Why video on a DSLR?

I've just experimented with the video function on my K50 and it seems completely pointless, a seriously retrograde experience compared to a dedicated video camera. Why is there an 'arms race' in this field? For years I have used a Sony camcorder with a 20x Zeiss zoom lens which feels right when held (unlike a DSLR) for panning etc. Holding in the palm of one hand, one finger control works the power zoom both in and out, and at variable speed, whilst the thumb operates the on/off. The camcorder is properly designed to do one thing very well. A DSLR should be likewise and resources spent on more useful functions instead.

Personally I have used video twice in the 7 years I have had a DSLR but I would rather the option were there than not. Having it there should it be needed (more like remember it's there tbh) means a lot of people don't have to carry 2 bodies round and at least a DSLR can do reasonable video ... a video camera (on the whole) is pretty rubbish at stills.

From what I understand it costs only a few pounds to include the option and it would take a brave manufacturer to leave it out on a mainstream camera now.

---

. My Flickr

For people who are skilled at shooting stills, the investment would still be in a DSLR with some quality lenses. However if there was ever a call for some video production, some might not have the money to actually buy more gear but if they had the option of some decent HD video in their DSLRs then that might suffice. Even the lenses are good enough. My Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 is amazing for video despite being a stills lens.

I have not tried the video on my k5
And have no interest in doing so
I use to have a vidieo camera a do oh used it a couple of times so I got shut of it as it was like a hover collecting dust
People that do a lot of filming will buy a video camera not stills camera so why can't we have a dedicate stills camera top of the range without ll the crap excuse the swaring

Regards stu

I really don't understand the hatred of video on a stills camera. If you don't use it then don't use it but for what it costs to include why alienate all those people that buy a DSLR because it CAN do video. At the end of the day all you have to do is ignore the video selector.

Next thing you know there will be someone on here that thinks post processing is the work of the devil

---

. My Flickr

From what I see, these people who use video seem to be complaining that "video is rubbish on Pentax cameras" and keep asking for better video - then go and buy a video camera! See RobL's comment above

---

Regards,
Michael
My new website:link

Not disagreeing with that, but seriously, this is the same old response to a feature that Pentax has had for a large number of models and years now. Time to get used to it I think. If you don't want to use it, don't select that mode stop on the mode dial

For those asking why video on a DSLR? - The answer is all the same reasons you would pick a DSLR over a bridge or point and shoot camera. Interchangeable lenses, weather sealing, sensor stabilisation, investment in lenses etc. Sound familiar?! A DSLR (or frankly newer tech mirrorless bodies seem far more progressive and/or suited) offers the flexibility to produce results that match my creative vision. If your videos don't look good enough for you, that's not a valid reason to dump a feature others are capable of using.

Video is fundamentally lots of 2MP stills pictures, and it uses information from the light that the sensor receives. It's not some physical bolt on piece that enables it. It is software, much like the other software based features, such as sensor shift correction, intervalometer, in camera HDR etc? There is no such thing as a non video capable body as all you need is a sensor to write the pictures to a video file. There is no money to be saved here, and instead it would cost more to supply the 'purist' / OCD crowd a one off custom body design with no button or mode dial option to enable the inherent video mode available on all cameras.

Look harder then.

Pentax has awesome hardware, but their software implementation of this feature needs only a few small tweaks to be very useful; at which point the complaining will stop. Stuffing up/going backwards with the sensor stabilisation from the K-5 family is one such example.

I missed video when I went from bridge camera to a k20d DSLR, and was pleased when I got it back with my k-5. With wildlife at least its great to catch some action and sound as well as some stills, especially when light levels are below that needed for sharp stills, and handy to be able to switch on the same device. Here is some video of puffins with my K-3, I'm still impressed with the quality of the video files that the k-5 and the k-3 put out. Sadly Youtube has chewed the quality somewhat
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqLdCQ_Jpks&list=UUWKHORK-rmkUl5VLN3npUvA

After watching this the other day my very anti video on DSLR has started to sway in his opinion somewhat

---

UK Wildlife blog ----- UK Wildlife Facebook page ----- UK wildlife Twitter

I have only dabled with the video function and i am glad it is there. As DSLR's are capable of video, why would i want to buy another expensive camera, from the little reaserch i have done a vide camera that allows you to change lens like a DSLR are expensive. I this way they offer an advantage over a camcorder.

If video is your sole reason for buying a camera then yes it makes sense to buy a video camera, but many people like both options.

A handy cam is essentially the equivalent of a bridge camera.
If you want the video specific equivalent of a DSLR then you are talking significant prices, hence the appeal of a dslr for video.

A dedicated video camera that output the recorded quality of my Pentax camera, with the IQ available from the lenses I can put on it, would cost some very serious cash!

---

My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver

Doesn't that camera already exist and costs £2.5K, the A7S.

I thought that was a mirrorless ILC, not a dedicated video device?

---

My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear - it is the way it works not what it can do. The DSLR just isn't designed to be handled in the same way. Motorised zoom? Pan and zoom in one motion? Basic stuff.