[PiDicus Rex]

Mmmm, here we go again,... we'll see which Stills-Only-Crowd member is the first to whine to the admins,....

---------- Post added 16-01-17 at 04:00 PM ----------

Of course, focus peaking while recording, flat picture profiles, audio levels, clean HDMI out, and proper sensor based in body stabilization instead of electronic stabilization would make it near perfect (autofocus is of the least concern), but first, good movie quality please!

To begin with, there a three basic options that can improve the quality of video on Any camera.
A good CoDec, minimum compression, and a skilled camera operator.


First, is using a decent CoDec.
And No!, "h.264' should NEVER be referred to as a 'professional' CoDec.

IntraFrame compression CoDecs that use Long-GOP formatting, were created for Content Delivery, not Content Creation.
Using them for Content Creation in consumer grade products (like Point-n-Shoot cameras, which use the same base processors as Professional level equipment, thereby reducung the cost to the manufacturer per unit through sales volumes) has driven the FPGA units and associated encoding methods in to professional level equipment, and in turn directly led to the creation of aftermarket products that recorded the AV, iLink and HDMI outputs to a Professional grade CoDec for content creation - ProRes, DNxHD, HQX, RedCode and CineDNG are prime examples.

Like Mjpeg, the above CoDecs often use Intra-Frame compression, which results in less data loss and easier editing, as it only compresses within the frame, not across a Group-of-Pictures.

Pentax could improve the quality of the vision in every firmware-updateable camera that records video, by simply upping the data rate.
The SD-XC controller used in every camera from K-01 onwards, supports much higher data-rates then the 19mBits per second that video is currently recorded at.
Upping that data rate to 45 to 55 mBits would instantly match of exceed the quality of the video, simply by retaining more detail in each frame.
At 45mBits, Pentax video would be an easy match that of a Canon 7D for the APSc models, and the K-1 would make the Canon 5D2 look like a consumer point-n-shoot toy.

Swap to "All-I-Frame" encoding at around 60mBits, and the h.264 would be about the same quality as Mjpeg at 100mBits, and would be less of a load on the Editing software.

Yes, this would mean people need to buy good quality Fast SD Cards - UHS1 or UHS3 would be my suggestion.
And why wouldn't we be buying them already?


One thing Pentax seems to have always done, is retain nearly all of the Dynamic Range of the sensor in the video footage - Most DSLR manufacturers loose about 2 to 4 stops of range by clipping the vision to IRE standards - Modified 'Log Profiles' retain more detail by squeezing the blacks higher and whites lower, Pentax did it by recording outside the IRE signal range -> -15% to +125%.

That clipping is why the Canon 5D2 has 11 stops range in stills, and 8.5 to 9 in video.
My K-01 has 12.9 in Stills, AND in video.
But then it gets compressed down to 19mBits and a heap of detail is thrown away.


Now, yes, I do know Panasonic, Sony, etc produce top end camera that use a variation of Mpeg4 known as AVCHD (and other acronyms to refer to in-house modified versions of h.264).

Here's the rub. Out in the real world, those onboard files are only used when an External Recorder isn't available.
Anytime there's a need for proper 'Professional Grade' footage, something like a Aja KiPro, Sound Devices PiX, Atomos Shogun, Odyssey 7Q, or BMD Video Assist, is connected to record higher quality FILES.

Not higher quality imagery, but higher quality Files that RETAIN the imagery recorded.

Pentax would be capable of doing the same if the HDMI was fixed.

I did a test quite some time ago that showed what happened to a K-3 when trying to record the output - basically, if you work in a place where you can use 720p60, you're good.
But if you want to record 1080p at all, at 24, 25, or 30 frames per second, You can't.

If the HDMI was fixed so that the frame size and frame rate chosen by the user was present at the HDMI port, and the Muted Profile used when filming, then the K-3, K-1, and 645Z, would all produce video of outstanding quality, easily better then anything from any un-hacked Canon camera, and certainly the equal of Nikons, Sony's and Panasonics.

Fixing the HDMI would therefore mean Pentax would SELL MORE CAMERAS.

