[Steve.Ledger]

I'll upload some OOC samples to DropBox..

Straight out of the K-50 (details in notes.txt)
Basically the best video IQ possible with my K-50. K-01 is similar, but mostly worse.
► https://www.dropbox.com/sh/pengw643cc4n68e/AAB0ppAtbIOawKd_RrGigJz8a?dl=0

[PiDicus Rex]

Christ, that looks like 480p blown up to 1080.

That was similar to my first thought.

you're really wanting massive DoF like camcorders and smart phone, which DLSRs aren't good for with video.

They can be, but it takes a decent lens, and a closed down Iris, which means a heap of light ( same as on an ENG camera ).

The 4th screenshot was from a Sony NEX-5 on a tripod,

Woah, that's horrid.

Also: F*** LED stage lights.

Lemme guess - cheap LED Parcan clones? HATE, WITH, PASSION.
Shot some burlesque before new year with those, absolutely rotten. Got a Mate-ette to book proper tungsten Par's for her's a couple of weekends ago, amazing, skin that looks like skin, not like blue plastic.

I'll upload some OOC samples to DropBox..

Will drag 'em in to Edius and take a look

[Steve.Ledger]

They can be, but it takes a decent lens, and a closed down Iris, which means a heap of light ( same as on an ENG camera ).

I have what I consider pretty decent lenses, but I don't have a DLSR that has decent video.
You're 'flyscreen' comment the other day was spot on. It's exactly the effect you get from Pentax video.
Rather than cropping the sensor at 1080, they remove lines until you get 1080p. Crikey, have you tried 720p mode, it's freaking scary bad...! Any line which isn't perfectly horizontal is like a flight of steps.
The word 'hideous' comes to mind.

So actually, my opinion is that no, a decent lens is not enough - more is needed in decent video engineering from a camera which should be quite capable of it.

[grispie]

Question - how does K-3 video compare to K-30 video? My K-30 produces really soft footage.

I think the k30 is similar to the K01 for video (??)
My k3 beats the k01 for video by far on less artifacts and more clean/sharper files & iso performance.. especially when putting an fa31 on it.
The difference is considerable to me.
these are still my best examples for video with k3 (nothing new, so most will have seen them before):

Vimeo

Vimeo

in any case, as steve indicated: shallow dof is you best friend when it comes to dslr video.
For wide, deep dof shots, you will always be stuck with a certain graininess, which you may like or not like.
And it is indeed lack of sharpness due to low bitrate. If only pentax would increase that bitrate.

I believe, shooting in 25fps, muted, contrast/sharpness/saturation down and re-adjusting in post will still give you the best result.
there is no limit on your creativity though... :-)

[kadajawi]

100% sure, and your K-5 screen shots prove what I was saying.

I'll upload some OOC samples to DropBox..

I do think the parts that are in focus are relatively sharp. Not 1080p (well, the screenshots are sadly sampled down to 720p), but it's not too bad, given that there is no sharpening applied. Everything sharp, in focus, no. With a lot more light I could get closer, but it won't match a tiny sensor.

That shot above with the waves coming in will confuse the h3ll out of the codec. The bit rate is not high enough for a shot like that to ever work on Pentax.

The K-5 can handle that. No problem. Newer Pentax cameras can't, that's true. But I think many would fail.

That was similar to my first thought.


They can be, but it takes a decent lens, and a closed down Iris, which means a heap of light ( same as on an ENG camera ).


Woah, that's horrid.


Lemme guess - cheap LED Parcan clones? HATE, WITH, PASSION.
Shot some burlesque before new year with those, absolutely rotten. Got a Mate-ette to book proper tungsten Par's for her's a couple of weekends ago, amazing, skin that looks like skin, not like blue plastic.


Will drag 'em in to Edius and take a look

I don't know what LED lights were used, but... it looked horrible. And it was way too focused... one point of the stage was always blown out, no matter what was standing there.

I suppose you'll never be able to share those shoots?

I have what I consider pretty decent lenses, but I don't have a DLSR that has decent video.
You're 'flyscreen' comment the other day was spot on. It's exactly the effect you get from Pentax video.
Rather than cropping the sensor at 1080, they remove lines until you get 1080p. Crikey, have you tried 720p mode, it's freaking scary bad...! Any line which isn't perfectly horizontal is like a flight of steps.
The word 'hideous' comes to mind.

So actually, my opinion is that no, a decent lens is not enough - more is needed in decent video engineering from a camera which should be quite capable of it.

Cropping the sensor at 1080p would mean a very, very tight crop. That wouldn't work for me. I already don't like the crop the newer Pentax forces onto you. It would be nice to have, if you need to zoom in for once. The solution is to read the whole sensor, and then resize it. But the processing power and the sensors Pentax used so far probably won't allow it. Nikon IS doing it (maybe not completely... but to quite an extent) with their newer cameras, so the Fujitsu/Sony hardware should be capable of doing it. One problem with newer Pentaxes is I think also the lack of an AA filter... that makes lines even harsher, and the AA simulator doesn't work during video.

Btw., as to that DSLRs can't produce sharp video... what about the NX1? I know, technically not a DSLR, but the only thing speaking against having that hardware in a DSLR body is that Samsung is not making DSLRs, and may not sell the CPU and sensor to other companies. Wouldn't it be great if Pentax and Samsung would be partners again? Samsung provides the sensor and processor, Pentax does the lenses and SR. Pentax creates DSLR cameras, Samsung mirrorless. A match made in heaven.

