Pentax is going to lose me because of 4K

**Fontan** · 07-17-2015, 10:42 AM

Make sure to let us know how GX8 works out for you, as the forum members here await for your review with a great deal anticipation.

Edgar_in_Indy · 07-17-2015, 10:49 AM

Originally posted by Fontan

Make sure to let us know how GX8 works out for you, as the forum members here await for your review with a great deal anticipation.

Based on the tone of the thread so far, I have to assume you're probably being facetious. If not, then I apologize in advance!

But if I do switch, I will certainly report back. My first DSLR was an Olympus e-520, and I later owned a PEN E-P1, and I have enjoyed the system in the past. The sensor performance has lagged a bit behind APS-C, so I'll wait for the reports to come back on this new 20mp sensor before making a move. But since I bought my Panasonic LX100 last December, my K-30 has gotten a lot less use.

rawr · 07-17-2015, 10:50 AM - **1 Like**

I'm not a video shooter because video is hard to do, and even harder to do well.

I have enough trouble taking interesting photos.

But everyone seems to be into it now. To me though it sometimes looks like just a new variation of CBA/LBA.

Edgar_in_Indy · 07-17-2015, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by normhead

I have to admit, you don't have a lens I'd replace if I had it.... and I'm not going to say you should stay. In fact what are you hanging on for? Now about that Sigma 100-300 ƒ4.

That's supposed to be a hell of a lens.

I love my lens collection, so that's what would make it hardest. I would miss my 50-150mm f/2.8 and 100-300mm f/4, but I think the Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 could pretty much take the place of both lenses. From what I've read, it's a very good lens.

But like I said, I'll wait to see how the new 20MP sensor performs. The RAW files from the sensor in my K-30 are amazing, so I'm not willing to give up too much in sensor performance.

If the Samsung NX-1 had with its APS-C sensor had IBIS, that probably would have been my new camera. Samsung also has some great lenses, but not all of them are stabilized.

normhead · 07-17-2015, 11:01 AM

Originally posted by rawr

I'm not a video shooter because video is hard to do, and even harder to do well.

I had to teach video. And I've done the thing where it took me 30 hours to reduce 4 hours of video into a one hour documentary. So, I know where you're coming from. But some people really enjoy it. I've seen students spend 10 hours of class time on a 1 minute "commercial".. Some people just really like that. Why they want a Pentax for that is another question. I guess it's kind of like "I should buy a stills camera and a video camera, but if I can go two for one, things will be more compact. I'm not sure that a small company like Pentax would ever find that worthwhile to do. I'd really like my next Pentax to have built in GPS, and now there's an option. So who knows, maybe someday Pentax will make what Edgar wants. But if we could count the number of people who have left because Pentax wasn't as fast as some other company at implementing this or that feature, it would be a pretty long list.

Edgar_in_Indy · 07-17-2015, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by normhead

But if we could count the number of people who have left because Pentax wasn't as fast as some other company at implementing this or that feature, it would be a pretty long list.

I've generally found that Pentax bodies give you more features for less money than the competition. (I assume that is a strategy they had to adopt due to their underdog status.) When I discovered the K-x, I immediately sold my brand-new, pre-ordered Canon t2i because the K-x gave me more features for less money.

normhead · 07-17-2015, 11:15 AM

Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy

I've generally found that Pentax bodies give you more features for less money than the competition. (I assume that is a strategy they had to adopt due to their underdog status.) When I discovered the K-x, I immediately sold my brand-new, pre-ordered Canon t2i because the K-x gave me more features for less money.

I agree they have more features for the money, but if they don't have "the" feature you want, it's all for naught.

jimr-pdx · 07-17-2015, 11:17 AM

The NX500 is still the 4k bargain - but it crops something awful for 4k and can only do 15 minutes due to its lack of heat dissipation. Using the 16mm prime with it is almost a 'normal' FL I've heard! You do get the BSI 28Mpx Samsung chip though, not an awful thing it seems. The GX8 specs will have a lot of people watching closely

---------- Post added 07-17-15 at 10:22 ----------

Also for those who know little of 4k: you can extract images from the video and have very impressive IQ. It's the new burst mode!

