[mikeSF]

OP is coming off overly defensive, IMO. I believe I read the nearly identical other thread, and with the exception of a few who are in the anti-video camp, the majority of the non-video users seemed to be in the "don't use and don't care" category, myself included.
Without going back to find that thread, I believe I may have commented that i've never used the video, but understand that companies offer it to remain competitive.

[stevebrot]

35mm film cameras take video for at most 12 minutes.

That I have to see. To the best of my knowledge, no 35mm film camera (still or motion picture) has ever been capable of video.


Steve

---------- Post added 11-12-14 at 11:34 AM ----------

If what you want to do is make movies, go do it, we have a whole section dedicated to it.

Norm, kadajawi is very active on the video section of this forum where he/she regularly shares his/her opinion that Pentax is brain dead for not providing a reasonably-priced APS-C camera with mechanical ISIS IBIS having support for the union of all the video bells and whistles found across all brands. There is only one song, but it is well-rehearsed.


Steve

---------- Post added 11-12-14 at 11:48 AM ----------

Without going back to find that thread, I believe I may have commented that i've never used the video, but understand that companies offer it to remain competitive.

Well put, Mike. It is a value-added proposition for many cameras. Unfortunately, most casual users get better results from their smart phones or a consumer-grade video camera than from the much more cumbersome video-capable dSLR.

As kadajawi expressed, there is an intriguing niche for a moderately-priced video-capable APS-C dSLR that supports effective ISIS, a full video feature set, and compatibility with a wide range of inexpensive faster lenses. Emphasis is placed on the product being "moderately-priced".


Steve

[Tanzer]

Just taking a random sample of the posts in this thread, I think the OP's hypothesis that there exists an aversion to video among Pentaxians, is valid.

I get that some folks don't care about it, and that's fine. But some folks are suggesting that Pentax would owe them reparations if they improve video capabilities? Feel free to jump ship -- the Df is still available, at the moment.

I would like to see video improved, because Pentax pretty much sucks for casual video (meaning anything not on a tripod). Maybe I am a little resentful that I get better results with my cheap camcorder.

Moreover, after weighing all my options, I have decided my next, most economical step is going to be ... yet another camcorder. A rather expensive one.

The truth is, if Pentax offered me video capabilities that are equivalent to today's 5Diii, GH4, or A7s, that probably still wouldn't prevent me from going the expensive camcorder route. Those cameras are still pretty impractical without a bunch of rigging. I'm sure I will get some flames from the DSLR video fans here, but you have to admit those cameras still have lots of room for improvement, as evidenced by how viciously they are one-upping each other lately.

I'm sure Pentax will have better video capabilities in the future, as the technology settles a bit, and they don't have to invest much money or take many risks. I'm not adverse to them making improvements today, but at the same time, I probably wouldn't settle until the state of the art, as a whole, improves.

[stevebrot]

But some folks are suggesting that Pentax would owe them reparations if they improve video capabilities?

No, quite the opposite. There are some folk who feel that Pentax should owe them reparations if Pentax DOES NOT improve video.

The truth is, if Pentax offered me video capabilities that are equivalent to today's 5Diii, GH4, or A7s, that probably still wouldn't prevent me from going the expensive camcorder route. Those cameras are still pretty impractical without a bunch of rigging.

I love it
You nailed it right on the head. You don't have to wade very deep into the various dSLR video tutorial sites before you encounter a ton of complaints and cautions about the limitations of video-enabled dSLRs. The plus points are usually summarized in terms of $$. An APS-C dSLR with ISIS IBIS and video that makes up for the deficiencies of the genre at a sub-$1200 price point might very well be a game changer. One wonders why nobody has done it. After all, it is easy.


Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 11-12-2014 at 08:14 PM.

[gmans]

35mm film cameras take video for at most 12 minutes. And, a APS-C sensor has the same size as 35mm film, and uses similar lenses. You can not do that with a proper video cam, at least not those in the consumer field

??? Well they never put these features in my film cameras. Maybe I should ask for a refund or is something lost in translation?

[monochrome]

the weariness many of us feel with the constant "better video" complaint.

Video is the new FF.

The negativity toward video in Pentax land is almost exclusively the result of a few very vocal people who are distressed that Pentax's implementation does not meet their expectations. The rest of us are either happy with the implementation or don't use it or don't care.

I have been quite pleased with the few, short videos I took with my K-01 and DA40 Ltd. I specifically bought that lens for the K-01 to use in MF or QS when taking a snap video. Auto focus is rarely used by professional videographers anyway - it is neither fast enough nor accurate enough for truly professional video capture.

The truth is, if Pentax offered me video capabilities that are equivalent to today's 5Diii, GH4, or A7s, that probably still wouldn't prevent me from going the expensive camcorder route. Those cameras are still pretty impractical without a bunch of rigging.

