[Steve.Ledger]

Don't forget to watch Philip Blooms' 3 part review of the BMPCC first.

Here's part 1

You Tube

You Tube

[PiDicus Rex]

Yes, Blooms review was one of the reasons I held off on buying one - that and the blamestorm that rages on the BMD forum, and my own experience with their second rate drivers and instructions for the Intensity Shuttle that I bought.

[kadajawi]

Apparently they were/are more capable than the good folk at Canon.


Steve

Canon wants to sell cameras like the 1DC. They don't want their DSLRs to be good for video.

Keep in mind the K-3 is fully capable of stabilized video without crop in live view.

I'll post much more when I get to it.

A few additions off the top of my head: Some things are clearly hardware based. But say focus peaking for a smaller area of the screen perhaps? Clear HDMI could be a hardware thing.

4K is nice. I think my next monitor will have > FullHD, though perhaps not 4K.

[richandfleur]

the K-3 is fully capable of stabilized video without crop in live view.

That's probably the easiest simple test to see if the stabilisation is mechanical or not. The crop border is required for software based stabilisation, to give the processor some wiggle room.
This shouldn't be apparent if it's mechanical based stabilisation.


It would be worth taking a shot on the K-5 / K-7 camera as a photo, and then comparing this to a still grabbed from a video of exactly the same focal length/aperture etc (on a tripod) with image stabilisation off and on in both case for comparison.


And then do the same on the K-30 / K-3 / K-01 etc.

[kadajawi]

Interesting idea. I can do that test, eventually.


Ok, here we go with my wishlist:


I want Pentax to treat video seriously, as a tool that is meant for professional users. Imagine a K-3 only having the green mode for stills. Ridiculous, right? Of course the users want control over aperture, exposure, and a TON of other things, and of course he doesn't want to be limited to JPEG. The green mode is there for those situations when you give the camera to someone else to take a group photo for you. Yet the video mode in any Pentax is basically stuck in the green mode.


Here's the thing: Without great AF the video mode is useless for consumers who just want to shoot a simple video. DSLRs, at least the big ones, like the K-3 and 645Z are owned and used by enthusiasts or professional users. People who put effort into their work and are more or less skilled (and want to improve themselves). That's also the kind of video shooting a DSLR lends itself to.


Pentax should not dumb their cameras down, or, perhaps better, offer an option in the firmware to unlock the advanced features.


Things I want/think they make sense for some users:


SR is an obvious one. 3 modes, at least. None, mechanical and electronic SR. More would be better. One mode for panning (so it corrects vertically), not horizontally. A combined mode where the mechanical SR filters out fast movements, and the electronic SR (using data from the accelerometer) filters out slow movements, and is able to "move" the sensor back in the center so it can take bumps again, instead of being maxed out. Basically a super steady mode. None and mechanical SR should be un-cropped, but with the option of giving you a crop (different levels of crop perhaps even?). We can go even further: Have a button that locks the sensor position, even while recording (i.e. the sensor will do it's best to keep the video steady at that position, even when it means it's maxed out. It will not try to go back to a center position. If you press it, an overlay will appear showing you where the sensor currently is, so you can balance it out by hand. Another button can tell the camera you are going to pan, so it knows not to do this overshooting and then going back thing that sometimes can appear when panning a bit faster. Additionally you could be able to set exactly how the camera tries to balance out camera shake, i.e. will it let you get a handheld look that just filters out stuff that leads to a wobbling picture, or do you want something that is really smooth?


MJPEG is a minimum requirement. Many video cameras and DSLRs offer you different quality settings AND different codecs, the Sony A7s for example has MP4, AVCHD and XAVC-S. Yes, they are all based around h264, but there's quite some difference. Especially XAVC-S is pretty amazing. I don't expect a Pentax to have that sort of processing power though. MJPEG will be fine. ProRes or similar would be a nice addition. RAW, even better. But not 100% needed. Oh, and of course higher bitrates for h264, however I have the feeling that the bitrate isn't the only problem when it comes to the h264 encoder in the K-3.


Line skipping vs pixel binning. Ideally do as much pixel binning as possible, but do give me the option of selecting how much line skipping I want. In a slow moving scene I want pixel binning. Better low light performance, less to no moire/aliasing. However pixel binning/full sensor readout leads to stronger rolling shutter effects and a heated up sensor. Sometimes I want to be able to move/shake the camera much more, in which case I'd rather have line skipping (faster sensor readout, less rolling shutter, and the movement will cover up jagged edges anyway). Being able to select how much I want to skip would be even cooler.