I can see where Edgar and others are coming from - it's not only video. Many folks say 4k looks a bit better even on 1080 HD screens, so it's not the next 3-D investment fad it's the real thing.

I won't buy a TV just to add 4k, but a camera that can manage it will receive a +1 in my evaluation of options. Pentax and HD will do for me into the near future.

Bunch · 07-17-2015, 11:23 AM - **2 Likes**

List of things I need from Pentax

99. a Micro 4/3 sensor
100. 4k video
101. a phone

Edgar_in_Indy · 07-17-2015, 11:23 AM

Originally posted by normhead

I agree they have more features for the money, but if they don't have "the" feature you want, it's all for naught.

True, but I don't consider 4K to be just another, ordinary "feature" as some on here do. It's the standard for TV for probably at least the next decade or two. Why spend precious time shooting and editing videos that won't look nearly as good as they could otherwise. Especially when they are videos that your family is going to watch and enjoy for the next 50+ years. TV's are getting larger and larger, and there will be a time when 1080p looks decidedly dated, much like SD does right now.

I have three young children, and the way 4K captures things like skin tone/texture and details in hair, eyes, etc is breathtaking. Kids grow up so fast, and 4K is almost like looking through a window and being there again. My family gets so much enjoyment out of our home videos, so I see no reason to keep shooting in standard HD at this point. Maybe that sounds silly or sentimental to a lot of people, but for me it's important.

**Rondec** · 07-17-2015, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy

True, but I don't consider 4K to be just another, ordinary "feature" as some on here do. It's the standard for TV for probably at least the next decade or two. Why spend precious time shooting and editing videos that won't look nearly as good as they could otherwise. Especially when they are videos that your family is going to watch and enjoy for the next 50+ years. TV's are getting larger and larger, and there will be a time when 1080p looks decidedly dated, much like SD does right now.

I have three young children, and the way 4K captures things like skin tone/texture and details in hair, eyes, etc is breathtaking. Kids grow up so fast, and 4K is almost like looking through a window and being there again. My family gets so much enjoyment out of our home videos, so I see no reason to keep shooting in standard HD at this point. Maybe that sounds silly or sentimental to a lot of people, but for me it's important.

Why do you think that? How long has it been that HD video was the standard to shoot for? Surely 8K will come along and it will up the floor with 4K and folks will want to shift again. Certainly the companies that sell TVs and cameras will have a lot invested in seeing folks have a reason to upgrade.

I don't honestly know how many folks really have a 4K compatible screen at this point. It feels like the shift will actually be gradual and slower than you think. You are a pretty techy person and on the cutting edge, but that doesn't mean that any of this remains static.

Edgar_in_Indy · 07-17-2015, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by Rondec

How long has it been that HD video was the standard to shoot for? Surely 8K will come along and it will up the floor with 4K and folks will want to shift again.
I don't honestly know how many folks really have a 4K compatible screen at this point. It feels like the shift will actually be gradual and slower than you think.

Like you said, 4K is being adopted only gradually. But I believe that it is here to stay. How long is a valid question, but it's pretty irrelevant. If/when 8K does come and replace 4K, then 1080P videos will look like postage stamps at that point, while 4K will hold up much better.

Go back and look at some of your old videos shot on early digital cameras at 640x480. They look pretty pathetic now blown up on today's much larger, much higher resolution screens. It will be a similar experience watching your old 1080p "HIGH DEFINITION!!!" videos 10 years from now on your 70" 4K TV, or 30 years from now on your 100+" 8K TV.

But as to your first question, HD has been around for a while now. I bought my first HDTV about 12 years ago (a 51" Sony Bravio rear-projection CRT monster). And HDTV had already been around for a good while at that point. My first HDTV device was actually a Hauppauge PC video card that I bought for my computer a few years earlier.

So HDTV has actually had some staying power, and as you pointed out, it's still going strong. We're still waiting for 4K Blu-ray, and real 4K broadcasts are probably still a long ways off. So when 4K does finally arrive in force, I don't expect it to pass by so quickly.

