K20D vs Canon 50D & Nikon D90

séamuis · 08-27-2008, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Why do people keep saying that?

because some people want specialized tools and are tired of everything becoming 'hybrid' that tend to do multiple things not so well.

nixcamic · 08-27-2008, 01:52 PM

Originally posted by séamuis

because some people want specialized tools and are tired of everything becoming 'hybrid' that tend to do multiple things not so well.

So what you are saying is that since they added video to the D90, its no longer going to be able to take decent stills?

Edit: Read my own post, and this is getting kinda flamewarish.

jake.astig · 08-27-2008, 03:50 PM

Originally posted by Gooshin

Good point Eric,

my response to that would be an open question to everyone to think about it.

Are photocamera companies creating this technology and expanding our options

or are consumers demanding this technology to expand their own creativity or utility?

chicken or the egg type deal here, who is REALLY pushing the engineers on this one?

it's all marketing president putin

Gooshin · 08-27-2008, 04:23 PM

but are the marketers creating a demand for a need that we dont need

or do consumers really demand it? (ie, did the marketing department do research and found otu that consumers want X,X,X)

how much of a market share do WE actually make up,

how many of the DSLRS sold actualy go into the hands of photographers who want to be artists or earn a living off of it, rather than someone with a big wallet that wants to take quality pictures of his family and is "sold" on the idea that he/she needs an SLR?

KungPOW · 08-27-2008, 06:32 PM

Part of the job of the marketing people is to identify the demand that we as consumers do not yet know we want. They then develope the plan to let us know about the next new thing we are going to want, and they bring in the advertisers.

The advertisers remind us that we want something. They work hard to make sure we are thinking about the new idea when we layout our cash. Even if we are not buying the "thing", they want use to think about it.

I would write more, but I need to buy more Coke & Doritoes.

lbam · 08-27-2008, 08:32 PM

Originally posted by KungPOW

I would write more, but I need to buy more Coke & Doritoes.

I'm glad you have your priorities in order..

lbam · 08-27-2008, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by kenyee

It's the D300's sensor (aka Sony's 12mpix CMOS sensor), probably with a few more tweaks as Nikon did when they put the D200 sensor in the D80...

Don't forget that it's a 12bit pipeline. Not 14bit, as per the D300.

Last edited by lbam; 08-27-2008 at 09:42 PM.

Jodokast96 · 08-27-2008, 09:19 PM

I haven't had time to read the entire thread, so forgive me if it's been mentioned already, but all of the cameras out there have their share of banding. It's not just Pentax.

Peter Zack · 08-28-2008, 05:32 AM

Video. Count me out on my DSLR. I do know something about the limitations it will place on the camera. Heat is a big one. I used to be a co-owner of a commercial video production studio with Sony 3 chip cams etc. Heat is a serious issue and part of the reason these cameras are so big compared to a DSLR.

There will be compromises in both mediums if they are combined. As for the artistic tool argument. A Painter does not use watercolour paint to create and acrylic painting. They use the specialized tool for the job. Artist's will have to just buy a good DSLR for that use and a vid cam for that use.

Think about this for a second. News companies use the best gear out there now and sometimes freeze a frame (actually 2 half frames) to show some detail. The IQ is crap as a still image. So want that be combined with your DSLR imaging engine? Not me!

Video is not the same as stitching 24 or 30 frames per second together. Video is 60 half frames that are interlaced to make the image smooth and to reduce flicker. These are not the same technologies and something will suffer if they are somehow combined.

Art Vandelay II · 08-28-2008, 07:16 AM

Originally posted by Peter Zack

Video is not the same as stitching 24 or 30 frames per second together. Video is 60 half frames that are interlaced to make the image smooth and to reduce flicker. These are not the same technologies and something will suffer if they are somehow combined.

I may be wrong here, so feel free to correct me, but if I recall one of the big arguments of 720p over 1080i at the beginning of the HDTV debates (before 1080p) was that 720p may not have as much resolution, but the image is cleaner because there is no stitching or interlacing. It was suppose to be a more "film projector-like" image in that at any given fraction of a second there is one complete image on the screen. So moire patterns in fabric for example will be a thing of the past.

As far as stills looking like crap, that may have been the case 10 years ago, but have you seen some of the recently released Watchmen stills? You wouldn't want to print them at 16x20" but they are more than good enough for web use.

