[JimC1101]

But I think the majority over previous polls don't really care so a videographer to make a change or improvement really wouldn't matter. If there would be an add to a Pentax camera and the price was not increased I might say "Wow, that is really cool" but again, I take thousands of pictures on a monthly basis but how many videos, not clips that I could use my smartphone on anyways, might I take in a month's time ? 5 maybe 10. And am I going to do a full length movie from my DSLR ? No. That is why most of us don't really care about video.


Also, when I was thinking to myself about this, I thought, when I take a really good pic, I will print it and frame it on my wall at home or in my office. That is the nature of pictures and photography. In my opinion, video is nice but it does not have the staying power of as a photograph since most of us will take a movie of our kids baseball game or vacation but once we see it a couple times, we shelf it.


I guess most of us who have stuck with Pentax really don't care about video and that is why we aren't asking for more video options.

[cxdoo]

Fair enough.. what is the reason?

1. I rarely shoot video.
2. I prefer my Panasonic HDC-SD700 form factor to DSLR when I do.
3. I prefer my DSLR not to have: articulating screen, additional buttons, additional hardware, additional menus I don't use.
4. I don't want anything that's not related to stills photography to impact computing/power envelope of my DSLR. That includes WiFi too.

Look, I fully understand there are people who want video and I understand what reasons they might have. What I'm saying is that NOT wanting video in the same device is not some quirk of brand deluded like hinted here. It's a preference.
I'm also extremely unhappy with my 'smartphone' as a phone and the next one I buy will be just a phone. I have a tablet that does everything else.

[roberrl]

I too have been a long time Pentax user from SP500 onwards. And I understand that not everybody wants video but then we all have devices with many facilities we'll never use; even a humble phone now has to have a quad core processor to be saleable. My frustration with video is that other manufacturers seem able to provide better capability than Pentax without compromising the still capabilities. I would love to be able use all the wonderful Pentax and other K-mount glass I've got to make better videos using, for example; the in body mechanical anti-shake. We seem to be hamstrung by the electronics that Pentax use rather than any inherent design problem ... so come on Ricoh/Pentax and demand a better chip from your suppliers and I'll bet it will have some benefits for the stills users as well.

[PANGU_yien]

Look, I fully understand there are people who want video and I understand what reasons they might have. What I'm saying is that NOT wanting video in the same device is not some quirk of brand deluded like hinted here.

I hope you didn't get that from my posts. I wasn't trying to hint that.

[cxdoo]

I hope you didn't get that from my posts. I wasn't trying to hint that.

I apologize if I sound a bit annoyed but that's because of this remark .

I understand why the Pentax users in here seem to have an aversion to video. It's a Pentax weak spot. And pointing that out is a very bad think. Should be dealt with immediately with a enormous load of negativity, it seems.

Feels unfair to have your preference discarded as fanboism.

[Mikesul]

I apologize if I sound a bit annoyed but that's because of this remark .

Feels unfair to have your preference discarded as fanboism.

Yes, this is something that has always puzzled me about so many board conversations. If I say I like something or that I am not interested in something else that in no way is a comment on what someone else likes. The video fans should continue to discuss what they want but it would be less annoying if they did not impute bad motives or ignorance to the rest of us or to Pentax.

[VisualDarkness]

1. I rarely shoot video.

Why would video capability make the camera worse? I never use bracketing, but my K-5's aren't worse because it's there.

2. I prefer my Panasonic HDC-SD700 form factor to DSLR when I do.

Still, that is no argument for why the camera would be better without video.

3. I prefer my DSLR not to have: articulating screen, additional buttons, additional hardware, additional menus I don't use.

Why wouldn't you want an articulating screen? I don't really need one but can't see any real negatives with one.
Additional buttons? It's one single tiny button extra.
The only additional hardware that really affects the form factor is the headphone jack, the rest is a moot point.
There's a lot of menu options I don't use but it's not troubling me in any way since it's so easy to skip them.

4. I don't want anything that's not related to stills photography to impact computing/power envelope of my DSLR. That includes WiFi too.

How would video capabilities impact processing for stills in any negative way? If anything the development for video has brought increased processing power to the cameras. By your logic my TI-82 would automatically be quicker to do calculations than my smartphone/computer since it's stripped to the bones and we all know that's not true at all.

