Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
The short battery life surprises me. I've shot 2,300 frames with two bars left on the battery display on my D810 two days in a row now, mostly long bursts.
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Yes me too. Those damn Nikon battery last forever. For the pentax I think it is because of sensor stabilisation, more little battery and all the wifi GPS stuff like in he A7R mark 2 toaster microwave nespresso whatever. This might drain a lot of power. If it is the true battery life WITHOUT all the gadget things then it is probably because the battery is weak or at least not on par with what Canon or Nikon use (or simply a badly managed power consumption).The short battery life surprises me. I've shot 2,300 frames with two bars left on the battery display on my D810 two days in a row now, mostly long bursts.
Kind of agree! Especially when one compares this battery life to all the mirrorless camera battery lifesYes me too. Those damn Nikon battery last forever. For the pentax I think it is because of sensor stabilisation, more little battery and all the wifi GPS stuff like in he A7R mark 2 toaster microwave nespresso whatever. This might drain a lot of power. If it is the true battery life WITHOUT all the gadget things then it is probably because the battery is weak or at least not on par with what Canon or Nikon use (or simply a badly managed power consumption).
But hey !! We are looking at the first Full Frame digital camera ever created by Pentax, in a crisis period. The Next one will be better we can easily pardon them for the little flaws ESPECIALLY at this price point !!
So are many others who would not be buying it.Looking forward to the new camera even if it is "10 years too late".
At 925 grams it better be ... :lecture:Some photos of the final beast. Ofc weather sealed like a tank and build like a tank: Magnesium alloy and Stainless steel chassis. Will be the most resilient FF solution of the market.
With all due respect, your analysis of 4K video, at least as far as North America is concerned, is simply wrong. Almost 30% of all screen sizes above 50" being sold today are 4K screens. Critical mass is approaching in terms of 4K penetration. 4K is being streamed by Netflix, Vimeo, YouTube and Amazon. Amazon and Netflix are producing original programming in 4K. HBO has been archiving a substantial amount of programming in 4K to "future proof" it.It do not film with 4K resolution; just full HD. Anyway, on this forum and other forums, who is equipped with 4K screens + have the serious hardware pipeline to pp 4k video ? Not that much at all. So 4K is actually a geek thing if ppl aren't in the industry. Without speaking about the ppl who have 4K able media support such as TV and computers to appreciate those files fully. I'm in the industry, shoot the latest RED.
4K for amateur is actually a lonely planet vastly debated virtually, on forums, but IRL it not yet there at all. Hell... the MAJORITY of ppl you cross in the street or your favourite grocery store do not even have a gear to run my virtual reality. Note that I crafted it on a SEVEN years old computer and yet, many ppl can't run it because VERY low hardware. So 4K ? It is a niche in the niche. Ok, most buyers of IMac (new) will have access to such resolution, either in 21 or 24... but most ppl aren't in MAC.
Industry try hard to democratize 4K (and even try to make us swallow higher rez such as 6K or 8K) but the reality is that ppl aren't yet equipped.
The truth is ppl today use more their phones than a real DESKTOP.
Just my two pecs. Download my virtual gallery and run it fantastic mode. If no glitches then your computer might be actual and have power enough to cope with 4K raw files (and save you some nights of encoding).
https://www.behance.net/gallery/32387485/CRYO
That actually confirms Hulyss' claim. I don't know how often people change their TV screens, but with less than 30% of new screens above 50" being 4K and hardly any of the screens that people already have, it will probably take at least 5-10 years before there's a sufficient number of screens out there to call it a significant number. Add to that the fact that the overwhelming amount of video captured by amateurs still is 1080 or lower, and there's probably little reason for Pentax to worry about this in what is a camera that is mainly designed to produce stills. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't have preferred 4K in the K-1, but for this camera, it's probably not a deal breaker for very many. There will probably be an "s" or "II" model with real 4K out in a couple of years.Almost 30% of all screen sizes above 50" being sold today are 4K screens.[/url]
US electronics industry trade groups estimate by 2019 45% of US homes will have UHD; 50% by 2020. As I pointed out previously, a major reason for shooting 4K now, is the improved image quality of 4K downrezed to 1080 vs the poorer quality of natively shot 1080.That actually confirms Hulyss' claim. I don't know how often people change their TV screens, but with less than 30% of new screens above 50" being 4K and hardly any of the screens that people already have, it will probably take at least 5-10 years before there's a sufficient number of screens out there to call it a significant number. Add to that the fact that the overwhelming amount of video captured by amateurs still is 1080 or lower, and there's probably little reason for Pentax to worry about this in what is a camera that is mainly designed to produce stills. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't have preferred 4K in the K-1, but for this camera, it's probably not a deal breaker for very many. There will probably be an "s" or "II" model with real 4K out in a couple of years.
I agree that it's a good idea to shoot 4K now. However, most people don't care much about the quality of their videos. Trash in 4K doesn't look better than trash in HDUS electronics industry trade groups estimate by 2019 45% of US homes will have UHD; 50% by 2020. As I pointed out previously, a major reason for shooting 4K now, is the improved image quality of 4K downrezed to 1080 vs the poorer quality of natively shot 1080.
The same could be said of most people when it comes to still photography, as well. The vast majority of the public can not tell the difference between images created on a $500 camera or a $50K system. OTOH, most of us who frequent photography sites are interested in improving our skills and creating high quality images.I agree that it's a good idea to shoot 4K now. However, most people don't care much about the quality of their videos. Trash in 4K doesn't look better than trash in HD