Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-11-2016, 01:33 PM   #16
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
I think the main reason is because it is the next "thing" and a way for one camera model to stand out over other camera models. It already takes a lot of processing power to edit HD video. I'm not sure about how many consumers really would sit down at their computer to edit 4K video.

On the other hand, if you have a sensor that is capable of implementing it, it is relatively minimal cost for Pentax (or whoever) to enable it on their camera. It really bothers me to hear folks who are bothered that they are paying for a feature that they don't use. The reality is that all CMOS sensors can do video and if you disable it, you probably sell fewer cameras and the price actually goes up. There is no particular benefit to leaving video off, as far as I can tell. I seldom use it, but it doesn't bother me that it is there.

QuoteOriginally posted by jimr-pdx Quote
Because it sells TVs and monitors, for one. Good for the economy!
Its one real advantage is that each frame is an 8Mpx image that can be extracted and processed as a still. That's enough for a decent enlargement, so it's a 30fps 'burst mode' at that lower resolution. I don't use burst mode hardly at all, so that doesn't sell me on it, but I can imagine doing an occasional extract from video. Not often though.
I have always wondered about this. Does the camera really store 25 or 30 8 megapixel frames or, does it actually store some sort of analysis of the changes from frame to frame that then can be played back as video?

I ask, because my experience with most video is that the while the resolution may be 8 megapixels, the individual frames have no where near the quality I would have had with, say the K10 and the dynamic range is a ton less than with any modern APS-C camera. Beyond that, I can't imagine wading through a minute or two of 30fps footage to find to snaps I wanted.

10-11-2016, 03:07 PM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Fries's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Gauw
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,582
At at my workplace (a newsstation) grabbing a frame from HD material is only done as a last resort when there is no decent photo available. The quality of the material does not only suffer from the fact that the resolution of the HD material is subpar but video is typically shot at low shutter speeds (double the framerate) to achieve the fluid look that video needs with some exceptions. That also impacts the quality of 4k material or even 8k material. If movement isn't captured with a reasonable shutter speed the results are rather predictable if you want to use a single frame as a photo.
10-11-2016, 06:25 PM   #18
Pentaxian
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: now 1 hour north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,897
I certainly recall the disappointment of the 1990s when 'digital camcorders' could shoot stills to an SD card.
Thank goodness I did not fall for that completely, and still took along my Pentax Program+ as those 'photos' were AWFUL

Apparently the 4k cameras do far better work -- but you still need to have a shutter speed that is consistent with 30FPS and focal length, if you want anything approaching a decent result.

Gordon (cameralabs/petapixel) shows some of its better moments at http://petapixel.com/2014/10/29/review-panasonic-lumix-lx100s-4k-photo-mode/
10-11-2016, 08:33 PM   #19
npc
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 313
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I

I have always wondered about this. Does the camera really store 25 or 30 8 megapixel frames or, does it actually store some sort of analysis of the changes from frame to frame that then can be played back as video?
This depends on the codec ... MJPEG for example basically just stores a jpeg for each frame. Lossy compression can be much stronger than what the camera would apply for stills so if you pull a frame out of the video - it's probably going to be worse quality than OOC JPEG. More advanced codecs analyze/predict changes and not just from frame to frame but can use a buffer of several frames, etc. There are raw video formats as well...

10-12-2016, 02:25 AM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
QuoteOriginally posted by npc Quote
This depends on the codec ... MJPEG for example basically just stores a jpeg for each frame. Lossy compression can be much stronger than what the camera would apply for stills so if you pull a frame out of the video - it's probably going to be worse quality than OOC JPEG. More advanced codecs analyze/predict changes and not just from frame to frame but can use a buffer of several frames, etc. There are raw video formats as well...
I think a lot of what I see is what Fries was talking about. Typically you would use a shutter speed with video that is twice your frame rate -- so 1/60 second up to maybe 1/120 second if you happen to have a camera capable of 4K and 60 frames per second. If there is much action going on in the scene, then the end result is not going to be great. But yes, I don't think most cameras shoot mjpeg.
10-12-2016, 03:33 AM   #21
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,694
Since a vast majority of displays commonly encountered are only capable of 1920X1080...a small percentage of users have a display capable of handling 4K - though here I sit, in front of a 4K display. A lot of standards not just displayt standards but data transmission, storage and tools to edit video have to change before 4k becomes the mainstream enough to warrant it....and by the time that happens 8K or even 16K will be a thing.
10-12-2016, 04:46 AM   #22
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,574
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
On the other hand, if you have a sensor that is capable of implementing it, it is relatively minimal cost for Pentax (or whoever) to enable it on their camera. It really bothers me to hear folks who are bothered that they are paying for a feature that they don't use. The reality is that all CMOS sensors can do video and if you disable it, you probably sell fewer cameras and the price actually goes up. There is no particular benefit to leaving video off, as far as I can tell. I seldom use it, but it doesn't bother me that it is there.
For me, that's the meat of the conversation. Digital photography is essentially video at its heart so why not include video on still cameras? I believe it will all merge at some point. Heck, isn't that what our smart phones do right now?

