[Imp]

is far cheaper, requires less RnD and be more widely sold than a dedicated video system which can use K-mount lenses.

lol totally didn't think of that - but now that you've mentioned it, i'd love to have both

[monochrome]

All these rational thoughts miss one key point. RICOH isn't stupid - they know what they are doing.

It is apparent RICOH isn't going to enable what you want on a Pentax dSLR. They've said they aren't going to, and they've released three major camera bodies that back up their statements.

They have a reason, whatever it is, that we don't understand yet.

[npc]

I'd love if they get rid of all these video related connectors mic/headphones/hdmi/etc until they at least get serious about video - and save some space or add couple of more customizable buttons maybe

[mikeSF]

A DSLR is a Digital Single Reflex Camera. Broken down that means it's 'digital' so is using an electronic sensor to capture light and a built-in computer to convert it to a visible colour image rather than using analog film. It has a 'Single lens' which channels and focuses light into the body and 'reflex' mirror system which flips up out of the way to flood the sensor with that light when the shutter button is depressed and finally it's a 'camera' which is a device to capture graphic images from photons, IOW: a device for recording visual images. Up until recently, that's all it was capable of doing due to the limits of technology so no-where is it written that it should continue to only be capable of capturing a single or a few single images per second. Today's technology is now advanced enough for the device to capture 24 to 60 smaller 'still' images per second and save them as a stream-able file in a container with an extension that is recognized on a computer to do so. It doesn't require any expensive additional hardware, it's mostly software and computing power via an upgraded image processing chip. It's called innovation, development, enhancement and invention. The continuing evolution of an idea. It's what we as humans do - it makes us who we are.. Tool makers supreme.
Comments such as yours remind me of the Luddites: "a person opposed to increased industrialization or new technology." It just makes no sense whatsoever. We'd have not got to the moon or mars, we'd have no digital SLRs, phones that do more than make receive voice calls without this distinctly human trait to innovate..
I don't mean to sound sarcastic, but I get tired and frankly p*ssed off from seeing such arguments from those who have no interest in DSLR video and therefore no business posting negative comments in a DSLR video related forum while they hold such opinions. Comments like yours are not objective or helpful in any way. Please stick to the 'stills' forum sections if that's your interest, (there's a larger choice) and leave this area to those who like to be positive about video. Finally, adding the capability for a modern DSLR to save images as video streams is not making a DSLR something it isn't, it's making it into something it is and is far cheaper, requires less RnD and be more widely sold than a dedicated video system which can use K-mount lenses.

Thanks for the pejorative soapbox speech including some dictionary.com citations, but you are wasting your time. Likewise, you are quick to group me in the Luddite category of these threads without foundation.
I personally would love to see a highly innovative charge at video by Ricoh-Pentax, but it seems much better in my opinion to create a dedicated device and do it well than to jam some video functionality into a still camera (avoiding using the "DSLR" term this time, thank you). YMMV.
It's Friday, drink a Margarita. Cheers.

[Steve.Ledger]

lol, they were not dictionary.com citations, my comments were to illustrate the absurdity that a DSLR should not be a video camera when today it very clearly is just that. In fact it's whatever the manufacturer and technology decides it is. Including by the way, a networking device and GPS tracker.
I said the comment remind me of the Luddites, but as you say - I'm wasting my time.

It's already midday Saturday here.. So I'll have a solid lunch thanks

[mikeSF]

there goes 15 seconds of my life I can't get back

[monochrome]

lol, they were not dictionary.com citations, my comments were to illustrate the absurdity that a DSLR should not be a video camera when today it very clearly is just that. In fact it's whatever the manufacturer and technology decides it is. Including by the way, a networking device and GPS tracker.
I said the comment remind me of the Luddites, but as you say - I'm wasting my time.

It's already midday Saturday here.. So I'll have a solid lunch thanks

And there you have squared the circle. Ricoh has decided what it is.

[Steve.Ledger]

Indeed, Ricoh decided to continue what Hoya had started which is to include video features and even add audio inputs (features which they called 'professional' during the K-3 marketing). The main issue for those who enjoy video as much as stills from their image recording devices, is the 'quality' of the video features Ricoh decided would be enough.
I am satisfied that Ricoh know the limits of what they are doing, it's just that many people are not satisfied with the current results.

