[hangu]

If the price of the K7 is such a concern, you should really be considering a used K-7 from the US. It's a superior camera to the K-x in many ways.

How are you so positive that you need a flash head?

[JoepLX3]

Stange, in Japanese catelogue I cannot find this Pentax 16-45 mm F4

But if I sacrifice aperture (F4 iso F2.8) then I can also consider this one (a little more tele reach):

• Pentax DA 17-70 mm F4 AL [IF] SDM, 485g = 450 Euro

[JoepLX3]

If the price of the K7 is such a concern, you should really be considering a used K-7 from the US. It's a superior camera to the K-x in many ways.

How are you so positive that you need a flash head?

I might not buy one directly, because it interferes a party a lot. But whenever I see the effects on indoor people shots (posed as well as spontaneous) then I know I have to go and learn & practice it myself too.
What of the K-7 (vs K-x) end's up on the pictures?
- Maybe I should ask this in different sub forum...

The K-x sensor seems to be better than K-7
Stabilization efficiency and horizon correction of K-7 would be nice to have
Shutter speed of 1/8000 vs 1/6000 is to my understanding marginal
Frame rate is also not something I want to pay 400 Euro for

What will Pentax do at/after Photonika?
- I want to by DSLR, but still have my LX3, so I am not in a hurry

[hangu]

I disagree with you that the K-x sensor is superior to the K-7's sensor.

I've never had a need for flash. My 55mm f1.2 and 50mm f1.4 is what I use in indoor situations. I think flashes are very useful but in no way a requirement.

You're overlooking a lot of features that make the K7 a superior camera to the Kx. To name a few: AF confirmation points, tethering, battery grips, weather resistance, higher fps, much quieter shutter, better build quality, better viewfinder, faster and better AF, better metering and etc.

I don't know what they will do at Photokina. I do not work for Pentax R&D.

[JoepLX3]

I disagree with you that the K-x sensor is superior to the K-7's sensor.

I've never had a need for flash. My 55mm f1.2 and 50mm f1.4 is what I use in indoor situations. I think flashes are very useful but in no way a requirement.

You're overlooking a lot of features that make the K7 a superior camera to the Kx. To name a few: AF confirmation points, tethering, battery grips, weather resistance, higher fps, much quieter shutter, better build quality, better viewfinder, faster and better AF, better metering and etc.

I don't know what they will do at Photokina. I do not work for Pentax R&D.

Depending on your applications, with good primes or good light you can for sure do without a flash. But like in fashion / wedding photography bringing some light (a flash, with bounce capability) will give you tools (and challenges) to improve the image quality of the resulting photo's.

Without any doubt the K-7 is a better camera than the K-x (for sure if Pentax will upgrade the sensor to get comparable high ISO performance as the K-x has), but I don't see how most of the things you mention result in better image quality.
Only better AF and metering in case the K-x would be wrong. Being a newbie myself, I might be confused with all the camera features of the K-7 and even make more user-mistakes than I would with K-x.

New camera's will impact pricing of current models, so maybe the price delta becomes smaller, only time will tell us.

[JoepLX3]

Oh, summarized my feeling is that the positive IQ impact of all the upgraded lens is larger than that of the difference between the K-x and K-7.

Is Sigma 50-150 mm F2.8 very comparable with Pentax 50-135 mm F2.8? (the price difference is half a new 50 mm F1.4 with HSM)
What is the best money value in the 18-50 mm Pentax "business"?

And finally which color K-x will give me the best results?

[hangu]

Let me get this straight... You think these tools will make the K-7 harder to use than the K-x for a beginner and that they wouldn't impact the image quality at all:

AF confirmation points, tethering, battery grips, weather resistance, higher fps, much quieter shutter, better build quality, better viewfinder, faster and better AF, better metering

Seriously?

Oh, summarized my feeling is that the positive IQ impact of all the upgraded lens is larger than that of the difference between the K-x and K-7.

That's quite an assumption.

And finally which color K-x will give me the best results?

You're on your own, buddy.

[JoepLX3]

That's quite an assumption.

It is not an assumption, that are just my current feelings and I would like have input from people with more experience (preferable even proof).

Do you think K-7 over K-x will have a larger IQ impact than Pentax DA*50-135 mm F2.8 over the kit 50-200 mm tele zoom lens?

PS: I will be able to select the color myself, maybe just black, but if also metallic finishing then I might go for the olive green.

[JoepLX3]

This below is probably what bothered me on the K-7's in the three different shops (I thanked the guy in my search for K-x details).

