[ChristianRock]

I have to disagree with this one, based on my experience in various kindergarden/school/dance school/gymnastics events. People who want to record video use their phones/ipads/video cameras.

You forgot to quote the part where I said that the people using the DSLRs are the ones that want better quality. I wasn't talking about the people who only use cell phones.

All people with DSLRs I've seen in these events were taking photos, and 99% had a basic kit and used full auto mode.

Yup, those are the ones I'm talking about, especially if you read the end of my post you'll notice that.

They got a DSLR because someone told them that's what you buy if you want 'quality' photos.

Or because that *IS* what you buy when you want better quality? (now with mirrorless large sensor cameras also added to the equation, of course)

In my neck of woods, people don't connect video with a DSLR, and in general don't want anything better than a phone for video.

That is your opinion, and I have mine. I'm not saying these people use video all the time, what I'm saying is, that is something that weighted a lot in their consideration of what camera to buy, or even that they needed to buy a camera. YMMV.

Another thing is that, yes, most of the parents record video and very few take photos, but that's because most of the parents bring only their phones to the event.

We take our kids out quite a bit, and also go to "touristy" places around where we live. There's *always* a few people with DSLRs hanging around their neck. They're usually the smaller cheaper ones, but I always see at least one larger DSLR as well.

In my opinion a market for people who need better than basic video capability in a DSLR is extremely small and definitely doesn't figure in mass retail market. Doing token video implementation and slapping a sticker CAN HAS VIDEO has it covered.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I think it's one of the main reasons for the DSLR boom and I stand by what it is - my personal opinion.

Everyone I know goes to reviews sites before buying something as expensive as a DSLR, and guess what, if the video sucks, that's a few points less in the score, and it affects the decision to buy. Even if they end up hardly ever using video, it affects the buying because it affects the reviews and the opinions of people.

[cxdoo]

I think it's far easier for a complete noob to get good still shots from a DSLR than to get good video, at least with a K5. Other camera bodies may be better.

Absolutely. Even a monkey can take a decent still. Video that is not shaky and boring is hard.

---------- Post added 13th Nov 2014 at 17:14 ----------

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I think it's one of the main reasons for the DSLR boom and I stand by what it is - my personal opinion.

Well, thanks for repeating what I said. I wasn't trying to be argumentative here, both in my previous replies here and now. I tell it like I see it.

[ChristianRock]

Well, thanks for repeating what I said. I wasn't trying to be argumentative here, both in my previous replies here and now. I tell it like I see it.

Oh I understand, and hopefully I'm not looking like I want an argument either These things are totally subjective and I find it interesting to listen to/read other people's opinions.

[kadajawi]

Absolutely. Even a monkey can take a decent still. Video that is not shaky and boring is hard.

It is not hard with a Pentax K-5 Well, the shaky part. It may still be very boring. The K-5 does a terrific job at stabilizing video into something that is not a mess, and other Pentaxes would be able to do that, too. Except for Pentax deactivating that very, very useful feature for regular Joe trying to shoot a video of his kids. Granted he'd still have to manually focus, but it helps. I was at a concert recently, and recorded much of it (turned down brightness not to annoy others too much). People kept bumping into me, and I shot with a 50mm and a 200mm. The 50mm is pretty smooth, the 200 gets bumpy at times, but I guarantee you, had I shot it with a Canikon it would have caused Michael Bay to get nausea.


A review that reads: "Takes good video - with manual control when wanted - and that stabilizes the video effectively with any lens, which all the other cameras don't do. With those you should use additional things to attach the camera to your shoulder, or to greatly increase the weight of the camera, in order to get not too much shake." could move a few cameras to normal people wanting to shoot their kids, right?


Or an ad on YouTube for example that shows video with and without IBIS.

[cxdoo]

The K-5 does a terrific job at stabilizing video into something that is not a mess, and other Pentaxes would be able to do that, too. Except for Pentax deactivating that very, very useful feature for regular Joe trying to shoot a video of his kids.