TaoMaas · 07-17-2015, 01:35 PM

Count me as another who is waiting to see if Pentax takes up 4K video. I'd settle for better HD, though...and I'd be willing to give up most every "auto" feature on current Pentax cameras to make it happen. Why don't I just go buy a dedicated video camera? I used to have one. A really good one, in fact. But HD came along and made it obsolete. At least if my still camera and video camera were one, I'd still have a large degree of my investment left.

Na Horuk · 07-17-2015, 01:49 PM

I kind of get you, OP. If you want/need a feature, and this company doesn't have it, you are forced to go to one that does. And I hope things work our for you! Maybe you can keep the Pentax system as well, and run one for video and another for stills. Pentax is still pretty great for stills, especially if you already own lenses and are familiar with this gear.

Originally posted by Bunch

List of things I need from Pentax

Got it right. Pentax is Pentax, for better or worse, and that includes some features and excludes others. If you want things that are not Pentax' priorities, its better to look elsewhere.
I think Pentax will never be a leader in the video department, even though Pentax cameras now all have video features that can be used in a pinch.

Cannikin · 07-17-2015, 02:03 PM

If video is as important to you as stills, Pentax is not the system to wait on. They don't even have 1080 60p implemented yet, let alone 4k (not counting the 4k timelapse mode). If you want Pentax to implement proper high end video, you will be waiting a very long time.

I own a GH4, as I run m4/3 as my walkaround system, and believe me there is a world of difference between implementations of companies that actively pursue the video market (Panasonic, Sony) and ones that have video as an afterthought (Pentax, Nikon, Olympus, Fuji).

If you can't afford to run two systems, go with the one that makes you overall happier, not brand loyalty. m4/3 stills aren't too far off from APS-C either (really the biggest difference from my K-3/K-5 is that files fall apart faster under heavy post-processing).

07-17-2015, 11:17 AM	#23
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	The NX500 is still the 4k bargain - but it crops something awful for 4k and can only do 15 minutes due to its lack of heat dissipation. Using the 16mm prime with it is almost a 'normal' FL I've heard! You do get the BSI 28Mpx Samsung chip though, not an awful thing it seems. The GX8 specs will have a lot of people watching closely ---------- Post added 07-17-15 at 10:22 ---------- Also for those who know little of 4k: you can extract images from the video and have very impressive IQ. It's the new burst mode! I can see where Edgar and others are coming from - it's not only video. Many folks say 4k looks a bit better even on 1080 HD screens, so it's not the next 3-D investment fad it's the real thing. I won't buy a TV just to add 4k, but a camera that can manage it will receive a +1 in my evaluation of options. Pentax and HD will do for me into the near future. Last edited by jimr-pdx; 07-17-2015 at 11:18 AM. Reason: oopz

07-17-2015, 01:29 PM	#27
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685 Original Poster	Originally posted by Rondec How long has it been that HD video was the standard to shoot for? Surely 8K will come along and it will up the floor with 4K and folks will want to shift again. I don't honestly know how many folks really have a 4K compatible screen at this point. It feels like the shift will actually be gradual and slower than you think. Like you said, 4K is being adopted only gradually. But I believe that it is here to stay. How long is a valid question, but it's pretty irrelevant. If/when 8K does come and replace 4K, then 1080P videos will look like postage stamps at that point, while 4K will hold up much better. Go back and look at some of your old videos shot on early digital cameras at 640x480. They look pretty pathetic now blown up on today's much larger, much higher resolution screens. It will be a similar experience watching your old 1080p "HIGH DEFINITION!!!" videos 10 years from now on your 70" 4K TV, or 30 years from now on your 100+" 8K TV. But as to your first question, HD has been around for a while now. I bought my first HDTV about 12 years ago (a 51" Sony Bravio rear-projection CRT monster). And HDTV had already been around for a good while at that point. My first HDTV device was actually a Hauppauge PC video card that I bought for my computer a few years earlier. So HDTV has actually had some staying power, and as you pointed out, it's still going strong. We're still waiting for 4K Blu-ray, and real 4K broadcasts are probably still a long ways off. So when 4K does finally arrive in force, I don't expect it to pass by so quickly. Last edited by Edgar_in_Indy; 07-17-2015 at 01:35 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Thinking of going Pentax. Convince me (or otherwise)	amcg01	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	20	12-10-2014 07:48 AM
The Local Camera Store Is Going To Bleed Me Dry	photographyguy74	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	22	02-25-2014 12:46 PM
going to buy a used K10D, because ... , is it a good decision ?	kamisu	Pentax DSLR Discussion	23	03-28-2012 06:55 PM
Guess who's going to lose her security clearance	boriscleto	General Talk	6	11-24-2011 03:29 AM
Prices going up because of the disaster?	chukers	Pentax K-r	12	03-14-2011 07:38 AM