Use the buttons. The camera has plenty of unused buttons. Let me use them. Apart from what I mentioned in the SR section I want a white balance lock (similar to AE-L), that works in video mode. It should be remembered even when the camera goes to sleep or you turn it off. Ideally I'd be able to go to a video on the SD card that had the white balance locked and get the exact same white balance and perhaps even look settings (?).


Focus peaking. I guess the K-3 doesn't have enough processing power to do video recording and focus peaking. Unless it is basically a picture style that gets applied to the whole image, and that would get recorded if it were activated while recording a video, try to enable it while recording. Yes, perhaps the whole frame won't work, but as much as possible. Maybe it's a square in the center that can have focus peaking. That'd be better than nothing. In any case, focus peaking while recording video would be fine. Perhaps at different levels even, i.e. we can set how sensitive it is at detecting contrast. Sometimes it doesn't have to be that precise, and you're glad if it detects contrast at all, sometimes the whole screen would seem to be in focus, and you need more sensitivity.


Get inspired by Magic Lantern. Or better yet get Magic Lantern developers to work at Pentax. Unlike Canon, Sony and Panasonic, Pentax does not have a professional video arm that needs to be protected. You can thus go really pro in terms of features. Of course that means Pentax needs to have people who really know video, and the demands of videographers. Who's better suited than the guys that make Canon DSLRs awesome video tools? Also, you could try to get a DP as an advisor. If possible a popular one with lots of following, say Philip Bloom. Get him to give input/ideas that you actually try to fulfil, and get him to be then vocal about it.


Video styles meant for grading. Give us a picture style designed for a wide dynamic range, a flat picture that gives us the ability to really push the video. To give it a filmic look etc. Try to match what competitors are doing, so that it's easy to work with 2 brands on set and to get things to match.


4K, RAW, 10 bit, 4:2:2 or better yet 4:4:4, etc. Clearly nice to have. Even if it's only over HDMI (a proper HDMI plug that is hard to damage, if possible).


Audio levels on screen, with a red dot indicating the highest point in the last 10, 20 seconds (think digital vu meters?), and the ability to change the gain (perhaps by pressing a button and then using a dial, like with ISO etc.).


Timecode. So that shooting with multiple cameras becomes easier.


Zebras etc. Self explanatory. Be inspired by what professional cameras do, and give many options.

Imagine what good advertising it would be for Pentax if the next Indie hit was shot on a Pentax DSLR or mirrorless, and the director giving interviews where he raves about what a great tool the camera was, for both the actual video as well as promotional stills. Ok, perhaps that's a bit far fetched. But professional users more and more need to do stills and video, and seeing a pro at a wedding for example shoot Pentax will inspire people to look into the brand, and perhaps buy a camera from Pentax. I've had people who like my photos be interested in buying a Pentax (AFAIK one or two did indeed buy a Pentax in the end, and back then I was not even close to being a pro).

[richandfleur]

Great post all round really kadajawi. There are definitely some common themes coming through.

But professional users more and more need to do stills and video, and seeing a pro at a wedding for example shoot Pentax will inspire people to look into the brand, and perhaps buy a camera from Pentax. I've had people who like my photos be interested in buying a Pentax (AFAIK one or two did indeed buy a Pentax in the end, and back then I was not even close to being a pro).

I've been asked recently what camera I use to get my videos. The fact is the camera is one part in the production process and in reality others buying my camera wouldn't mean they'd end up producing the end result I do. That reads really self promoting, but the point is really that a flat cinema profile looks horrible, but is a great ingredient to allow for colour grading later on. Pentax video is presently orientated around the 'scene' mode of stills, where you dial in 'birthday candles' and the camera settings tweak for that use. As you say, we're stuck in pre baked outcomes of JPEG in video, and what we're really asking for is the keys to take the hardware out for a spin in pro mode.


I still maintain that most of what we're asking for is software. Most of the decisions we want some creative control over had to be made in order to produce the final file look these cameras are presently creating. All we're asking for is the ability to modify some of those settings to help us achieve a different look than the Pentax engineers envisaged/assumed we wanted. I had just hoped someone from Pentax would actually be listening but it appears we're a group of enthusiasts quite separated from the actual company.

[kadajawi]

Thanks.