• Two times I have wrongly set exposure compensation on my LX3 without reminding to turn it off, as a result a couple of days with under vs over-exposed pictures
• The "easy" scene selections on the K-x is a pro over the K-7, at least for my wife
• Sometime less features is indeed better

There are really 2 presses to the shutter button. The first is a very light press, you don't really feel a change, it basically touching the button lightly. This stage engages the metering and focus, you can tell you are using the first stage of the button press because the camera will come to life (if it was in standby) and start focusing and metering on the rear screen and in the viewfinder. The 2nd stage of the shutter button is a relatively firm press, you'll know the photo is being taken obviously since the shutter will engage.

A quick question: When you are doing the half/first light press, is the camera focusing? If so, do you get a beep, or does the green hex in the viewfinder start to flash? What conditions are you trying to shoot in - outdoors, low light, something else?

There are a couple of menu options you may have changed that could be part of your problem (you'll have to go into the menu and read the manual to find them). One is to allow shutter release whether the camera finds focus or not (this use is a personal preference that you'll have to learn). If the lens is attempting to focus, but then the green hex starts to blink that means it can't find a focus point, and the shutter won't fire if you have this setting turned on (it should be on until you learn when you want to turn it off, as this will prevent you from taking out of focus photos).

The second is called 'catch in focus' - this might by the one you have enabled - it means the camera will only fire when it achieves focus, and this should be turned off until you learn to use it (and know you want it set on!).

[theperception2008]

This below is probably what bothered me on the K-7's in the three different shops (I thanked the guy in my search for K-x details).

• Two times I have wrongly set exposure compensation on my LX3 without reminding to turn it off, as a result a couple of days with under vs over-exposed pictures
• The "easy" scene selections on the K-x is a pro over the K-7, at least for my wife
• Sometime less features is indeed better

Hi Joe,

Here's the thing, camera bodies change, lenses don't. I think it is wiser to invest in better lenses and learn more about the style of photography that you want to do. The type of lenses you want to use are also an important thing that you want to decided upon. This time around, I have gone with mostly primes. I have several manual focus and auto focus prime lenses and that's what Pentax is known for. I also have a few consumer zooms for holidays and when changing lenses are impractical. Either way, investing money in a good body and really good lenses is the better investment plan. Also make sure you have a fast enough computer to process the raw files after you start shooting lots of pics!

My set up: A used K100D Super

Lenses: FA 77 1.8 ltd., DA 35 2.8 ltd., SMC F 50 1.7, DA 16-45 F4, DA 55-300, M 50 1.4, M 50 1.7, Promaster 7 28 2.8

All the prime lenses are sharp, some obviously sharper than the others. The zooms are good with good contrast and sharpness, but the primes are just that much sharper. I also like moving around to compose my shots, zooms make me feel lazy. :-P

p.s. always shoot in RAW, that way you can correct for most of the exposure. it helps alot in post processing!

[JoepLX3]

Thanks for your feedback and it looks like you have a nice lens set!!!

I have two young daughters so can't afford that many lenses, because

1. Too expensive
2. Too heavy

Also good body AND good lens is a little too much for me at this moment, so I tend to go for 2 good zoom lenses (so I can follow my kids easier) and in the future add 1-2 primes as well as potentially upgrade the body.

Best regards,

Joep

[Pentaxor]

Thanks for your feedback and it looks like you have a nice lens set!!!

I have two young daughters so can't afford that many lenses, because

1. Too expensive
2. Too heavy

Also good body AND good lens is a little too much for me at this moment, so I tend to go for 2 good zoom lenses (so I can follow my kids easier) and in the future add 1-2 primes as well as potentially upgrade the body.

Best regards,

Joep

Joe, if budget is a huge issue for you for now, I'll recommend the k-x, 16-45, and 55-300 combo.. but since you have some younglings, it will be good to have atleast one portraiture prime lens. probably a 50/1.4. lens. although a manual focus 50mm 1.4 lens will do for such purpose + you can get it for really loose change. you can get a used one for $50 bucks in Japan I believe.

[JoepLX3]

Joe, if budget is a huge issue for you for now, I'll recommend the k-x, 16-45, and 55-300 combo.. but since you have some younglings, it will be good to have atleast one portraiture prime lens. probably a 50/1.4. lens. although a manual focus 50mm 1.4 lens will do for such purpose + you can get it for really loose change. you can get a used one for $50 bucks in Japan I believe.

