[PiDicus Rex]

Your assertion that I must use something before passing judgement (or even know about) is beyond reproach.
Example: never done hard drugs - I know they are bad. See?

But I've seen enough examples, there has been enough word of mouth, for me to understand without having to try it myself.

Did I hold your hand through that one well enough? Get it now?

All you've done is, like others, show that you're willing to speak about that which you have no experience in.


This is a recurring theme, where the "My Pentax Should Only Be A Stills Camera" mouthpieces wander in to the VIDEO area to tell us whom Do Use Video that we shouldn't be allowed to.

It's long past due that those opinions should be keep to yourselves, rather then negatively impact those of us who are sick of hearing them ad nauseam.

---------- Post added 24-04-21 at 11:30 PM ----------

There are two ways to manage three pedals .

One is to use your right foot to work the gas and brake simultaneously. I use my heel on the brake pedal, and my toe on the gas. Works perfectly.

Another way is to pull up on the parking brake handle (use my thumb to hold the button in so the handle moves freely), move the right foot from the brake to the gas and then ease the clutch out while applying gas. As the car starts to move forward let the parking brake off.

Easy squeezy, no pan, no stain.

It is my personal opinion that no one should be allowed a drivers license until they can demonstrate proficiency at operating a motor vehicle with a manual transmission. Anyone can jump in and drop a lever into D and go, it takes little, if any skill to do so.

Driving a motor vehicle is serious business, and the automatic transmission has enabled those who don’t possess the skills to drive, making the highways a more dangerous place than it needs to be.

You missed Side-Stepping the Clutch, or the advanced class, "Clutchless shifting through Rev Matching"

The latter is great for left foot braking while down shifting.

[texandrews]

OK, last warning. This call and response is too testy for these forums. I don't yet want to delete posts, because the thread has some nuggets of value, but knock it off. Already one member has complained and removed her/himself from the thread, and it was a couple of hours of work for me to sort things with that person and the mods team, who also got involved.

The post above and the one quoted in it are needlessly snarky/testy/confrontational. Stop it. Express what you are saying w/o using ad hominem comments. For the record, both points of view have their validity, although as I stated in my much milder post (see, it really is possible!) that I in fact tend to defer to those with hands-on experience. But one more time with the testiness and there will be penalties for all parties.

Don't give offense, and if you feel offended walk away or report the post. That's how it is here.

[swanlefitte]

One of the main things I want in a camera for video is to operate it without any twist in my wrist or forearm. Holding for extended time is fatiguing, moving to follow a scene is harder to flow, and fingers become less dexterous with arm/wrist swirl. My ks-2 is terrible for this, my k100d is much better until you need to do anything but press the shutter and even the asahi pentax s is better.

[PiDicus Rex]

One of the main things I want in a camera for video is to operate it without any twist in my wrist or forearm. Holding for extended time is fatiguing, moving to follow a scene is harder to flow, and fingers become less dexterous with arm/wrist swirl. My ks-2 is terrible for this, my k100d is much better until you need to do anything but press the shutter and even the asahi pentax s is better.

That wrist loading has been a factor since the days of VHS-c, Hi-8 and DV - all the 'consumer' camcorders went smaller, single handed, and that let to operators who moved from them to larger sensor cameras, and still using them one handed.

Oddly enough, in the manuals for the Pentax film era SLR's, there used to be a set of guide images on how to hold the SLR for most stable images, right hand on the grip, left hand under the lens, film cover to the cheek, elbows in to the body.
This grip works for taking stills, and is also the ideal grip for doing video, far more stable then single handed with hands and elbows away from the body to look at the LCD, and is still possible with Mirrorless with EVF, and DSLR's with hybrid EVF/OVF viewfinders.

Even on a body as large as the 645Z, this grip gives a stable platform to the camera and smoother motion.

Using that grip on the K-3iii, perhaps with a Loupe over the LCD, and with the mechanical stabilization being back on, should give exceptional results, far beyond any single handed camcorder can achieve.

For hand-held filming, the only other way to alleviate the sort of arm, shoulder, and spine aggravation that the Two-hands-out-front method leads to, is a an ENG / Cine Rig, putting the camera body up in front of the shoulder, with external viewfinder.

[ecostigny]

That wrist loading has been a factor since the days of VHS-c, Hi-8 and DV - all the 'consumer' camcorders went smaller, single handed, and that let to operators who moved from them to larger sensor cameras, and still using them one handed.

Oddly enough, in the manuals for the Pentax film era SLR's, there used to be a set of guide images on how to hold the SLR for most stable images, right hand on the grip, left hand under the lens, film cover to the cheek, elbows in to the body.
This grip works for taking stills, and is also the ideal grip for doing video, far more stable then single handed with hands and elbows away from the body to look at the LCD, and is still possible with Mirrorless with EVF, and DSLR's with hybrid EVF/OVF viewfinders.

Even on a body as large as the 645Z, this grip gives a stable platform to the camera and smoother motion.

Using that grip on the K-3iii, perhaps with a Loupe over the LCD, and with the mechanical stabilization being back on, should give exceptional results, far beyond any single handed camcorder can achieve.

