[richandfleur]

A test video that takes 5 seconds to take would clearly show them how bad it is

Vimeo

I had hoped that a feature upgrade firmware would be released by now, but that side of things just hasn't happened other than to allow support for Pentax offerings such as the 1.4x Teleconverter. Certainly no annual iOS feature enhancement upgrades coming from Ricoh/Pentax unfortunately. I've said this too many times already, but the hardware present on the K-30 is sufficient to allow for lots of improvements, such as audio levels displays, mechanical SR, increased video IQ bitrates etc.


I'm now looking at non Pentax options, especially as mirrorless kicks off and is often more video focussed, and that's sad but directly in their hands really.

[Steve.Ledger]

SR should be off when tripod mounted, that 645Z camera is clearly on a tripod.

[richandfleur]

The SR handles fine during the upwards tilt. So whilst yes it should be off on a tripod, that's not the root cause of this issue.

[Steve.Ledger]

Sorry, why would you demonstrate SR for vertical panning on a tripod?
I know being on a tripod is not the root cause of the effect we saw, but the point is that it isn't necessary to have SR enabled in that situation because it isn't designed to stabilize tripod mounted video or 'panning' of any kind. I'd like to see the same shot 'hand held'.

[richandfleur]

Sorry I don't have a 645z to demo that shot for you Steve...

I showed that as an example of where optical stabilisation can't cope but where mechanical stabilisation would recognise that there was no actual shake motion occurring to stabilise. Mechanical is always going to have a major leg up on purely optical stabilisation techniques by virtue of knowing when actual shake movement is actually occurring.

[altopiet]

The lack of video knowledge and experience is perfectly fine, if they would ask someone who knows, or try to find out. If you're not the target audience for a product, or a feature of a product, find out what your audience wants. Other companies can do it...

I don't know anything about video, and using my Pentax and my Canon Legria cameras for a few clips here and there, gives me enough quality for my personal use.....

I've been following the threads by the video experts for a while, and find it very interesting.

Is it possible that Ricoh/Pentax know what you're talking about, I mean how stupid can they be...but as they do not have the same market penetration as Canon and Nikon, that it might not be worth the extra cost involved to retain the personnel with all the knowledge you are talking about.... that'll increase cost and eventually mean more expensive cameras to all users, most of them probably not needing the features you mention?

It might be that they are doing what they can with what they have, and if and when their market share and revenue increase in future, more R+D might go toward perfecting the video capabilities?

I'm just trying to get some logical explanation as to why they don't employ the features you want, ruling out any weird conspiracy theory or any other F*** attitude they might have toward Pentax users?

[Giklab]

Sorry I don't have a 645z to demo that shot for you Steve...

I showed that as an example of where optical stabilisation can't cope but where mechanical stabilisation would recognise that there was no actual shake motion occurring to stabilise. Mechanical is always going to have a major leg up on purely optical stabilisation techniques by virtue of knowing when actual shake movement is actually occurring.

I think you mean "digital".

[Steve.Ledger]

Sorry I don't have a 645z to demo that shot for you Steve...

[faceplam] I was not asking you, Richard - it was rhetorical.

I showed that as an example of where optical stabilisation can't cope but where mechanical stabilisation would recognise that there was no actual shake motion occurring to stabilise. Mechanical is always going to have a major leg up on purely optical stabilisation techniques by virtue of knowing when actual shake movement is actually occurring.

Yes, but it's a poor, nay stupid example to demonstrate how digital stabilization is flawed. Like I said, I'd like to see an hand held sample.



---------- Post added 11-08-14 at 08:05 PM ----------

Is it possible that Ricoh/Pentax know what you're talking about, I mean how stupid can they be...but as they do not have the same market penetration as Canon and Nikon, that it might not be worth the extra cost involved to retain the personnel with all the knowledge you are talking about.... that'll increase cost and eventually mean more expensive cameras to all users, most of them probably not needing the features you mention?

In business, you don't 'not' do something because you can't afford to, you do it because you can't afford not to.
PENTAX are losing customers to other brands because of their meh attitude to video. They would increase their user base if they blew the others out of the water with superb video capabilities. PENTAX already have enviable quality hardware and stills imaginary features all at a price point below their rivals, beating the others at video as well would draw more customers to PENTAX and fill their coffers.
Simple basic business sense.

