[Edgar_in_Indy]

If Pentax really has made a conscious business decision to neglect video features, then they have been playing with fire by adding video to their cameras in the first place.

If people start to play around with the video features on their Pentax, then some of them will become interested in video, and crave more. But Pentax won't have anything to offer those people. That's pretty much the situation I've found myself in.

I just noticed that this thread has been moved out of the "Pentax DSLR Discussions"....seems like that's where it belongs.

---

Last edited by Edgar_in_Indy; 07-19-2015 at 06:31 AM.

[Adam]

While I wish that Pentax could at least not lag as far being as the others in terms of video features, I think that's simply going to be the reality going forward. As long as they do a great job with stills I think that the majority of their target audience will be more than happy.

Having a second camera for video seems perfectly reasonable (everyone I know who otherwise shoots with Pentax and is serious about video has one), but the investment there shouldn't be as big as long as you settle for a few essential lenses. Depending on the format you might also be able to adapt Pentax lenses.

[micromacro]

I've never understood the grousing of poor video in Pentax DSLR's.... buy a camcorder and be done with it...

Yep. I don't know serious video makers who will use just a camera for recording video.
For an amateur video while traveling my son uses Panasonic Lumix because his Canon is "crap" for videos. And my Pentax is "crap" as well

[Edgar_in_Indy]

I've never understood the grousing of poor video in Pentax DSLR's.... buy a camcorder and be done with it...

Yep. I don't know serious video makers who will use just a camera for recording video.

And I don't know many serious video makers who use just a "camcorder". But I'm not a "serious" video maker anyway, so I don't have a problem using my regular camera, as long as the video quality is good.

There's a world of difference between the kind of camcorder that someone like me can afford/justify in addition to my DSLR kit, and the kind of serious video camera that professionals use to get great video. But a DSLR and/or mirrorless camera lets you get video that looks like it was shot with a serious video camera, without spending thousands of dollars on a large, complicated video camera that is designed for professional use day in and day out.

It seems like so many of you still don't understand what I'm trying to say. I don't want the video quality of a typical consumer camcorder, and I don't want to take out a loan to buy a serious video camera, but I still want to get video that looks good on a big screen. In the past, that would have been a pipe dream. But now, certain camera makers have made it very possible. I wish Pentax was among them, but I understand that's not likely to happen.

Anyway, I don't have to rush into anything. The camera I mentioned in my original post does not come out until September, and I probably would not buy it until after Christmas anyway, so I still have time to figure out what I want to do. My LX100 takes excellent video, so that should tide me over.

And maybe, as Adam suggested, I won't go in whole-hog. Maybe keep my Pentax gear, and start out with just a lens or two on the other camera.

[RMabo]

I understand your point, but I don't see how allowing a DSLR to record at 3840x2160 instead of just 1920x1080 would make the camera any harder for you to use for still photography.

The price would be higher because of more expensive hardware, and the camera may be limited and compromised internally for optimum video photography with processing power dedicated to video etc. Video simply makes DSLR more expensive and more complicated than they would be without video.

[micromacro]

And I don't know many serious video makers who use just a "camcorder". But I'm not a "serious" video maker anyway, so I don't have a problem using my regular camera, as long as the video quality is good..

True.
So, why to be kind of angry of Pentax? Buy Sony or Panasonic as the second system.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

True.
So, why to be kind of angry of Pentax? Buy Sony or Panasonic as the second system.

Um...where was I angry? I thought that others were being aggressive toward me, or towards the idea of wanting better video features in Pentax cameras.

[Mikesul]

Um...where was I angry? I thought that others were being aggressive toward me, or towards the idea of wanting better video features in Pentax cameras.

Ah, but we do not always see our posts the way others see them. The steady stream of very intense arguments for the kind of video you want in a Pentax camera does annoy some people. Sony uses the same sensors and does include video that people seem to like so the real solution is to look there. Pentax offers many attractive features (especially toughness and a bit of weather resistance that the newer Sonys do not offer) so many of us buy Pentax cameras. I do not know of a camera which has everything I would like. Decisions are often difficult. I really doubt that any of our arguments will have any affect on Ricoh/Pentax one way or the other.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

Ah, but we do not always see our posts the way others see them. The steady stream of very intense arguments for the kind of video you want in a Pentax camera does annoy some people.

You should go back and read my original post #1, and then the first reply to my post. I see no anger or derision or anything else ugly expressed in my post, but the second post is sneering and sarcastic.

It seems to me like it is more a case of people feeling overly (and needlessly) defensive, than it is me expressing any negative emotion. At least that's how I see it.

[Mikesul]

Ok, so why not just drop it? Nothing will be changed by continuing the dispute. This issue has been beaten up on the forum almost as much as EVF vs OVF.

[stevebrot]

I don't know if you have kids, but when you are already holding your camera, with your fancy lens, and taking pictures of your kids, it's very nice to be able to push a button and immediately switch to making high-quality video that looks good even when viewed on a large display. Is it a crime to want video that is not low-contrast, grainy, jaggy, sparkly, aliased, moired, washed out, and just generally ugly?

My kid is grown, but I don't believe your description fits the output from my K-3 in part or in full. For sure, I have to press a lever and a button to change modes, but that is the penalty for having an optical viewfinder. I have never shot with a K-30, but the K-50 I have had use of does a pretty good job as well for its price range.


Steve

[Venom3300]

and one of the reasons I left Canon is because they have focused too much on video.... so do what you have to do. but I don't think Ricoh/Pentax really cares.

[stevebrot]

If pentax users don't care about video, it is because there isn't a Pentax camera with video with caring about.

That reasoning is a little fuzzy. I have a number of photographer friends, most of whom are pretty serious about their craft. For the most part, they shoot Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Pentax. I know one Lumix shooter, though he primarily does video. I have asked most of my other friends whether they were happy with the video capabilities of their cameras and the general response has been a questioning look followed by something like, "I know it does that, but have never tried that feature". Often enough that is followed by, "Why? I have my phone for that". I know one person who purchased a Canon 7D primarily for video back in late 2010.


Steve

[Edgar_in_Indy]

My kid is grown, but I don't believe your description fits the output from my K-3 in part or in full. For sure, I have to press a lever and a button to change modes, but that is the penalty for having an optical viewfinder. I have never shot with a K-30, but the K-50 I have had use of does a pretty good job as well for its price range.

It's kind of hit-and-miss, depending on the circumstances. In some lighting with some subjects, it looks great. And that's what whetted my appetite in the first place. But in some other circumstances or locations, things don't come out so well.

But regardless, in my original post I described that I'm wanting a camera that does 4K and has stabilization. My K-30 has neither for video.

---------- Post added 07-19-15 at 05:46 PM ----------

Ok, so why not just drop it? Nothing will be changed by continuing the dispute. This issue has been beaten up on the forum almost as much as EVF vs OVF.

Pretty much any topic on this forum has been beaten to death. But I don't recall seeing much discussion of 4K on here.

If nobody wants to talk about it, then there won't be any discussion. I don't think anybody on here needs to be told by anyone other than a moderator to "drop it."

[stevebrot]

I just noticed that this thread has been moved out of the "Pentax DSLR Discussions"....seems like that's where it belongs.

IIRC, it was moved within hours of your original post, perhaps because that post was mostly a list of the features and desirability of the recently announced Lumix GX8. It is a sort of a shame that the thread is titled and framed as it is since it is likely there are a fair number of users who monitor this section of the site who are very interested in the GX8 and a lively discussion would likely have ensued, a component of which would probably have been a comparison to offerings from Pentax and other makers.


Steve