[richandfleur]

*You* generalized in post 19 that manufacturers did this, I pointed out that it's a matter of models even within a manufacturer's lineup ... deal with it, mate.

You've said that multiple times. We've all heard you.

It's not a matter of models in Pentax land. None of them offer a higher bit rate or mechanical stabilisation in video mode. Deal with it, mate. None.

[clackers]

.

It's not a matter of models in Pentax land. None of them offer a higher bit rate or mechanical stabilisation in video mode. Deal with it, mate. None.

That's a totally different topic from what can be enabled in firmware, Richandfleur.

Sounds like *you* need to swap brands. (Rolls eyes).

[grispie]

I recall pentax to fix an issue using m lenses with the K01 for video. It was buried under a general firmware update, but it was there and i was thankful for it.

Regardless, i don't trust any brand to fix it later on. Because it seems to be a matter of luck, with all brands and sony being the King here. I see no reason Pentax/Ricoh to be any worse than other cameramakers in this. I prefer the product to have everything i need when i buy it..
And if it doesn't, my fault, i should have looked better when buying something.

[richandfleur]

I see no reason Pentax/Ricoh to be any worse than other cameramakers in this.

It's more that than fixes. Problems should be fixed, surely that's a given.
I personally think Pentax could easily do more, given it's hard to give examples of any major new features given to their cameras (via firmware update) recently.
The addition of focus peaking on the Q seems to be the main example.


New features that keep up with technology developments is a bonus. An example would be newer video formats, which simply weren't developed at the time of initial production.
One shouldn't necessarily expect this, but assuming the original hardware is capable, it's definitely a nice offering.
It's a question of how much does the manufacturer look after you after you've invested in their system?


This really is going off topic though, and would probably be better addressed in a new thread somewhere else.

You Tube

You Tube

---------- Post added 01-14-16 at 09:17 AM ----------

Pentax are actually very close, and would be immediately competitive again by:

• Offering a higher bitrate for video, that favours IQ over smaller file size.
• Enabling focus peaking during video capture
• Enabling sensor shift stabilisation during video capture
• Enabling digital zoom during video capture.

It's disappointing to have taken a step backwards (stabilisation wise) after the K-5 / K-7 series had this working very well.
One assumes this was a hardware issue, but regardless it's definitely something Pentax will need to address again moving forward; especially given at least 2 other companies are now offering this feature.
The have an excellent package otherwise, and it would be great to see them return to being able to make the most of it in stills and video modes.

---

Last edited by richandfleur; 01-13-2016 at 04:23 PM.

[grispie]

The have an excellent package otherwise, and it would be great to see them return to being able to make the most of it in stills and video modes.

I know we are off topic, but since the topic is answered i guess...
Regardless of the step from K5 to K3 and what was lost & gained, i am more dissapointed to hear that the video IQ in the Ks2 is below the K3 for some reason. Yesterday evening we were watching someone else's project in class that i had filmed with my K3 mixed with a jvc camcorder. 2 people made the comment that the images from the pentax looked quite pleasing (ps: was before any pp, mostly simple, static shots in good lighting, profile: mute).
I agree, i like it a lot more than canon colors myself. But i also know they are tricky to grade and in difficult situations, the codec just struggles.

So i was hoping that the Ks2 would at least get the same level of attention for video or better. Seems not & it says a lot about how pentax looks towards video in their cameras.
My conclusion at this point is that is not worth it waiting for pentax to get it right if you're after quality footage to grade. Love them for stills, but i'm very close to jumping for video. Probably Nikon, since they seem to invest heavily in the video area of their cameras, have no higher segment to protect and nikon mount lenses are a good investment.
Likely i'll await to see what the pentax FF looks like though..

[Steve.Ledger]

My conclusion at this point is that is not worth it waiting for pentax to get it right if you're after quality footage to grade. Love them for stills, but i'm very close to jumping for video.