10-13-2016, 12:03 AM   #23
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,306
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
For me, that's the meat of the conversation. Digital photography is essentially video at its heart so why not include video on still cameras? I believe it will all merge at some point. Heck, isn't that what our smart phones do right now?
Smartphone can do most of the stuffs so why bother the computer and camera
Smartphone is no longer a phone with a camera but a camera with a phone built in, making call is secondary ! I don't want to get the top of the line model with 4K video, I only need a big screen phone with good response and it came with that, I've no choice and I never use that feature !
Adding 4K capacity also means upgrading the CPU and memory to handle that 'big data', which normally not needed on still, but customer has to pay for that addition like it or not. I understand this is marketing decision, if Pentax releases a high end DSLR without 4K there will be no market, because Pentax is not Leica !

Last edited by lotech; 10-13-2016 at 12:06 AM. Reason: Typo
10-13-2016, 02:58 AM   #24
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
QuoteOriginally posted by lotech Quote
Smartphone can do most of the stuffs so why bother the computer and camera
Smartphone is no longer a phone with a camera but a camera with a phone built in, making call is secondary ! I don't want to get the top of the line model with 4K video, I only need a big screen phone with good response and it came with that, I've no choice and I never use that feature !
Adding 4K capacity also means upgrading the CPU and memory to handle that 'big data', which normally not needed on still, but customer has to pay for that addition like it or not. I understand this is marketing decision, if Pentax releases a high end DSLR without 4K there will be no market, because Pentax is not Leica !
Well, Pentax has to sell in the current market place. The K-1 obviously doesn't include 4K video and neither do any of their other current models. I don't see Pentax running out to put 4K video on their cameras, but let's say that the D7200 sequel and Canon's 80D sequel all have 8 fps, can handle 40 RAW files in the buffer and have 4K video and Pentax comes out with a K3 II sequel that under shoots all of those specs. Well, odds are that Pentax will sell fewer cameras in that situation.

Sometimes it is just about checking boxes and if the sensor can handle it, adding processing speed and buffer memory is beneficial for still shooting as well. I just don't think there is any problem enabling features that are there already and building a highly specified camera -- even if I won't personally use all of the features.
10-13-2016, 03:55 AM   #25
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,694
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
Heck, isn't that what our smart phones do right now?
They're still phones. they aren't anywhere near as good as dedicated video hardware, cameras are likewise ill suited to professional videography..how many DSLRs have dedicated inputs for XLR mics with phantom power?
10-13-2016, 05:24 AM   #26
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,574
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
...cameras are likewise ill suited to professional videography..how many DSLRs have dedicated inputs for XLR mics with phantom power?
Not all video requires XLR inputs with phantom power. We use our DSLR mainly for the b-roll on our stories. It's smaller, cheaper, can use multiple lenses, gives as good or better image quality than our dedicated video cameras, and we can use a smaller tripod which lets us shoot more angles much faster.
10-13-2016, 07:15 AM   #27
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,694
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
We use our DSLR mainly for the b-roll on our stories.
But not on the A-roll because... A DSLR isn't up to the task. Sure you can use and external recorder with XLR inputs with a better mic than what is commonly seen on most DSLRs - but then you have to sync up the audio which can be a pain.
10-13-2016, 01:20 PM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,129
3840x2160....1920x1080, the latter looks good on a full HD display but the former looks better.Its noticeable, and once the former is viewed on a 4K display, its very noticeable.
10-13-2016, 03:59 PM   #29
Veteran Member
emalvick's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Davis, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,642
It seems that including 4k is a no-brainer and marginal cost for the current/next generation cameras given modern technology.

I think the real issue isn't the ability to shoot 4k but the codec used. It's not like they're going to capture RAW images to make video out of. In the few instances I've worked with video in the past, the codec can make quite a difference in terms of editing. The real challenge will be capturing high enough quality while being able to maintain 4k at 30 fps (or whatever fps is desired).

I would suspect that if video really matters enough, users will buy a video camera just because I'd assume there is more option and control that photography equipment can't provide. For instance, being able to smoothly adjust aperture rather than on fixed intervals. I suppose there are lenses for our camera mounts that can handle that or perhaps tweaks. The ergonomics aren't exactly ideal either. I'm personally happy with the typical 1080p video and will be. I still struggle to find a reason to even need Blu-Ray vs. a standard DVD (720p)... I mean, I can see that one is better than the other, but the improvements don't necessarily make the DVD "bad". When watching movies, etc, it's more about the content at which point you forget whether you are watching BR or DVD but rather just enjoying a good movie.
10-13-2016, 04:09 PM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Flyover America
Posts: 4,469
QuoteOriginally posted by emalvick Quote
it's more about the content at which point you forget whether you are watching BR or DVD but rather just enjoying a good movie.
And exactly the same thing can be said about still photography:

- it's more about the content at which point you forget whether you are seeing an image taken with a K5 or a K1 but rather just enjoying a good image.

This tech fetish BS really does get out of hand.

Just as an aside - a freeze frame from the Polish film "Ida" cinematographer Ryszard Lenczewski.
There's more good stills "content" in this film than I would see in a day of viewing Flickr.

Last edited by wildman; 10-18-2016 at 12:32 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
4k, 4k video, canon, capacity, dslr/mirrorless, people, photography, video
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Panasonic shows why 4k video matters jimr-pdx Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 13 03-04-2016 03:06 PM
Is 4K video coming to Q? surfar Pentax Q 35 03-04-2016 07:12 AM
What is 4k video in K1? gmans Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 9 02-17-2016 07:23 PM
What is a Q "Must Have" lens UncleRed Pentax Q 9 01-26-2013 10:37 AM
Is there any known official reason why the K7 Didn't Have Full Manual Video Mode? Christopher M.W.T Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 08-24-2009 06:57 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:36 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top