digital SR in k3

paranoia23 · 10-25-2013, 01:16 AM

just read the german manual of the k3 ... it mentions the "movie SR" ... kill all humans!

grispie · 10-25-2013, 02:21 AM

Originally posted by paranoia23

just read the german manual of the k3 ... it mentions the "movie SR" ... kill all humans!

:-) there must be some kind of reason why they are not capitalizing on the mechanical SR for movies, and i can't believe it would be just noise...

VisualDarkness · 10-25-2013, 03:03 AM

Originally posted by grispie

:-) there must be some kind of reason why they are not capitalizing on the mechanical SR for movies, and i can't believe it would be just noise...

I bet heat could be an issue too.

grispie · 10-25-2013, 03:07 AM

Was that an issue with the K5?

rawr · 10-25-2013, 03:36 AM

I trust the first reviewers of the camera will verify what the SR options are in video, and how they work.

Ideally, the camera would have three SR options on the Movie SR menu - SR off; electro-magnetic 'classic' SR, and 'digital' SR.

grispie · 10-25-2013, 04:06 AM

Originally posted by rawr

Ideally, the camera would have three SR options on the Movie SR menu - SR off; electro-magnetic 'classic' SR, and 'digital' SR.

it says "movie SR" on or off...
I saw it somewhere on youtube where someone was going through the menu of the K3
Back to reality! although i agree... :-)

Na Horuk · 10-25-2013, 04:30 AM

Ugh.. isnt digital SR the main reason for jello effect (other than CMOS sensor properties)? And it crops the frame, making the FoV even smaller, even if SR is disabled? If that is true, thats a pretty big mistake for the camera, which otherwise promises to be great for video.

kadajawi · 10-25-2013, 06:59 AM

Hm. Movie SR could also mean a sensor based SR... We will have to see. If it indeed only has digital SR video people are way better off with a Nikon or Canon, cause there you at least can get video SR through the lens. Digital SR made the camera useless for video work... Or at least it doesn't have any advantage.

kadajawi · 10-25-2013, 07:18 AM

Originally posted by Na Horuk

Ugh.. isnt digital SR the main reason for jello effect (other than CMOS sensor properties)? And it crops the frame, making the FoV even smaller, even if SR is disabled? If that is true, thats a pretty big mistake for the camera, which otherwise promises to be great for video.

The digital SR isn't the reason for jello per se, but it is a massive amplifier. Jello comes from the CMOS sensor, but normally it wouldn't be that bad cause to appear the video needs to be shaky anyway, which can hide the jello a bit (unless the camera really has rolling shutter issues). The digital SR though means that all the negative effects from camera shake is recorded, i.e. jello and motion blur, and then the video is stabilized. But since it is stabilizing according to the first few lines the rest will be moving around... as jello comes from reading different parts of the sensor at different times, in the same frame. Blurring can't be corrected either.

The K-5 does get very hot and overheats when taking video, but that also happens with the camera on a tripod (though I don't deactivate SR). The heat can be seen with hot pixels, the K-5 really has a hot pixel problem.

Btw. it worked great on the K-5, and Olympus these days also has video stabilisation based on the sensor. Panasonic has added sensor shift IS to one of their new cameras, but does digital SR for video, and... they have been panned for that. It really sucks. I believe Sony has digital SR only too (though their cameras have sensor shift IS), and you can clearly see it, despite probably being the best implementation of digital SR.

TomGarn · 10-26-2013, 01:31 PM

So this is alarming, at least diminishing my hopes again...

The SR in my old K-7 is double as good compared to the
shake reduction in that Tamron I use on a Canon 60D.

It would be a great loss not to have it ... we shall see.

paranoia23 · 10-27-2013, 12:37 AM - **1 Like**

i would like to know how the digital SR is applied ... especially about the usage of the gyro sensors.

TomGarn · 11-15-2013, 12:42 PM

(I just copy my words here from another subject - because they rather belong to this thread)

Till yesterday I was madly ready to fight for the good old Sensor-SR - Today I watched my second test with the K-7
and I know now this SR has absurd & irreparable problems while panning ! So it can only be used in stills where
your shaking gets withdrawn quite nice.
What is happening there ? I never heard of this till now - how comes ? When you are panning and end on some
object and do stop there, the movement doesn't stop - it goes backwards - the object then shifts back as to catch
and neutralize the own opposite movement ... Before each panning the SR has to be put off, only if you know you
just point to a static object, you can ever put it on !
I just didn't knew that before, so movie SR will be a great relieve and Pentax was right to forget about that old SR.
Vibration Controle (VC for Tamron) in the glass doesn't do this wrong and can be used - it works not that strong so
it easily can be controlled - same with software movie shake reduction.