And that's the conclusion I believe many folks who like to shoot video clips as well as stills are coming to. I did. I sold all my Pentax APS-C gear (as well as the Q and lenses) and have gone to an Olympus OM-D m43 system which makes use of it's 5-axis IBIS in video. I am extremely pleased I made the move in spite of losing a fair amount of money on the sale of some not too old gear. I still have the MX-1 however, as it has proven itself to be the best grab and snap camera I have plus of course it has the tilting screen which in my view is a must-have on all modern cameras.
I'll watch future Pentax developments with interest though,

[skogpingvin]

My 150-500 is from last year. It has OS and the OS works. I'm sure the same is true of the 50-500, which unlike the 150-500, is still in production.

I've also got the Sigma 150-500 APO HSM, and the OS works fine. I got mine in February 2015 in Australia, so it might be old stock - but I doubt it because I had to wait. Serial number on the lens is 14813502.

Disable the in-body stabilisation when using in-lens OS, and it works nicely.

[Steve.Ledger]

Disable the in-body stabilisation when using in-lens OS, and it works nicely.

This is no IBIS in Movie mode for the K-3. Perhaps you mean disable Movie SR?

[skogpingvin]

No, sorry, I'm talking about the OS in the lens, which I use in preference to the in-body SR for stills. Not video.

[Steve.Ledger]

Yes, but this thread is about video, not stills. Hence my confusion

[anemone]

It has the old dinosaur MPEG codec, but as long as you don't mind - and a couple of people like Kadajawi prefer it, IIRC, yes, you get sensor stabilisation!

And it is the dinosaur you know.

This product is licensed under the AVC Patent Portfolio License for the
personal use of a consumer or other uses in which it does not receive
remuneration to (i) encode video in compliance with the AVC standard
(“AVC video”) and/or (ii) decode AVC video that was encoded by a
consumer engaged in a personal activity and/or was obtained from a video
provider licensed to provide AVC video. No license is granted or shall be
implied for any other use.
Additional information may be obtained from MPEG LA, L.L.C.
See MPEG LA - The Standard for Standards

I find that license disturbing. However no other camera gives better license. And I believe MPEG LA has stated it won't change its policy to attack commercial videos.

But what comes to IS... I prefer to switch it off and fix it in post. Because IS gives faster bounces which are harder to compensate. And sometimes IS gets everything wrong.

This video has in body IS on and it was shot on tripod locked to only tilt. Still the frame is moving like I hold camera in hand.

You Tube

You Tube

I was able to stop the moving but those jumps were next to impossible.

[richandfleur]

a) you're not supposed to have stabilisation on when you're on a tripod, but b) it wouldn't have mattered anyway.


I assume you're using a newer camera?
With 'Movie SR' the camera sensors don't seem to be used, so it's purely stabilising on the visual image coming in. Fireworks, and ceiling fans, confuse the camera. IF motion sensors were being used then the algorithm could distinguish between camera movement that it needs to stabilise, and subject movement which it doesn't need to correct for. Software approaches are always going to have this issue, because it's bloody hard work to differentiate between the two movements when you are only being shown a picture.

[anemone]

I turned off SR from the stills and didn't even thought video would have own switch for it in menu. K100D doesn't have video, but it has real switch for SR. Somehow I thought K-3 would have same kind of switch this thing off switch in menu. But no, video and stills both have own menu entry. That video was shot with K-3.

Discarding sensors makes sense. It's expensive to run sensors all the time in power consumption budget.
If there is (there has to be) custom written codec for video, it already calculates motion vectors for the video file. Extracting "movement" is almost free and next frame can be taken from different part of imaging sensor.

[kadajawi]

Sure, but that battle's over.

These days, all phones and AFAIK all DSLRs use h264.

Canon 1D C (8000ish Euro monster designed for professional video work) and Canon 1D X Mark II (6000+ Euro) use MJPEG. h264 is consumer. Also, the Samsung NX1 uses the successor, h265 (HEVC). Wonderful codec, but insanely hard to decode. My Intel i5 with 4x 4.5 GHz manages to decode the NX1 files at roughly 15 fps.

One difference is also that most brands have a better encoder... there are many different implementations of h264, and the one Pentax uses isn't the best. And in addition they are using a relatively low bitrate (though 20 Mbps isn't too uncommon). That should change with the FF, if they are using a newer Fujitsu processor. It should also do 4K then... all the hardware in there should be able to support it.

