[Spock]

In the future there will be no such thing as video or still cameras - only fixed lens p&s cameras and interchangable lens prosumer and professional cameras.

[richtrav]

Yeah I can understand how someone might be upset paying extra for something they may not want. But nobody gets the perfect camera they want - last time I checked my inbox nobody from Pentax was beating down my door asking me for suggestions about their next model (just for the record I'd put an improved video at the top of the list). And look on the bright side, just 'cause you don't use it you may want/need to sell it one day, and video-enabled DSLRs are fetching higher prices thesedays than non-video ones (they're SOOO 2007!)

[DonDouglas]

I'm enthusiastic about the addition of video capability for both of the reasons I stated above: Web publishing and the tantalizing lure of potential stock footage sales (at $100/second, give or take).

My problem with it is that, in the case of Pentax, it apparently comes with a significant reduction of dynamic range (unless some later reviewer contradicts the IR tests, some later software update fixes it, or a different interpretation of the data somehow nullifies their findings). Canon and Nikon managed to include video in models which actually increased dynamic range over their earlier, non-video-capable versions.

[falconeye]

My problem with it is that, in the case of Pentax, it apparently comes with a significant reduction of dynamic range

If, and it is a big IF, dynamic range is reduced, then it is due to the revision of the sensor which now features 4 rather than 2 read-out channels. And this revision was done to support the 5.2 fps burst shooting mode. It wasn't done for video.

A (worse) 720p@30Hz video mode would have been feasible with 2 channels only. Given it features 4 channels, the K-7 720p mode beats most other dSLR in video quality now. But the extra channels were required to support the faster shutter.

[dopeytree]

Firstly research.

cinema5D.com • View topic - Sticky: cinema5D user's favorites (4 and 5 Star videos)

thats a pretty good list of GOOD videos/films/comercials shot with dslrs yes canon (but becuase it has had video out the longest)

Now notice the shallow depth of field not acheivable with a conventional VIDEO CAMERA. Notice the clarity? even a £100,000 video camera. And the low light level capabilities of these dslr with video is better than any other video camera available even the £100,000 ones! Now take into account you have a whole army of proffesionial pin sharp lens ready to go, what are you waiting for.

Thats what all this buzz it about.

Now the industry is changing very very fast.

Video is the new big thing but learning how to enhance this and use this feature is what you probably wanted to actually know.

What Magnum the famous photography agency do is create slideshows with video, photos text, sounds and audio commentery.

http://inmotion.magnumphotos.com/

Also here's some good video samples http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25464/D300S.html

and yes I do use pentax at the moment but that may have to change... I'm waiting for some fast wide angle primes or sdm primes.

I have a K-7 and I love it but I think everyone can appreiciate these nikon videos are better than pentax's of dogs running around.

I can see your not understanding the use of video as pentax really aren't selling it very well!

[Peter Zack]

Yes the OP has every right to voice his opinion and ask the question. That's what forums are about. Is this how we greet a new member? I'd ask those of you that came down strongly (language not opinions as yours are just as valuable) to edit your posts.

You may feel strongly about a subject and have every right to oppose it but there's no reason to use rude or inflammatory commentary against someone just because you don't agree with their point of view.

Edit before I delete!!

[richtrav]

Peter

While I agree some did come down a bit harshly on the original poster, his post to me did seem more like a complaining rant (with misinformation) rather than adding anything constructive to the forum. How I wish he would just go out one day and TRY the video feature (assuming he has a K-7)

And I'm really big on the K-7's video capabilities, to me it takes nicer looking videos than any Nikon. I even prefer the look to Canon's videos (though admit Canon's have more detail with fewer artifacts/jaggies in 1080 mode). Now just let me have some control over the camera when shooting!!!!

[dopeytree]

Yeah I too prefer the look of the pentax's the nikon videos are just to illustrate the point about video.

Canon seems to have the best low light abilities although we don't have iso controls yet on the K-7 which could help if we could avoid 3200+

The only equal level good video I've really seen filmed on the K-7 is this:

[osv]

I'm enthusiastic about the addition of video capability for both of the reasons I stated above: Web publishing and the tantalizing lure of potential stock footage sales (at $100/second, give or take).

the k-7 specs are plenty good enough for web video, but since you are effectively limited to 720p, trying to sell it as stock footage could be problematic... there are broadcast channels out there that use the full 1080p, so uprezzing 720p is not usually a desirable option for people that are looking to buy stock footage... remember, you are competing against things like the red camera, and professional video cameras as well.

there is a lot of mis-information out there about still cameras that shoot video... the canons use a version of h.264, not avchd, and even with its low-complexity version of h.264, it still provides a superior picture to the mjpeg codec that pentax is using... plus it's also the full 1080p frame size... at this point in time, canon is the only serious player in the still camera video scene.

beyond that, none of the still cameras on the market today have true motorized video zoom lenses, so things like crawl shots are going to be very difficult, if not impossible... even if you were able to control the zoom by hand, most still camera lenses are not capable of holding proper focus throughout the zoom range.

so you are limited to shooting in film-style mode only.

bottom line, i'd love to trade my k10d in for the k-7, but i won't be doing it because i want to shoot video with the k-7... i'll use a dedicated video camera for that.

