[kittykat46]

I am in the same boat as you with that(8 Frames).
It's definitely going to affect my shooting style and I'm most likely going to keep my K20's for a while.

My last ditch hope with respect to total shots in buffer is with the new SDxC cards. I really hoping that the performance gains will add a few frames to the entire affair and perhaps even make controlled bursts more possible.

I honestly don't know how much control we have with a 1 second window

To say the least, I am very disappointed with Pentax at this level. I mean... this is almost as bad as the K-7 sensor indent of 2009!

Digital Camera review had a functioning K-5 to play with, and they said they got 15 frames in RAW (actual shots). dpReview stated that, too, as well as the German-language brochure that was distributed at Photokina....
So I'm not sure what the final specs will be...I think Pentax really messed up the Public Relations part of the K-5 launch..

Pentax K-5 First Look Review: More and Better Video

[JohnBee]

But on every Pentax site I've seen(to date) it shows 8 frames in RAW at 7FPS
I hope this wasn't Penta'x last ditch effort to lower costs so they could better compete with the D7000!! arg!

[glanglois]

I thought that Falk felt that he confirmed the 8-shot buffer in handling the K-5.

OTOH, this was preliminary software. SW won't create new memory from scratch but there may be an arbitrary limit in the early versions that would not appear in the final product.

I claim no engineering expertise (mostly because I have none) but I do know that early SW may have limitations that are present only to limit some functions while other areas are tested and debugged.

We shall continue to hope.

[aliquis]

Bumping a somewhat old thread.

Now there are DxOmarks for the cameras.

And dpreview got 7D, D7000 and K-5 reviews.

The impressions I've got are:
* D7000 and K-5 has slightly larger and newer sensors with better high-ISO, DR.

All got 100% viewfinder, they seem to prefer ergonomics of K-5 and 7D having everything as well and D7000 somewhat lacking.

Ken Rockwell says D7000 got better AF and metering than 7D, other reviews however says D7000 metering doesn't work that well and as I interpret things from dpreview it seems like 7D and K-5 actually got better metering.

7D AF seem better than D7000, I got the impression K-5 AF works well to.

I think I read something about how auto-ISO was poorly implemented on one of the cameras (7D?) and very smart on at least one other K-5? D7000?

You people discussed flash performance, Ken Rockwell obviously say D7000 flash performance is so good. Is it better than on the 7D? Dpreview don't seem to review flash performance?

Ken Rockwell also mention how he had to change the color settings / WB more on the 7D, however he also want more vibrant and saturated photos so maybe that affect things?

7D video mode is obviously better. D7000 live-view & movie focus is best but still not very good.
K-5 burst speed and buffer is better than that of the D7000 isn't it?



So on those merits I would had picked the 7D over the D7000 since it's bigger and got more buttons, better and more reliable AF and metering, better video mode and burst rate (don't care), full metal body, probably better weather sealing (?)
D7000 would have had better sensor, eventually better auto-ISO (?) and better flash performance (?)

Here in Sweden Canon prices are closer to what they are in the US. Nikon gear cost more it seems, at least earlier.

Compared to both those I would had picked the K-5 over D7000 in case it got better metering, better ergonomics, full metal body, anti-shake. Probably over the 7D if it where camera alone as well thanks to sensor and anti-shake vs eventually snappier performance of the 7D (?)


Turn-offs with the K-5 deal here in Sweden is that you people tell about how SDM isn't that great, the lenses are more expensive, the primes are compact but slow but I'd rather have them fast and bigger in that case. Less third-party lenses and the Tokinas cost more under the Pentax brand. Also I don't know how flash and such work.

I would feel safer with the other brands.

I would probably had wanted to like the Nikon more for the sensor size alone, but since they mess up the house and metering and AF don't seem to win over the 7D it's hard to argue for it (unless flash is a huge issue/difference?)

Lens options is quite decent for both? Probably better for Canon if anything? Canon seem to cheap out on lens hoods and caps (?) though ..