For hand-held filming, the only other way to alleviate the sort of arm, shoulder, and spine aggravation that the Two-hands-out-front method leads to, is a an ENG / Cine Rig, putting the camera body up in front of the shoulder, with external viewfinder.

What you say makes a lot of sense. The two-handed approach to stills photography allowed one to minimize camera movement, so I agree that it would also make for steadier video as well--so long as one had a means of viewing the video as it was being shot.

[PiDicus Rex]

What you say makes a lot of sense. The two-handed approach to stills photography allowed one to minimize camera movement, so I agree that it would also make for steadier video as well--so long as one had a means of viewing the video as it was being shot.

That's where the Mirrorless cameras take the advantage, and where Pentax could strike in with a unique option, if they added a Hybrid viewfinder - OVF when the mirrors down, EVF when it's locked up.

The same option that would make video easy through the eyepiece, would also allow a faster burst rate for stills, as the mirror could stay up and just cycle the shutter leafs.

Having the option to draw histograms, focus peaking and exposure zebra in the OVF, surely the Stills Crowd would like that?

[house]

Having the option to draw histograms, focus peaking and exposure zebra in the OVF, surely the Stills Crowd would like that?

I thought so but then I reconsidered. I turn everything off in my viewfinder (level indicators on custom button) and don't really want or need more info displayed as it ruins the experience. A traditional ovf has enough info as it is below the frame. The key thing to solve imho is manual focussing. The various focussing screens do this of course.

Perhaps Pentax could devise a way of doing digital overlays that is subtle and has a "optical" feeling but I've sort of realized that you might as well get a milc if you want a cluttered viewfinder. To many overlays, and particularly digital ones, will turn the ovf so close to an evf the advantage shrinks to a point where it barely matters.

[PiDicus Rex]

I thought so but then I reconsidered. I turn everything off in my viewfinder (level indicators on custom button) and don't really want or need more info displayed as it ruins the experience. A traditional ovf has enough info as it is below the frame. The key thing to solve imho is manual focussing. The various focussing screens do this of course.

Perhaps Pentax could devise a way of doing digital overlays that is subtle and has a "optical" feeling but I've sort of realized that you might as well get a milc if you want a cluttered viewfinder. To many overlays, and particularly digital ones, will turn the ovf so close to an evf the advantage shrinks to a point where it barely matters.

The mistake here, is to assume that the displays have to be over the top of the images, rather then in the borders.
Majority of Cinema systems, the image is clear of most of the overlays.

https://www.4kshooters.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ARRI_ALEXA_Battery_Full_Warning.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ll2VJjbFmNc/maxresdefault.jpg

[ecostigny]

The mistake here, is to assume that the displays have to be over the top of the images, rather then in the borders.
Majority of Cinema systems, the image is clear of most of the overlays.

https://www.4kshooters.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ARRI_ALEXA_Battery_Full_Warning.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ll2VJjbFmNc/maxresdefault.jpg

Sometimes less is indeed more. Ideally, the overlays should be customizable, so you only see what you need.

[ZombieArmy]

The K-01 *is* a crappy old camera, particularly for video, as is evident from the results. Its still loved and you can get great results from it, those arent incompatible. It would be helpful if less people here supported the less balanced pentaxians and told them off when going over board.

All old mirrorless cameras from the era were awful. The K-01 was also just unfortunately ugly so it's a good target to pick on. If the K-01 was hacked like the GH2 was it'd actually probably be the best lil video camera of the era.

[house]

the best lil video camera of the era.

I put the important bits in bold. Any camera from that era would be junk compared to what a proffessional videographer would use today. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a caveat stating that all other cameras from that era would be just as bad. That level of care and sensitivity makes no sense considering the context. It's about a camera and in a lighthearted video attempting humour. It's not a serious topic affecting peoples lives in a profound way.

The idea that there exists people so sensitive about an old camera that they get upset that a joking video doesn't provide (unneccessary) historical context to every critical statement is frightening.

[Racer X 69]

Any camera from that era would be junk compared to what a proffessional videographer would use today.

I can’t imagine why a professional videographer would choose a still camera that also does video over a dedicated video camera.

[ZombieArmy]

I put the important bits in bold. Any camera from that era would be junk compared to what a proffessional videographer would use today. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a caveat stating that all other cameras from that era would be just as bad. That level of care and sensitivity makes no sense considering the context. It's about a camera and in a lighthearted video attempting humour. It's not a serious topic affecting peoples lives in a profound way.

The idea that there exists people so sensitive about an old camera that they get upset that a joking video doesn't provide (unneccessary) historical context to every critical statement is frightening.

Are you referring to me? I don't believe I said I was upset but this post might put me there with the presumptions

This is a forum, I was merely discussing as you do on those, please don't attack my character.

[house]

Are you referring to me? I don't believe I said I was upset but this post might put me there with the presumptions

This is a forum, I was merely discussing as you do on those, please don't attack my character.

I wasn't talking about any one person. I usually quote when that's the case.

[ZombieArmy]

I wasn't talking about any one person. I usually quote when that's the case.

But you did quote me?