[kadajawi]

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.

Resolution isn't everything, and some people rather have one camera that does both, because you can quickly switch between stills and video. Imagine having a $2000 camera + lenses and a $6000 camera (where decent video cameras begin) + lenses. Both being bulky and heavy. And really you should add even more gear to the video camera. That's too much. Those cameras are an option for people who exclusively do video, i.e. where the budget is big enough to hire a photographer and a videographer.

However getting a Canon seems foolish. If he wants good stills and video he should have gotten a Sony, Samsung, Panasonic or Olympus, or even a Nikon. Canon needs Magic Lantern to be good for video, and IMHO that's more for planned video shoots, not weddings. My favorite would have been Olympus for that purpose, to get the stabilization (or soon Sony). Unstabilized video is terrible, and when the body doesn't do it the lenses have to, or you need to use external gear which makes it much heavier and harder to use for stills.

[Sportsgal501]

https://youtu.be/qxNwgtwJLbw

Sounds like he already had kept his Canon gear, like myself I was about to pick up a K-3 on Friday but ended up picking up a Canon 24mm f/2.8 prime lens that usually runs for $599.00 for $450.00 since I've been using my Canon more lately than my K-5IIs it was a deal I couldn't pass.

I don't shoot video but after using my K-5IIs for primary sports (I did shoot a wedding with it and my Fuji X10) the autofocus isn't on par with Canon's which is faster, I did get a nice chunk of shots with it but believe I could have gotten more if I was using my Canon.

Right now just waiting to see how the Pentax full frame looks since I'm ready to upgrade and waiting to see if Canon mentions a 6D Mark II replacement for it's 6D,I received an "invite only" to their Expo next month in NYC and looking forward to going.

Sitting on the fence for the next big thing from Pentax and Canon.

[normhead]

Resolution isn't everything, and some people rather have one camera that does both,

He said weddings. OK, so what happens when you're at the magic moment, the ring is about to be placed on the Bride's finger and you want both stills and video?

At a wedding, one camera just doesn't cut it.

Resolution isn't everything? Yes but it's not insignificant either. Nor is the dynamic range issue. In fact, given that I have some very nice video taken with my K-3, I'd propose that anyone with decent videography skills can do video with a K-3. There is just nothing you can do to make up for lack of resolution and dynamic range when you go to a Canon system. And I can point you at a couple of folks who switched from Canon to Nikon recently (at significant cost) based on those two issues. Lack of Dynamic Range and Resolution. Those are issues real photographers change systems for. Lack of video that's idiot proof... not so much.

I'm not really sure what your angle is in defending this guy.

[kadajawi]

He said weddings. OK, so what happens when you're at the magic moment, the ring is about to be placed on the Bride's finger and you want both stills and video?

At a wedding, one camera just doesn't cut it.

Resolution isn't everything? Yes but it's not insignificant either. Nor is the dynamic range issue. In fact, given that I have some very nice video taken with my K-3, I'd propose that anyone with decent videography skills can do video with a K-3. There is just nothing you can do to make up for lack of resolution and dynamic range when you go to a Canon system. And I can point you at a couple of folks who switched from Canon to Nikon recently (at significant cost) based on those two issues. Lack of Dynamic Range and Resolution. Those are issues real photographers change systems for. Lack of video that's idiot proof... not so much.

I'm not really sure what your angle is in defending this guy.

Fair enough. Maybe record 4K video and grab stills? That could work, yes, it's just 8 MP, but that's not too bad.

What I did see was a wedding photography company that came with several people, one shooting video with a Nikon DSLR on a glidecam, the rest mostly shooting stills on Nikon DSLRs, but also video at times. That way they could cover different angles when editing it all together, and the footage matches up nicely.

From 20 to 24 MP the difference isn't big, I am using 16 MP and am perfectly happy with it. Before that I had 6, and that was fine too usually. Mind you I don't crop so much.

I'm not saying that the K-3 is a terrible camera for video, I do like the image a lot. The way it looks. However, the encoder is pretty bad, and the bitrate is too low etc. The K-5 didn't have a great encoder either, but they threw 4 times the bits on it, and the result is really nice. I'm sure the K-3 could do the same. The lack of SR is a shame, because while most others don't have that either, for them it would mean new hardware, for Pentax it would mean a small firmware update. The hardware is there already. It certainly is useful when you're not shooting with stabilizing gear.

I don't really defend this guy. His choice of Canon is odd. If he really wants to do better video and decent stills, then he should be going to Sony, Samsung, Olympus or Panasonic (with the latter two being a step down in terms of stills). What I do say is that Pentax should hopefully invest a little bit, really just a little bit into video... especially in finding out what videographers want. That could help them move cameras and give them exposure to the public.

Canon does need to up their sensors, I agree. Not that they are terrible, those cameras are perfectly capable, but the competitors are just better. (Which neatly summarizes video on Pentax.)

I can point you to rich hobbyists who did switch to Panasonic and Sony from Nikon and Canon because of video.

[normhead]

I can point you to rich hobbyists who did switch to Panasonic and Sony from Nikon and Canon because of video.