This would be good for everyone, as more sales volume means both more profit per product line as the R&D cost is amoritised across great unit sales.
So the cameras could be cheaper to the customer, or at the same end-user price, provide greater ongoing corporate revenue.


So, recording better files onboard by upping the data rate, or using Mjpeg at a high data rate, and enabling the HDMI to output footage to an external recorder, deals with the first two needs - a Good CoDec and Lower Compression.


The third need for good footage from Any camera, a good camera operator, comes with experience.

What about lenses, and sensors and all that?
Well,..... We Already Got That!

Pentax provided it when they Nailed! the Stills side of the cameras development.
All that really needs to happen, is for the Video Firmware to be engineered to the same high standards as the Stills Firmware.

Turning the Sensor Shift back on in Video should be easy - Don't forget, in the K-5, Pentax had Sensor Shift Stabilisation before EVERY other DSLR brand.
Now, nearly a decade later, Sony have it on APSc and FF cameras, Olympus have it, and Panasonic have it in the new GH5.

Pentax has Sensor Shift on APSc and FF, it's just not turned on in Video.

Focus Peaking while recording shouldn't be too hard, neither would Audio Meters be difficult - the LiveView on the LCD already updates with exposure information while recording, so the hardest part of that is done, they just need to tell it what else to draw on the screen.

We've got Mic in and Headphone out.

And that K-1 funky mount for the LCD, makes low-angle and high-angle filming easier.


The basics are all there for Pentax to be the leader in Video, but the stick-in-the-mud 'Stills Only' attitude appears to be what's holding things back.

---

Last edited by PiDicus Rex; 01-15-2017 at 10:14 PM.

[PiDicus Rex]

Now, if anyone from Pentax / Ricoh is reading this, YES, I am still available to be hired as a consultant, guide, and beta tester for Video features.

[btnapa]

I cannot see myself eager to buy another Pentax camera if the movie quality continues to remain at the current quality level, even if autofocus and other features improve, as in the K-70.

@lmp, your concerns ARE VALID. I have had conversations (informal) with Pentax staff for the past four years trying to get them to see the fact that they have to attract new and younger users in order to ensure the brand survives. We (myself included) older folk will not be around much longer. We can stay loyal fans but Pentax needs younger, new generation users (such as yourself) to survive in the long term.

As far as video improvement in Pentax cameras, I am not techy enough to know if it is possible given the current DSLR technology. However, if Sony can do it with their latest A99II camera then I don't see why Pentax cannot do it either.

If I were a betting man, based on my interactions with US based Pentax staff, the sense I get of the company's culture in general, and the time it takes for the company to move to align itself with where the industry is going, I would not bet on Pentax. I know this is going to raise eyebrows and I can already feel the arrows in my back but I have to be honest. After all, I love the brand, I love what it stands and has stood for in the past 40+ years I have known about it. It would hurt me to see it go away. However, I have lived long enough to witness so many multi-billion dollar technology companies that no one ever thought could go out of business, vanish into thin air because they did not adapt (listen).

On behalf of Pentax I want to thank you for being a loyal fan. However, if serious video is going to be your focus, I am sorry to say the action is somewhere else. We can go into this issue much more in depth but I don't think it would be a good use of our time. It is what it is. Pentax has its target audience. From all that I have read and witnessed, video seems to be an afterthought. So you draw your own conclusions. And remember, it is YOUR hard earned money, and you decide how and where to spend it.

[Leoi]

Mmmm, here we go again,... we'll see which Stills-Only-Crowd member is the first to whine to the admins,....

---------- Post added 16-01-17 at 04:00 PM ----------



To begin with, there a three basic options that can improve the quality of video on Any camera.
A good CoDec, minimum compression, and a skilled camera operator.


First, is using a decent CoDec.
And No!, "h.264' should NEVER be referred to as a 'professional' CoDec.

IntraFrame compression CoDecs that use Long-GOP formatting, were created for Content Delivery, not Content Creation.
Using them for Content Creation in consumer grade products (like Point-n-Shoot cameras, which use the same base processors as Professional level equipment, thereby reducung the cost to the manufacturer per unit through sales volumes) has driven the FPGA units and associated encoding methods in to professional level equipment, and in turn directly led to the creation of aftermarket products that recorded the AV, iLink and HDMI outputs to a Professional grade CoDec for content creation - ProRes, DNxHD, HQX, RedCode and CineDNG are prime examples.

