[Urkeldaedalus]

Let me simplify the question...

If someone said you could have either a D7000, K-5, or D7 for free, which one would you pick?

That's actually a pretty valid question. Of those three, I'd definitely go for the K-5, mostly because I already own a lot of Pentax lenses I like. If you rephrased this question and asked a Pentax K-5, a Nikon D700, and a Canon 5D Mark II then maybe I'd have a harder time choosing Pentax. Of course, to get the full frame system of my dreams, even if you spotted me a free camera I'd still have to buy all those expensive lenses, which would be a long way from free

As for you, it sounds to me like you're looking for a reason to switch one way or the other, so you should just do it. Although most of these cameras you compare to each other will differ some in specs and price, all will be competent cameras that will get the job done.

[Arpe]

7D will beat K-5 in every aspect.

But not for me. For me big doesn't beat small. Not so weather-sealed doesn't beat very weather-sealed. Heavy doesn't beat lighter. Compact flash doesn't beat SD card. SR in camera doesn't beat SR in lens..etc...

So for you maybe, but not in the black and white and because I say so manner.

[elho_cid]

On certain markets the K-5 may seem expensive. ( I'm takling about you guys in the USA, where you are spoiled with cheap electronics. Try european prices instead...)

But upgrader from *istDL will probably benefit a lot even from a cheap camera like K-x. Or get some K-7. And use the rest of your funds to do something about those lenses...
Not even D3 pro camera body will deliver if a cheap lens is attached.

[sweetpapa]

Personally, I'd go with the K-5. This is due to my investment of Pentax lenses and their selection of primes. I love the Pentax philosophy of smaller very well designed lenses. I can put a small fast prime lens on, my FA35, and it doesn't feel super bulky and handles 90% of my shooting needs.

I have a K10D and I've been waiting for the K-5 to come along for years. The K-5, I feel, solves my 2 critcisms: high ISO performance and AF speed/accuracy.

[WerTicus]

printing at a3 or smaller size is very expensive on ink - you need to step up to a2 to make it economical.

[Rondec]

This is a decision that only you can answer. Either camera is going to feel like a step up from your current camera. There are two downsides to Canon -- first of all, their lenses do seem to be targeted to get you to move to full frame. The particular lens that you mentioned getting with the 7D is a full frame lens and would not be nearly wide enough (for me anyway) to consider it a walk around lens. The second thing is size. I don't hesitate to take my K7 everywhere -- to the zoo, to a restaurant, on a hike, but if I had a 7D sized camera with a grip, I think it would tend to stay home a lot more.

Peter Zack shot a little bit with one and compared it to his Pentax kit (https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/non-pentax-cameras-canon-nikon-etc/85315-...t-get-one.html) and not surprisingly, he liked certain things about the 7D and certain things he didn't. I personally would take a K5 over the 7D any day of the week as it fits my style of shooting better (and this is without really knowing much about the image quality of the K5).

[robjmitchell]

I wouldn't touch a d7000, plastic construction with mag alloy heat sink. Not solid and goes against materials physics 101. If they used a cheap AA filter like in the D90 then expect soft images. They also force you into their hideously expensive pro lenses as there is nothing at the intermediate level.
The 7d is a really nice camera especially at that price. You can get some nice intermediate lenses like 17-40/4L and 70-200/4L IS, Not to mentions their super tele stuff that pentax don't offer.
I would still take the K-5 any day though, weather sealing plus ultrasonic dust removal is fantastic.
Not to mention all those fantastic stabilised primes due to in body SR. Hopefully autofocus has nearly caught up. I'm still a bit hesitant on the SDM lenses although the new DC motor is promising for the future. I find video is overrated.
For action sports or birding I would go 7d
For anything else, especially low light I would wait for K-5

[Frogfish]

Forget any investment in lenses for the moment. For what it sounds like you are looking for then, just compare AF accuracy & speed and ISO capability. To do that you need to wait for some reviews on the K5 and the 7000 from respected sources.

However, and this is a biggie, if it's even close then you need to look not at the cameras but at the lenses. All Pentax lenses have SR built in - that means even on M42 or legacy glass you have IS, that is worth one or two stops at least. So to get the equivilant from a Canon or Nikon lens you will need either a much faster non-IS lens ($$$) or a similar speed IS lens ($$$$$).

If the K5 is anywhere near the performance of the 7,000 and 7D then it's a no brainer unless money is not an issue.

