[Azergoth]

If I had paid £800 for a video camera it seems reasonable to expect it to out perform a similarly priced stills camera.
As Pentax have never done 'good' video (or even claimed it to be good) it's a little surprising that these threads keep popping up

I disagree ;-) Modern DSLRs are not "stills" only cameras! The K3 has dedicated switch to toggle between stills and movie. The K3 has a microphone and headphone jack. The K3 has all exposure modes (even manual), image stabilisation and allows full control over the sound level. Those features are op notch features for a DSLR. Only image quality is lacking

And, like you said, we're talking about a £800/$€1000 camera, not the KS2 or a Canon 1200D. It's supposed to be Pentax "best" DSLR.

That's a fair point... But I'm not sure we should encourage Ricoh to offer even less video functionality by removing the audio interfaces!!

Haha! Non, I'm not saying that I would rather encourage them to work on their firmware to increase image quality ;-)

And for those claiming the hardware is not compatible, I would really doubt about that. Just look at the competition and specs. The K3 is capable of recording 24MPix 14 bit raw files at 8.3/s. My guess is that the hardware is reaaaaaly good

[ChristianRock]

I am going to start a new thread: K-3 vs a burger. Veredict: the burger is much tastier!
I don't know why people keep comparing apples to oranges.

[Azergoth]

I am going to start a new thread: K-3 vs a burger. Veredict: the burger is much tastier!
I don't know why people keep comparing apples to oranges.

Wrong post, ChristianRock ;-) And it's Windows, not oranges

--> Because apples have the features of oranges, use the same technology and are marketed as such?

[Na Horuk]

There was a poll some months ago, maybe a year ago, about the video function. Most Pentaxians practically never use it, many expressed they want it gone altogether.
That said, I also saw some stunning videos done with K-1, K-5, K-3, so it is possible. People often forget that video is so much more than just camera. You need to use a dolly, a camera stabilizer, follow focus systems, stepless aperture with calibrated focus distances on the ring, you need to make a very precise plan, you need to have good lights, and so on. Some people think that since their iphone has decent video, then a DSLR should be Hollywood quality!
This aspect is actually similar to stills. Yes, you need a good camera and a good lens, but you also need a lot of skills and knowledge, and accessories. Without all of that, you will probably get better results with a high end P&S with full automation and digital filters.

[BigMackCam]

I am going to start a new thread: K-3 vs a burger. Veredict: the burger is much tastier!
I don't know why people keep comparing apples to oranges.

Compared to some of the rubbish sold as burgers here in the UK, the K3 might actually taste better

[ChristianRock]

Wrong post, ChristianRock ;-) And it's Windows, not oranges

--> Because apples have the features of oranges, use the same technology and are marketed as such?

Wrong... one is marketed as a dedicated video camera, the other is a stills camera that allows you to shoot some videos with.

You can't see the difference? It's like buying a stereo vs a car that has a stereo in it - and than complaining that the car's sound isn't as good as the dedicated stereo system you have at home.

[Azergoth]

There was a poll some months ago, maybe a year ago, about the video function. Most Pentaxians practically never use it, many expressed they want it gone altogether.
That said, I also saw some stunning videos done with K-1, K-5, K-3, so it is possible. People often forget that video is so much more than just camera. You need to use a dolly, a camera stabilizer, follow focus systems, stepless aperture with calibrated focus distances on the ring, you need to make a very precise plan, you need to have good lights, and so on. Some people think that since their iphone has decent video, then a DSLR should be Hollywood quality!
This aspect is actually similar to stills. Yes, you need a good camera and a good lens, but you also need a lot of skills and knowledge, and accessories. Without all of that, you will probably get better results with a high end P&S with full automation and digital filters.

I totally agree with you. I'm a happy (and proud) Pentaxian and almost never use the video function of my K3. I wouldn't mind losing the video capability of my DSLR. But it's there! And with pretty rings and bells and even hardware features (headphones, mic, switch...) so it "should" be better. No?

And absolutely, it is way more than the camera, and I'm not arguing with that. I was just comparing iq "out of the box", having set both cameras on a tripod, focused on where I needed etc.

Compared to some of the rubbish sold as burgers here in the UK, the K3 might actually taste better

---------- Post added 03-09-16 at 03:23 PM ----------

Wrong... one is marketed as a dedicated video camera, the other is a stills camera that allows you to shoot some videos with.

You can't see the difference? It's like buying a stereo vs a car that has a stereo in it - and than complaining that the car's sound isn't as good as the dedicated stereo system you have at home.

Ah! Marketing! We're maybe on something...

Your right! The first one has a lens, a cmos sensor, fast signal processing and stores the data on a SD card. The second one has a lens, a cmos sensor, fast signal processing and stores the data on a SD card.

[BigMackCam]

The first one has a lens, a cmos sensor, fast signal processing and stores the data on a SD card. The second one has a lens, a cmos sensor, fast signal processing and stores the data on a SD card.

The first one has a lens, a cmos sensor, fast signal processing and stores the data on a SD card and is developed by a large team with a big budget specifically for video performance. The second one has a lens, a cmos sensor, fast signal processing and stores the data on a SD card and is developed by a small team with a more limited budget specifically for stills photography performance.

