Pentax...

Status
Not open for further replies.
sorry to keep posting, first off that RED one is super sexy. second off, i would love to have this camera with the 3 lens package (if it is of similar to better quality than the gh1) rather than having my gh1+stock lens+fd adapter+2 fd lenses. Not having auto focus on 2/3 of my lenses is a big problem when doing live event photography (which I do a lot of). lets assume the video quality is the same as the K7. so how does the K7 stack up against the GH1 video wise? (aside from it being 30p, as this is gonna be 24p the 30p isnt an argument). how is the video quality alone comparison? have we seen any test videos from the K-X yet? know anything about manual controls? (this is a necessity!) does it have any stupid restrictions like the Nikons? (idiotic 5 minute recording cap).

sorry if i'm acting like a kid in a candy store, its just the idea of an ACTUAL DSLR + 720 24p video + 3 lenses for $850 bucks (and I can get it in sexy red) sounds incredible to me. I'm just trying to understand why its SOOOOO much cheaper than the GH1? where's the catch? (again 1080p isn't a factor for me as I think the GH1's 1080p mode is crud full o mud. is it merely the 1080p factor that costs so much more?)

thanks a bunch :)

[edit - just noticed its 2 lenses for either 750 or 850, different second lens, either way, still kickass]
 
Car3o, what were you trying to link to? it just links to the DVXuser News page¿ were you trying to link a specific post?
 
paulgandersman said:
sorry to keep posting, first off that RED one is super sexy. second off, i would love to have this camera with the 3 lens package (if it is of similar to better quality than the gh1) rather than having my gh1+stock lens+fd adapter+2 fd lenses. Not having auto focus on 2/3 of my lenses is a big problem when doing live event photography (which I do a lot of). lets assume the video quality is the same as the K7. so how does the K7 stack up against the GH1 video wise? (aside from it being 30p, as this is gonna be 24p the 30p isnt an argument). how is the video quality alone comparison? have we seen any test videos from the K-X yet? know anything about manual controls? (this is a necessity!) does it have any stupid restrictions like the Nikons? (idiotic 5 minute recording cap).

sorry if i'm acting like a kid in a candy store, its just the idea of an ACTUAL DSLR + 720 24p video + 3 lenses for $850 bucks (and I can get it in sexy red) sounds incredible to me. I'm just trying to understand why its SOOOOO much cheaper than the GH1? where's the catch? (again 1080p isn't a factor for me as I think the GH1's 1080p mode is crud full o mud. is it merely the 1080p factor that costs so much more?)

thanks a bunch :)

[edit - just noticed its 2 lenses for either 750 or 850, different second lens, either way, still kickass]
Click to expand...


Well for one the Gh1 is $600 body only and stateside comes with a kit lens worth every penny of the $900 extra dollars that is quite excellent, versatile (especially for event photography and videography...if that even is outdoors :D), etc. Furthermore this lens allows for silent auto focus during video which does not seem to be a feature of any of these competitor cameras/lenses.

The GH1 has a great electronic view finder and a large articulated LCD. Because the camera relies on live view it has numerous features that are designed to make liveview, and by extension, video, better.

The Gh1 supports 720/60p which means slow motion video, as well as supporting 1080p.

The Gh1 has full manual controls for video, no word on that in this camera yet but general pattern would indicate that it does not.

Lastly the GH1's mirrorless design allows for a short flange distance that means it can mount just about any lens ever made with the right adapter.

It is an excellent camera.

To address your main question "why does it cost more?" It costs more because of the excellent kit lens, the technology required to pack a 1.4 megapixel viewfinder into the camera, the articulating LCD, the multi-aspect sensor, and the ability of the m4/3 system to mount many lenses (in many ways I think we're still helping them recoup the R&D costs of m4/3...glad they were generous enough to give us some awesome features for the money.)

The GH1 remains king of video DSLRs when it comes to buying a camera exclusively for video features in both a narrative filmmaking or event environment. While cameras like the 5D mk II can achieve better video quality in some situations, and cameras like the 7D have more framerate features and a better codec, the features of the GH1 and the m4/3 system make it ideal for shooting video in ways that no other DSLR has been able to match outside of pixel-peeping quality or people using it in outlandishly weird conditions and shots that they would never dream of getting with a normal video camera but do with the GH1 to try to prove a point about mud or banding.

Lets keep in mind that the GH1 is still $2000 cheaper than the next most expensive prosumer video camera Panasonic makes (and yes I do in many ways consider it a prosumer video camera, despite the shortcomings) and is truly geared toward video users just as much as toward photographers. Companies like Pentax, Nikon, and to a lesser degree, Canon, seem to, despite the great work people are doing with these cameras, be taking a totally back asswards approach to video, saying "well even though people who are serious about photography are buying these we think that they'll just want to shoot stupid little videos of their cat and don't need full featured video support." It's ridiculous. In many ways the very things that lessen the appeal of the GH1 to serious photographers make it perfect for those wanting to shoot video...and I believe that is why the camera has been so popular, such a huge hit, and sold out for so long everywhere.
 
thank you for that :) very good points you reminded me of there! :) i think I just haven't gotten the right use out of my gh1's stock lens yet. the issue is that I keep finding myself in live band or event scenarios that are very dark or at night and I am never able to use my stock lens, so i'm unable to do automatic anything. most of the situations I find myself in (for photo and video, usually same events) i end up having to use one of my fully manual FD lenses. the slowness of the stock lens is what makes it unusable a lot of the time for me. :/ also, I do a lot of photo manipulation so I can't really shoot higher than 800 ISO and not get lotsa noise. i'm really using my camera for 50/50 photo and video. i'm in a tricky spot.

[edit - whats funny is that I am a professional filmmaker but getting the GH1 has turned me into very much a photographer, haha. i keep finding myself doing photography with this camera rather than shooting videos! what's wrong with me? :p]
 
Yeah. The thing to keep in mind about the stock lens is that it is a very wide (28mm equivelant!), 10x zoom, with lots of features (silent AF, OIS, close focusing, etc)...it's pretty versatile and a lot better than many zooms like it out there. 4-5.8 isn't exactly slow for a 10x zoom that's around $1,000 or more, in fact it's about average (actually you won't find many zooms with a range that nice.) It's really a great lens, just not for some situations...but with any DSLR you're going to have to whip out the fast primes in low light...the lens may be slow for a video camera or for a DSLR kit lens...but not for a 10x zoom....f4-5.8 is respectable. No it's not the only lens you'll ever need, but am I glad I have it? Would I be screwed without it? You betcha.

EDIT: It's also one of the sharpest zooms of that range I've ever seen ever.
FURTHER EDIT: It is also capable of very shallow DOF at longer focal lengths despite the slow speed. And is also capable of very deep DOF when stopped down which is great.
SHAMELESS PLUG RELATED TO DEEP DOF: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhatqMeFVVE&fmt=22 focused to nearly infinity @ f/14...
 
The GH1's kit lens (14-140mm) goes for £500 on eBay.

That makes the GH1 body worth about £500 as well. Not so bad - at all.

Buy a GH1 and stick a Pentax lens on it :)

Pentax have slightly under delivered here. 720p (at least it's at 24p) but nothing else special - no AF, still has mirror box, no flip out screen... it's not a GH1 beater, unless it has some very special codec and low light performance under it's belt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top