[PiDicus Rex]

Yes, of course a RED Scarlet-W will give you better image quality than an A7S (not in low light perhaps). But the price...

Having used both, the A7s with a Shogun recorder is not only a heck of a lot more cost effective, the ProRes files hold a lot more detail then the onboard recording for HD, and look amazing in 4K.

You made the sensor size argument more succinctly then I did.

[richandfleur]

Every Pentax camera has had video since the K-7? in 2009.


Since then, Pentax has never been a stills only camera. That mindset persists as a weird identity for some to justify why Pentax now doesn't do video well.
I say now, because they were in the game originally. They show up on the like of film riot youtube videos back in the day.
Even Olympus and Fuji, who were companies who outright said they didn't care about video, have made huge gains.
Pentax is flapping at the bottom of the barrel, and any changes they do make in future will very likely just bring them up to where they should be now.




The changes required to be good enough are not big. Heck I'd suggest taking some time away from designing DSLR's with glowing LED's in the grips and introducing video interlaced frame rate modes etc and just get on with the core changes required.
They just require Pentax to give a

[BigMackCam]

Rich, every one of us Pentax users know that Ricoh *could* improve the video offering. We also know that the LEDs in the K-S1 weren't the best idea. I'm sure Ricoh is smart enough to recognise both. The LEDs in the K-1 look genuinely useful to me... On the few occasions I shoot in absolute darkness, I have to carry a flashlight to do anything on my camera. Maybe these will alleviate that need for people who buy that model? Either way, Ricoh has chosen to put its efforts and R&D funds into the stills photography side of things, primarily. I don't think anyone is trying to justify why Pentax cameras aren't competitive in terms of video performance - its just that most are more interested in the stills photography side of things, and recognise that's where the current Pentax line excels. We know that if we want the best video performance right now, we probably need additional dedicated devices. I'm certainly glad Ricoh chose to make a FF camera that (we hope and believe) will be excellent at stills photography and pitch it at a price that's accessible for many.

[richandfleur]

I just don't get how a company can make a big deal about it's image quality, and then offer comparatively poor image quality in a video mode.

Ricoh should go all in with a stills only DSLR camera, with no scene modes etc and let everyone proudly announce that Pentax is not a video company.


As it stands though, they've gone backwards in their image quality. They freakin had sensor based stabilisation working. Now you only find that on Olympus and Sony cameras for example. Pentax could make their products more competitive in the video world with a few changes, some of which they've already conquered in the past.

The mode is there, so make it good. Not even excellent or cutting edge, just good, instead of poor. They're at the bottom of the pile now in terms of video quality, and that's saying something considering where they were, where others were too, and where everyone is now.

[BigMackCam]

I just don't get how a company can make a big deal about it's image quality, and then offer comparatively poor image quality in a video mode.

Ricoh should go all in with a stills only DSLR camera, with no scene modes etc and let everyone proudly announce that Pentax is not a video company.


As it stands though, they've gone backwards in their image quality. They freakin had sensor based stabilisation working. Now you only find that on Olympus and Sony cameras for example. Pentax could make their products more competitive in the video world with a few changes, some of which they've already conquered in the past.

The mode is there, so make it good. Not even excellent or cutting edge, just good, instead of poor. They're at the bottom of the pile now in terms of video quality, and that's saying something considering where they were, where others were too, and where everyone is now.

Well, we have different opinions on the subject, and that's cool. One thing's for sure - the K-1 is going to be a success if they've got the stills image quality people are hoping for, and I'll bet they have. Video enthusiasts will be disappointed, sure, but it's not worth getting frustrated about. You can't please everyone. Better they please the majority of their market - and that majority wants a capable FF Pentax DSLR for stills photography. Anything else is butter. Who knows, maybe in future Ricoh will go down the route you've mentioned and push further towards a stills-only offering - or maybe they'll improve the video capability. Either way, the K-1 is what it is.

[richandfleur]

I hear you to, if it's good enough for how you use it, or if you never use it anyway, then all good.


What I'm saying is that if it's there, it should work well, and I'm basing 'well' on what is happening with other manufacturers in the market segment. Pentax is presently quite a way behind everyone now in video terms, and it's starting to show. Look at the reviews on say the 645Z, which Pentax pushed as the first MF camera to have video. It got hammered because the quality is crap. Pentax can't have their cake and eat it to forever, you can't push a feature that's actually going to hurt you when people use it and realise it's sht.