[kadajawi]

Even if I don't want Pentax to waste money on video?

Tell them not to spend much on video. I don't want that either... Or if they do spend, I'd be willing to spend more for a camera that does what I want. Perhaps through a paid firmware update.

Thanks for the info, I'll post there.

Btw., right now Pentax very much copies Canon in terms of video. What we want is them to bring that Pentax touch to video, like offering SR. Things that bring them ahead of the pack.

I don't want a separate device that sucks at stills. Stills has to be great, video should be good. Those are my priorities.

[TaoMaas]

If Pentax's still imaging was far enough ahead of everyone else to warrant ignoring the direction of the DSLR market, I might agree with downplaying video. But it's not. "We only do stills" sounds like Leica's philosophy...and they had almost a half-century head start on making that work due to their reputation for legendary still photography. Has that built the company up...or turned them into a niche brand that's a non-player in the market these days?

[PiDicus Rex]

this. not by trying to make a DSLR into something it isnt, but by innovating a dedicated video solution that can use the full gamut of K-mount lenses.

Sony tried that, they're called the VG-10, VG-20, VG-30 and the full frame VG-900.
And the A7 series outsells them hand over fist with Video and Cinema shooters.

[maleek]

If it were a priority, Pentax could really offer something unique in the video department. They could start by bringing back mechanical shake reduction and up the codec. If that were the case, I'd probably upgrade, given the time.

[kadajawi]

If Pentax's still imaging was far enough ahead of everyone else to warrant ignoring the direction of the DSLR market, I might agree with downplaying video. But it's not. "We only do stills" sounds like Leica's philosophy...and they had almost a half-century head start on making that work due to their reputation for legendary still photography. Has that built the company up...or turned them into a niche brand that's a non-player in the market these days?

Oh but Leica is actually doing plenty in terms of video. Apparently they are pretty great at video these days.

The new SL has:
24MP Full-Frame CMOS Sensor
Leica Maestro II Image Processor
Internal DCI 4K Video in Super35 Mode
V-Log L Gamma
10 Bit 4:2:2 Output via HDMI
1080p Slow Motion at 120fps

DCI 4K... not just 3840x2160, but 4096x2160. Actual, true cinema style 4K. Not the 16:9 pseudo 4K (though yes, it's cropped then). V-Log. 10 bit output via clean HDMI. 120 fps. etc. And video quality seems to be impressive too. LEICA!!! That's like Rolls Royce doing a hardcore sports car that can compete with any Ferrari, Porsche or Lamborghini.

At its price it is a bit hard to justify, unless you want to do stills and video, in that case it might even be good value. But heck, Leica is investing in video, and those specs don't come for free. They must have put lots of work into getting those specs (and it's far above what I hope Pentax will eventually offer).

[surfar]

Ricoh/Pentax have just released the 4K action cam,its the first 4K tool...and won't be the last.

Not something to appeal to lots of forum members but there will be some.

I view it as a learning curve for RicohP,and I'll guess that sensor(or similar)will find its way into other models?.Probably a bridge camera.

So that's a start to catch up to most of the other camera producers.

[Danas_Anis]

they got to be kidding. Don't they read any reviews of cameras? Apart the lack of FF (which is now a fixed issue) the only other major thing about Pentax cameras to get huge criticism is video capabilities and quality, maybe focusing speed for sports shooting also gets critiques, but the problem is lenses mostly for this one. If heads of decisions making at Pentax doesn't want to read forums etc. Best way to know what market wants is to read few reviews of their latest products. Specifically pros and cons section. Video is a huge con hurting the sales. Upgrade it to current expectations for a dslr.

Learn from competition, Panasonic got successful because they got video right, sony got successful because theu made both stills and video quite right. Even Olympus upgraded video specifications and quality in their latest offerings. Fuji is also stepping up there a little bit.


Clean HDMI output is expexted,
Camera with inbody sr? Video sr by sensor shift is expected,
Min bit rate 50Mbs is expected.
Focus peaking during video recording is expected. Zebras are expected.

Simple as that, critiques didn't change since 2011. During this time at least few reviews could have been reviewed to see what id being said about latest products they offer.