[Steve.Ledger]

I do think the parts that are in focus are relatively sharp.

No, you misunderstood, perhaps you missed my earlier points. Your video is of relative close up subjects, I'm talking about scenes and landscape video with massive DoF and everything in focus.

The K-5 can handle that. No problem. Newer Pentax cameras can't, that's true. But I think many would fail.

I doubt the Olympus OM-D E-M5 II would fail with it's 77MBps Bit-Rate, OK it's not APS-C - but it's impressive.

Btw., as to that DSLRs can't produce sharp video... what about the NX1?

When I say DSLR I mean Pentax DSLR.
The NX-1 is an example of what Pentax could do. Right now, the 4K video from the NX-1 would make Pentax DSLR video look like it was shot using a potato.

[kadajawi]

Many, not the OM-D E-M5 II. :P However that 77 Mbps is all I, isn't it? That consumes A LOT more bitrate just to get the same quality. Then again, 80 Mbps MJPEG, which is quite similar to all I h264 (but h264 is better at compressing stills) is better.

The reason I brought my videos up is because the sample posted by Imp look BAD. Not because of the distance. It looks like the sensor, at no point in the frame captured anything that looks like it has more than 480p resolution. There is nothing sharp. What I recorded does look sharp IMHO. Not the whole frame, but the part that is in focus. I can go through my videos shot during the day when I get home to see if I have a sample that is similar... Basically judging by IMPs sample I don't think anything, even close up will be sharp. That sensor doesn't resolve enough resolution... or maybe it's the compression that ruins it... clearly there is lots of detail and movement everywhere that eats up too many bits...

[Kobie]

Here's a video I took of my dog going crazy for soap bubbles. I don't think it looks all that bad, but I wasn't expecting RED camera quality either.
https://flic.kr/p/saM3nT

[PiDicus Rex]

.

I don't know what LED lights were used, but... it looked horrible. And it was way too focused... one point of the stage was always blown out, no matter what was standing there.

Yeah, that's them, aweful ruddy things, Colour Temp of about 50,000K to get a decent skin tone in a photo.

I suppose you'll never be able to share those shoots?

The one with the Tungsten lighting, I may be able to share some - there's some parts of the performances, such as song lyrics, that the performers want to keep off the web.

And it is indeed lack of sharpness due to low bitrate. If only pentax would increase that bitrate.

All little blur hides a multitude of parsing errors...

, I'm talking about scenes and landscape video with massive DoF and everything in focus.

Shoot at the HyperFocal distance and close down the iris, same way it's done for cinema.
It's either that or get a Frazier Lens, assuming Panavision will let you rent one.

Right now, the 4K video from the NX-1 would make Pentax DSLR video look like it was shot using a potato.

I really need a Mr Potato Head with a toy camera right now,...

---------- Post added 05-05-15 at 02:15 AM ----------

Here's a video I took of my dog going crazy for soap bubbles. I don't think it looks all that bad

No, that's about right for hand held with a Zoom lens and the Video SR on.
Tripod and no SR improves it out of sight on a long lens - stick to using wides for handheld.

And for the sake of Lolz around the world, put a GoPro on that dogs head!

[kadajawi]

.
Yeah, that's them, aweful ruddy things, Colour Temp of about 50,000K to get a decent skin tone in a photo.


The one with the Tungsten lighting, I may be able to share some - there's some parts of the performances, such as song lyrics, that the performers want to keep off the web.


All little blur hides a multitude of parsing errors...


Shoot at the HyperFocal distance and close down the iris, same way it's done for cinema.
It's either that or get a Frazier Lens, assuming Panavision will let you rent one.


I really need a Mr Potato Head with a toy camera right now,...

---------- Post added 05-05-15 at 02:15 AM ----------


No, that's about right for hand held with a Zoom lens and the Video SR on.
Tripod and no SR improves it out of sight on a long lens - stick to using wides for handheld.

And for the sake of Lolz around the world, put a GoPro on that dogs head!

Legal issues? Understandable.

The lights were constantly changing, between red and blue usually, but it wasn't pretty. The first concerts I shot used proper lights, and it looked so much nicer. It's a shame... though I can understand how much better the LEDs must be for performers.

I actually quite like the GoPro, was really impressed. The footage from it looks better than the NEX 5! Really wouldn't have expected that, and that was the 2...

[Imp]

Pentax cameras have great sensors. All it would take for better video is a better firmware. And perhaps a bit more processing power.

To bad there isn't a Magic Lantern equivalent for Pentax. We're too low-key. =(

[richandfleur]

Pentax cameras have great sensors. All it would take for better video is a better firmware.

Yep, the changes required to make a huge difference are all software really.

[kadajawi]

Question: PiDicus Rex, you always mention how the K-5 files have a bigger DR than is visible... how do you recover those details? Any idea how to do it in Premiere? I've tried the Fast Color Corrector and pulled down the output level, but I can't recover anything.

[PiDicus Rex]

Legal issues?

Nah, just limited amounts of material - if their act is available online, they have to write a new act, else people will come, and then tell everyone 'Oh, I've seen that show online already,...'

All it would take for better video is a better firmware. And perhaps a bit more processing power.

Yup, or less processing and more data transfer, in the case of just sending the uncompressed vision straight to the HDMI port, or writing the files out as raw data.

[Imp]

How is Pentax video if it is ported out to a Ninja or external recorder? Has anyone tried?