Like Mjpeg, the above CoDecs often use Intra-Frame compression, which results in less data loss and easier editing, as it only compresses within the frame, not across a Group-of-Pictures.

Pentax could improve the quality of the vision in every firmware-updateable camera that records video, by simply upping the data rate.
The SD-XC controller used in every camera from K-01 onwards, supports much higher data-rates then the 19mBits per second that video is currently recorded at.
Upping that data rate to 45 to 55 mBits would instantly match of exceed the quality of the video, simply by retaining more detail in each frame.
At 45mBits, Pentax video would be an easy match that of a Canon 7D for the APSc models, and the K-1 would make the Canon 5D2 look like a consumer point-n-shoot toy.

Swap to "All-I-Frame" encoding at around 60mBits, and the h.264 would be about the same quality as Mjpeg at 100mBits, and would be less of a load on the Editing software.

Yes, this would mean people need to buy good quality Fast SD Cards - UHS1 or UHS3 would be my suggestion.
And why wouldn't we be buying them already?


One thing Pentax seems to have always done, is retain nearly all of the Dynamic Range of the sensor in the video footage - Most DSLR manufacturers loose about 2 to 4 stops of range by clipping the vision to IRE standards - Modified 'Log Profiles' retain more detail by squeezing the blacks higher and whites lower, Pentax did it by recording outside the IRE signal range -> -15% to +125%.

That clipping is why the Canon 5D2 has 11 stops range in stills, and 8.5 to 9 in video.
My K-01 has 12.9 in Stills, AND in video.
But then it gets compressed down to 19mBits and a heap of detail is thrown away.


Now, yes, I do know Panasonic, Sony, etc produce top end camera that use a variation of Mpeg4 known as AVCHD (and other acronyms to refer to in-house modified versions of h.264).

Here's the rub. Out in the real world, those onboard files are only used when an External Recorder isn't available.
Anytime there's a need for proper 'Professional Grade' footage, something like a Aja KiPro, Sound Devices PiX, Atomos Shogun, Odyssey 7Q, or BMD Video Assist, is connected to record higher quality FILES.

Not higher quality imagery, but higher quality Files that RETAIN the imagery recorded.

Pentax would be capable of doing the same if the HDMI was fixed.

I did a test quite some time ago that showed what happened to a K-3 when trying to record the output - basically, if you work in a place where you can use 720p60, you're good.
But if you want to record 1080p at all, at 24, 25, or 30 frames per second, You can't.

If the HDMI was fixed so that the frame size and frame rate chosen by the user was present at the HDMI port, and the Muted Profile used when filming, then the K-3, K-1, and 645Z, would all produce video of outstanding quality, easily better then anything from any un-hacked Canon camera, and certainly the equal of Nikons, Sony's and Panasonics.

Fixing the HDMI would therefore mean Pentax would SELL MORE CAMERAS.

This would be good for everyone, as more sales volume means both more profit per product line as the R&D cost is amoritised across great unit sales.
So the cameras could be cheaper to the customer, or at the same end-user price, provide greater ongoing corporate revenue.


So, recording better files onboard by upping the data rate, or using Mjpeg at a high data rate, and enabling the HDMI to output footage to an external recorder, deals with the first two needs - a Good CoDec and Lower Compression.


The third need for good footage from Any camera, a good camera operator, comes with experience.

What about lenses, and sensors and all that?
Well,..... We Already Got That!

Pentax provided it when they Nailed! the Stills side of the cameras development.
All that really needs to happen, is for the Video Firmware to be engineered to the same high standards as the Stills Firmware.

Turning the Sensor Shift back on in Video should be easy - Don't forget, in the K-5, Pentax had Sensor Shift Stabilisation before EVERY other DSLR brand.
Now, nearly a decade later, Sony have it on APSc and FF cameras, Olympus have it, and Panasonic have it in the new GH5.

Pentax has Sensor Shift on APSc and FF, it's just not turned on in Video.