Art Vandelay II · 08-28-2008, 07:34 AM

Also, one more thought. If overheating is going to be such a major problem why is it not an issue on any point and shoot I've ever used? Or in the new Panasonic LX3 which also offers "HD video"?

nixcamic · 08-28-2008, 07:37 AM

Originally posted by Peter Zack

Video is not the same as stitching 24 or 30 frames per second together. Video is 60 half frames that are interlaced to make the image smooth and to reduce flicker. These are not the same technologies and something will suffer if they are somehow combined.

Your post was actually making good points, and I started to believe you, until this. There is both interlaced and progressive video, interlaced is indeed as you described. progressive (which is considered the better of the two) however, is just a series of frames stuck together. Almost all video before DVD was progressive, not interlaced, including all film video, which has to be progressive by nature. DVD was interlaced, because it compresses better, although it provides a lower quality image. HD DVD and Blueray offer the option of interlaced and progressive video. This is what the p and i in 1080p and 1080i stand for. Anyhow, I'm sure the nikon engineers are smarter than any of us and figured out how to make a camera that doesn't suck.

kenyee · 08-28-2008, 08:42 AM

Originally posted by Peter Zack

Video is not the same as stitching 24 or 30 frames per second together.

Hate to tell you, but native film is 24fps. A lot of HDTV displays (including projectors) support this as well so they don't to translate it to 30fps or 60fps. That's one reason Pentax tried to get the K20D's "video" mode to 24fps but they only had enough bandwidth for 20fps or I'm sure they would have promoted it as "film quality video"...not sure if you remember all the K20D rumors about "HDTV video" as a feature ;-)
So believe it or not, the K20D fired the first "video in a dSLR" salvo...Nikon was just the first to package audio/video into an AVI file on a dSLR.

p.s., Mark Dimos is the surfer photographer I was trying to remember the name of...

Peter Zack · 08-28-2008, 09:18 AM

Yes that's all correct and film (movie) are 24 frames as are some Jpeg formats. But today's TV is still 30 frames (NTSC format) or 60 half frames being a 60Hz signal. Which I know is changing as we write this. The new formats Progressive is indeed i interlaced and p is full frame or not interlaced. Both are used and have advantages and dis advantages. P being single frame has higher resolution. but the P format has issues with Shutter drag and not as good for sports or other high speed action (remember we are talking about the shooting of a video and not the display of a video).

But there in lies the issues. Heat. These cameras that can shoot this type of resolution have systems in them to cool the chip(s) that capture the video. That increases the size and if not properly controlled, the noise.

The demands on the imaging engine and components. 1080 requires special processors and dedicated wiring to record. That requires space and more computing power. If the bodies are going to stay the same size, somethings gotta give. So since the D90 is about the same size (although it is 35Gr heavier or 1/10th of a pound) as the D80, does that mean they compromised on some areas of the still picture taking ability?

The demands on the shutter. Use the camera a lot and how long will the shutter last. I see nothing from Nikon saying that the video is captured using an electronic shutter (essentially turning the chip on and off instead of the typical shutter mechanism).

Not long ago we were discussing shutter lifespans and what most cameras were rated at. 100,000 seems to be the base standard with some suggesting that shutters may last twice that.

So lets say the camera shoots 24 frames per second as the D90 does. That's 86,400 frames to shoot an hour of video. Great I just spent over a grand to use the camera for 1.5 hours and then throw it out. If they are using an electronic shutter for this then I'm off base. But again does that compromise the still image quality? mechanical shutters are slower for sync speeds but infinitely better in almost anything else including unwanted artifacts from the power on/off surge to capture a frame.

So unless they have a dual system for electronic shutter shooting, how long till the camera wears out.

maybe I'm way off base....

and I know I'm swimming up Niagara Falls quite unsuccessfully.

Andrew Faires · 08-28-2008, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by Peter Zack

maybe I'm way off base....

I guess my question is whether the k20d opens and closes the shutter 20 times a second to achieve it's high speed frame rate? I suspect that it keeps the shutter open (similar to live view) and samples the information 20 times per second. If that's the case, then I'd wager Nikon does the same sort of thing for it's movie mode. However, I'm just guessing.