I am well acquainted with a Broadcast Network News / News Feature Producer. Her Executive Producer ordered an experiment with Canon 5D cameras for Remote shoots. The rigging added cost; the sound gear added cost; the shooters couldn't pull focus; light was a huge problem; the time required to edit in post stressed the Operations staff; in short, after six months they hauled the Sony's out of the gear locker and went back to what works.

To suggest that professionals prefer the dSLR format, other than on controlled shoots in studio, is just plain wrong. For location shooting a traditional vidcam is still the better-suited device.

[Mikesul]

Exactly. Well put!

[kadajawi]

That I have to see. To the best of my knowledge, no 35mm film camera (still or motion picture) has ever been capable of video.


Steve

Haha, yeah. I was thinking of 35mm movie cameras. Film refers to movie in German... sorry 'bout that. And video as in moving pictures. IIRC they are by default limited to 12 minutes before the roll has to be changed, most extremely long takes in cinema history are at most 12 minutes long. If you want a more mobile cinema camera, more compact and lighter, you may have to sacrifice that. It's not much better with modern cameras. Arri mentions 34 minutes of footage on one of their drives.

---------- Post added 11-12-14 at 11:34 AM ----------

Norm, kadajawi is very active on the video section of this forum where he/she regularly shares his/her opinion that Pentax is brain dead for not providing a reasonably-priced APS-C camera with mechanical ISIS having support for the union of all the video bells and whistles found across all brands. There is only one song, but it is well-rehearsed.


Steve

Brain dead is maybe a bit harsh, just a bit... ignorant and clueless in terms of video. I do have other songs, like it would be nice if Pentax had an API that can be accessed via WiFi or USB. Something I would like very much for stills... being able to program the camera to do certain things, like batch scripts, would be neat and a nice time saver. Think exposure bracketing, but with other things.



---------- Post added 11-12-14 at 11:48 AM ----------

Well put, Mike. It is a value-added proposition for many cameras. Unfortunately, most casual users get better results from their smart phones or a consumer-grade video camera than from the much more cumbersome video-capable dSLR.

As kadajawi expressed, there is an intriguing niche for a moderately-priced video-capable APS-C dSLR that supports effective ISIS, a full video feature set, and compatibility with a wide range of inexpensive faster lenses. Emphasis is placed on the product being "moderately-priced".


Steve

I hope you're talking about IBIS, not a group of terrorists.


It's not a tool for casual users, so Pentax should not see it as such. No need to hold back and keep things simple, if you want to shoot video with a DSLR, it's a challenge, but a possibly rewarding one. You do need practice and some skill to pull it off.


Effective IBIS can reduce the amount of gear needed to pull off decent shots. Instead of a Glidecam or Steadicam, shoulder rig etc. you can hold the camera handheld, and you'll get something stable enough. It filters out the sort of movements that make the footage look ugly (watch any number of handheld unstabilized video shot with a Canon DSLR... with it's wobblevision). I'd argue the K-5 (and those OM-Ds) are the camera that works best without any rigging. All the others need to be rigged, the Pentax doesn't necessarily.


Pentax has everything that is needed to do this, in every body since the K-7. And from the K-7 on they had the feature. All the cameras up to the K-5 had wonderful stabilization. Then Pentax just stopped. To implement this feature I really doubt they need to spend a lot of money. It is working in live view, so why not while recording video? Just put a disclaimer that the audio track might include sounds of the sensor moving onto the screen. It is up to users to decide if they can live with that, or not, or maybe to use it only in certain situations, or to use an external microphone/recorder. It's just a too minor issue to give up such an advantage over other brands.


Moderately priced body... any Pentax would be capable of proper video IBIS, and they could probably push out a firmware update enabling it for all their cameras. At that point they can start advertising the feature, and they will draw some attention. I hope to bring this to attention with Pentax... that they have a great advantage over other brands, but they have to activate it, and then advertise it a bit. Barely anyone in the video community seems to have noticed that the Pentax K-5 has IBIS for video... with the Olympus OM-D series somehow that was a much bigger deal.


Btw., Pentax doesn't owe me anything. I am free to leave, if I have enough. Hopefully it won't come to that.


@monochrome: Pulling focus on a DSLR takes more skill and practice, but it can be done. I have seen that they are used for some shots on German TV, like during reports, typically on some sort of shoulder rig, and the footage looks good. It can be done, and it looks good. And cameras have improved since the 5D. Plus if you use APS-C it's easier to pull focus.

[monochrome]

And cameras have improved since the 5D

OK. I am referring to actual experience here, not supposition. By 5D I was being generic. IIRC the experiment was with the 5DMkIII. It was about 15 months ago.