But why would Pentax do this, unless there is a good reason for it? It's not like decent video would eat into their other offerings.

[Clavius]

Sometimes some of you guys think too much, and take things too seriously, I think. That goes both for photography and video.

The greatest market for DSLRs are families who just want a good quality camera to register moments in their lives. I'm certainly in that demographic.

So if the pictures of their babies or kids or birthday parties or Christmas or whatever, don't look like they were made by Ansel Adams, who cares. At least they have decent quality pictures to remember those moments, after the kids grow up, after a loved one passes away, etc.

Same goes for video. Just because I'm not Ridley Scott doesn't mean I should be discouraged from filming my kids while they're playing in the yard or at the park, or when the baby is saying something extremely cute.

Video, in my opinion, was the reason for the huge boom in DSLR sales that went on from about 2009-2013. Everybody already had a DSLR, but now everybody had to have a DSLR with video. Now that everybody who wanted one has one, the DSLR market has slowed down tremendously in the last couple years, and it's back to pre-2009 levels, sort of.

Also, one of the reasons Pentax failed to take advantage of the aforementioned sales booms, is because the video was inferior, especially because there was no autofocus during video recording. Yes you can laugh at us but us dads and moms need all the help we can have while we chase our kids around.

So, don't take life too seriously, and if you don't like the fact that your Pentax has video, just don't use it, and stop complaining about it. Those of us who use it, will thank you for not trying to get Pentax to change in a way that would make us have to look for another brand of camera.

You hit the nail on the head. No matter how bad the HDSLR video is, it's always much better then the standard household digital Sony handycam. Having one camera doing both excellent stills and video was a must-have.

Admitted, video does seem more out of place on a DSLR then on an EVIL. With the recording in the eye level VF it's a whole lot more stable.

[cxdoo]

You hit the nail on the head. No matter how bad the HDSLR video is, it's always much better then the standard household digital Sony handycam. Having one camera doing both excellent stills and video was a must-have.

Well, it's me again.
I just don't see this. Maybe I'm ignorant. I have both a video camera (Panasonic HDC-SD700) and, obviously, a Pentax DSLR. Those couple of videos I took with K5II didn't look at all better, and were probably worse due to me not knowing how to focus and holding it awkwardly. No one I know who has a DSLR bought it for video.


I don't dispute what you're saying, I'm just adding that there is a place where what you are saying wasn't observed. How much more or less it's representative of the world market, I don't know.

[kadajawi]

But why would Pentax do this, unless there is a good reason for it? It's not like decent video would eat into their other offerings.

Well... yes. Exactly. Why. Cluelessness? Ignorance? I think I've read dpreview criticise the noises SR makes during video in the K-5, and ever since the functionality was gone. Could it be that? Pentax does cite noise as a reason for removing IBIS from video, and when they can figure out a way to make it quieter, they'll put it back. Or do they mean noise as in it heats up the sensor, which introduces noise in terms of lower image quality, and something was lost in translation? The K-3 is indeed less noisy. But I would have said that's because of a newer sensor. Sony must have fixed heat issues with their sensors because in their cameras the sensor is always on, always working... A hint that dpreview or other reviews did indeed influence Pentax could be that lack of manual controls were criticised, the next camera had it. Lack of buttons... Pentax went overboard and put on an unnecessary switch, sacrificing still handling. Automatic gain control was criticised... Pentax went and installed a headphone jack plus manual gain control in the K-3... a very, very video feature, utterly pointless for anything but video, and it cost them a redesign of the case, additional hardware inside the camera, etc. I can't remember having read that IBIS is not working for video anymore, and that that is a bad thing, though I didn't look for that. Perhaps cause reviewers are used to not having that feature?


