Originally posted by LaurenOE Awesome review.
Sadly, I was looking to buy 4 or 5 of these cameras for work and this review kinda killed that.
I was *really* hoping the video on the 645z would be better so I could justify the purchases.
I saw in the video they were using Final Cut Pro.
Any idea how the Adobe creative suite might handle the files?
As in Premier CC 2014?
I wish there was someway to salvage this so I could go Pentax.
Any ideas?
The files will be the same in terms of image quality and grade-ability on Premiere and Final Cut. It seems the processor is the weak link here, so it would be great if Pentax added a firmware upgrade for uncompressed HDMI out, like Canon did with the 5D MK III. We'll have to see how committed Pentax is to making the 645 system a viable video platform.
I feel they made a huge oversight by underserving the video crowd, as filmmakers will pay a lot for a unique aesthetic, which the 645Z certainly could provide.
---------- Post added 07-15-14 at 11:46 PM ----------
Originally posted by Thomas The video coverage, if it came at the expense of comparisons to other still cameras, was a bit excessive. I have no idea who would get a 645Z to shoot video, but I feel safe in saying that not many still photographers give a hoot about video.
Tom
The Pentax 645Z is very unique for filmmakers as it gave the opportunity for a larger format look not yet seen digitally, with the closest comparison being 70mm film. As a videographer, I was hugely excited when the camera was announced. I figured if Pentax did it right, they could have the 5D MK II of the medium format world on their hands. The MK II was a bitch to work with, but people put up with it for the unique aesthetic, and it led to the current large sensor video revolution we currently enjoy. Pentax had an opportunity for a similar kind of notoriety. That's why we produced such an extensive video test.
It's a shame the software issues make the camera nearly unusable, even for experts like Nick and Chris from DDG.