Read more at:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/172-pentax-k-3/238987-pentax-k-3-video-di...#ixzz2kkFNXTsn

TomGarn · 11-24-2013, 09:31 AM

Here's my K-7 footage including SR Test:

1. Second K-7 field-test with displayviewfinder attached to it this time,
. . carrying my completely filled backpack - trying to stand still - freehanded.
2. Bad outtakes - impossible for usage in a real video
3. Btw. Bonus-footage - The song I am reminded at with some of my old photos

You Tube

kadajawi · 11-30-2013, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by TomGarn

(I just copy my words here from another subject - because they rather belong to this thread)

Till yesterday I was madly ready to fight for the good old Sensor-SR - Today I watched my second test with the K-7
and I know now this SR has absurd & irreparable problems while panning ! So it can only be used in stills where
your shaking gets withdrawn quite nice.
What is happening there ? I never heard of this till now - how comes ? When you are panning and end on some
object and do stop there, the movement doesn't stop - it goes backwards - the object then shifts back as to catch
and neutralize the own opposite movement ... Before each panning the SR has to be put off, only if you know you
just point to a static object, you can ever put it on !
I just didn't knew that before, so movie SR will be a great relieve and Pentax was right to forget about that old SR.
Vibration Controle (VC for Tamron) in the glass doesn't do this wrong and can be used - it works not that strong so
it easily can be controlled - same with software movie shake reduction.

Read more at:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/172-pentax-k-3/238987-pentax-k-3-video-di...#ixzz2kkFNXTsn

I'm sorry but I have to disagree here. The movement back can be fought by learning how to pan a bit differently, more smoothly, with a fade out at the end (which also looks nicer IMHO), and you'll only notice it when you look for it. The wobble (and other artifacts) that you WILL get with an electronic shake reduction system as found in the K-3 is much more noticable and can't be corrected at all - unless you deactivate SR. In any case you might very well get the same effect with movie SR... the only thing that would really help is if the camera can predict the future. Since that isn't possible you'd have to stabilize after the video was shot, and the software knows what frames will follow. But since most cameras use CMOS sensors that have a rolling shutter that will introduce the wobbling effect.

Movie SR is so useless that I'd be better off buying a Canon, which doesn't have built in stabilization either (since movie SR is useless it doesn't matter), but does have the option of using a lens with IS, and is otherwise better for video anyway.

TomGarn · 12-01-2013, 06:31 AM

Originally posted by kadajawi

The movement back can be fought by learning how to pan a bit differently, more smoothly, with a fade out at the end
electronic shake reduction system as found in the K-3 is much more noticable and can't be corrected at all

Will try next to pan with inner SR-Fader ...

Sory to hear about an even worse movie SR ... !

So try a 17-50 /2.8 Tamron VC (Vibration Controle) and you
will be happy to have a safe - but smaller area - SR in your Canon.

10-25-2013, 01:16 AM	#1
paranoia23 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 188	digital SR in k3 just read the german manual of the k3 ... it mentions the "movie SR" ... kill all humans!

12-01-2013, 06:31 AM	#15
TomGarn Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Hamburg Posts: 339	Originally posted by kadajawi The movement back can be fought by learning how to pan a bit differently, more smoothly, with a fade out at the end electronic shake reduction system as found in the K-3 is much more noticable and can't be corrected at all Will try next to pan with inner SR-Fader ... Sory to hear about an even worse movie SR ... ! So try a 17-50 /2.8 Tamron VC (Vibration Controle) and you will be happy to have a safe - but smaller area - SR in your Canon. Last edited by TomGarn; 12-01-2013 at 06:49 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K3 officially released in Australia	WA-surfer	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	21	01-19-2014 12:17 PM
K-3 video SR - digital not mechanical?	Ayoh	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	66	11-05-2013 11:56 PM
Digital Camera World - K3 Speculation	troenaas	Photographic Industry and Professionals	2	03-05-2013 01:35 AM
In-Body SR vs. In-Lens SR Pros and Cons?	uchinakuri	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	32	09-23-2010 09:42 PM

10-25-2013, 02:21 AM	#2
grispie Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 1,199	Originally posted by paranoia23 just read the german manual of the k3 ... it mentions the "movie SR" ... kill all humans! :-) there must be some kind of reason why they are not capitalizing on the mechanical SR for movies, and i can't believe it would be just noise...

10-25-2013, 03:03 AM	#3
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Originally posted by grispie :-) there must be some kind of reason why they are not capitalizing on the mechanical SR for movies, and i can't believe it would be just noise... I bet heat could be an issue too.

10-25-2013, 03:07 AM	#4
grispie Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 1,199	Was that an issue with the K5?

10-25-2013, 03:36 AM	#5
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	I trust the first reviewers of the camera will verify what the SR options are in video, and how they work. Ideally, the camera would have three SR options on the Movie SR menu - SR off; electro-magnetic 'classic' SR, and 'digital' SR.

10-25-2013, 04:06 AM	#6
grispie Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 1,199	Originally posted by rawr Ideally, the camera would have three SR options on the Movie SR menu - SR off; electro-magnetic 'classic' SR, and 'digital' SR. it says "movie SR" on or off... I saw it somewhere on youtube where someone was going through the menu of the K3 Back to reality! although i agree... :-)

10-25-2013, 04:30 AM	#7
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Ugh.. isnt digital SR the main reason for jello effect (other than CMOS sensor properties)? And it crops the frame, making the FoV even smaller, even if SR is disabled? If that is true, thats a pretty big mistake for the camera, which otherwise promises to be great for video.