Focus Peaking while recording shouldn't be too hard, neither would Audio Meters be difficult - the LiveView on the LCD already updates with exposure information while recording, so the hardest part of that is done, they just need to tell it what else to draw on the screen.

We've got Mic in and Headphone out.

And that K-1 funky mount for the LCD, makes low-angle and high-angle filming easier.


The basics are all there for Pentax to be the leader in Video, but the stick-in-the-mud 'Stills Only' attitude appears to be what's holding things back.

That's a pretty detailed answer.

And may I add a simpler approach to good video: if Pentax continues to use Sony components, couldn't it take advantage of the new 4k-optimized-no-pixel-binning sensors of the A7r II and the a6300 on the next generation of cameras?

Now, yes, I do know Panasonic, Sony, etc produce top end camera that use a variation of Mpeg4 known as AVCHD (and other acronyms to refer to in-house modified versions of h.264). Here's the rub. Out in the real world, those onboard files are only used when an External Recorder isn't available. Anytime there's a need for proper 'Professional Grade' footage, something like a Aja KiPro, Sound Devices PiX, Atomos Shogun, Odyssey 7Q, or BMD Video Assist, is connected to record higher quality FILES.

I'm not sure if anyone in this thread is even asking for "Professional Grade" HDMI output, though that would be an interesting feature that is already present in some other cameras. Even consumer oriented codecs, like the h.264 on the a6300 XAVC-S format, could offer enough quality to 99% of users when well implemented. Sony, for example, offers 14-stops of video dynamic range on that camera; that is, with a good bitrate and a log color profile.

The GH- and Alpha series have certainly affected Canikon sales, I'm worried on how this may affect Pentax.

[eddie1960]

Had you have researched prior to buying you would have known video is not Pentax's forte. Hence your rant has really has no merit. So next time research more thorough and get what closest meets your need.

Like the others here i don't see any value in this kind of response, the section is suggestions and feedback, and thats what the OP provided. Personally i hardly ever shoot video (and my Fuji system really is no better than my Pentax was) I do however see the need for good quality video. Canon has not only wone over a lot of shooters with theirs but in fact carved a niche in the production industry for film and tv with the DSLRs they have been offering. Panasonic also has done an excellent job. Since many pros need the ability to shoot both unless tehy can afford to rund more than one system the video right now takes cameras like the K1 and K3ii off the list . Personally i think improved Video would have a bigger impact than chasing rarified high end sports level AF , AF has improved dramatically and will continue to do so, video needs a big boost and its almost entirely down to software that can have costs spread over multiple models over a couple of generations starting at the top and working down

---------- Post added 16th Jan 2017 at 13:39 ----------

Mmmm, here we go again,... we'll see which Stills-Only-Crowd member is the first to whine to the admins,....

---------- Post added 16-01-17 at 04:00 PM ----------



To begin with, there a three basic options that can improve the quality of video on Any camera.
A good CoDec, minimum compression, and a skilled camera operator.


First, is using a decent CoDec.
And No!, "h.264' should NEVER be referred to as a 'professional' CoDec.

IntraFrame compression CoDecs that use Long-GOP formatting, were created for Content Delivery, not Content Creation.
Using them for Content Creation in consumer grade products (like Point-n-Shoot cameras, which use the same base processors as Professional level equipment, thereby reducung the cost to the manufacturer per unit through sales volumes) has driven the FPGA units and associated encoding methods in to professional level equipment, and in turn directly led to the creation of aftermarket products that recorded the AV, iLink and HDMI outputs to a Professional grade CoDec for content creation - ProRes, DNxHD, HQX, RedCode and CineDNG are prime examples.

Like Mjpeg, the above CoDecs often use Intra-Frame compression, which results in less data loss and easier editing, as it only compresses within the frame, not across a Group-of-Pictures.

Pentax could improve the quality of the vision in every firmware-updateable camera that records video, by simply upping the data rate.
The SD-XC controller used in every camera from K-01 onwards, supports much higher data-rates then the 19mBits per second that video is currently recorded at.
Upping that data rate to 45 to 55 mBits would instantly match of exceed the quality of the video, simply by retaining more detail in each frame.
At 45mBits, Pentax video would be an easy match that of a Canon 7D for the APSc models, and the K-1 would make the Canon 5D2 look like a consumer point-n-shoot toy.