08-28-2008, 09:18 AM	#89
Peter Zack Pentaxian Moderator Emeritus Join Date: May 2007 Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,643	Yes that's all correct and film (movie) are 24 frames as are some Jpeg formats. But today's TV is still 30 frames (NTSC format) or 60 half frames being a 60Hz signal. Which I know is changing as we write this. The new formats Progressive is indeed i interlaced and p is full frame or not interlaced. Both are used and have advantages and dis advantages. P being single frame has higher resolution. but the P format has issues with Shutter drag and not as good for sports or other high speed action (remember we are talking about the shooting of a video and not the display of a video). But there in lies the issues. Heat. These cameras that can shoot this type of resolution have systems in them to cool the chip(s) that capture the video. That increases the size and if not properly controlled, the noise. The demands on the imaging engine and components. 1080 requires special processors and dedicated wiring to record. That requires space and more computing power. If the bodies are going to stay the same size, somethings gotta give. So since the D90 is about the same size (although it is 35Gr heavier or 1/10th of a pound) as the D80, does that mean they compromised on some areas of the still picture taking ability? The demands on the shutter. Use the camera a lot and how long will the shutter last. I see nothing from Nikon saying that the video is captured using an electronic shutter (essentially turning the chip on and off instead of the typical shutter mechanism). Not long ago we were discussing shutter lifespans and what most cameras were rated at. 100,000 seems to be the base standard with some suggesting that shutters may last twice that. So lets say the camera shoots 24 frames per second as the D90 does. That's 86,400 frames to shoot an hour of video. Great I just spent over a grand to use the camera for 1.5 hours and then throw it out. If they are using an electronic shutter for this then I'm off base. But again does that compromise the still image quality? mechanical shutters are slower for sync speeds but infinitely better in almost anything else including unwanted artifacts from the power on/off surge to capture a frame. So unless they have a dual system for electronic shutter shooting, how long till the camera wears out. maybe I'm way off base.... and I know I'm swimming up Niagara Falls quite unsuccessfully. Last edited by Peter Zack; 08-28-2008 at 09:37 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Canon 50D to Pentax K20D convert.	Bionetta	Welcomes and Introductions	4	06-10-2010 12:56 PM
Pentax K20D, K-7 and Canon 50D high ISO compared	emr	Pentax DSLR Discussion	8	07-09-2009 07:44 AM
DA 35ltd Macro (K20D) vs. Nikon 35 1.8 G (d90)	jsherman999	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	43	04-17-2009 05:32 AM
How close is the K20D to the Canon 50D?	monkeybear	Pentax DSLR Discussion	37	03-23-2009 12:41 PM
Canon 50D copies & improves on Pentax	jms698	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	48	09-01-2008 08:34 AM

08-27-2008, 01:16 PM	#76
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	Quote: Why do people keep saying that? because some people want specialized tools and are tired of everything becoming 'hybrid' that tend to do multiple things not so well.

08-27-2008, 01:52 PM	#77
nixcamic Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Guatemala Posts: 354	Originally posted by séamuis because some people want specialized tools and are tired of everything becoming 'hybrid' that tend to do multiple things not so well. So what you are saying is that since they added video to the D90, its no longer going to be able to take decent stills? Edit: Read my own post, and this is getting kinda flamewarish.

08-27-2008, 03:50 PM	#78
jake.astig Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Philippines Posts: 160	Originally posted by Gooshin Good point Eric, my response to that would be an open question to everyone to think about it. Are photocamera companies creating this technology and expanding our options or are consumers demanding this technology to expand their own creativity or utility? chicken or the egg type deal here, who is REALLY pushing the engineers on this one? it's all marketing president putin

08-27-2008, 04:23 PM	#79
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	but are the marketers creating a demand for a need that we dont need or do consumers really demand it? (ie, did the marketing department do research and found otu that consumers want X,X,X) how much of a market share do WE actually make up, how many of the DSLRS sold actualy go into the hands of photographers who want to be artists or earn a living off of it, rather than someone with a big wallet that wants to take quality pictures of his family and is "sold" on the idea that he/she needs an SLR?

08-27-2008, 06:32 PM	#80
KungPOW Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Vancouver, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,699	Part of the job of the marketing people is to identify the demand that we as consumers do not yet know we want. They then develope the plan to let us know about the next new thing we are going to want, and they bring in the advertisers. The advertisers remind us that we want something. They work hard to make sure we are thinking about the new idea when we layout our cash. Even if we are not buying the "thing", they want use to think about it. I would write more, but I need to buy more Coke & Doritoes.

08-27-2008, 08:32 PM	#81
lbam Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 442	Originally posted by KungPOW I would write more, but I need to buy more Coke & Doritoes. I'm glad you have your priorities in order..

08-27-2008, 09:02 PM	#82
lbam Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 442	Originally posted by kenyee It's the D300's sensor (aka Sony's 12mpix CMOS sensor), probably with a few more tweaks as Nikon did when they put the D200 sensor in the D80... Don't forget that it's a 12bit pipeline. Not 14bit, as per the D300. Last edited by lbam; 08-27-2008 at 09:42 PM.