10-25-2013, 06:59 AM	#8
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	Hm. Movie SR could also mean a sensor based SR... We will have to see. If it indeed only has digital SR video people are way better off with a Nikon or Canon, cause there you at least can get video SR through the lens. Digital SR made the camera useless for video work... Or at least it doesn't have any advantage.

10-25-2013, 07:18 AM	#9
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	Originally posted by Na Horuk Ugh.. isnt digital SR the main reason for jello effect (other than CMOS sensor properties)? And it crops the frame, making the FoV even smaller, even if SR is disabled? If that is true, thats a pretty big mistake for the camera, which otherwise promises to be great for video. The digital SR isn't the reason for jello per se, but it is a massive amplifier. Jello comes from the CMOS sensor, but normally it wouldn't be that bad cause to appear the video needs to be shaky anyway, which can hide the jello a bit (unless the camera really has rolling shutter issues). The digital SR though means that all the negative effects from camera shake is recorded, i.e. jello and motion blur, and then the video is stabilized. But since it is stabilizing according to the first few lines the rest will be moving around... as jello comes from reading different parts of the sensor at different times, in the same frame. Blurring can't be corrected either. The K-5 does get very hot and overheats when taking video, but that also happens with the camera on a tripod (though I don't deactivate SR). The heat can be seen with hot pixels, the K-5 really has a hot pixel problem. Btw. it worked great on the K-5, and Olympus these days also has video stabilisation based on the sensor. Panasonic has added sensor shift IS to one of their new cameras, but does digital SR for video, and... they have been panned for that. It really sucks. I believe Sony has digital SR only too (though their cameras have sensor shift IS), and you can clearly see it, despite probably being the best implementation of digital SR.

10-26-2013, 01:31 PM	#10
TomGarn Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Hamburg Posts: 339	So this is alarming, at least diminishing my hopes again... The SR in my old K-7 is double as good compared to the shake reduction in that Tamron I use on a Canon 60D. It would be a great loss not to have it ... we shall see.

10-27-2013, 12:37 AM - 1 Like	#11
paranoia23 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 188 Original Poster	i would like to know how the digital SR is applied ... especially about the usage of the gyro sensors.

11-15-2013, 12:42 PM	#12
TomGarn Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Hamburg Posts: 339	(I just copy my words here from another subject - because they rather belong to this thread) Till yesterday I was madly ready to fight for the good old Sensor-SR - Today I watched my second test with the K-7 and I know now this SR has absurd & irreparable problems while panning ! So it can only be used in stills where your shaking gets withdrawn quite nice. What is happening there ? I never heard of this till now - how comes ? When you are panning and end on some object and do stop there, the movement doesn't stop - it goes backwards - the object then shifts back as to catch and neutralize the own opposite movement ... Before each panning the SR has to be put off, only if you know you just point to a static object, you can ever put it on ! I just didn't knew that before, so movie SR will be a great relieve and Pentax was right to forget about that old SR. Vibration Controle (VC for Tamron) in the glass doesn't do this wrong and can be used - it works not that strong so it easily can be controlled - same with software movie shake reduction. Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/172-pentax-k-3/238987-pentax-k-3-video-di...#ixzz2kkFNXTsn

11-30-2013, 12:48 AM	#14
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	Originally posted by TomGarn (I just copy my words here from another subject - because they rather belong to this thread) Till yesterday I was madly ready to fight for the good old Sensor-SR - Today I watched my second test with the K-7 and I know now this SR has absurd & irreparable problems while panning ! So it can only be used in stills where your shaking gets withdrawn quite nice. What is happening there ? I never heard of this till now - how comes ? When you are panning and end on some object and do stop there, the movement doesn't stop - it goes backwards - the object then shifts back as to catch and neutralize the own opposite movement ... Before each panning the SR has to be put off, only if you know you just point to a static object, you can ever put it on ! I just didn't knew that before, so movie SR will be a great relieve and Pentax was right to forget about that old SR. Vibration Controle (VC for Tamron) in the glass doesn't do this wrong and can be used - it works not that strong so it easily can be controlled - same with software movie shake reduction. Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/172-pentax-k-3/238987-pentax-k-3-video-di...#ixzz2kkFNXTsn I'm sorry but I have to disagree here. The movement back can be fought by learning how to pan a bit differently, more smoothly, with a fade out at the end (which also looks nicer IMHO), and you'll only notice it when you look for it. The wobble (and other artifacts) that you WILL get with an electronic shake reduction system as found in the K-3 is much more noticable and can't be corrected at all - unless you deactivate SR. In any case you might very well get the same effect with movie SR... the only thing that would really help is if the camera can predict the future. Since that isn't possible you'd have to stabilize after the video was shot, and the software knows what frames will follow. But since most cameras use CMOS sensors that have a rolling shutter that will introduce the wobbling effect. Movie SR is so useless that I'd be better off buying a Canon, which doesn't have built in stabilization either (since movie SR is useless it doesn't matter), but does have the option of using a lens with IS, and is otherwise better for video anyway.