07-17-2015, 10:42 AM	#16
Fontan Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: 5th floor Posts: 1,610	Make sure to let us know how GX8 works out for you, as the forum members here await for your review with a great deal anticipation.

07-17-2015, 10:49 AM	#17
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685 Original Poster	Originally posted by Fontan Make sure to let us know how GX8 works out for you, as the forum members here await for your review with a great deal anticipation. Based on the tone of the thread so far, I have to assume you're probably being facetious. If not, then I apologize in advance! But if I do switch, I will certainly report back. My first DSLR was an Olympus e-520, and I later owned a PEN E-P1, and I have enjoyed the system in the past. The sensor performance has lagged a bit behind APS-C, so I'll wait for the reports to come back on this new 20mp sensor before making a move. But since I bought my Panasonic LX100 last December, my K-30 has gotten a lot less use.

07-17-2015, 10:50 AM - 1 Like	#18
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	I'm not a video shooter because video is hard to do, and even harder to do well. I have enough trouble taking interesting photos. But everyone seems to be into it now. To me though it sometimes looks like just a new variation of CBA/LBA.

07-17-2015, 11:00 AM	#19
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685 Original Poster	Originally posted by normhead I have to admit, you don't have a lens I'd replace if I had it.... and I'm not going to say you should stay. In fact what are you hanging on for? Now about that Sigma 100-300 ƒ4. That's supposed to be a hell of a lens. I love my lens collection, so that's what would make it hardest. I would miss my 50-150mm f/2.8 and 100-300mm f/4, but I think the Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 could pretty much take the place of both lenses. From what I've read, it's a very good lens. But like I said, I'll wait to see how the new 20MP sensor performs. The RAW files from the sensor in my K-30 are amazing, so I'm not willing to give up too much in sensor performance. If the Samsung NX-1 had with its APS-C sensor had IBIS, that probably would have been my new camera. Samsung also has some great lenses, but not all of them are stabilized.

07-17-2015, 11:01 AM	#20
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by rawr I'm not a video shooter because video is hard to do, and even harder to do well. I had to teach video. And I've done the thing where it took me 30 hours to reduce 4 hours of video into a one hour documentary. So, I know where you're coming from. But some people really enjoy it. I've seen students spend 10 hours of class time on a 1 minute "commercial".. Some people just really like that. Why they want a Pentax for that is another question. I guess it's kind of like "I should buy a stills camera and a video camera, but if I can go two for one, things will be more compact. I'm not sure that a small company like Pentax would ever find that worthwhile to do. I'd really like my next Pentax to have built in GPS, and now there's an option. So who knows, maybe someday Pentax will make what Edgar wants. But if we could count the number of people who have left because Pentax wasn't as fast as some other company at implementing this or that feature, it would be a pretty long list.

07-17-2015, 11:06 AM	#21
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685 Original Poster	Originally posted by normhead But if we could count the number of people who have left because Pentax wasn't as fast as some other company at implementing this or that feature, it would be a pretty long list. I've generally found that Pentax bodies give you more features for less money than the competition. (I assume that is a strategy they had to adopt due to their underdog status.) When I discovered the K-x, I immediately sold my brand-new, pre-ordered Canon t2i because the K-x gave me more features for less money.

07-17-2015, 11:15 AM	#22
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy I've generally found that Pentax bodies give you more features for less money than the competition. (I assume that is a strategy they had to adopt due to their underdog status.) When I discovered the K-x, I immediately sold my brand-new, pre-ordered Canon t2i because the K-x gave me more features for less money. I agree they have more features for the money, but if they don't have "the" feature you want, it's all for naught.