If the D7000 would have had D300s style house and the metering would had been as good or superior as the 7D I would had picked that.


As far as sensors goes I guess non-pixel peepers may not notice much and that future cameras will be better anyway.


Right? Wrong? Changes?


We should have had US pentax prices in Sweden =P

---

Last edited by aliquis; 01-01-2011 at 12:56 AM.

[aliquis]

Correction of self.

Seem metering was good on the K-5 vs the D7000.

However as far as AF goes it seem that accuracy wasn't perfect, so maybe better on the D7000, but the D7000 AF speed was slow with some lenses. So the 7D probably won anyway. Better low-light AF performance of 7D vs D7000 to. Can't see anything about metering on the 7D there.

But I'm just reading text, not seeing numbers, videos or actual usage

Say a 7D with kit 18-135 3-4 days ago for 7900 SEK close buy. Stupid to not have bought it if I wanted a new camera =P

[pingflood]

Correction of self.

Seem metering was good on the K-5 vs the D7000.

However as far as AF goes it seem that accuracy wasn't perfect, so maybe better on the D7000, but the D7000 AF speed was slow with some lenses. So the 7D probably won anyway. Better low-light AF performance of 7D vs D7000 to. Can't see anything about metering on the 7D there.

But I'm just reading text, not seeing numbers, videos or actual usage

Say a 7D with kit 18-135 3-4 days ago for 7900 SEK close buy. Stupid to not have bought it if I wanted a new camera =P

Damn, where did you see that deal? Unless it was completely beat to hell it was a real steal. Did see a Pentax Limited 35/2.8 recently for 1990 brand new by the way, so Pentax deals can be had too.

To be honest you really can not go very wrong with any of those cameras. Of course there are some things where a certain brand stands out as the leader; for instance Nikon with their excellent flash system and metering. Or Canon with affordable longer glass (e.g. 400/5.6, 100-400). Or Pentax with excellent build and very nice image output.

Out of the three I would personally go with the 7D (obviously, since I own one) because of the lightning fast response, great AF system, and a huge selection of lenses available. But that is because of what I prioritize in my shooting. Were I doing landscapes and portraits instead of birds and wildlife I would probably lean towards the K-5 because of the very nice image quality.

[WerTicus]

Is it really far to compare a year old camera to this generation?

[Rondec]

Is it really far to compare a year old camera to this generation?

You can compare any cameras, particularly if they are both currently for sale and comparably priced. If Canon discontinues the 7D and releases a new camera in three or four months, everyone will compare it to the K5 and D7000, even though at that point, they will be six or seven months old. That's just the way things go.

[elho_cid]

At least Pentax still does cameras that can stand in that comparision. Having read reviews on latest Sonys and Olys...

[piotro]

Is it really far to compare a year old camera to this generation?

Well, take into account that in last years Pentax was trying to catch-up with "current" technology (as shown by C and N).
In some places it may worked, in some it didn't - i.e. AF, movie mode in comparison to C 7D.
So this is fair comparison, as Rondec says, both cameras are in production.

[aliquis]

Damn, where did you see that deal? Unless it was completely beat to hell it was a real steal. Did see a Pentax Limited 35/2.8 recently for 1990 brand new by the way, so Pentax deals can be had too.

To be honest you really can not go very wrong with any of those cameras. Of course there are some things where a certain brand stands out as the leader; for instance Nikon with their excellent flash system and metering. Or Canon with affordable longer glass (e.g. 400/5.6, 100-400). Or Pentax with excellent build and very nice image output.

Out of the three I would personally go with the 7D (obviously, since I own one) because of the lightning fast response, great AF system, and a huge selection of lenses available. But that is because of what I prioritize in my shooting. Were I doing landscapes and portraits instead of birds and wildlife I would probably lean towards the K-5 because of the very nice image quality.

Blocket. Was nearby to. Saw one for 7000 SEK this spring to but that was in "dalarna" and I was tired so I missed it.

