[kadajawi]

The sad thing is that Canon is ahead of Pentax in terms of video despite not even trying... they've been overtaken left and right by everyone else. Panasonic, Sony, Olympus, Nikon. The only reason why Canon is still decent for video is because some 3rd party developers hack the cameras and give them much more functionality in firmware.

Canon itself would much rather sell you the C100 II for $5500, or the C300 II for $16000. They don't want people to use their cheap DSLRs for video. It's like Pentax much rather selling you a 645Z than a K3 II.

I am still depressed that Pentax is still not using the hardware they have to their full extend for video. Enable MJPEG and SR in the K-3 and we'd have an entirely different beast that could compete at least with all the 1080p cameras out there. Maybe add a log profile and focus peaking during video, but otherwise that's all they'd need to be competitive. SR works during live view, so the software and the capability are still there, somewhere, and MJPEG is just 24, 25, 30 2 MP stills per second in a neat container... that can't be too difficult for the processor, it certainly wasn't for the K-5.

The only SR enabled alternatives are the small sensor Olympus cameras and the expensive Sony A7 II (?), where the sensor is so heavy that the SR isn't all that efficient anymore. The Pentax SR however works very well as long as you don't go for very long lenses. If you stay below 100-150mm it's great.

[biz-engineer]

SR for videos on K-3 is not a good idea due to faster battery drainage. Engineers have done the right choice to implement software video SR on K-3, unlike hardware SR on K-5. In liveview, K-3, the SR is still hardware because it makes sense for image stabilization and liveview is not supposed to run permanently.

[Giklab]

SR for videos on K-3 is not a good idea due to faster battery drainage. Engineers have done the right choice to implement software video SR on K-3

So they've done the right thing by going with a system that doesn't work? Remember, software SR uses the CPU to do its thing, and that drains the battery as well. How exactly do you know that the hardware SR uses more energy?

[normhead]

He is trading a camera that sells for $1149 (Canadian) for a camera that sells for $2200 Canadian. He's getting a better camera... duh. Is he getting twice as much value for twice the price? Is he going to make twice as much money shooting with the Canon? The answer could be yes, for him, but it won't be for most Pentax shooters.

Honestly, if I were him, and I was shooting weddings and wanted to go with Canon, I'd be looking at a 5D Mk III, and if i was sticking with Pentax I'd be looking at a 645z. I'd get a dedicated camera for video. The last wedding I did ( 8 years ago), I shot with 3 dedicated video cameras and put together a very nice video that was way over the clients expectations. I hired a photographer to do the stills, and I shot as second camera when I wasn't shooting video. Ed just isn't working at a level that I could find acceptable. I couldn't recommend him. I suspect from the sound of it, he'd be a lot cheaper than me though.

---

Last edited by normhead; 07-31-2015 at 09:37 AM.

[kadajawi]

SR for videos on K-3 is not a good idea due to faster battery drainage. Engineers have done the right choice to implement software video SR on K-3, unlike hardware SR on K-5. In liveview, K-3, the SR is still hardware because it makes sense for image stabilization and liveview is not supposed to run permanently.

I have shot roughly 1000 photos and 45 minutes of video on one battery. SR always on. K-5. Battery life is just fine, thanks.

And again. Software SR doesn't work. It f***s up the image. It looks worse than no SR. Even deactivated it makes the camera worse. I tried it. I hate it. I can spot it, every time, any implementation, and it always looks horrible. Can you fix a photo that was shaken and thus is blurry? Nope. Not really. So why would software SR be able to fix it? At least unstabilized you mask the blurrying in the shaking.

I have shot many hours of video handheld with my K-5. No problems. The camera still works. Noise was not a problem. Heat wasn't (not more than I'd expect from the sensor, even on a tripod it heats up just as much). Unless Pentax switched to an inferior SR system there is nothing wrong with it, and the advantages easily outweight the disadvantages.

norm: If you'd hire a videographer these days he'd either come with a $5000+ camera or a DSLR/mirrorless. Or he is stuck in the 90s and shoots on tape. People want large sensors, and those are expensive unless they are in a DSLR.

[biz-engineer]

How exactly do you know that the hardware SR uses more energy?

I measured it with inserting an amp meter. You can do the same, to be sure.

I have shot roughly 1000 photos and 45 minutes of video on one battery. SR always on. K-5. Battery life is just fine, thanks.

The K-5 has a lower current consumption. CIPA rated K-5 at 740 shots, while Nikon was rated at 1050. The K-3 was rated 560 shots, while the D7100 was rated 950 shots and D7200 was rated 1110 shots. K-3 II is rated 720 shots.

[Giklab]

I measured it with inserting an amp meter. You can do the same, to be sure.

And how did you measure the CPU drain? I'm really interested.

[biz-engineer]

And how did you measure the CPU drain? I'm really interested.

