[Christopher M.W.T]

Any word on the quality of the K5's video mode?

Having just recently done photography at an event I used my K7's video mode even with a 50mm 1.4 lens it was still dark and noisy.

My partner use a 5D Mk2 with a 50mm 1.8 and it was a total revelation, the footage he had was unbelievable. It's making me seriously consider moving to the 5D mk2 for my next camera purely for the video mode.

But is the K-5's video mode majorly improved or not?

[Christopher M.W.T]

5D low light footage.


Login | Facebook

[falconeye]

But is the K-5's [low light, ed.] video mode majorly improved or not?

I guess this'll be moved into the video section soon

The real question is about the kind of subsampling done in video mode. I'm one of a few who tried to figure that out using zone plate test charts.

Once you know the subsampling factor you can derive all other properties from it.

The 5DmkII seems to do a kind of "read every 3rd line" skipping but reads all rows. That's a subsampling factor of 3. According to my own research, the K-7 has a subsampling factor of 6. However, the K-x seems to have an even higher subsampling factor giving it a worse low light performance than the K-7 despite its good low light capabilities in still mode. My guess would be 9.

In still mode and at ISO 1600, the 5DmkII has about 1 stop advantage over a K-x, and 2 stops over a K-7. Add the subsampling factor 3/6 and you end up with a low light advantage of 3 stops in video mode for the 5DmkII over a K-7.

As for the K-5, I expect the performance at ISO 1600 to be only 1 stop behind a 5DmkII (in still mode). In video, it depends on the subsampling factor (9, 6, 4 or 3?). There are rumors that Sony worked on this but who knows ...

Will be interesting to see real world footage of the same scenes.


BTW, even a subsampling factor of 3 let's you loose 1.5 stops over still performance, i.e., even a 5DmkII isn't a good performer in video (for a given lens surface). And a Bayer filter compared to a trichroic prism in a 3 CCD camcorder let's you loose another 1-2 stops...
[so, it looses 3 stops compared to the feasible. But the large chip being much bigger than only 8x the surface makes more than up for this]



UPDATE:
Just one more info:
Some where speculating Sony uses a lower subsampling factor because using Exmor HD in a dedicated video camera, the NEX-VG10. That doesn't seem to be the case. I.e., the Caprock filter (http://www.caprockdev.com/antimoire.htm) still provides the usual level of moiré and aliasing reduction, search vimeo for it. With a subsampling factor of 1, the Caprock filter would have no effect.

[Christopher M.W.T]

Thanks for the response there.

Regardless of how the 5Dmk2 does it, it's low light video performance is nothing short of amazing, I was totally shocked.

[jogiba]

BTW the 60D is better than the 7D for video.

[JeffJS]

THE one video I've done with the K7. DA*16-50. Not necessarily low light but no light assistance other than whatever was in the room.

Grad Party

[Fl_Gulfer]

Just buy a nice Video camera. I'm glad I did.

[Urkeldaedalus]

In the little I've done with the K-5's video, the quality of the 1080p footage seems very good. As for noise, I took a video of a wedding dance in an almost completely darkened room and the noise was still much better than the K-7's video. In fact, the K-7 probably wouldn't have even been able to do the same video in a similar low light situation.

This said, if you want a DSLR for video, Pentax still is probably not the way to go at the moment due to lack of manual controls as you know. There are ways you can work around it, but still, annoying.

[jogiba]

Just buy a nice Video camera. I'm glad I did.

That is like saying if you want to take stills get a point & shoot camera. Try doing this with a video camera under $50,000.
[YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1Rq2KzoTSg[/YT]

[YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zs-Ge_cmI4[/YT]

[falconeye]

Try doing this with a video camera under $50,000.

Or try becoming famous for an artistically average short film (Reverie) without doing it on a hyped piece of technology.

[tuco]

Funny, when we shoot our digital still cameras we wouldn't be caught dead saying it was film. But in this new DSLR video revolution, we call them "film".

[Christopher M.W.T]

Reality is and argue whatever but the 5D Mk2 produces amazing low light video, that cannot be argued. Regardless of bit rates, codecs etc the results speak for themselves.

[falconeye]

the results speak for themselves.

Back to your original question and regarding results ...

Here are some results from Fenschel & Janisch (a film production company) for the D7000 which is supposed to have an almost identical sensor and the low light film performance may be indistinguishable from a K-5 (the overall performance of a K-5 may be better though, because of higher bitrate support). Note that 1080p footage from a D7000 is 24p vs. 25p from a K-5.

Some of their other samples show too that color moiré and aliasing is a bit more pronounced on a Canon 7D than a D7000.

Here you go:

You Tube

You Tube

(iso 1600 which the K-5 would have to auto-select)

You Tube

You Tube

[Christopher M.W.T]

Back to your original question and regarding results ...

Here are some results from Fenschel & Janisch (a film production company) for the D7000 which is supposed to have an almost identical sensor and the low light film performance may be indistinguishable from a K-5 (the overall performance of a K-5 may be better though, because of higher bitrate support). Note that 1080p footage from a D7000 is 24p vs. 25p from a K-5.

Some of their other samples show too that color moiré and aliasing is a bit more pronounced on a Canon 7D than a D7000.

Here you go:
YouTube - Nikon D7000: Low Light Test (ISO 1600)

(iso 1600 which the K-5 would have to auto-select)

Thanks for t

YouTube - Nikon D7000: Artificial Light

Thanks for that, thats impressive!

[Christopher M.W.T]

Does it say anywhere what lens was used /