Swap to "All-I-Frame" encoding at around 60mBits, and the h.264 would be about the same quality as Mjpeg at 100mBits, and would be less of a load on the Editing software.

Yes, this would mean people need to buy good quality Fast SD Cards - UHS1 or UHS3 would be my suggestion.
And why wouldn't we be buying them already?


One thing Pentax seems to have always done, is retain nearly all of the Dynamic Range of the sensor in the video footage - Most DSLR manufacturers loose about 2 to 4 stops of range by clipping the vision to IRE standards - Modified 'Log Profiles' retain more detail by squeezing the blacks higher and whites lower, Pentax did it by recording outside the IRE signal range -> -15% to +125%.

That clipping is why the Canon 5D2 has 11 stops range in stills, and 8.5 to 9 in video.
My K-01 has 12.9 in Stills, AND in video.
But then it gets compressed down to 19mBits and a heap of detail is thrown away.


Now, yes, I do know Panasonic, Sony, etc produce top end camera that use a variation of Mpeg4 known as AVCHD (and other acronyms to refer to in-house modified versions of h.264).

Here's the rub. Out in the real world, those onboard files are only used when an External Recorder isn't available.
Anytime there's a need for proper 'Professional Grade' footage, something like a Aja KiPro, Sound Devices PiX, Atomos Shogun, Odyssey 7Q, or BMD Video Assist, is connected to record higher quality FILES.

Not higher quality imagery, but higher quality Files that RETAIN the imagery recorded.

Pentax would be capable of doing the same if the HDMI was fixed.

I did a test quite some time ago that showed what happened to a K-3 when trying to record the output - basically, if you work in a place where you can use 720p60, you're good.
But if you want to record 1080p at all, at 24, 25, or 30 frames per second, You can't.

If the HDMI was fixed so that the frame size and frame rate chosen by the user was present at the HDMI port, and the Muted Profile used when filming, then the K-3, K-1, and 645Z, would all produce video of outstanding quality, easily better then anything from any un-hacked Canon camera, and certainly the equal of Nikons, Sony's and Panasonics.

Fixing the HDMI would therefore mean Pentax would SELL MORE CAMERAS.

This would be good for everyone, as more sales volume means both more profit per product line as the R&D cost is amoritised across great unit sales.
So the cameras could be cheaper to the customer, or at the same end-user price, provide greater ongoing corporate revenue.


So, recording better files onboard by upping the data rate, or using Mjpeg at a high data rate, and enabling the HDMI to output footage to an external recorder, deals with the first two needs - a Good CoDec and Lower Compression.


The third need for good footage from Any camera, a good camera operator, comes with experience.

What about lenses, and sensors and all that?
Well,..... We Already Got That!

Pentax provided it when they Nailed! the Stills side of the cameras development.
All that really needs to happen, is for the Video Firmware to be engineered to the same high standards as the Stills Firmware.

Turning the Sensor Shift back on in Video should be easy - Don't forget, in the K-5, Pentax had Sensor Shift Stabilisation before EVERY other DSLR brand.
Now, nearly a decade later, Sony have it on APSc and FF cameras, Olympus have it, and Panasonic have it in the new GH5.

Pentax has Sensor Shift on APSc and FF, it's just not turned on in Video.

Focus Peaking while recording shouldn't be too hard, neither would Audio Meters be difficult - the LiveView on the LCD already updates with exposure information while recording, so the hardest part of that is done, they just need to tell it what else to draw on the screen.

We've got Mic in and Headphone out.

And that K-1 funky mount for the LCD, makes low-angle and high-angle filming easier.


The basics are all there for Pentax to be the leader in Video, but the stick-in-the-mud 'Stills Only' attitude appears to be what's holding things back.

very well put, I never really shoot video but would still like to see this in the cameras (the broader the brand appeal the better it is for all of us)

[PiDicus Rex]

I'm not sure if anyone in this thread is even asking for "Professional Grade" HDMI output,

'Clean Feed' HDMI output that complies to the HDMI standards, is 'professional grade' output, be it 8bit, or preferably 10bit.