[Mikesul]

Why would video capability make the camera worse? I never use bracketing, but my K-5's aren't worse because it's there.

Still, that is no argument for why the camera would be better without video.

Why wouldn't you want an articulating screen? I don't really need one but can't see any real negatives with one.
Additional buttons? It's one single tiny button extra.
The only additional hardware that really affects the form factor is the headphone jack, the rest is a moot point.
There's a lot of menu options I don't use but it's not troubling me in any way since it's so easy to skip them.

How would video capabilities impact processing for stills in any negative way? If anything the development for video has brought increased processing power to the cameras. By your logic my TI-82 would automatically be quicker to do calculations than my smartphone/computer 'ssince it's stripped to the bones and we all know that's not true at all.

I really do not care if Pentax adds video features as long as they continue to improve the camera's core features. Some may be concerned that attention to video would divert development resources away from stills.

[normhead]

I have made one video since I bought my K-3. What it reminded me, was that though I've made dozens, and taught it, I don't like it. On one video, by the time you've edited and added the sound etc. you've spent hours, and often it's watched once or twice and filed.But still my video on my K-3, was fine. I still have video cameras in my closet with 12 hour batteries etc. and I don't use them either. I know that Clavius is going to say, well actually he already did, that I'm just saying that to protect the brand, but he's an insulting arrogant nobody who thinks he knows everything about everybody... I can't believe he pre-emptively insulted my opinion before I even posted. He doesn't even need to read your opinion to start spinning in to something it's not. So really no comment needed on that topic.

So long story short. I paid for this camera, there is a cost to the video features and I thorougly resent paying that money for something I find so frivolous. The problem with Pentax video is that I have to pay for it whether I want to or not. If they want to bring out a camera with video capabilities for those who want it, go ahead, they'll find out who cares enough about video. What I want is, I want out of paying for the development of video, the inclusion of video capability on my camera, which is after all mine, not Pentax's, and long story short, I do not want to subsidize the development of Pentax video for the whiners on here who want video, and want it subsidized by every Pentax user. Whatever I paid for the video on my camera, Pentax, disable it, and give me my $25 or whatever it cost back.

You guys crying for video are my enemies. What you want will cost me money for something that can be done better on a dedicated system. And the crazy thing about this, is all these people making up marketing excuses and every other kind of mindless drivel for having video aren't shooting video. And the guy who does has used a K-3 for a video, Benjikan, he's not complaining. Really dudes, you're just way over the top on this one. I don't have Sirius radio in my car either. The last thing I need is a bunch of clowns trying to make it standard in every vehicle along with the attendant costs. I see video proponents in the same light. They want it, they want me to help pay for it. The Pentax video tax. What a selfish attitude.

SO that's my aversion, I have to pay for it. Now what's the reasoning for why I should pay for something i don't want?

[cxdoo]

Why would video capability make the camera worse? I never use bracketing, but my K-5's aren't worse because it's there..


Still, that is no argument for why the camera would be better without video.

Ok, I can do this too. Why not add a full Android? I mean, the LCD is already there, would be fun to play a game or two while idling? How about MP3 player? If we add a GPS, we can also have navigation. What about a 3G module, then you don't need the phone? And imagine having Lightroom on the camera too, then you can do your PP on the spot!
The point being you have to draw a line somewhere. For me, video is beyond the line.

Why wouldn't you want an articulating screen? I don't really need one but can't see any real negatives with one.

I don't want it because I don't have a use for it and I don't want to worry about me (or more realistically my kids) breaking it.

Additional buttons? It's one single tiny button extra.

I don't need one tiny button extra. We talk about preferences here right? It doesn't exactly bother me, but if you ask me, I don't want it.

The only additional hardware that really affects the form factor is the headphone jack, the rest is a moot point.
There's a lot of menu options I don't use but it's not troubling me in any way since it's so easy to skip them.

How would video capabilities impact processing for stills in any negative way? If anything the development for video has brought increased processing power to the cameras. By your logic my TI-82 would automatically be quicker to do calculations than my smartphone/computer since it's stripped to the bones and we all know that's not true at all.

