DPR review of K-7

Tom C cakaltm at gmail.com
Sat Oct 3 14:23:11 EDT 2009

I want the world and know I can't have it.


On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 12:59 PM, P. J. Alling
<webstertwentysix at gmail.com> wrote:
> Tom, you'll be in the same boat with any system. Canon 6mp cameras are now
> selling for even less than Pentax.  Read the Canon forums and you'll find
> that Canon has it's share of problems, with exposure, noise, focus, you name
> it. The question is what do you want, and is it even possible to get it.
> Tom C wrote:
>> I basically agree.  I thought because of the sensor, CMOS vs. CCD,
>> that the K20D/K10D difference was considered quite large.
>> Here's my chagrined viewpoint on the K-7, with my own rationale
>> applied, and I reserve the right to change my mind:
>> 1. First I have really been close to purchasing a Canon EOS 5D MK II
>> and still am, so there is an issue of  'do I want to spend a
>> significant amount of money on the K-7'?
>> 2. I've been very unhappy with the K20D, mainly in the area of
>> exposure accuracy. A very high number of images require adjustment and
>> it's unpredictable at times. I thought Pentax 'got it right ' before,
>> at least that's what all the cheering for their two prior top-end
>> cameras would lead one to believe. So I'm left wondering... have they
>> really got it right this time?
>> 3. The review on dpreview states the K-7 has "More RAW noise than
>> predecessor (but in line with competition)".  That sounds like a
>> potential 1/4 step backwards in image quality from the K20D. It also
>> reveals "In numerical terms the K-7 teams up with its predecessor in
>> being the noisiest camera in this group of four cameras".
>> 4. The review on dpreview states the K-7 has "Less dynamic range than
>> direct competitors" and "At it default settings the K-7 produces
>> slightly less dynamic range than its predecessor".  Again that sounds
>> like a potential step backwards in image quality.
>> 5. The review states "Therefore, purely from an image quality point of
>> view, there is no pressing need for K20D users to upgrade".
>> All of that being said, I realize that these reviews are often
>> splitting hairs on the numbers, and the testing really only covers
>> performance in one set of conditions, and graphs don't always tell the
>> true story.
>> There is much to like about the K-7.  Some of the features that
>> especially appeal to me are the magnesium body being smaller/lighter,
>> 100% viewfinder, the in camera composition adjustment feature, the
>> level indicator and level adjust features, and the CTE white-balance
>> setting (to keep sunsets looking like sunsets), and maybe a 77-segment
>> meter will help with exposure accuracy.
>> So I'm undecided at this point, and I have not held the camera in my
>> hand, nor had first-hand experience using it.
>> When I look at what the money is buying, I'm unsure that I'll see a
>> difference in image quality.  Of course, the #1 determinant of that is
>> the human behind the viewfinder, but considering that to be equal,
>> will there be a difference? The Canon has a 6.5 MP advantage which I
>> believe will make a noticeable difference.
>> As one other poster noted, and I'll paraphrase, 'maybe waiting for the
>> K-7 successor is a viable option for K10/20D owners'.   I sort of feel
>> we're on the disposable camera bandwagon here.  The K10/20/7 all have
>> the same nominal sensor resolution, and similar noise issues, similar
>> AF systems still regarded as slow, and by all accounts regardless of
>> desirable features, little if any inherent difference in image quality
>> (can't speak for K10D).  My K20D is not even two years old.  Having
>> paid $1100 for it, I now would feel lucky if I could get $500
>> reselling it. If I buy a K-7 and a year from now Pentax decides to
>> release a 20+ MP body, I'd guess I would be in the same boat... having
>> just spent upwards of $1000 on what is a disposable camera due to the
>> fact that it will be considered obsolete by today's standards.  Of
>> course the same can be said regardless of manufacturer.
>> I've got an *istD and another derivative of it sitting on the shelf
>> collecting dust, and I see the K20D soon becoming a paper-weight as
>> well.
>> Tom
>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 9:29 AM, AlunFoto <alunfoto at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2009/10/3 paul stenquist <pnstenquist at comcast.net>:
>>>> I had a K20D and a K10D. The K20D was my every day camera, and the K10D
>>>> was
>>>> a backup. When the K7 was introduced I bought one and sold the K10.
>>>> Believe
>>>> me, the K7D is a big step up from the K20. Exposure is much better, the
>>>> faster write speed is a blessing, and the autofocus is superior in every
>>>> situation I've encountered. I find it difficult to use the K20 these
>>>> days,
>>>> although it's fine for when I have to shoot with two cameras.
>>> Now it's time for my "me too". However I have sold my K20D and picked
>>> up a second K-7 the day before yesterday. The AF speed is my killer
>>> feature.
>>> When the K20D I was a bit surprised by how all the forums blabbed
>>> about it being a "minor upgrade" from K10D, despite the facts. They
>>> are two very, very different beasts. The K10D was probably as good as
>>> any APS-C CCD sensor could get, and Pentax used a 22 bit A/D converter
>>> to make sure they got the best signal achievable out of it. From there
>>> to K20D's CMOS is nothing short of a new paradigma. The K-7 also
>>> introduce a new tech platform since they've changed the operating
>>> voltage, but the technological difference between K20D and K-7 is much
>>> less of a revolution than the previous leap. Yet it receives so much
>>> more attention. :-)
>>> Jostein
>>> --
>>> http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/
>>> http://alunfoto.blogspot.com
>>> --
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> PDML at pdml.net
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>>> follow the directions.
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML at pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>> follow the directions.
> --
> The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or
> drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a
> damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is
> not a free man any more than a dog.
>        --G. K. Chesterton
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML at pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.

More information about the PDML mailing list