[jogiba]

the k-7 specs are plenty good enough for web video, but since you are effectively limited to 720p, trying to sell it as stock footage could be problematic... there are broadcast channels out there that use the full 1080p, so uprezzing 720p is not usually a desirable option for people that are looking to buy stock footage... remember, you are competing against things like the red camera, and professional video cameras as well.

there is a lot of mis-information out there about still cameras that shoot video... the canons use a version of h.264, not avchd, and even with its low-complexity version of h.264, it still provides a superior picture to the mjpeg codec that pentax is using... plus it's also the full 1080p frame size... at this point in time, canon is the only serious player in the still camera video scene.

beyond that, none of the still cameras on the market today have true motorized video zoom lenses, so things like crawl shots are going to be very difficult, if not impossible... even if you were able to control the zoom by hand, most still camera lenses are not capable of holding proper focus throughout the zoom range.

so you are limited to shooting in film-style mode only.

bottom line, i'd love to trade my k10d in for the k-7, but i won't be doing it because i want to shoot video with the k-7... i'll use a dedicated video camera for that.

And what is the widest FL of that Canon camcorder ? I use 6.5mm to 2350mm lenses to shoot 1536x1024 30fps HD video with my K-7.

[hinman]

The more that I research and see other happy k-7 owners with video, the more that I am convinced that the added video feature does indeed expand the usage of dslr in a positive way.

My latest videos that I found include demo of three lens from DA 14mm f/2.8, FA 35mm f/2.0 and Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, all three fast lens used in video at nighttime and indoor setting

The Passing moon youtube video is amazing to say the least

And Diego's video clip from K-7 summarizes his wonderful trip in Cambodia creatively

Hin's Tech Corner: labeled k-7 video

I am sold on the video feature.

Thanks,
Hin

[Aristophanes]

By way of a warning, I have a good friend traveling to china next week & she warned me that were I looking to travel there to make sure that I didn't take a camera with Video included as it was likely to be confiscated. Tourists are apparently not allowed to take video cameras into China.

Last time I was a tourist in China, I bought a videocamera there.

Plenty of selection. Lots of locals and tourists buying videocams. I'm not sure what silliness your friend is spouting, but it's not true. The only place I ever had my videocam confiscated (temporarily) was in the UK.

[richtrav]

the k-7 specs are plenty good enough for web video, but since you are effectively limited to 720p, trying to sell it as stock footage could be problematic... there are broadcast channels out there that use the full 1080p, so uprezzing 720p is not usually a desirable option for people that are looking to buy stock footage... remember, you are competing against things like the red camera, and professional video cameras as well.

there is a lot of mis-information out there about still cameras that shoot video... the canons use a version of h.264, not avchd, and even with its low-complexity version of h.264, it still provides a superior picture to the mjpeg codec that pentax is using... plus it's also the full 1080p frame size...

beyond that, none of the still cameras on the market today have true motorized video zoom lenses, so things like crawl shots are going to be very difficult, if not impossible... even if you were able to control the zoom by hand, most still camera lenses are not capable of holding proper focus throughout the zoom range.

so you are limited to shooting in film-style mode only.

bottom line, i'd love to trade my k10d in for the k-7, but i won't be doing it because i want to shoot video with the k-7... i'll use a dedicated video camera for that.

Mmm, h.264 is great if you need to keep file sizes down but I don't see anything wrong with a low-compression motion jpeg like the K-7 uses (though a 4 star setting wouldn't hurt). Heck, the GH1 owners would probably kill for a 1080 motion jpeg option. For editing and extracting still frames it is nice to have.

The K-7 would have a lot more suitors among the video crowd if it had manual controls, it sits at an attractive price point between the low-end models with crippled video features and the more expensive Canons or very elusive GH1 (which most videographers consider a 720 camera due to its poorly implemented 1080 mode). For companies and people with deep pockets the Canons are a pretty easy call unless they have the budget for RED. The built-in IS is a big advantage of the K-7 that no other camera maker offers. Knock a hundred or two off the MSRP and add manual controls and a lot of people who are starting to use DSLRs for shooting video would take more serious notice of our nice little camera.

I'm not bothered by the fact the K-7 doesn't have the highest specs ("only" 1536x1024); 1080/24/25/30p might be necessary for professionals but I'm just a lowly amateur and to me the video mode of the K-7 is delivering a lot for 2009. And let's be honest, nobody wants to talk about the inconvenient truth that NONE of these cameras (5DII and apparently 7D included) come anywhere close to delivering their advertised resolution; in fact on the horizontal axis none even approach the ability to resolve 1280 lines. The clarity is wonderful and that shallow depth of field you can get is very appealing - that's what video DSLRs do best in 2009 - but in the resolution department all these cameras are still sorely lacking. Those 1920 or 1280 figures need to be taken with a grain of salt. You won't start seeing resolution numbers exceeding 1000 horizontal lines until the camera makers get serious and start sampling more pixels in video and special burst modes.

