big companies seem quite similar...


"DE: So all of those things really bring its video capabilities very much into the enthusiast category. Do you see enthusiast videographers as being a particular market that would buy the D5300? Was that part of your intent?
TY: Yes, it’s really what we aimed for, although we’re never (at this point) going to decide to launch a purely video camera. You can see our intent from the fact that, for example, in the recording format we only have ‘pro’ and nothing else is really decided. So the focus right now is on the clean HDMI output for use [in professional-level applications]. We’re not thinking of supporting the pro resolution that the Hollywood users would like, though, or the true, professional enthusiasts would like, because that would be making a video camera."
http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/02/14/nikon-qa-head-of-development...wn-as-an-aberr


So they aimed the D5300 at a more professional audience in terms of video... yet they didn't get the usability right. A case of not asking potential customers? Nikon adds a feature video enthusiasts/professionals crave for and has great video quality, but mess up the usability side of it. Pentax adds a feature video enthusiasts/professionals crave for (manual gain + headphone jack) but mess up the usability side of it (though nowhere near as much as Nikon did!). What is wrong at these camera makers? Maybe I am indeed right in saying that these companies don't really get video, and they should ask someone who does, or at least listen to customers.

[PiDicus Rex]

Maybe I am indeed right in saying that these companies don't really get video, and they should ask someone who does, or at least listen to customers.

Da, total agreement, and I'll volunteer to meet the Pentax Engineers to do it!

I was thinking along the lines of what if Pentax updated the firmware of the K-3 and turned it into a serious filmmakers tool. Then the mount would be not so ideal.

The problem then won't be that the mount is longer and the Canikon crowd can't use their glass,... The problem will be, that as they all rush out to spend up on 'the amazing 'new' Pentax that is just the latest, greatest New! Shiney!' that they just have to have to be seen as cutting edge,... ( aka, annoying effing hipsters..)
Well, the problem will be that they will drive up the prices of all the K-mount classic lenses.

[kadajawi]

I would also do it, though I'm not in a position/lack the experience to really tell them what is needed.


To be honest, I think Andrew Reid from EOSHD would be a good starting point, Philip Bloom would be, etc. These people have quite a following, so if they also blog that they have met Pentax reps and talked with them about what is needed, that would also give Pentax some much needed PR.


Classic K-mount lenses are expensive anyway... Canon glass is quite cheap IIRC, cause the glass is obsolete, you can't use it on the newer cameras. But Pentax owners often bought their cameras because they can use old lenses... which drove up cost.


Btw., Olympus is now working on the E-M1 firmware... improving video functionality. They are working on the manual gain part for now, but who knows if they won't also improve the rest over time. Apparently Olympus staff does read EOSHD, so they seem to care. And that is from a company that basically said "we don't want to have good video functionality, if you want video buy Panasonic".


The D5300 does partial pixel binning it seems. And if the D7200 will use the same sensor and processor, but with a more professional oriented user interface and functionality (which I think is safe to assume), then the D7200 could turn out to be pretty damn good.


And another link, this time a test of the Olympus OM-D E-M10 in built image stabilisation. Like the K-3 it has a 3 axis stabiliser, rather than 5 axis used on higher end OM-D models.

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

To be honest that looks pretty good to me. A bit better than my K-5 I'd say. Oh, and... I haven't heard of any drawbacks of using the Olympus IS. Maybe there isn't any, and Pentax... well, I still don't know what they were thinking.

[kenyee]

@kadajawi: I think you're beating a dead horse. It's blindingly obvious that you really should be using an OM-1 or something.
I'm seriously thinking about the GH4K to play with if the body is $1500, but other rumors say it's $2500 :-P

[kadajawi]

@kenyee: I don't want to give up Pentax though. And first and foremost I'm taking photos. Video is merely a hobby. Besides I have Pentax lenses, and I'm happy with my K-5. So for the next couple of years I'll be sticking to it. Besides, the OM-D E-M1 also has massive problems for video. It's like... give me a Olynikotax damn it. D5300 sensor and processor, E-M1 5-axis stabiliser and Pentax UI with some E-M1 features. At least it looks like Nikon and Olympus are waking up, we'll see if Pentax does too. Hopefully they do by the time I want to/have to replace my camera.

[kenyee]

@kadajawi: if you're not doing video professionally, just rent the gear for the times you do. Seems simpler than buying the system for the N times a year you want to use it :-)
Better than buying an entirely new system and then letting it gather dust while you do photography most of the time...
And for video, it's much less about the gear than the rest of the story, lighting, moves, etc. Look at the Apple iOS BTS video to see all the crazy gear directors ended up using to do that "great" video done w/ "only iOS devices". 10K+ gear to get it to look good doesn't really give you that much confidence in it :-P

[kadajawi]

Well, I'm fine with the shots I can pull off with my camera, and I like to be familiar with the gear I use. Even for smaller video shoots I think the K-5 will do just fine (especially since I don't need any rigs). You just have to make sure there is enough light so the ISO doesn't go up (and hot pixels appear). And I think, for some reason, that my 18-55 is a limiting factor. At f3.5 it has a very soft look to it, could be that all the coating has disappeared...