I don't use the on board HDR stills features, and I don't use the on board intervalometer anymore because it's let me down several times by just randomly stopping. To me these are features that are included, so they should work well. I don't use the HDR, but I don't mind it being there for those who do. My only comment on it is that if it's there, it should work, otherwise don't put it there at all.

[BigMackCam]

I hear you to, if it's good enough for how you use it, or if you never use it anyway, then all good.


What I'm saying is that if it's there, it should work well, and I'm basing 'well' on what is happening with other manufacturers in the market segment. Pentax is presently quite a way behind everyone now in video terms, and it's starting to show. Look at the reviews on say the 645Z, which Pentax pushed as the first MF camera to have video. It got hammered because the quality is crap. Pentax can't have their cake and eat it to forever, you can't push a feature that's actually going to hurt you when people use it and realise it's sht.

I don't use the on board HDR stills features, and I don't use the on board intervalometer anymore because it's let me down several times by just randomly stopping. To me these are features that are included, so they should work well. I don't use the HDR, but I don't mind it being there for those who do. My only comment on it is that if it's there, it should work, otherwise don't put it there at all.

Yes, I understand where you're coming from too.

Maybe it's better they just take the video out altogether, although I can't help thinking that choice might backfire... The capability that's there is more than enough for casual use, and we have at least a couple of people on the forum using the K-3 for professional quality video (using pro rigs too, admittedly) and getting results that are good enough for commercial clients... those people would be pretty disenfranchised if the video capability was removed.

It's easy to see Ricoh's dilemma... Whatever they do, a portion of users will be unhappy. I don't think there's a right or wrong answer to the issue, unless Ricoh is prepared to plough a good chunk of R&D money on the video side of things, and frankly I don't see that happening any time soon.

Ah well... At least we have plenty of equipment choices available to us

[Steve.Ledger]

Richard, give it up man. Bite the bullet and be happy.. I did and I am

[Imp]

It's easy to see Ricoh's dilemma... Whatever they do, a portion of users will be unhappy. I don't think there's a right or wrong answer to the issue, unless Ricoh is prepared to plough a good chunk of R&D money on the video side of things, and frankly I don't see that happening any time soon

Or... they just buy RED

[richandfleur]

Richard, give it up man. Bite the bullet and be happy.. I did and I am

First instinct is to say pss off, but you're actually right.


It's mostly an issue of changing complete systems. Adaptors exist, but it's never particularly nice.


My end goal is like to be Sony Steve, though I'm really warming to your, and others, reviews of the Olympus system also. I've been holding off as Sony haven't pushed their sensor stabilisation down into the APS-C lineup yet, and that essentially gives Pentax a bit of hope to release something that might fit.

I'd like to stay with Pentax, but they're not making products that fit my needs anymore.

[Steve.Ledger]

I'd like to stay with Pentax, but they're not making products that fit my needs anymore.

And that's the bottom line isn't it..
Brand loyalty is only a good thing for as long as the brand has what fits your needs.
Yes I lost money by selling and moving, but not a huge amount. But what I gained was exactly what fits my needs now, and that's what's important. I've actually ended up with funds to spare yet I now have two OMDs, one PEN and four useful lenses. It works well for me.
Pentax may catch up, but I couldn't wait just out of loyalty, there's no return on product loyalty.
At the end of the day photography and the gear I use is all about what pleases me.

[monochrome]

And that's the bottom line isn't it..
Brand loyalty is only a good thing for as long as the brand has what fits your needs.
Yes I lost money by selling and moving, but not a huge amount. But what I gained was exactly what fits my needs now, and that's what's important. I've actually ended up with funds to spare yet I now have two OMDs, one PEN and four useful lenses. It works well for me.
Pentax may catch up, but I couldn't wait just out of loyalty, there's no return on product loyalty.
At the end of the day photography and the gear I use is all about what pleases me.

i'm calling thread winner.

[ChristianRock]

Ricoh should go all in with a stills only DSLR camera, with no scene modes etc and let everyone proudly announce that Pentax is not a video company.