But we've all strayed well off topic here. This thread is about the K-S1 video quality.[

[Danas_Anis]

Is it possible that Ricoh/Pentax know what you're talking about, I mean how stupid can they be...but as they do not have the same market penetration as Canon and Nikon, that it might not be worth the extra cost involved to retain the personnel with all the knowledge you are talking about.... that'll increase cost and eventually mean more expensive cameras to all users, most of them probably not needing the features you mention?

It might be that they are doing what they can with what they have, and if and when their market share and revenue increase in future, more R+D might go toward perfecting the video capabilities?

If that is the thinking of Ricoh Pentax then it is plain stupid.
How you expect to grow your market if you do not offer anything for new customers to come.
Look now at Samsung, they worked hard on making a camera so they would return back to the arena and finally they did it.
The inclusion of 4K video in two versions alone is their main card of attention, Samsung completely destroyed 7D mark 2 and is kicking Panasonic GH4 in its butt. And looks like when you do things pretty right for both still and motion imaging you can get many new customers to choose you.

I wish Pentax offered something like Samsung did with their NX1.

As much as I love Pentax, looks like Samsung stole me, cause now I am looking for a camera that offers up to date video features since the new generation of customers ask for video next to photography and I need a tool to handle both. So if there is no one else to offer APC sensor and decent video features (better video IQ etc.) (to make things worse it should include trending 4K) Samsung NX1 seems to be the only valuable choice as of yet.

So Ricoh Pentax should really consider video features and improving quality cause they are now loosing clients.

I kind of expected KS1 to have better improvements in terms of video offerings, but Ricoh Pentax missed the shot again as they did with 645z, they got many new eyes on them as to be the first ones to offer video on medium format and they fail big by not making it stand out.

And to think in an extreme dramatic point of view, if Ricoh Pentax is to ignore the importance of video demands in the market, soon the only way to stay living focusing on still only would be to offer 645z at the same price as Canon 5D is priced. Then it would be something almost revolutionary.

Other wise the nice unique back lit buttons on KS1 and possibly future Pentax cameras won;t bring much new customers to Ricoh Pentax to live well.
I think it is less financially damaging to hire couple of folks to work on video features to make them stand out and lurk in new customers than having customers not only to not choose Ricoh Pentax, but also have leaving customers.

[kadajawi]

I don't know anything about video, and using my Pentax and my Canon Legria cameras for a few clips here and there, gives me enough quality for my personal use.....

I've been following the threads by the video experts for a while, and find it very interesting.

Is it possible that Ricoh/Pentax know what you're talking about, I mean how stupid can they be...but as they do not have the same market penetration as Canon and Nikon, that it might not be worth the extra cost involved to retain the personnel with all the knowledge you are talking about.... that'll increase cost and eventually mean more expensive cameras to all users, most of them probably not needing the features you mention?

It might be that they are doing what they can with what they have, and if and when their market share and revenue increase in future, more R+D might go toward perfecting the video capabilities?

I'm just trying to get some logical explanation as to why they don't employ the features you want, ruling out any weird conspiracy theory or any other F*** attitude they might have toward Pentax users?

Pentax DSLRs are not _awful_ for video, but they don't make use of what is possible with the hardware that is there. And that is the frustrating part. Relatively simple fixes to make others look to Pentax and say... oh... that IS interesting, I'd like to have that camera, instead of... meh, I can have that, in better, from Canon, Nikon, or anyone else. And while Nikon is improving their cameras, Pentax is moving backwards, making them worse.


Canon, too, is limiting their video capabilities of their cameras. But that is because they have some very lucrative professional video cameras they'd rather sell, so their DSLRs can't be too good, or they'll lose money. Pentax doesn't have that.


Hiring someone to translate our video wishlist in this forum would be already sufficient to give them some ideas they can work on... is that really too much of an expense? They could go to the folks behind Magic Lantern and ask them if they are interested in working on the Pentax. Hire some of them so they can access the firmware and work on it directly. These people do a ton of great work for FREE for Canon... they are the ones that make Canon DSLRs usable for video, they are the reason why people actually buy Canon DSLRs if they want to shoot video. Without them, no sales for Canon.


The problem with the 645Z was that the hardware really isn't suitable for quality video. It can't be done with a 50 MP MF sensor at this point... I think the sensor only is able to do video because they wanted live view... and that is a feature that people who buy the sensor can use. For example in a studio the camera can be connected to a big monitor giving people working on the shoot the ability to see the photo before it is taken. Polaroids taken to the next level, basically.