I agree, most things are software based. Software turns so-so Canon cameras into amazing professional video tools. In terms of hardware there's not so much Pentax can do, they are using whatever Fujitsu and the sensor maker provides them with, however sensors are generally getting better for video (and Pentax can chose wisely), and the same goes to processors.


Maybe Adam could point Pentax towards our little corner here.

[PiDicus Rex]

And then do the same on the K-30 / K-3 / K-01 etc.

K-01 'crop factor' is 1.53 for Stills, and about 1.65/1.7 for video - I swap to stills on-set to get some production shots while setting up.

---------- Post added 21-07-14 at 05:51 PM ----------

MJPEG will be fine. ProRes or similar would be a nice addition. RAW, even better. But not 100% needed.

I could use RAW, but would happily settle for ProRes 4.4.4. - It's pretty much a defacto cross-platform standard now - Premiere, FCP, Edius and Avid all read ProRes files.
For my personal preference, ProRes is virtually identical in quality to Grass Valley's HQX Superfine CoDec.

Line skipping vs pixel binning.

Hadn't thought of that, makes 100% sense though.

Pentax does not have a professional video arm that needs to be protected.

TRUE! no need to worry about internal politics and taking sales from other divisions of the company.

[TomGarn]

Good job as always kadajawi !

Now we would be surprised for some kind of comment from Pentax & friends ...
But this kind of communication seems unwanted or dangerous to companies anyhow.
Maybe on facebook someone available to talk about future plans ? I doubt that somehow ...

A
Better lenses for video I wished to see (Here adding wanted features - one by one)
17-70mm focus =< 2.8 // manual focus ring with smooth turning + long range // silent power zoom // instant tele-jump for manual focus

B
Well fitting display-viewfinder // with diopter +- 5 // with a really good antifog for the eyepiece

C
Display monitor has to be movable from now on of course,

D
Individual manual sound for two (or 4) channels - instead of just stereo (I am not aware how well the K-3 has come close)

E
as above so below

[kadajawi]

Good job as always kadajawi !

Now we would be surprised for some kind of comment from Pentax & friends ...
But this kind of communication seems unwanted or dangerous to companies anyhow.
Maybe on facebook someone available to talk about future plans ? I doubt that somehow ...

A
Better lenses for video I wished to see (Here adding wanted features - one by one)
17-70mm focus =< 2.8 // manual focus ring with smooth turning + long range // silent power zoom // instant tele-jump for manual focus

B
Well fitting display-viewfinder // with diopter +- 5 // with a really good antifog for the eyepiece

C
Display monitor has to be movable from now on of course,

D
Individual manual sound for two (or 4) channels - instead of just stereo (I am not aware how well the K-3 has come close)

E
as above so below

A. Not seeing that happen. It's not what Pentax does... they'd need proper video cameras before they should even start thinking about that. Wouldn't it be possible to upgrade any lens to power zoom? Like with those focus pulling rigs, add another ring to the zoom ring. As long as that is smooth enough and the motor good enough you should be able to get something nice... and that would work with almost all lenses. (Also, remember those push/pull type zoom lenses? They are awesome for smooth zooming!


B. Sounds more like an aftermarket 3rd party company thing to me. And those things do exist, don't they?


C. I'd like it to be tiltable, but I understand that it adds bulk and weight, and reduces robustness, so I'm a bit split on that one. For me personally I'd pick the movable screen over a fixed one, but it can be a disadvantage for others, especially given the market Pentax caters to.


D. 2 channels is stereo... I could see an aftermarket accessory that attaches to the hot shoe and maybe connects via USB or so. It has better microphones built in (perhaps even surround?) and a better ADC too. In terms of size it wouldn't make the camera much bulkier. A version of that could have plugs instead of microphones, or both. The audio data is digitally put into camera and muxed as is into the video file, i.e. the compression can be done by the external device.


At this point I'd rather have them fix the firmware though. The foundation needs to be good before we can even think about adding hardware. The K-3 improved much on the audio side, with that headphone jack etc., but since they downgraded the video in some areas that's a wasted effort to me.

[PiDicus Rex]

The lack of a tiltable screen isn't as big of an issue for me, it'd be nice for future models, but not essential.

Lenses - yes, a focus ring that is fixed to the lens, not clutched, is essential, and the more degrees of rotation for it, the better, especially when being used with focus rigs.
All of my Sigma Zooms are already Parfocal, I'd want that, and smooth zoom action, to be included in all future lens designs.