However I've seen that damn photo with the 7D and a scanner/multifunctionprinter two or three times so I wonder if it's the same guy and he never sell, same picture but different ads or something fishy about it. In person I guess it wouldn't had mattered. Though I felt I needed to read up more on the D7000 as far as sensor and such goes. But metering and AF seem better on the 7D and I like the house better because it's much more solid/large. But I don't know how flash and lenses perform. Kinda don't like how Canon uses smaller sensors but that's all and it would probably feel better to invest in their lenses anyway.

The K-5 seem nice with only AF missing, well, that and lenses of course. Additional advantage would be the anti-shake which would help make it more competitive. But the lens range isn't as wide so I dunno. I think it falls there for me. Even though they may be more APS-C focused and compact.

I've got the impression Canon got wireless flash trigger in their bodies to. Beyond that I don't know what the difference is between the systems. Please share.

Some of them boosted ISO to 400 when using flash to light up the background more as well to not make it all dark. Sounded smart. Some used auto-ISO straight on while some other took into account the glass in question (as in higher iso for more tele/shorter shutter times.) The Pentax (?) had the option to go low or high auto ISO depending on whatever you where shooting hand-held or not and such.

The reviews says the 7D meters better than the D7000, so ... Except Ken Rockwell that is, but then he's into Nikon camp so I don't know how much to trust him there. Especially since the two other review sites didn't agree. Maybe it was rather "I know the D7000 metering is better because it's got more zones and RGB" rather than "D7000 metering is better as seen on the photos."

Birds don't interest me. I'm vegan so killing animals doesn't either. But I guess you could shoot them with a camera. But it seems like something which would take a long time. I would most likely rather shoot people (with and without camera ;D), wide angle on buildings and cities and shit and eventually wanted to have a nice macro, where Canons 65mm 1-5x is the most awesome thing there is I guess. For nature shots which are not birds
Birds are boring

But I don't know. Too expensive hobby and maybe it's better to just buy stocks instead. But the markets feels somewhat overpriced now. Sure Swedish economy goes well but why is more or less everything about 2007s levels? Are the economy really there yet? (Maybe it is? =P) What about all the debt, inflation and actually solving anything? =P. So the risk are that maybe you get some money early on in 2011, but then things correct themselves and you're ****ed.

At least with a camera you'd still have the camera! ;D

Guess the smaller sensor is just fine for you as well since it just make you glass even longer =P


Should had read "saw a 7D" and not "say a 7D" to...

[aliquis]

At least Pentax still does cameras that can stand in that comparision. Having read reviews on latest Sonys and Olys...

Yeah, wouldn't get an Olympus with mirror. And neither of the current NEX.

Don't want four-thirds either since the sensor is even smaller and give wider DOF.

Oly EVIL I dunno. Future NEX system style? Probably not with über-expensive glass.

So

[philippe]

I don't understand you people, you are nagging about minor differences (*) between two camera's that are only important in rather extreme situations. In more 'common' shooting environments and —demands, there will be hardly any noticeable difference between these two models.
Don't forget that gear isn't the determining factor, the man/woman behind the viewfinder is.
So, why bothering, pick a system and go out shooting and have fun.


(*) except the price and brand irradiation...

[aliquis]

Damn, where did you see that deal?

Canon EOS 7D | Dalarna | Blocket

9000 SEK with 18-135 IS, though maybe one could bargain.

[aliquis]

I don't understand you people, you are nagging about minor differences (*) between two camera's that are only important in rather extreme situations. In more 'common' shooting environments and —demands, there will be hardly any noticeable difference between these two models.
Don't forget that gear isn't the determining factor, the man/woman behind the viewfinder is.
So, why bothering, pick a system and go out shooting and have fun.


(*) except the price and brand irradiation...

Which two of them? Pentax vs 7D or 7D vs D7000? In the first case glass seems to be the most obvious difference?

Since "a system" cost so freaking much I think it's an issue to pick the right one.