If the official explanation is indeed the real reason... they really should test their cameras in real life. My videos at most exhibit something that I'd describe at static noise... if that comes from the IBIS, I can easily live with it (though I do hear some noises and feel the movement in my hands, but in the video it's rather quiet). It's simply a very small issue IMHO, and if really necessary, if you really care, you can work around it by attaching an external microphone. Pentax might even make a small microphone that sits on the hot shoe without sticking out as much as a RODE for example, and that is isolated a bit from the camera. For cases where the in camera audio is indeed good enough, but the SR disturbs, you can still deactivate it.


I've got 3 friends who are into photography, and have spent a lot. One doesn't care about video, he's been with Canon for ages and has plenty of toys. I doubt he will ever switch. The other two do though. One has started with a Canon EOS 40D, then bought a Nikon D7000 (or D7100). I recommended him a K-5, but he thought the D7x00 has video AF, so he picked that one. Of course then he discovered that video AF is absolutely pointless on that camera. The next step was a Sony a7S... because of video. He wanted a camera with IBIS, but the K-5 is outdated by now, and Olympus suffers from poor high ISO performance and not so good dynamic range. Pentax doesn't offer IBIS anymore. So the Sony it was, plus a Glidecam-like rig. He travelled all the way to Thailand with it, from Europe. Using a Glidecam is not easy btw., it did frustrate him. At least high ISO is ridiculously good, image quality too of course, and the AF works. Another one started with a Nikon D40, and then wanted to upgrade. He went for a GH3, thanks to size/weight, lenses (he likes birding/wild life, so a small sensor helps you get small lenses with high focal lengths), and video. Both of them aren't filmmakers, they just want to take good video during holidays for example. A Pentax K-3 with SR and maybe a bit better video performance could have attracted them. Pentax didn't offer it, so no sale.

[cxdoo]

Thanks that was an informative post, and I'd go with cluelessness as in, someone up the ladder said 'There must be video in such and such way' and engineering just crammed it in.


However,

I think I've read dpreview criticise the noises SR makes during video in the K-5, and ever since the functionality was gone.

If Pentax really takes clues from what dpreview writes about them, it is truly and utterly f... doomed.

[normhead]

A Pentax K-3 with SR and maybe a bit better video performance could have attracted them. Pentax didn't offer it, so no sale.

An interesting speculation. Or maybe the whole video thing was irrelevant to them. I'm sure Pentax analyses where their possible markets are. Everyone keeps saying improving the video wouldn't cost anything. Well, that's not true. Nothing is free. Every company decides where to put the money they have for R&D. Guys who don't work for Pentax, don't know the development costs the manufacturing costs or any other possible negatives say Pentax should do this that and the other. The only way improving video would be good for Pentax would be if it makes them more money than where they invest their R&&D money at present. Some people say investing in better video would sell more cameras. But would it sell enough more to recoup development costs, and please spare me the ignorance, don't tell me there would be no cost to this. If you're paying guy to sit at a desk and just think about it for an hour. You're paying him for that hour, that's a cost.

So yes, Pentax could sell more cameras if the camera had all the bells and whistles and was a great video cameras. But would that generate more in sales than something else they are directing their resources towards? If you don't know that, you're not really in a position to comment on what Pentax "should" do.

[kadajawi]

@cxdoo: Hahaha. I really hope that's not what happened. I hope it came down to customer feedback, but surely they would have realized the shitstorm against the lack of video IBIS... and they even acknowledged it in the last Pentaxforums interview... that it's something users ask for.


@normhead: I know my friends, and we talked through their purchasing decision. Video was clearly a very big factor, and Pentax was out because of that (and for the second one because of a lack of zoom lenses beyond 300mm).


We'd be happy if Pentax activated a feature that is already there... and that previous generations of the camera supported without a problem. Mind you, they did invest money in giving the camera manual gain for audio, and giving it additional circuits and connectors so you can attach a headphone to check audio levels. And they changed the case of the camera for this, rather than just re-use the K-7 body yet again. That sounds like a bigger investment than doing a small change in the firmware to add another option.


Most video advancements come from what their sensor maker and their processor maker gives them.