Sound. Stereo is fine, just use an external mixer with full separation, so long as it's 48kHz sample rate, with the maximum signal to noise separation.
If you need dual mono, or mono in to dual mono with one track recording 10 or 20 dB lower, it's better practice to use an external mixer - that sort of ability is only built in on top end video cameras, rarely of anything in a comparative price bracket to DSLR's.

[kadajawi]

The lack of a tiltable screen isn't as big of an issue for me, it'd be nice for future models, but not essential.

Lenses - yes, a focus ring that is fixed to the lens, not clutched, is essential, and the more degrees of rotation for it, the better, especially when being used with focus rigs.
All of my Sigma Zooms are already Parfocal, I'd want that, and smooth zoom action, to be included in all future lens designs.

Sound. Stereo is fine, just use an external mixer with full separation, so long as it's 48kHz sample rate, with the maximum signal to noise separation.
If you need dual mono, or mono in to dual mono with one track recording 10 or 20 dB lower, it's better practice to use an external mixer - that sort of ability is only built in on top end video cameras, rarely of anything in a comparative price bracket to DSLR's.

For me at least focusing manually is very hard if not impossible when not looking at the screen straight... which limits what I can do with the camera. Not sure why that is so.

[TomGarn]

View:
Even if you got young sharp eyes - for your screen - held away by arm length,
you need to take sharpness either in full zoom - or use that digital trick-zoom.
So I wonder how anyone should ever manage well enogh without a 3 x magni-
fying viewfinder. I always use that !
Who else does ?
And if not ... Why not ?

Sound:
2 seperate channels for example are needed for question and answer with two mics.
Stereo can't ever do that, Kadajawi - because those channels can't work seperately on
our type of stereo / double-mono via recording auto-level controle ... and not on any Pentax
yet, I guess. That`'s why I asked for two real independendant mono channels - available on any
simple semiprofessional camcorder for decades now.

Lenses:
When I put on my A 35-105 / 3,5 I have a nice focus-ring - but the zoom ring is
to near to the camerabody and to small ... well I can manage somehow ... but
this is almost a torture while shifting focal length ... *sigh*
That lense is as sharp as the Tamron btw. - and cheap on ebay (below 100,- €)
https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-a-35-105mm-f35/review.html

With the zoom-pushing tele-lense: A 70-210 / 4 zooming is just great and easy
but pulling back to 70mm I still fear I might loose focus ...

My most-used lense, the Tamron 17-50 / 2.8 - has a junky plastic ring for focus,
so I dream about tightening it somehow ... Focus change is a heavy task in Try
and Error then .... My only luck here again is my magnifying LCD viewfinder !

Manual old lenses are still the best for video. Them, parfocal and with same F
of course is a must ... when you are a handyman on video ... ;-)

I was gossiping here about my dreams for a Pentax-Future. I doubt they will have
so many chances in reality - cause nobody listens to us ....
But dreaming is aloud in this thread, right ?
GH4 can do ... so why not our Super-Pentax-RICOH K-1 ?

[PiDicus Rex]

Sound: 2 seperate channels for example are needed for question and answer with two mics. Stereo can't ever do that, Kadajawi - because those channels can't work seperately on our type of stereo / double-mono via recording auto-level controle ... and not on any Pentax yet, I guess. That`'s why I asked for two real independendant mono channels - available on any simple semiprofessional camcorder for decades now.

That's not how 'Stereo' recording in the camera works.
It is ALWAYS two independent channel when recording - it is how you blend those channel in mix-down that determines the Stereo separation.
(exception: when feeding the Mic input a pre-mixed true Stereo signal)

It really should be regarded as Dual-Mono in recording, but that's harder to sell to the uneducated average buyer then the recognizable "Stereo" branding.

But dreaming is aloud in this thread, right ?

No. You'll need to equip your subconscious with a Volume control. I think that is Allowed.

[TomGarn]

Stereo or dual mono - doesn't matter to me ...
What I wanted to say is that I want two manual channels
that I can use for two different signals of course - independently
AND also - of course - manage a manual controle on the volume of those signals

If you split a stereo-signal in two mono-channels, you will always have the same
automatic volume controle for both channels (in our Pentaxes) if stereo or double mono.

I wanted (dreamed about) the usage of two channels ... that may of course also be combined
as a stereo signal - if wanted - if one pushes the switch.

It seems again I didn't make myself clear enough here. Sorry.