07-17-2015, 11:23 AM - 2 Likes	#24
Bunch Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 283	List of things I need from Pentax 99. a Micro 4/3 sensor 100. 4k video 101. a phone

07-17-2015, 11:23 AM	#25
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685 Original Poster	Originally posted by normhead I agree they have more features for the money, but if they don't have "the" feature you want, it's all for naught. True, but I don't consider 4K to be just another, ordinary "feature" as some on here do. It's the standard for TV for probably at least the next decade or two. Why spend precious time shooting and editing videos that won't look nearly as good as they could otherwise. Especially when they are videos that your family is going to watch and enjoy for the next 50+ years. TV's are getting larger and larger, and there will be a time when 1080p looks decidedly dated, much like SD does right now. I have three young children, and the way 4K captures things like skin tone/texture and details in hair, eyes, etc is breathtaking. Kids grow up so fast, and 4K is almost like looking through a window and being there again. My family gets so much enjoyment out of our home videos, so I see no reason to keep shooting in standard HD at this point. Maybe that sounds silly or sentimental to a lot of people, but for me it's important.

07-17-2015, 01:10 PM	#26
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy True, but I don't consider 4K to be just another, ordinary "feature" as some on here do. It's the standard for TV for probably at least the next decade or two. Why spend precious time shooting and editing videos that won't look nearly as good as they could otherwise. Especially when they are videos that your family is going to watch and enjoy for the next 50+ years. TV's are getting larger and larger, and there will be a time when 1080p looks decidedly dated, much like SD does right now. I have three young children, and the way 4K captures things like skin tone/texture and details in hair, eyes, etc is breathtaking. Kids grow up so fast, and 4K is almost like looking through a window and being there again. My family gets so much enjoyment out of our home videos, so I see no reason to keep shooting in standard HD at this point. Maybe that sounds silly or sentimental to a lot of people, but for me it's important. Why do you think that? How long has it been that HD video was the standard to shoot for? Surely 8K will come along and it will up the floor with 4K and folks will want to shift again. Certainly the companies that sell TVs and cameras will have a lot invested in seeing folks have a reason to upgrade. I don't honestly know how many folks really have a 4K compatible screen at this point. It feels like the shift will actually be gradual and slower than you think. You are a pretty techy person and on the cutting edge, but that doesn't mean that any of this remains static.

07-17-2015, 01:35 PM	#28
TaoMaas Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: Oklahoma City Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,574	Count me as another who is waiting to see if Pentax takes up 4K video. I'd settle for better HD, though...and I'd be willing to give up most every "auto" feature on current Pentax cameras to make it happen. Why don't I just go buy a dedicated video camera? I used to have one. A really good one, in fact. But HD came along and made it obsolete. At least if my still camera and video camera were one, I'd still have a large degree of my investment left.

07-17-2015, 01:49 PM	#29
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	I kind of get you, OP. If you want/need a feature, and this company doesn't have it, you are forced to go to one that does. And I hope things work our for you! Maybe you can keep the Pentax system as well, and run one for video and another for stills. Pentax is still pretty great for stills, especially if you already own lenses and are familiar with this gear. Originally posted by Bunch List of things I need from Pentax Got it right. Pentax is Pentax, for better or worse, and that includes some features and excludes others. If you want things that are not Pentax' priorities, its better to look elsewhere. I think Pentax will never be a leader in the video department, even though Pentax cameras now all have video features that can be used in a pinch.

07-17-2015, 02:03 PM	#30
Cannikin Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: SW Washington Posts: 833	If video is as important to you as stills, Pentax is not the system to wait on. They don't even have 1080 60p implemented yet, let alone 4k (not counting the 4k timelapse mode). If you want Pentax to implement proper high end video, you will be waiting a very long time. I own a GH4, as I run m4/3 as my walkaround system, and believe me there is a world of difference between implementations of companies that actively pursue the video market (Panasonic, Sony) and ones that have video as an afterthought (Pentax, Nikon, Olympus, Fuji). If you can't afford to run two systems, go with the one that makes you overall happier, not brand loyalty. m4/3 stills aren't too far off from APS-C either (really the biggest difference from my K-3/K-5 is that files fall apart faster under heavy post-processing).