An option would be to get some Magic Lantern on board... either by giving them some support... give them a few cameras, and access to the firmware (might not work legally), or by trying to hire a few. Yes, it costs money, but Magic Lantern is a decent driver of sales for Canon, having some Magic Lantern devs working in Pentax with full access could give them nice PR, and hopefully sales too.


But you're right, I don't work at Pentax and can't tell them what to do, so the word should is too harsh. But suggestions...? People have been very hard on Pentax for not having FF.

[stevebrot]

Video is a skill, and a mindset. It's really a job. A job that is better done by talented engaged people, but still a job.

You've got that right. It is a job in the same sense as any task that requires production skills.


Steve

---------- Post added 11-13-14 at 10:13 AM ----------

I have to disagree with this one, based on my experience in various kindergarden/school/dance school/gymnastics events. People who want to record video use their phones/ipads/video cameras.

That is my experience as well. I am frequently at events where people are doing casual video of their children and I don't know that I have ever seen anyone using a dSLR. Usually it is a phone, pad, a compact/bridge camera, or a lower-end camcorder.


Steve

---------- Post added 11-13-14 at 10:17 AM ----------

all those consumer reviews demand it.

Yes. The K-3 was docked by Consumer Reports because it does not do higher than 30p for 1080p HD video. FWIW, they were not concerned about codec, raw HDMI output or IBIS.


Steve

---------- Post added 11-13-14 at 10:25 AM ----------

Well... yes. Exactly. Why. Cluelessness? Ignorance?

ROI (Return On Investment). All features come at a cost and the cost is present at all phases of development, production, QA, marketing, and post-sale customer service. Nothing is free and all features need to be balanced against market demand and ROI. That is why my K-3 does not support the same level of flexibility as my Chamonix view camera. There is limited market for those features and very limited to no ROI.


Steve

---------- Post added 11-13-14 at 10:29 AM ----------

@normhead: I know my friends, and we talked through their purchasing decision. Video was clearly a very big factor, and Pentax was out because of that (and for the second one because of a lack of zoom lenses beyond 300mm).

I know that it may be painful to think about, but it may be that you and your friends constitute a niche market segment and represent little potential for profit.


Steve

(...starting to sound like a Ferengi here...)

[Rondec]

Video is really tough. It takes heavy duty processing to edit it. Takes a lot longer to edit something that is rewatchable more than twice. I just think that you have to have video to sell in the marketplace, but it isn't that useful a feature, at least not for the average person.

[drypenn]

I tried playing around with my K30 video last night.

The good news: it works! And quality is quite good even after downloading it on a 42" LED TV. I used the very best prime Pentax can offer: the FA77 and the FA31.

The bad news:
Without the use of any equipment (monopod or tripod), I now conclude that doing video on DSLR is very unergonomic (just as I thought). It's akin to using a hammer trying to drive a teeny weeny screw on a lens mount. Yes, I agree that even an iPad seems a better tool since it's more comfortable, (the first time I've tried using it was also last night). You cannot use the OVF, you have to hold it awkwardly.

Even my 10-year old daughter noticed and asked why I wasn't using the video camera.

Mounting it on a tripod, it becomes acceptable, since you just click and leave it alone, and as I've said quality is really acceptable.

The whole experiment lasted about 10 minutes.

Conclusion: I'm a monkey who cannot and will not do video on a DSLR again. I'll just use the Panny: lighter, better button placements. Right tool for the job.

Side topic: For what it's worth, you can see some kids doing some selfies with DSLRs and kit lens here. Maybe Pentax should also think about putting a front LCD on the next iteration of K3 .

[stevebrot]

I now conclude that doing video on DSLR is very unergonomic (just as I thought). It's akin to using a hammer trying to drive a teeny weeny screw on a lens mount. Yes, I agree that even an iPad seems a better tool since it's more comfortable, (the first time I've tried using it was also last night). You cannot use the OVF, you have to hold it awkwardly.

Even my 10-year old daughter noticed and asked why I wasn't using the video camera.

LOL...ROFL...


Steve