All in all I think for 2009 the K-7 is a great camera, The Little Pentax That Could. I just hope Pentax is ready to improve on it and Hoya is willing to let them if they want to compete in the upcoming video wars. Judging by what they've done with the K-7 I think they stand a good chance if they don't sit still. Two years ago digital photography seemed to have been settling in and even becoming a bit routine (dare I say mundane) before this pesky notion of video raised its head. I was perfectly content using a 4 year old camera, the idea of a couple more megapixels or Live View hardly got my pulse racing. Now from where I'm sitting, 2009 for photography is looking more like the exciting 1999 than the relatively ho-hum period of the last few years. Yet again it looks as if the digital age is about to give us a new creation. Pentax may have a short window of opportunity here to grab a piece of an emerging market as the Big Guys appear to have been taken a little offguard.

[Aristophanes]

The advantage of AVCHD versus M-JPEG is that the former is better played direct to TV.

Next gen will all have dual processors and full 1080p in either AVCHD or M-JPEG. Then the sampling rates will go up with the next round of sensors.

And all brands will be pushing out lenses that AF silently with video like Panny's 14-140.This is likely pushing every brand;s lens development guys into overdrive right now. Joe Consumer will want a DSLR with video, but will be thrown by MF.

This is where I wonder if Pentax has the goods. For the in-body part, that will evolve; but the lens development will be the real test.

Mmm, h.264 is great if you need to keep file sizes down but I don't see anything wrong with a low-compression motion jpeg like the K-7 uses (though a 4 star setting wouldn't hurt). Heck, the GH1 owners would probably kill for a 1080 motion jpeg option. For editing and extracting still frames it is nice to have.

The K-7 would have a lot more suitors among the video crowd if it had manual controls, it sits at an attractive price point between the low-end models with crippled video features and the more expensive Canons or very elusive GH1 (which most videographers consider a 720 camera due to its poorly implemented 1080 mode). For companies and people with deep pockets the Canons are a pretty easy call unless they have the budget for RED. The built-in IS is a big advantage of the K-7 that no other camera maker offers. Knock a hundred or two off the MSRP and add manual controls and a lot of people who are starting to use DSLRs for shooting video would take more serious notice of our nice little camera.

I'm not bothered by the fact the K-7 doesn't have the highest specs ("only" 1536x1024); 1080/24/25/30p might be necessary for professionals but I'm just a lowly amateur and to me the video mode of the K-7 is delivering a lot for 2009. And let's be honest, nobody wants to talk about the inconvenient truth that NONE of these cameras (5DII and apparently 7D included) come anywhere close to delivering their advertised resolution; in fact on the horizontal axis none even approach the ability to resolve 1280 lines. The clarity is wonderful and that shallow depth of field you can get is very appealing - that's what video DSLRs do best in 2009 - but in the resolution department all these cameras are still sorely lacking. Those 1920 or 1280 figures need to be taken with a grain of salt. You won't start seeing resolution numbers exceeding 1000 horizontal lines until the camera makers get serious and start sampling more pixels in video and special burst modes.

All in all I think for 2009 the K-7 is a great camera, The Little Pentax That Could. I just hope Pentax is ready to improve on it and Hoya is willing to let them if they want to compete in the upcoming video wars. Judging by what they've done with the K-7 I think they stand a good chance if they don't sit still. Two years ago digital photography seemed to have been settling in and even becoming a bit routine (dare I say mundane) before this pesky notion of video raised its head. I was perfectly content using a 4 year old camera, the idea of a couple more megapixels or Live View hardly got my pulse racing. Now from where I'm sitting, 2009 for photography is looking more like the exciting 1999 than the relatively ho-hum period of the last few years. Yet again it looks as if the digital age is about to give us a new creation. Pentax may have a short window of opportunity here to grab a piece of an emerging market as the Big Guys appear to have been taken a little offguard.

[GLXLR]

What rubbish! First off, there is absolutely no restriction to bring or use video cameras in China... if not how in the world did visitors to the Olympics shoot with their video cameras?

It actually depends on where in the country you wish to be traveling to... Obviously Xing Jiang is super tight on security, so they won't allow any video cameras or satelite phones.

Of course, recent terroist attacks there restrict any form of internet contact or direct phone contact with my relatives there. The only way I can talk to them is through UUtalk, with me talkinginto the mic and then they receive it through their normal phone. Chinese government is super strict as to not let any information of the attacks out of XinJiang, let alone China, so I think you should research a bit more before saying it is total rubbish.