Video requires stream processing and compression. This requires either specialized chips (more realistically) or software. In either case, there is no benefit to me if Pentax does that.
And yes, I'd take TI-82 for basic calculations over the phone/computer, if for the ergonomics only.

[JimC1101]

I really do not care if Pentax adds video features as long as they continue to improve the camera's core features. Some may be concerned that attention to video would divert development resources away from stills.

Look at Canon. They make very good video in their DSLR's but if you look at the DxO numbers, Canon is far from spectacular from their picture output. I was at one time considering a Canon DSLR coming from all Canon P&S and bridge camera and assumed that I would get Canon, until I looked at the noise at high iso and a few other things. To me, Canon is a great video camera but I would not want it as a DSLR picture shooter. I have never been disappointed in choosing Pentax over any other manufacturer.

[kadajawi]

1. I rarely shoot video.
2. I prefer my Panasonic HDC-SD700 form factor to DSLR when I do.
3. I prefer my DSLR not to have: articulating screen, additional buttons, additional hardware, additional menus I don't use.
4. I don't want anything that's not related to stills photography to impact computing/power envelope of my DSLR. That includes WiFi too.

Look, I fully understand there are people who want video and I understand what reasons they might have. What I'm saying is that NOT wanting video in the same device is not some quirk of brand deluded like hinted here. It's a preference.
I'm also extremely unhappy with my 'smartphone' as a phone and the next one I buy will be just a phone. I have a tablet that does everything else.

I prefer the Panasonic XC-900 or so form factor to my K-5. That's a camera that was launched after my K-5 and costs more than it. But the footage it produces? Absolutely useless, ugly junk. Mind you the encoder is great, but the 3 sensors create a horrible image that makes a bloody iPhone look good. And that's not even taking into account the lack of shallow DoF.

You seem to want no progress at all... which should be great for you, just buy second hand cameras.

Just because there are some features of my camera that I won't use it doesn't mean I want them to be taken away for everyone else.

What Pentax could, maybe should do is make video an option in the menu. Like those many options in a long list. It will give the option between no video, basic video and advanced video. Basic and advanced unlook a menu that gives you video capabilities and control over them. There only has to be one button for video on the camera, and that can be reassigned for any other function (like a second Fx button).

The added development costs are easily offset by increased sales (just look at OM-D vs. GH4 or A7S... the latter two sell like hot cakes, the Olympus doesn't despite being just as good if not better for stills). Heck, all my friends who have actually spent money on cameras want them to take stills and video. I recommended them Pentax, and they were open to Pentax, but ultimately rejected the brand thanks to video. These people spend several thousands on camera equipment, and that could have gone to Pentax. If the K-3 had SR one of them might even have bought it.

@Jim: Canon isn't bad at stills because of video. And they don't push video on their DSLRs. It is their own sensor tech that lags behind, perhaps because they were too comfortable with their lead... their cameras just sell.

[JimmyDranox]

Why some people hate video on DSLR? (someone says in this post that the person who put video on DSLR for the first time must be shot)

Why some people hates changes? Why people hates what's different? Why people hates, in general?

I think there are questions with very complex answers. Some can be found by everyone with a little life experience, but those answers would be better kept for yourself. And try not to do the same.

[BrianR]

My aversion to video- there's a time commitment to learning how to do it well that's much larger than my desire to make a video of anything.

I don't really care that it's included, I might even bring myself to use it for something. I imagine if they left it out sales would suffer since it's become a 'must have' and that could result in higher prices or the doom of pentax, which we'd then only be able to document with stills. (kidding about the doom).

[dadipentak]

Why the AVERSION to video?

Dude, I'm 72 and never was technically inclined to begin with--even back in the day when it was about banging rocks together (although--eventually--I did get pretty good at that ;~). It's not that I'm averse to video (as opposed to, say, rock-climbing ) it's just something I don't want to attempt (see also "ballroom dancing".)

Now, I don't know whether you've seen any of my photos but if so, I'm sure you appreciate the challenge I'm facing in terms of still photography--I mean, I rarely use flash because doing it well is really hard! I've barely scratched the surface in terms of what my cameras can do in terms of still photography and now I'm supposed to try video? Seriously?