Of course should someone be crazy enough to hire me to shoot a movie, with a budget and stuff, then hell yes I'm going to rent the appropriate gear.


Anyway it's not just about me. For Pentax to be successful in the professional market they need to get video right, IMHO, as professional photographers are more and more required to shoot video too. And probably they won't want to buy 2 sets of gear or always rent if needed (doing an important shoot with gear you have never or only once used before, especially if it's radically different from what you are used to, not a good idea).

[Steve.Ledger]

Yes I have to agree. There's nothing about the K-3 that I need which my K-7 and K-01 won't satisfy me with. But, if it had killer video including the clean HDMI out then I'd be interested. (Also an articulated screen would be good). This is why I haven't spent my savings on a K-3 and honestly, if the K-7 died tomorrow, I'd probably grab a K-5IIs.

[kenyee]

Anyway it's not just about me. For Pentax to be successful in the professional market they need to get video right, IMHO, as professional photographers are more and more required to shoot video too

If you're serious about that market, it's a no brainer at this point...the Panny GH4K kills everything including Canikon's offerings except maybe Canon's C100.
That level of video expertise requires a lot of experience which panasonic had from their videocams. Pentax won't have this. Even Sony/Canon who also have high end videocams can't do as well as Panny.

Sadly, I think Pentax thinks its main competition is Nikon, so if Nikon pushes video more, you'll likely see Pentax respond (e.g., 1080/60p which they will now have to add because Nikon is adding it to their entire lineup).
I'd be more than shocked to see Pentax doing more than Nikon....

[kadajawi]

For me it would be activating the stabiliser... ideally there'd be no stabiliser, sensor shift stabiliser, electronic stabiliser, sensor shift + electronic stabiliser (fast movements are countered by the sensor shift system, including rotation, and the electronic stabiliser balances out slow movements, and is able to recover the sensor shift system from awkward positions). All versions without electronic stabiliser can be with or without crop.
Then bump up the bitrate and offer different quality settings. i.e. Standard which is as it is now, and then quality dependent settings that have a raised limit of say 50-80 Mbps, but otherwise represent say q18, q20, q22 and q24 in x264. So even q24 can bump up to 80 Mbps if really needed. Makes the actual size less predictable, but it would be small where possible, but big where needed.
At that point I personally would be happy already and would consider it.


Clean HDMI out doesn't sound like a huge issue for them to fix, though who knows. Articulated screen is nothing that can be fixed in firmware, obviously, and I kind of doubt we will see this on a rugged camera from Pentax. I think only Panasonic makes cameras that are rugged and have an articulated screen. An external screen for that seems to make more sense. It's bigger, can offer some stuff like focus peaking, might even be able to act as a recorder, the resolution is higher and you're more flexible in positioning it.


dpreview did an interview with Nikon at QP+, and Nikon said that they recognise that professional photographers these days need to do stills and video. Obviously they don't want to give up the professional market, so they will have to focus on that. They also said they have a dedicated video team at Nikon.
CP+ 2014: Nikon Interview - 'our cameras need to evolve': Digital Photography Review


So... Nikon is pushing video. The D5300 has some amazing video quality, including higher bitrates (though not very high, but hey... it's something). Obviously a entirely consumer focused DSLR will not be giving you the controls you'd want as a videographer, but I'm fairly certain that the D7200 will be offering the quality of the D5300, but with better controls. Pentax have caught up with the D7100... but sadly the D7200 is just around the corner. As for 1080/60p... I thought that would be a limitation of the processor. Then again, Nikon uses more or less the same processors as Pentax does, just with a new name (and some more input from Nikon).


The reason why Canon isn't doing great stills cameras for video below their Cinema EOS line is probably because that line is very lucrative. Sony... I'm sure they could do great, and maybe their APS-C/FF flagships will be, but they too have more professional video cameras they want to protect.

[Steve.Ledger]

Articulated screen is nothing that can be fixed in firmware, obviously, and I kind of doubt we will see this on a rugged camera from Pentax. I think only Panasonic makes cameras that are rugged and have an articulated screen.

Except they have just added a flip out screen to the Pentax 645D II

[kadajawi]

Except they have just added a flip out screen to the Pentax 645D II

Oh. The 645D II is so far out of my price bracket that I don't care much about it. But is it rugged? I mean, it's more of a studio camera, isn't it? For that it totally makes sense, but getting seals, at least a bit of impact protection, and putting it into a body as small as possible...

To be honest I would prefer a flip out screen too.

[Steve.Ledger]

Oh. The 645D II is so far out of my price bracket that I don't care much about it.

Agree.. But at least it shows they are aware of the usefulness of such screens, they seem to be appearing on lots of premium and pro level bodies these days.
Make perfect sense to me, kind of surprised when I think about it that the K-3 didn't have it