08-27-2008, 09:19 PM	#83
Jodokast96 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Erial, NJ USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,134	I haven't had time to read the entire thread, so forgive me if it's been mentioned already, but all of the cameras out there have their share of banding. It's not just Pentax.

08-28-2008, 05:32 AM	#84
Peter Zack Pentaxian Moderator Emeritus Join Date: May 2007 Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,643	Video. Count me out on my DSLR. I do know something about the limitations it will place on the camera. Heat is a big one. I used to be a co-owner of a commercial video production studio with Sony 3 chip cams etc. Heat is a serious issue and part of the reason these cameras are so big compared to a DSLR. There will be compromises in both mediums if they are combined. As for the artistic tool argument. A Painter does not use watercolour paint to create and acrylic painting. They use the specialized tool for the job. Artist's will have to just buy a good DSLR for that use and a vid cam for that use. Think about this for a second. News companies use the best gear out there now and sometimes freeze a frame (actually 2 half frames) to show some detail. The IQ is crap as a still image. So want that be combined with your DSLR imaging engine? Not me! Video is not the same as stitching 24 or 30 frames per second together. Video is 60 half frames that are interlaced to make the image smooth and to reduce flicker. These are not the same technologies and something will suffer if they are somehow combined.

08-28-2008, 07:16 AM	#85
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886 Original Poster	Originally posted by Peter Zack Video is not the same as stitching 24 or 30 frames per second together. Video is 60 half frames that are interlaced to make the image smooth and to reduce flicker. These are not the same technologies and something will suffer if they are somehow combined. I may be wrong here, so feel free to correct me, but if I recall one of the big arguments of 720p over 1080i at the beginning of the HDTV debates (before 1080p) was that 720p may not have as much resolution, but the image is cleaner because there is no stitching or interlacing. It was suppose to be a more "film projector-like" image in that at any given fraction of a second there is one complete image on the screen. So moire patterns in fabric for example will be a thing of the past. As far as stills looking like crap, that may have been the case 10 years ago, but have you seen some of the recently released Watchmen stills? You wouldn't want to print them at 16x20" but they are more than good enough for web use.

08-28-2008, 07:34 AM	#86
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886 Original Poster	Also, one more thought. If overheating is going to be such a major problem why is it not an issue on any point and shoot I've ever used? Or in the new Panasonic LX3 which also offers "HD video"?

08-28-2008, 07:37 AM	#87
nixcamic Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Guatemala Posts: 354	Originally posted by Peter Zack Video is not the same as stitching 24 or 30 frames per second together. Video is 60 half frames that are interlaced to make the image smooth and to reduce flicker. These are not the same technologies and something will suffer if they are somehow combined. Your post was actually making good points, and I started to believe you, until this. There is both interlaced and progressive video, interlaced is indeed as you described. progressive (which is considered the better of the two) however, is just a series of frames stuck together. Almost all video before DVD was progressive, not interlaced, including all film video, which has to be progressive by nature. DVD was interlaced, because it compresses better, although it provides a lower quality image. HD DVD and Blueray offer the option of interlaced and progressive video. This is what the p and i in 1080p and 1080i stand for. Anyhow, I'm sure the nikon engineers are smarter than any of us and figured out how to make a camera that doesn't suck.

08-28-2008, 08:42 AM	#88
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	Originally posted by Peter Zack Video is not the same as stitching 24 or 30 frames per second together. Hate to tell you, but native film is 24fps. A lot of HDTV displays (including projectors) support this as well so they don't to translate it to 30fps or 60fps. That's one reason Pentax tried to get the K20D's "video" mode to 24fps but they only had enough bandwidth for 20fps or I'm sure they would have promoted it as "film quality video"...not sure if you remember all the K20D rumors about "HDTV video" as a feature ;-) So believe it or not, the K20D fired the first "video in a dSLR" salvo...Nikon was just the first to package audio/video into an AVI file on a dSLR. p.s., Mark Dimos is the surfer photographer I was trying to remember the name of...

08-28-2008, 09:29 AM	#90
Andrew Faires Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Ontario Posts: 744	Originally posted by Peter Zack maybe I'm way off base.... I guess my question is whether the k20d opens and closes the shutter 20 times a second to achieve it's high speed frame rate? I suspect that it keeps the shutter open (similar to live view) and samples the information 20 times per second. If that's the case, then I'd wager Nikon does the same sort of thing for it's movie mode. However, I'm just guessing.