The main issue with Pentax's implementation of HDMI on all it's DSLR cameras, is that it does not output the same frame rate and frame size as you have selected to record internally.
You may select 1080p25, and you'll get 720p60 after you hit record.

On the K-01 it's even worse = plug a cable and screen, or recorder, in, and the K-01 switches over to playback mode - You cannot record while HDMI is connected.
That's just f[CENSORED]d.

When you do playback footage from the K-01, recorded at 1080p25, the HDMI output is 1080i50. grrrrr.

---------- Post added 20-01-17 at 03:25 AM ----------

very well put, I never really shoot video but would still like to see this in the cameras (the broader the brand appeal the better it is for all of us)

Thank you.

For those of us the primarily shoot video, all Pentax has to do, is listen to the feedback we've been posting for the last half decade or more, which will mean they can make the Video side of the firmware reach the same high standards as the Stills side of the firmware.
Bonus to the Stills crowd, is that these changes will result in more sales, so the brand will continue, and costs per product line will be amortized over more units sold, so make the cameras more profitable.
As you said, these changes can be spread over all the models, which will further amortize the costs.


The main areas to improve....
1) Allow users to choose Sensor Shift OR Off OR 'MovieSR'
2) Up the datarate to at least 50mBits - And/Or allow users to select Mjpeg for Video at 80 to 100mBits
3) Clean Feed HDMI output at the user selected frame size and frame speed.
4) Rewrite focus peaking to keep it displayed during recording.
5) Live Audio Metering.

The arguements made against these functions,... and the replies to them..

"Sensor Shift can be heard on recordings" - Show the user a warning they have to hit 'ok' to accept, then activate Sensor Shift.
"Sensor Shift uses more Battery Power" - Sell us more batteries.
"h.264 is a" - Imma cuts you off there, it's not, let me choose Mjpeg if I prefer it, you've got it in the firmware already for the timelapses.

[Quartermaster James]

It seems to me that I have seen some great videos shot on current Pentax cameras posted in these forums.

[Imp]

It seems to me that I have seen some great videos shot on current Pentax cameras posted in these forums.

Of course you have. Great video can be made from almost any camera, especially in skilled hands. However, this does not mean that Pentax is particularly good at video compared to the competition, and I think is fair to say that you don't know too much about the video aspect of dslrs? If that is indeed the case, I would respectfully suggest that your comment does not apply to this conversation, where those who are interested in video are offering our suggestions for product improvement.

[Quartermaster James]

Of course you have. Great video can be made from almost any camera, especially in skilled hands. However, this does not mean that Pentax is particularly good at video compared to the competition, and I think is fair to say that you don't know too much about the video aspect of dslrs? If that is indeed the case, I would respectfully suggest that your comment does not apply to this conversation, where those who are interested in video are offering our suggestions for product improvement.

Thank you for your considered reply.

[Leoi]

It seems to me that I have seen some great videos shot on current Pentax cameras posted in these forums.

Indeed, I think with a correct PP video should be decent-looking.

Here's an example

You Tube

You Tube

However, even the image quality of this edited video is miles away from, lets say, a sony a6300, in resolution, bitrate, and dynamic range.

[PiDicus Rex]

It seems to me that I have seen some great videos shot on current Pentax cameras posted in these forums.

I have to say, that is more a reflection of the high standard of skill levels shown, then it is about the functionality of the cameras.

---------- Post added 27-01-17 at 10:18 PM ----------

Thank you for your considered reply.

And you are a Gentleman - I would have been, harsher,....

That was a bit rough Imp.

---------- Post added 27-01-17 at 10:23 PM ----------

However, even the image quality of this edited video is miles away from, lets say, a sony a6300, in resolution, bitrate, and dynamic range.

Ahh, but Pan sideways, and a Pentax kills a Sony for Skew performance.

[Imp]

That was a bit rough Imp.

my apologies, you said my point much better... and nicer

[PiDicus Rex]

you said my point much better... and nicer

It's normally the other way around mate

I freely admit, I'm 'abrupt'.