Btw., I've seen a Panasonic camcorder that does a pretty good job at compressing small sensor video (so everything is in focus... much more details to compress!) to 10 Mbps... and it still looks pretty decent. As I said, different implementations of h264...

Sad to see that you left Pentax, Steve. Sadly it is also absolutely understandable. What disturbs me about the Olympus 5 axis stabilization is that it is so good that it looks artificial. Pentax SR still looks handheld, but without all the nasty side effects that handholding a camera (especially one with a rolling shutter sensor) can have.

I agree with richandfleur: No feature updates (except for supporting newer Pentax hardware) in the past... many years from Pentax. In contrast other brands do update their cameras. There are certainly things that could be done in software... why can't the Fx button be used as a Fn button that the *ist series had? So you push Fx, and then the up button, and you'd go to white balance. Otherwise if you only press the up button, you'd move up the sensor. I'm not the only one asking for such a Fn button back. Or adding back SR, which is still working during live view. Video feed + SR, and it works. Pentax claims the system is too noisy, but we are very aware of that and we don't consider it an issue we can't work around. It's like them disabling shooting raw, because it's a bit troublesome.

@grispie: While I don't expect a manufacturer to add features that aren't there at the time of purchase, I do very much appreciate it, and prefer brands that do (Samsung, Sony, Olympus, Fujitsu, and to a lesser degree Panasonic).

For me Pentax would also be instantly competitive if they added:
- High bitrate MJPEG... just as an option for when we need the highest possible quality and easy editing
- High bitrate h264 or HEVC
- SR during video, perhaps with settings to fine tune it
- WB lock (like AE-L, just for white balance, while shooting video)
- At this point, 4K. Being able to zoom into the frame while editing is useful... you could film an interview with one camera and still have something to cut
- Focus peaking DURING recording
- LOG mode

All of this shouldn't be rocket science for a company like Pentax.

I'm also awaiting the FF... while I may not be in the market for it, it should show the general direction. If it is positive, if they do something about video, I'll stay. Otherwise... especially considering I need to shoot video for my company too now... On the photography side it doesn't matter what I shoot with (for work), anything will be good enough. But on the video side...

@anemone: The K-3 does have software stabilization, which has the issues you experienced (amongst others). There's a reason why we hate it so much. It is terrible. It is awful. It ruins videos. It almost never improves them, and if it does, you could do the same while editing, and probably better. It is terrible, not having it would be way better.

However the K-7, K-5 and some other older cameras have shown that in body SR, by physically moving the sensor, works. It works very, very well. It uses actual sensors to determine camera movement, which means it won't be confused when it sits on a tripod. It fixes the actual shaking that can occur before it gets recorded by the sensor, which means a) you can use the complete sensor to record the video, and b) all the artifacts that happen because the sensor records something shaken won't happen, because they were fixed before that. The same system still works on modern Pentax cameras when using live view, and it WORKS. However Pentax won't let us record that. Which is why we are pissed off and one by one jumping ship. Pentax has received this feedback for half a century or so at this point, and we know they heard it, and still they chose to ignore us, giving a reason, that, if it is really the reason, is a non-issue. Something many would love to live with if it means they get stabilized video.

[Steve.Ledger]

Sad to see that you left Pentax, Steve. Sadly it is also absolutely understandable. What disturbs me about the Olympus 5 axis stabilization is that it is so good that it looks artificial. Pentax SR still looks handheld, but without all the nasty side effects that handholding a camera (especially one with a rolling shutter sensor) can have.

Well, all IBIS systems are 'artificial'... Even OIS is 'artificial'.
What I am finding is that the 5-axis IBIS is rock-solid and unlike the K-7 or even the Panasonic camcorder I have, you don't get the 'recoil' at the end of a pan as easily as happens with those cameras.
I've compared some of my past K-7 IBIS stabilized clips with the Olympus and can tell you it's superior and has a very nice natural flowing movement.
Soon, I shall be able to compare it with the Olympus 3-axis stabilization as I have recently sold the MX-1 and ordered the E-M10 Mk1.
One thing is certain to me, Olympus are well ahead of the rest when it comes to IBIS.