Measure the current flowing out of the battery, while switching your camera in different modes, live view, with, without SR, video with and without SR etc...

[kadajawi]

Measure the current flowing out of the battery, while switching your camera in different modes, live view, with, without SR, video with and without SR etc...

Interesting. Is it a big difference? But even so... bring a spare battery. Or deactivate SR. I haven't heard of any reason that would make me think ok, no SR is a good idea. Keep in mind you can always deactivate it, and all the disadvantages are gone. Is it too noisy for you? Turn off SR. Battery life too short? Turn off SR. etc.

I'd be happier if the K-3 had no SR than the software SR, because if that's what I want I can still do it in Premiere Pro, where the quality will be better and I have more control. Movie SR is a deal breaker for me, I might live without SR, but Movie SR just goes one step too far. I find it shocking that Pentax didn't try the function and look at the result, because if they did they should have said "ok, lets just not use it. This is terrible".

[normhead]

Anyone who can't buy, care for, and use a second battery really shouldn't be using a camera. We have to expect photographers will have some level of expertise in technical matters. Knowing when your battery is running out and being prepared... does that even qualify as technical expertise? Lets talk about some things that actually matter.

"Hey look the battery meter on my K-3 is down to two bars and is in the yellow. What do i do?"
"Buy a Nikon D7100 you moron."

[kadajawi]

Hahaha normhead, exactly. While battery life does matter, it isn't exactly a good reason to omit features, especially if you can just deactivate them if you need to save power. Just mention it in the manual.

"While video SR improves image quality significantly, there is the possibility of it being audible in the audio track. For best possible audio quality we recommend the use of an external microphone.

Because moving the sensor around constantly uses power, battery life with video SR enabled will be shorter than without while recording video."

There. Problem solved. The users aren't idiots. You don't have to nanny them. Most features have drawbacks, like high ISO or raw. That doesn't mean you deactivate them, you just expect the user to understand.

I am a bit worried about Ed's clients. He is shooting stills and video? I doubt he is using a glidecam while shooting stills, and he probably won't be attaching one when he switches to video. That means that unless he uses stabilized lenses that will look quite bad. The Pentax K-5 would be better. Of course the K-3 will be worse, as there are almost no stabilized lenses for it, and there is no useful SR.

In any case the lack of good video (it is, but then the codec ruins it a bit, and it doesn't make full use of the hardware to give it an edge over competitors) has cost Pentax at least one customer. Quite possibly more.

[biz-engineer]

The question was why Ricoh moved from hardware SR to software SR. I provided a possible reason. Regarding Nikon cam., it was there for comparison, as what Ricoh might have considered. Regarding being able to have a back-up battery or a grip, it's up to you. There is no consideration whether a user is smart or idiot.

[kadajawi]

The question was why Ricoh moved from hardware SR to software SR. I provided a possible reason. Regarding Nikon cam., it was there for comparison, as what Ricoh might have considered. Regarding being able to have a back-up battery or a grip, it's up to you. There is no consideration whether a user is smart or idiot.

Ricoh said it was the noise the SR mechanism makes. They must have sensitive ears. The K-5 was quiet, the lesser models weren't. Unless they swapped the K-5 SR system for a much noisier one it should have been fine. Maybe they tested it internally and so found that it noisy, too noisy for them. But that's why there is a microphone port. Power consumption is another possible explanation. Or maybe that the hardware won't be able to survive the stress (again, the K-5 does... what has changed?).

The thing is that no matter how many reasons you can bring up for deactivating the system, it is SO useful that deactivating it is still the worse option. If they'd deactivate the internal microphone when SR is activated, I'd still use it. And users have been asking to get it activated again. Again and again, and more than just me. Ever since the K-01 and K-30 were released. Now even competitors have come up with video SR, and they don't have any problems with it. Users understand the disadvantages it has, they can decide for themselves and deactivate it when they don't need it. Then _ALL_ disadvantages of video SR are gone. Completely.

Their insistence of keeping it off, and of using the nowhere near as good, the worse than not being there movie SR (software) makes me think there's a deal with some other company, perhaps Sony, that says Pentax has to keep video SR off. Otherwise they won't get the sensors. If SR is activated, they'd be competing too much with Sony cameras...

[osv]

If he is shooting sports, then 7D Mark II is better than K-3 II in all aspects: much better buffer, better fps, a lot better autofocus system, much more lenses to chose from, etc. When comes to video...Canon is also way far ahead Pentax.

and both are way behind sony when it comes to video... he shoulda just gotten a good camcorder, if he wants to shoot video.

instead he's trading in a 24mp k3 for a 20mp 7d?? pay twice as much for less resolution, and then still have to buy lenses?

even ken rockwell would pause at that,

i must be missing something.

[monochrome]

i must be missing something.

There's no drama if he doesn't emote, and change brands.