In the wide area I will consider the:
- Pentax 16-45 F2.8 vs Tamron 17-50 F2.8 vs Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4.0
and in the tele range
- Pentax 50-135 F2.8 vs Sigma 50-150 F2.8

To be exented later by for example one of these (depending on my feelings):
- Pentax/Tamron 18-250
- Sigma 50 F1.4
- Tamron/Sigma 70-200 F2.8
- Another prime lens 30-40 or > 100

[RioRico]

Choice can be approached a couple of ways: camera first, or lens first. The first way is: Ooh, I want this camera, what kit should I get? The other way is: Ahh, I want lenses that do certain things, what camera can I hang them on? I took the second approach. I wanted a fisheye zoom and only Pentax had the 10-17 at a (then) affordable price; and I wanted a utility superzoom; and I wanted something fast. So the DA10-17 (and user reviews) drove my pick of the K20D, with the DA18-250 and FA50/1.4 and AF360. Of course, without a clear pick of most-wanted lens(es), the decision is tougher, eh?

Think specifically about which glass you want most, and why, and where you feel comfortable in changing lenses. With multiple zooms, you get narrow or wide (overlapped) change-of-lens points. My major AF zooms are the aforementioned 10-17 and 18-250, and a Lil'Bigma 170-500. New two-lens kits typically consist of an 18-55, and a 50-200 or 55-300. Too much of my shooting is between 40-80mm, and if I didn't have my 18-250, I'd be swapping lenses constantly. Not good. I find it much easier (mentally and aesthetically) to swap at the 18mm point and in the 170-250 range, than at the 55mm point. Which is why I don't use the DA18-55 and my A-type Tamron 60-300 together very much -- wrong coverages.

And yes, it's very good to have some good and fast primes, whether AF or manual or mixed. Whatever zooms you choose, it's good to have f/2 or faster glass at around 20-28, 50-58, 85-100 mm. My basic prime set: Zenitar 16/2.8; Vivitar 24/2 (if the iris worked!!); M28/2.8; Isco Westron 35/2.8; FA50/1.4, M50/1.7, Mac-Tak 50/4; Nikkor 85/2; Tak-B 135/2.5; and the tiny, crisp Tele-Tak 200/5.6. Except for the Zen16, Viv24, and FA50, all these cost me less than US$50 each. Your obsessions may differ. Good luck.

[JoepLX3]

Choice can be approached a couple of ways: camera first, or lens first. The first way is: Ooh, I want this camera, what kit should I get? The other way is: Ahh, I want lenses that do certain things, what camera can I hang them on? I took the second approach. I wanted a fisheye zoom and only Pentax had the 10-17 at a (then) affordable price; and I wanted a utility superzoom; and I wanted something fast. So the DA10-17 (and user reviews) drove my pick of the K20D, with the DA18-250 and FA50/1.4 and AF360. Of course, without a clear pick of most-wanted lens(es), the decision is tougher, eh?

Think specifically about which glass you want most, and why, and where you feel comfortable in changing lenses. With multiple zooms, you get narrow or wide (overlapped) change-of-lens points. My major AF zooms are the aforementioned 10-17 and 18-250, and a Lil'Bigma 170-500. New two-lens kits typically consist of an 18-55, and a 50-200 or 55-300. Too much of my shooting is between 40-80mm, and if I didn't have my 18-250, I'd be swapping lenses constantly. Not good. I find it much easier (mentally and aesthetically) to swap at the 18mm point and in the 170-250 range, than at the 55mm point. Which is why I don't use the DA18-55 and my A-type Tamron 60-300 together very much -- wrong coverages.

And yes, it's very good to have some good and fast primes, whether AF or manual or mixed. Whatever zooms you choose, it's good to have f/2 or faster glass at around 20-28, 50-58, 85-100 mm. My basic prime set: Zenitar 16/2.8; Vivitar 24/2 (if the iris worked!!); M28/2.8; Isco Westron 35/2.8; FA50/1.4, M50/1.7, Mac-Tak 50/4; Nikkor 85/2; Tak-B 135/2.5; and the tiny, crisp Tele-Tak 200/5.6. Except for the Zen16, Viv24, and FA50, all these cost me less than US$50 each. Your obsessions may differ. Good luck.

Grrrr, you are so right...

But I think (know) I will have comparable issues at other brands, so let me try to fix the puzzle with Pentax K-x in mind.

The don't wanting to swap between 40 and 80, is exactly what I suffered from back with my SLR set. I started with 28-90 + 75-300 and hardly used the tele lens. Then I bought 28-200 and only used that one. But now I know I want faster glass, so I HAVE to split the zoom and/or add primes from the beginning.

--- In other thread is one typo, the Pentax 16-45 is only F4 (not F2.8), for so far that option...

I am leaning more and more to getting the fancy shots from the DA* 50-135 F2.8 and fill the wide angle with the cheap kit lens untill I figured out which prime / wide zoom to go for, it can even become the 12-24 or 10-17 icw Sigma 50 mm F1.4 (does that last one give "normal" (non-fish-eye shots at 17 mm?)).