See, now just because Pentax doesn't have all the video features you need, you're trying to deny me the opportunity to use a Pentax camera to record simple videos of my kids running around, or to record my wife doing videos for her blog.

Not cool...

As others have said, good luck with Sony or Panasonic or whoever does the pro video stuff that you need. I only need amateur level stuff so my K-r does ok for what I need.

[kadajawi]

Well, we have different opinions on the subject, and that's cool. One thing's for sure - the K-1 is going to be a success if they've got the stills image quality people are hoping for, and I'll bet they have. Video enthusiasts will be disappointed, sure, but it's not worth getting frustrated about. You can't please everyone. Better they please the majority of their market - and that majority wants a capable FF Pentax DSLR for stills photography. Anything else is butter. Who knows, maybe in future Ricoh will go down the route you've mentioned and push further towards a stills-only offering - or maybe they'll improve the video capability. Either way, the K-1 is what it is.

Give the K-1 / firmware of the K-1 to a hand full of talented developers, and the camera would turn from being crap for video to something that filmmakers would actually buy. When I consider the K-5, launched 6 (!!!) years ago, to be better for video than their latest and greatest, which also costs more, then something went wrong. Something really went wrong.

They removed sensor shift based SR too, a feature that was working very, very well. Reason being that there are some very minor drawbacks to it. They might as well remove video capabilities, same thinking. Oh, and raw stills. Because they require more work processing, and they need more space on the memory card. So lets remove raw. (Would that be a stupid decision? Yes, of course. But not worse than removing sensor shift based SR, just that fewer people care). The camera is artificially limited because of this. It is artificially limited because of Movie SR, that even when deactivated hurts image quality just by being in the camera and available.

IMHO for casual use, buy a bloody camcorder. For professional use, DSLRs are where it's at, or better yet DSLMs. At the higher end there's of course good alternatives, but they are very expensive.

Casual users will want proper AF... nothing Pentax could offer. They want ease of use. etc. DSLRs are for those who want control over the look. They want to pull focus themselves or have an assistant for that. etc.

@IMP: They don't need to buy RED. They need to hire some Magic Lantern devs or ask a professional videographer (ideally a Hollywood DoP, cause that'd be good for marketing too!) on what a good camera has. Because the main impression Ricoh gives is that they have no idea whatsoever about what their video shooting (potential) customers want, what they are interested in. They need someone to tell them... "hey, Movie SR? Awful idea. Please activate proper SR again. And those bitrates? Any way to increase them? Could you try to create a LOG picture profile, and maybe also have a clean HDMI out?". Maybe not all of these things can be done, but I'm sure at least some things are trivial to implement, they just don't want to do it.

@ChristianRock: I'd take that K-r over a K-1 for video any day. It's probably better.

I don't really like the way Sony video looks, especially out of the camera. I don't like the way Olympus SR works, it works very well, but it doesn't look that nice to me. Plus their sensors are small. Canon hasn't improved video capabilities since the 550D, so that people go and buy their C300 etc. (which cost like 10x as much?). Nikon isn't too bad, but lack stabilization. Samsung is the same, just better for video, but with no future. Pentax however has a SR whose look I really like, Pentax creates beautiful, natural and even filmic looking videos right out of the camera. It's merely a few tweaks to make it perfect, while there are many things wrong with the competitors too.

Btw., the pro video stuff by Sony or Panasonic or Olympus are cameras like the Sony a6000 and a6300 (the a6000 being a cheap mirrorless stills camera), the Sony A7 series (great stills cameras), the Olympus OM-D series (which are great stills cameras), the Nikon D5300, ... Pro video stuff is really expensive and not that necessary. Canon C300 II for example, and those REDs etc.

[richandfleur]

See, now just because Pentax doesn't have all the video features you need, you're trying to deny me the opportunity to use a Pentax camera to record simple videos of my kids running around, or to record my wife doing videos for her blog.

Not cool...

Mate I just want them to return what they had working. They had SR working, so I'd like that back.
I'd like a higher quality video bitrate mode.
I'd like focus peaking to still work once I've started recording.


It would cost more to take it out. I don't want to take it out. Pentax die hards seem to either fall into the it's good enough for me so Pentax shouldn't do any more to it, or the I don't use it at all and wish it wasn't there crowd. I want to address the obvious shot comings, so the offering is on a par with this area in general, across all manufacturers.