And how are their videos?

[kadajawi]

And how are their videos?

I have only seen a bit from the GH3... it's fine. Painfully sharp. Daylight, stopped down, ... The goal is just to be able to record video at events or during holidays... what you would have bought a camcorder for in the past, but since these cameras can do stills well too... No idea about how the A7S performed, but it can do great things.

I once did a live concert that I then edited to the album version of the song (as the sound technician lost the original recording...), it's in the video section of the forum if you want to see it. Pentax K-5, Sony NEX 5 and GoPro 2 Hero, and the Pentax easily beat the other two cameras in terms of image quality.

[Steve.Ledger]

However getting a Canon seems foolish. If he wants good stills and video he should have gotten a Sony, Samsung, Panasonic or Olympus, or even a Nikon. Canon needs Magic Lantern to be good for video, and IMHO that's more for planned video shoots, not weddings. .

He wants 'easy' video, not necessarily better. Remember he said video with Pentax is too hard but with Canon it's easier..
I fully understand that position. The K-01 is not easy for video, if it have had a tilt or flip-out screen, it would have been easier. The 'red' button is a factory preset video, which is rubbish akin to Auto for stills..

Ed's a member of this forum, where's his voice??

[kadajawi]

He wants 'easy' video, not necessarily better. Remember he said video with Pentax is too hard but with Canon it's easier..
I fully understand that position. The K-01 is not easy for video, if it have had a tilt or flip-out screen, it would have been easier. The 'red' button is a factory preset video, which is rubbish akin to Auto for stills..

Ed's a member of this forum, where's his voice??

Oh. I couldn't watch the video thanks to my internet being really bad.

Apart from the lack of a flip out screen there's nothing else I really need in my K-5 for video. Focus peaking would be nice, yes, but I can do without. What I need is a screen that I can look at from other angles. Otherwise I'm happy. It's not really hard. Maybe harder on the K-3 because you need to be more careful with what you film, how you film it.

Is the Canon really _easier_? Maybe the ones with proper AF...

[starbase218]

Why can't the guy switch? If he feels that he is more confident/comfortable shooting Canon, that's all the motivation he personally needs, right? That's how I see this video, even if Ed himself doesn't entirely see it that way. E.g. he seems to hint that the chance of something being wrong with the camera is bigger with Pentax than it is with Canon. I think it is first and foremost his perception that tells him this. How much truth there is to the statement is not clear. But like I said, that doesn't matter in this context. He apparently still feels more confident/comfortable shooting Canon. In the end, cameras and lenses are just tools. If a carpenter likes saw A better than saw B, why would he use saw B, if it's the end-result that counts?

That any of you don't switch also doesn't necessarily mean Pentax is better.

---------- Post added 08-03-2015 at 02:03 AM ----------

Anyway, I've never known Ed to speak anything but his own mind. That's why he sometimes says he doesn't do "reviews", but instead just gives his opinion about something. And that opinion can change. And with Ed, it frequently does. I sometimes think maybe he should spend less time deciding what gear is the very best for him, and just get some gear that he likes and is good for what he does, don't think of other gear anymore, get to know it and make the best of it. He's had Nikon, Canon and Pentax, not to mention Fuji, so he's got experience is several systems.

Well, maybe he'll stick with Canon this time.

[mikeSF]

He's kinda the Ken Rockwell of Pentax.

Lemme get this straight, we're losing the "Ken Rockwell of Pentax"?
Promise?

but seriously, this is news why? The guy wants to shoot video and stills for weddings and is more comfortable using Canon. God bless him.

[Giklab]

Lemme get this straight, we're losing the "Ken Rockwell of Pentax"?
Promise?

but seriously, this is news why? The guy wants to shoot video and stills for weddings and is more comfortable using Canon. God bless him.

No promises My BS senses are telling me this isn't the last time he switched brands.

[Rondec]

It's no big deal. I am surprised that if he was interested in video, that he wouldn't get a camera that was capable of 4K. It really does feel like that is where the industry is going and the 7D MK II doesn't do it. I would have looked at Sony or Samsung, probably first of all if video was that important.

I do wonder how he plans to coordinate this. Will he have two videographers and two still photographers or, will they just all shoot both video and stills? I would imagine that a division of labor would achieve better results. I can't imagine trying to shoot stills and video at the same wedding with the same camera, but maybe I just don't have mad photography/videography skills like Ed...

[fs999]

What a funny thread

[starbase218]

Lemme get this straight, we're losing the "Ken Rockwell of Pentax"?

Ed the Ken Rockwell of Pentax? LOL! Ken would probably need about 5 seconds instead of 30 minutes to make a point. That point would be grossly over-exaggerated and have no subtleties whatsoever.

Just about the opposite of Ed.

[mikeSF]

Ed the Ken Rockwell of Pentax? LOL! Ken would probably need about 5 seconds instead of 30 minutes to make a point. That point would be grossly over-exaggerated and have no subtleties whatsoever.

Just about the opposite of Ed.

gee...what a surprise to see you in here.