I'm skeptical about the 7D having the better end of the specs on paper. to me, they are pretty much equalize each other by virtue of their pros and cons on paper. fps, video, ISO, resolution, WR, durability, size, SR, NR, etc...

On paper the 7D still demolishes the K-5....

FPS" 8fps is the same sure....but the 7D can do like 330 in a row at 18mp....K-5 can do 7 at 16mp. No comparison there at all.

Vidoe:7D has full manual video controls and multple frame rate selections. Once again, no comparison.

ISO: we will have to see. 7D has usable 3200. I could care less about 'extended range'. Canon could probably throw a million iso on there but it doesn't matter because no one will use it, just like noone will use 52k on the k-5.

Resolution: 18 vs 16 MP. Better cropping power. 7D wins there.

WR: Magnesium bod with weather sealing. Not sure how people can say the k-5's is better. People take the 7D to the friggin arctic circle and shoot with it while it is covered in snow. Not sure how u can say it doesn't have good weather sealing.

SR: Okay you win here. But people saying that IS lenses are SO EXPENSIVE obviously haven't checked the prices of Canon lenses recently. They are very reasonably priced. I can get even better lenses for the Canon for cheaper than I could get the same lens for Pentax, even including IS.

Size of cameras is a personal matter. I hate small cameras. I feel like I am going to drop them. Had to put a battery grip on the K200D the day I got it. I love the size of the 7D.

Also the 7D has a 1.0x viewfinder with 100% coverage. Not sure the K-5 has that or not.

That's been my conclusion doing research in the past few weeks.

[ManuH]

Resolution: 18 vs 16 MP. Better cropping power. 7D wins there.

This difference is inconsequential. It's about 5% linearly, you won't notice it even in pixel peeping. Dynamic Range and colors have not been a forte of Canon sensors so overall the K-5 IQ might be better.

Also the 7D has a 1.0x viewfinder with 100% coverage. Not sure the K-5 has that or not.

It has 0.92x 100% coverage but the sensor being slightly larger (1.5x crop vs 1.6x for the Canon) the difference is less than it appears. The 7D VF is about the same size as the 100% 0.94x D300 VF.

Ultimately the main differentiator is the SR. The K-5 and K-7 even uses it at their advantage to auto correct the horizon level, something impossible to do with a lens IS. And the small Ltd primes are also unique to the system. And ergonomic but this is very personal.

[atomiccow]

FPS" 8fps is the same sure....but the 7D can do like 330 in a row at 18mp....K-5 can do 7 at 16mp. No comparison there at all.

Agree. The 7D has 18 mp 14 bit raws and a buffer of 16 raws. Thats twice the capacity of the K-5 with more megapixels and faster FPS. Canon's hardware is better here no question.

Vidoe:7D has full manual video controls and multple frame rate selections. Once again, no comparison.

The K-5 video controls are speculated to be equal to the K-7's which is basically zero so 7D wins here hands down.

ISO: we will have to see. 7D has usable 3200. I could care less about 'extended range'. Canon could probably throw a million iso on there but it doesn't matter because no one will use it, just like noone will use 52k on the k-5.

The K-5 sensor (developed by Sony for the A55) has been proven already in reviews to have better noise and better dynamic range than the 7D sensor. Given Pentax doesn't do something to make the sensor worse than how it can natively perform, we can expect better than 7D results here. The availability of 52K iso however does not point to the fact that the K-5's iso performance is better than other camera's with the same sensor (A55 and D7000).

Resolution: 18 vs 16 MP. Better cropping power. 7D wins there.

This is subjective. The K-5 sensor has better dynamic range than the 7D so the tradeoff will be up to the user.

WR: Magnesium bod with weather sealing. Not sure how people can say the k-5's is better. People take the 7D to the friggin arctic circle and shoot with it while it is covered in snow. Not sure how u can say it doesn't have good weather sealing.

Very true. Many people say here the K-5/7 have top notch durability and all. People fail to realise the K-5/7 still has a plastic rear panel and is not a full magnesium body either. The 7D is undeniably a full magnesium body with magnesium front, rear, top, and bottom panels. As for WR no ones to say Pentax's is better. More weather seals doesn't mean better WR. A better design won't need as many seals to keep the same amount of durability. For example a body constructed from seperate top, bottom, front, and rear panels will have to have seals at all areas where the panels are mated where as someone else might forge the top, front, and bottom from the same panel which wouldn't require any seals. As well the amount of seals required varies with the type of switches and controls used. The K-5 selector pad may require each button be indvidually sealed while the 7D selector wheel may need only one to seal the whole unit. In either case none of the companies have taken the care to pass any sort of waterproofing/resistance specifications. If the K-7 was really miles above the competition, why doesn't Pentax go and subject it to some standardized water and dust protection tests and get it certified with some official ratings.