[normhead]

I like my Pentax gear, because as far as I can tell it's the best for what I do... lucky, but true, doesn't work for everyone but works or me. Using my Pentax stuff is nothing like the near pro-quality I used when I was teaching. If you're used anything decent, you won't be happy using a DSLR. I'm not saying you can't. I'm saying it isn't the same as having the best equipment for what you do. You're always going to know there's better. Some people can live with that, some can't. I should have signed out one of those cameras at school before I retired. And, I have carried one of those beasts you have to support on your shoulder through Algonquin for home videos. If you're going to do it, do it right.

[stevebrot]

the weariness many of us feel with the constant "better video" complaint.

Sadly this complaint is mostly voiced by a small number of people who have a very valid set of needs that are not met by their Pentax dSLRs. It would be nice to wish otherwise, but I suspect that those needs are unlikely to be satisfied at the low end of the price spectrum by Pentax or any other maker.

Steve

---------- Post added 11-12-14 at 07:07 PM ----------

I hope you're talking about IBIS, not a group of terrorists.

Yep...my hind brain is not cooperative as of late...


Steve

---------- Post added 11-12-14 at 07:13 PM ----------

Pentax has everything that is needed to do this, in every body since the K-7.

That is an assumption, though you make a good point. Have you considered that Sony also disables its mechanical IBIS in the A-77II when recording video? It is not just Pentax.


Steve

---------- Post added 11-12-14 at 07:18 PM ----------

If you're used anything decent, you won't be happy using a DSLR.

Oh, man! That is a statement!


Steve

[drypenn]

Bottomline:

I'd take my $299 Panasonic video cam, mounted on a $200 Benro tripod when doing videos, over any Samsung/Sony DSLR mounted on whatever mumbo-jumbos attachments, every single day from Monday to Saturday, and twice on a Sunday. That Panasonic video cam is that good, and a whole lot smaller too, and it is in full HD

[clackers]

Coming at this from another angle, testing the audience's priorities.

If the FF Pentax DSLR comes along with two models ... one with no video capability like the Nikon Df, one with reasonable ... how much more would people be prepared to pay? For me, it couldn't be more than $50, even on a two grand product. I just wouldn't use it.

[kadajawi]

@normhead: I think we're all aware of there being BETTER gear... but I think most of us can only dream of ever using something like that... and I'm not that ambitious anyway. Just... regular video cameras are not better. Easier, user friendlier, but not better. DSLRs are the step up from that, and then it becomes expensive.


@stevebrot: I think it depends. If Pentax could put some effort in it (as they have started with the K-3) and complete the software, plus get back what they've taken from us, that would make me very happy already. I don't want them to spend big amounts... just see what a bit of investment can get them. Enhancements in terms of actual image quality will come "for free" by just using newer sensors and processors, I'm not worried about that.


Thanks for the info. Wasn't aware that the A77 II has mechanical IBIS... but the Panasonic GX7 does have IBIS, but not for video IIRC (and why didn't the GH4 get IBIS?). It's weird, you'd expect Panasonic to know better. Then again, Olympus does have IBIS for video. Maybe the mechanisms used by Panasonic and Sony aren't suitable for video? Maybe Pentax also switched after the K-5, and that's the real reason. Who knows. We can only go by what Pentax told us all, and that is the noise the mechanism makes. Maybe someone who has both can comment if the K-3 is louder? Or perhaps Pentax has used a better, more sensitive microphone. But that shouldn't stop them from offering the option. It's a mystery...


All I can say is that I have seen IBIS work in live view on newer Pentax cameras. K-50, K-3, not sure if I tried the K-30 to that extend.


Btw. I'm glad that the discussion has calmed down.


@drypenn: I have some experience with this camera, and I have many hours of footage from it:
http://shop.panasonic.com/shop/model/HC-X900M
It is Panasonic's flagship. And to be honest? Great to use, convenient, amazing stabilizer and good sound... but the image quality absolutely sucks. My K-5 is vastly superior. There is no competition at all, whatsoever, except for sharpness, perhaps. But colors, dynamic range, the way it almost always falls apart when there is blue sky (lighter areas turn from blue into turquoise, while my K-5 just turns them into a lighter shade of blue). A Sony A7S would make minced meat out of the Panasonic. Or a Panasonic GH4. Or most other cameras.

[drypenn]

All I can say is that I have seen IBIS work in live view on newer Pentax cameras. K-50, K-3, not sure if I tried the K-30 to that extend.

Btw. I'm glad that the discussion has calmed down.

I'll try to use my K30 doing some video tonight, just to see if I have been missing something. I don't even know how to access video in that camera, time to find or download the manual.

---------- Post added 11-13-14 at 11:35 AM ----------

Coming at this from another angle, testing the audience's priorities.

If the FF Pentax DSLR comes along with two models ... one with no video capability like the Nikon Df, one with reasonable ... how much more would people be prepared to pay? For me, it couldn't be more than $50, even on a two grand product. I just wouldn't use it.

Or if it's just possible: let customers choose between a model with video, versus a model without one but will come with a spare battery.