[altopiet]

If that is the thinking of Ricoh Pentax then it is plain stupid.
How you expect to grow your market if you do not offer anything for new customers to come.
Look now at Samsung, they worked hard on making a camera so they would return back to the arena and finally they did it.
The inclusion of 4K video in two versions alone is their main card of attention, Samsung completely destroyed 7D mark 2 and is kicking Panasonic GH4 in its butt. And looks like when you do things pretty right for both still and motion imaging you can get many new customers to choose you.

I wish Pentax offered something like Samsung did with their NX1.

As much as I love Pentax, looks like Samsung stole me, cause now I am looking for a camera that offers up to date video features since the new generation of customers ask for video next to photography and I need a tool to handle both. So if there is no one else to offer APC sensor and decent video features (better video IQ etc.) (to make things worse it should include trending 4K) Samsung NX1 seems to be the only valuable choice as of yet.

So Ricoh Pentax should really consider video features and improving quality cause they are now loosing clients.

I kind of expected KS1 to have better improvements in terms of video offerings, but Ricoh Pentax missed the shot again as they did with 645z, they got many new eyes on them as to be the first ones to offer video on medium format and they fail big by not making it stand out.

And to think in an extreme dramatic point of view, if Ricoh Pentax is to ignore the importance of video demands in the market, soon the only way to stay living focusing on still only would be to offer 645z at the same price as Canon 5D is priced. Then it would be something almost revolutionary.

Other wise the nice unique back lit buttons on KS1 and possibly future Pentax cameras won;t bring much new customers to Ricoh Pentax to live well.
I think it is less financially damaging to hire couple of folks to work on video features to make them stand out and lurk in new customers than having customers not only to not choose Ricoh Pentax, but also have leaving customers.

It would be interesting to know the decision makers in Ricoh's thoughts regarding Pentax, which is a small part of their business AFAIK, and how much they are prepared to invest to increase their market share compared to the big players. Pentax is such a small player that they might not deem it possible to to take a big enough share of the market, even if they invest much more than Pentax can generate on it's own; and try and get it to fund it's own growth over the long term... doing it by focussing on Pentax strong points of durability, all weather etc.

I know it's sometimes difficult to try and understand why they can't go more aggressively for market share, but taking into account current global economic situation and overall decline in DSLR sales, they might have a much more conservative and long term approach to strengthen the brand and it's capabilities.

Perhaps they are wrong and Pentax will die eventually, or if they have a sound business strategy and plans in place, which might make Pentax a much bigger player in future, and unfortunately I don't think their planning is going to be influenced by a minority of users who care about quality video....if only one can read their minds, but it's almost the same situation as with FF...nobody knows for sure, and everyone keeps guessing, which is understandably frustrating.

[kadajawi]

How much can activating a feature that already existed in previous cameras, and for which all the hardware needed is already in the camera, and which works in other areas of the camera perfectly fine, how much can that cost?! If it takes a programmer more than a day I would be very surprised.

I don't ask Pentax to be on the forefront, pushing the envelop. Just make use of the hardware that is there and improve the software a bit to extend functionality. The quality improvements are given to Pentax by Fujitsu, Nikon, Sony and Samsung. The processor keeps improving. The sensors keep improving. Add on top SR and a bit of solid firmware and you have a compelling packet.

[altopiet]

How much can activating a feature that already existed in previous cameras, and for which all the hardware needed is already in the camera, and which works in other areas of the camera perfectly fine, how much can that cost?! If it takes a programmer more than a day I would be very surprised.

I don't ask Pentax to be on the forefront, pushing the envelop. Just make use of the hardware that is there and improve the software a bit to extend functionality. The quality improvements are given to Pentax by Fujitsu, Nikon, Sony and Samsung. The processor keeps improving. The sensors keep improving. Add on top SR and a bit of solid firmware and you have a compelling packet.

if it's as easy as that, then I must agree with you, it seems silly not to do it....

[PiDicus Rex]

demonstrate SR for vertical panning on a tripod

pssst, <whispers,..> Steve, it's called tilting

[Steve.Ledger]

pssst, <whispers,..> Steve, it's called tilting

'Tilt' is a short movement. 'Panning' is a continuous movement.