[nivek535]

hey.. so i've done a lot of research on the k-5...
but i still can't seem to find some answers to some of my questions.
1. how does the k-5 compare to k3 kx k5 ii for film making. (short stories/movies like on youtube)
2. is it safe to assume there's no difference in 24fps/25fps VISUALLY? how about 30fps?
3. would there be a better option for a beginner/uni student (in terms of price and cost efficiency)?
4. what are some important specs for filmmaking (not daily-life-videos, but short movies) to watch out for when buying a dslr? sensor size (again, i'd assume 0.1mm won't make a difference visually..)? color depth (1.0 bit makes no difference either?) lower noise at iso?
5. what is ISO boost?

Thanks for any response in advance
-a newbie

[Adam]

hey.. so i've done a lot of research on the k-5...
but i still can't seem to find some answers to some of my questions.
1. how does the k-5 compare to k3 kx k5 ii for film making. (short stories/movies like on youtube)
2. is it safe to assume there's no difference in 24fps/25fps VISUALLY? how about 30fps?
3. would there be a better option for a beginner/uni student (in terms of price and cost efficiency)?
4. what are some important specs for filmmaking (not daily-life-videos, but short movies) to watch out for when buying a dslr? sensor size (again, i'd assume 0.1mm won't make a difference visually..)? color depth (1.0 bit makes no difference either?) lower noise at iso?
5. what is ISO boost?

Thanks for any response in advance
-a newbie

The K-5 is a bit crippled for video making, since it doesn't give you any manual controls. The video quality is decent, but the .AVI file format can be difficulty to work with and without conversion, many applications won't be able to open those files.

If you can forgo the external mic input, then the K-50/K-500 would probably be the better choice as it offers manual controls and the H.264 format. The K-3 is even better (but 2-3x as expensive), since it has a external mic input & headphone jack, and also a better audio sampling rate.

I'm just brushing the surface here, as lots of factors determine whether or not a camera is good for video. Many HDSLRs have issues with video quality or artifacts, so I'd recommend that you read some reviews before buying. If you're serious about video, you might want to get a DSLR camera with raw video output (like the D800) or a dedicated camcorder.

[nivek535]

The K-5 is a bit crippled for video making, since it doesn't give you any manual controls. The video quality is decent, but the .AVI file format can be difficulty to work with and without conversion, many applications won't be able to open those files.

If you can forgo the external mic input, then the K-50/K-500 would probably be the better choice as it offers manual controls and the H.264 format. The K-3 is even better (but 2-3x as expensive), since it has a external mic input & headphone jack, and also a better audio sampling rate.

I'm just brushing the surface here, as lots of factors determine whether or not a camera is good for video. Many HDSLRs have issues with video quality or artifacts, so I'd recommend that you read some reviews before buying. If you're serious about video, you might want to get a DSLR camera with raw video output (like the D800) or a dedicated camcorder.

whoa, what a quick response. thanks for that first.
Hope you don't mind answering a few more questions:
1. AVI format? can I work that with premiere pro/after effects?
2. (side question) when someone says record at flat settings (contrast lowest, saturation lowest etc) do they mean -2 or 0? (ie. settings allow -2 -1 0 +1 +2, 0 or -2?)
3. with regards to no manual control, is autoexposure lock not sufficient?
4. what is HDSLR in simpler terms? I did a quick google search, i still cant seem to differentiate between them (Dslr/hdslr)

thanks again

[Adam]

1. I got it Pentax .AVI's work with premiere pro once, after installing some codecs. Premiere elements is a no-go, however. No windows movie maker for quick and dirty videos, either.
3. The camera will be able to maintain exposure, but you can't change the aperture during recording, or set the shutter speed or ISO at all. If the camera gets the exposure wrong, your old option is to try to use exposure compensation which may or may not do the trick, depending on what you're recording.
4. an hdslr is just dslr that can record hd video

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[Steve.Ledger]

It's a trivial matter to transcode the AVI in handbrake (for example).
Changing settings 'during recording' is hardly a deal-breaker, how many people need this anyway?

If you're only wanting short stories/movies like on youtube, are you sure you want to use a dslr at all? What's the reasoning?
And what is your budget?

[zekewhipper]

1. I got it Pentax .AVI's work with premiere pro once, after installing some codecs. Premiere elements is a no-go, however. No windows movie maker for quick and dirty videos, either.
3. The camera will be able to maintain exposure, but you can't change the aperture during recording, or set the shutter speed or ISO at all. If the camera gets the exposure wrong, your old option is to try to use exposure compensation which may or may not do the trick, depending on what you're recording.
4. an hdslr is just dslr that can record hd video

You should at least be able to change the aperture simply by turning the aperture ring (assuming the lens has one).

[cscurrier]

2. (side question) when someone says record at flat settings (contrast lowest, saturation lowest etc) do they mean -2 or 0? (ie. settings allow -2 -1 0 +1 +2, 0 or -2?)

They mean bringing it down to -2, or the lowest possible setting. Many DSLR filmmakers do this to try and achieve the most "cinematic" look in camera, though further color correction in post is still generally needed. This, in my opinion, is of course relative to the style of your video you are trying to produce.

[nivek535]

sorry for the late reply and thanks for the responses !