SR: Okay you win here. But people saying that IS lenses are SO EXPENSIVE obviously haven't checked the prices of Canon lenses recently. They are very reasonably priced. I can get even better lenses for the Canon for cheaper than I could get the same lens for Pentax, even including IS.

It may be true that Canon's cheaper glass is worse than Pentax's cheaper glass. For example some of Canon's EF-S lens cost more than Pentax's Limited's and the quality of the Limited's are very, very good. Of course though there are only 6 DA Limiteds. Comparing top notch glass however, the DA* cannot keep up with the Canon L in any way. Everyone can attest that Canon's telephoto's smoke anything Pentax currently offers. The non-tele DA*s, of which there are only 2, are both unspectacular. This is up to the user. For Canon you pay more for the good stuff but you also get more (better SDM, better IS, better image quality). For Pentax you pay less for a very limited choice of good stuff and don't have access to anything really spectacular.

Size of cameras is a personal matter. I hate small cameras. I feel like I am going to drop them. Had to put a battery grip on the K200D the day I got it. I love the size of the 7D.

People on this forum seem to universally agree that the K-5/7 had definatevily the best grip. I would say the grip is better than my father's 40D. People should realise grip is subjective and can't ever be considered a pro or a con.

Also the 7D has a 1.0x viewfinder with 100% coverage. Not sure the K-5 has that or not.

The K-5/7 have 0.92x magnification, 100% coverage viewfinders. The 7D has the advantage of a transparent LCD overlay. The K-5/7 has the advantage of changable focus screens. Spectacular if you shoot manual. If you shoot computerized lenses, I would say the 7D viewfinder is by far more the more useful one.

[Eruditass]

Let me simplify the question...

If someone said you could have either a D7000, K-5, or D7 for free, which one would you pick?

7D so I could sell it.

If not, K-5 because I have a system and the cost of switching / ownership is low, allowing me to invest in more important things like lenses.

Bodies will keep on improving. If you do sports for a living, no question on the 7D though.

[Urkeldaedalus]

I really think more than "So and so is better" it's more what you're going to be using it for.

For my own use:

Canon 7D would be better for: Documenting wildlife/birding, video projects, sports.

Pentax K-5 would be better for: Travel, documentary photography/photojournalism, street shooting, weddings.

Does that mean the Canon 7D can't do wedding photography well and the K-5 can't do sports? No, not at all. I'm just saying what I personally would use the two cameras for if I had the choice. That, to me, is more useful than spec sheet comparisons.

[JeffJS]

I get the impression that part of what is driving your *rushed* decision is this rebate. Bad idea IMO. Not that rebates aren't nice or that I wouldn't get use out of the printer but how much Printing do you really see yourself doing? I ask that because the last time I considered a photo printer, I decided against even getting one. The support cost seemed ridiculous to me. I felt the money was much better spent on lenses and the like. Especially when I can go to any number of sites, upload a file, choose a size and other options, and a week later (or so) my prints were at my door. That may not work for someone in a hurry but it does for me.

Companies are always offering rebates of one sort or another. It isn't likely you're going to put your hands on a K5 before the end of the month so trying to guess at whether or not you will like it is, again, a bad idea. Any of the Pentax flagship models (and even the Kx/Kr) is going to out-perform your current camera.

All of the cameras are going to have their pros and cons. There is going to be something about each that you love and there is going to be something about each that you hate. The Only true advantage I see of choosing Canon over the Pentax (for us Amateurs) is lens selection and availability. The question you really need to asnwer is how much are you willing to pay for it (and compare apples to apples when making your decision).

I get the impression that part of what is driving your *rushed* decision is this rebate. Bad idea IMO. Not that rebates aren't nice or that I wouldn't get use out of the printer but how much Printing do you really see yourself doing?

Using the printer isn't the point of getting the printer. It's getting the printer for $50 after rebate and then selling it for $400 on eBay, with a profit of $350, essentially knocking the price of the 7D down to $1350.