[torashi]

That was terrible - at first I thought he was using artificial bokeh enabled in a phone or something. Why not just set it to F4, have a nice background blur and he can 'freely' move in the focus zone. It completely ruined the point he was trying to make

I suspected some software blur, too, because of the weird DOF. He's pretty much in focus but then suddenly gets all blurry in a weird way. Not the one I'm used to from other f/1.2 optics.
Focus breathing is distracting, but just because he was demonstrating the AF system. No conventional presenter would in their right mind start moving this much back and forth.

[FozzFoster]

He's pretty much in focus but then suddenly gets all blurry in a weird way.

I also find it really odd that he goes to a location and then nearly entirely blows out the background with bokeh blur... why not just stay in studio?
A bit more depth of field can really add to the story telling of an image/scene.

[torashi]

I also find it really odd that he goes to a location and then nearly entirely blows out the background with bokeh blur... why not just stay in studio?
A bit more depth of field can really add to the story telling of an image/scene.

Well, f/1.2 ist the ultimate test for any AF system, in the same way his movements were. I figure his goal here was to show how it performed under a stress test, not a masterclass on high end video production, composition and photography. That said, he could've done it in a dimly lit studio, or at night, which would've been even better to showcase it's capabilities. Nighttime shooting is the reason to get such a fast lens anyway.

[redmenace]

You should go and watch it. It is funny to see a guy talking about video quality and how to achieve it while the camera constantly looses focus and everything gets blury.

Thanks for saving me the trouble!

[kadajawi]

Oh boy. Another clickbait full of it video from him.

I'm exclusively shooting 4K and wouldn't ever want to go back to FHD. His video looks bad. The focus shifting is horrible. Good lord. The AF is crap. I thought Canon was supposed to be good for AF?

Being able to reframe is nice. File size? Really? Storage is cheap. Hardware to play back and edit is cheap enough. I was doing it with a 7 year old Intel Core i5 Ivy Bridge. All I needed to do it properly was add a GeForce GTX 1060, though a lesser card could probably do too, I simply also wanted something I can use for gaming. My system is significantly faster now, but it's more a case of wanting than needing. I reckon you could easily build something adequate for about 500 Euro, excluding the monitor.

I watch on my phone, which is 1440p. That's always the resolution I select if I can. Same thing with my tablet. 1440p. The computer has a 4K screen, so that's what I use. I'm not streaming video on the go, so I don't care about bandwidth too much.

IMHO on the desktop (32" screen being quite close to me) 4K is a neccessity. Everything else gives me pixels that I don't want to see. On the phone, FHD will do, but I notice higher resolutions (4K is just too much though, except for VR glasses). On my TV, FHD is just right. The benefits of 4K aren't worth giving up the gorgeous plasma image for me. And I wouldn't notice it anyway.

But most of all: Shooting FHD is just not worth it. That's like shooting photos with a 4-6 MP DSLR. For most use cases, that will be enough. But would you do it? Would you buy a Pentax camera if it had a 6 MP camera in 2020? I mean, to view it on a monitor it's enough (well, almost, if you have a 4K screen). For most use cases it will suffice. But if everyone else is giving you 16 MP or more?

Also, he is talking about HIS viewers. Other channels will have different stats.


Besides: Pentaxes FHD is in no way comparable to, say, Panasonics FHD. There are worlds between them in terms of image quality.