Ricoh is choosing carefully where to concentrate the efforts of its modestly-sized engineering teams, and we know that isn't in the area of DSLR video...

EDIT: Going back to my analogy of a 4x4 family station wagon versus a Land Rover... One has four driven wheels, an engine, suspension, brakes, steering, seats, a body and doors. The other has four driven wheels, an engine, suspension, brakes, steering, seats, a body and doors. Why didn't the station wagon manufacturer make their car more capable off road? Why didn't Land Rover make their car more comfortable and a bit quicker on the road, or less thirsty on fuel? Different priorities... Same basic technology, though.

[ChristianRock]

Ah! Marketing! We're maybe on something...

Your right! The first one has a lens, a cmos sensor, fast signal processing and stores the data on a SD card. The second one has a lens, a cmos sensor, fast signal processing and stores the data on a SD card.

The mask has come off and we can see you are just trolling.

[Azergoth]

The first one has a lens, a cmos sensor, fast signal processing and stores the data on a SD card and is developed by a large team with a big budget specifically for video performance. The second one has a lens, a cmos sensor, fast signal processing and stores the data on a SD card and is developed by a small team with a more limited budget specifically for stills photography performance.

Ricoh is choosing carefully where to concentrate the efforts of its modestly-sized engineering teams, and we know that isn't in the area of DSLR video...

EDIT: Going back to my analogy of a 4x4 family station wagon versus a Land Rover... One has four driven wheels, an engine, suspension, brakes, steering, seats, a body and doors. The other has four driven wheels, an engine, suspension, brakes, steering, seats, a body and doors. Why didn't the station wagon manufacturer make their car more capable off road? Why didn't Land Rover make their car more comfortable and a bit quicker on the road, or less thirsty on fuel? Different priorities... Same basic technology, though.

I get your point Pendax/Ricoh has certainly not as many engineers working on their cameras as CaNikon. Just look at the frequency of body (and lenses) releases... And it's fin the way it is
But who cares how many engineers have worked on it? It's the final result that counts (and, related, the price you and I pay for it).

And indeed, Ricoh is choosing carefully where to concentrate the efforts, but then don't market (sorry for the swear) high end video capabilities without good image quality.

To quote their website, today, in 2016:

professional h.264 video
Enhance your video recording experience with full HD movie capture in the h.264 format (60i/50i/30p/24p). Switch from still image to video recording with the flip of a dedicated switch. Equipped with a headphone terminal and stereo microphone terminal for external microphone connection. You can also adjust the audio recording level manually and monitor sound levels during recording.

[TER-OR]

If you want to take good video, get a videocamera. Some DSLR do OK for video - some are set up fairly well. None will be as good as a videocamera of the same cost. Use the right tool for the job. Sony does make some nice midrange videocameras.

[BigMackCam]

Ricoh is choosing carefully where to concentrate the efforts, but then don't market (sorry for the swear) high end video capabilities without good image quality.

I get your point too, but Ricoh isn't marketing the K3, K3II, K1 etc. as video cameras (just like Sony didn't market that video camera as a stills camera, but they provided a stills capture mode anyhow). They clearly state the video capture features in the specifications and leave it up to us to decide whether that's good enough for our intended use. Most of us (you included, I'm sure) picked our Pentax DSLRs for stills photography, and the video capabilities are fine for casual use. The tagline for the Pentax K3II on Ricoh's UK website is "The best photo camera for expedition shooting". I don't see anything in Ricoh's marketing blurb that makes any great claims for video capabilities; that section you quoted in your edit isn't called out by them as a big reason to buy the camera. If we're being picky, maybe they should have left out the word "professional", but anyone who knows video will know from the specs what to expect.

EDIT: Oh, take a look at these videos: www.vimeo.com/mimesisfilmworks - they were produced by one of the members here with some of his colleagues, and much of the content was shot with K-3 and K-30 cameras. Make sure you view in HD and full screen. Not bad, eh?

EDIT 2: Also on Ricoh Imaging's UK website, in the several pages of feature descriptions, there is one small section which reads as follows:

Smoothly record quick movement in Full HD movies

Capture subjects changing over time with the automatic timer

Utilize the rich lineup of interchangeable lenses including fisheye and super-telephoto to capture impressive Full HD 60i/30p movies. You can use artistic functions such as Custom Image and Digital Filter, easily edit images with the camera, and also record stereo audio with an external microphone.

*File format is MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 and MOV.

That's the entire mention of video for the K3II... so, they're clearly not pushing it as a primary feature of the camera. It's mentioned in there along with stuff like digital filters etc.!

[normhead]

If you'd told me what you were thinking before you did it, i would have told you... "don't do that". And dedicated movie camera is better than a DSLR. It's been discussed multiple times on the forum.

If you want video, get a dedicated video camera.

Why is this so hard to comprehend?

My Rav 4 is much better at taking my wife and dogs on trips, than my K-3 is. That doesn't surprise me either.

[drypenn]

This topic is very confusing!

So, which tastes better? A Rover or a burger?

[bertwert]

So, which tastes better? A Rover or a burger?

Tablet!
No not that type of tablet, this tablet: