[hal_a]

Abstract, what do you look for in a camera? List the factors that are important to you and then get the cheapest camera that suits your needs.

With the money that I've just helped you save, you can buy me a lens .

It seems to me that you want better control on the body and don't want to fret through menus on the LCD. Also, you're looking for higher resolution sensor and better AF, but you have no need for lightning fast AF.

If I am correct, then you could save yourself a lot of money by considering the Pentax K10D and K20D.

What are your reasons for not considering them?

[janneman]

I have a horrible feeling a lot of people are going to be disappointed here, including myself.

I really hope I am wrong.

Yep, THE big question for me too (as well as SR start up time).

Some reports "yes improved" , some "no, not improved".
Some "no not with SDM". Maye optimized for new DC lenses and not that obvious with SDM. Maybe not faster but more secure... Maybe improvement in one AF mode and not as good in the other... We will have to wait and see

[Abstract]

Abstract, what do you look for in a camera? List the factors that are important to you and then get the cheapest camera that suits your needs.

With the money that I've just helped you save, you can buy me a lens .

It seems to me that you want better control on the body and don't want to fret through menus on the LCD. Also, you're looking for higher resolution sensor and better AF, but you have no need for lightning fast AF.

If I am correct, then you could save yourself a lot of money by considering the Pentax K10D and K20D.

What are your reasons for not considering them?

Important:

Lots of manual controls and dedicated buttons( Seems like the K7 fits well here)
Very Strong build quality(I like the magnesium body on the K-7)
Weather Resistant(This is a must)
Decent Iso usage(I do not need super good but above D40 would be superb noise wise)
100% Viewfinder
SR and metering on older lenses(I am probably not gonna use newer ones besides the WR kit lens for obvious reasons)

Not needed:

Good Auto-Focus(Using mostly older lenses, I love focusing myself.)
No need for extreme Fps...


Thats all I can think of right now, honestly I though about the K20D and it seems near priced to the K-7 so I was like why bother I guess....

[Urkeldaedalus]

Abstract, to answer your question, I think the K-7 is more than good enough if:

1. You don't shoot higher than ISO800 much.
2. You don't need fantastic AF for sports or other action photography.

Honestly, I think the K-7 has pretty good AF as it is, but a lot of people haven't experienced this because the high ISO performance prevented them from buying/trying one. If the K-5 improves on the K-7's autofocus just that much more (it doesn't have to be a huge improvement IMO) then it will present a formidable combo in a tiny package.

For your, purposes, though, I bet the K-7 would work great, and would be a fine upgrade from your current camera. I'd also look at the K-r, as that seems like a hybrid between a lot of what made the K-x and the K-7 great for half the price of the K-5.

[Abstract]

Yeah I think I am gonna go with the K-7, If that Dpreview link I posted is accurate its just as good as a D300 Iso wise at 3200 which is impressive to me honestly(Not sure if I would use it but still..... I took a look at the K-r, I dont really like it as much...I held the K-7 in my hands and it felt great to use so thats a big plus!

[leinadoli]

In the end there will be pluses and minuses on both sides of the spectrum. However, I think the issue here is how well do you know how to handle your camera and how do you get the most out of it. If you can master these aspects, then forget about every new model that comes along and only think about a potential buy once the need arises.

[r0ckstarr]

Yeah I think I am gonna go with the K-7, If that Dpreview link I posted is accurate its just as good as a D300 Iso wise at 3200 which is impressive to me honestly(Not sure if I would use it but still..... I took a look at the K-r, I dont really like it as much...I held the K-7 in my hands and it felt great to use so thats a big plus!

Congrats on your choice. So, what kind of things will you be taking pictures of? Got a first lens chosen yet? I've never used a D40, but I do love my K7 and am sure you will like yours as well. Welcome to the forums.

[Ex Finn.]

Consider getting the grip also, with 2 batteries you can shoot for a stupid-long time.
Enjoy your new toy.

[Abstract]

Thanks!

I was thinking about the battery grip actually,seems like it would be nice to have to not worry about constant charging. I shoot mostly Nature and street photography(Photography Portfolio of Chris Anderson - A View From Inside My Eyes thats some of my stuff), as for lenses I am gonna scout out ebay until I find some nice manual lens deals. I guess my first lens would be the kit lens though, hope its nice, haven't heard much about it honestly, most reviews do not mention it.

[paperbag846]

How am I funny? For thinking that a enthusiast model would perform better iso wise then a beginner? If so I am hilarious...

Honestly at this point it seems like a fanboy getting angry, I am comparing cameras to get the best deal, I have no brand loyalty, point is K-7 has been put up against models such as the D300 and Canon Equivalent. It has not been compared with beginner models.

Sensor quality has a small part to play in the overall "enthusiast package". Pros can take breathtaking shots with rather old sensors, and tend to stay below certain ISO limits anyways. With the exception of the fullframe / ASP-C comparison, I think sensor quality is mattering less and less in comparison with other features that are valuable to pros.

Weather-resistance, metering, AF speed AND accuracy, external control (without a menu) of a wide variety of features, and frame rate matter just as much as ISO to a working pro who needs the perfect shot to make money. Look in National Geographic, utilizing some of the best working photographers in the world, to see what I mean. Some very powerful photos have their fair share of grain, but they are expertly composed, perfectly focused, and capture the perfect moment in time to tell a story.

I should mention an alternative you have not thought of, but might be a good place for you to start. I bought the K20d for a very good deal, because it was "old tech". However, sensor quality aside (it has a very good, but not anywhere close to the best, sensor) the K20d helps me produce good photos because of the great variety of buttons on the outside of the camera which help me work fast. I tend to buy manual focus and will concede that AF is not it's strong point, but it hardly holds me back since I have learned how to manual focus. The camera is also extremely robust and I have every confidence in its performance .

If you don't need a modest AF performance increase and video, the K20d can be found for less than a k-x these days.

[Abstract]

K20d helps me produce good photos because of the great variety of buttons on the outside of the camera which help me work fast. I tend to buy manual focus and will concede that AF is not it's strong point, but it hardly holds me back since I have learned how to manual focus. The camera is also extremely robust and I have every confidence in its performance .

Yeah thats what I am aiming for, I also use only manual lenses on my D40 but the lack of controls on the camera can get to be a pain, I am hoping for a nice sale or drop in price on the K-7 nearing christmas time because of the K-5 going on sale around this time. I know ISO is not the most important but its nice to know after clean up in a noise program the K-7 can stand its own in this respect.

Man if I could ever get a job with the national geographic I would be in heaven....

[JohnBee]

I would say yes.

Based on the ISO6400 file floating around, it would seem as though the K-5 does not have(or non perceivable) low level NR at much higher sensitivities. Wheras the earlier models all seemed to have low level NR at/or around ISO 2000(or whatever).

So my guess is that if we couple this with the added color depth and possible DR associated with the K-5, we could be looking at a considerable upgrade in IQ across the board.

That's my hope at least

[robjmitchell]

If your getting into a new system and are considering the cost difference then K-7 is probably better choice than k-5, Simply because $600 can buy you some really really nice lenses. I upgraded from K10d so I was quite happy with the high ISO at the time. The K-7 got so many things right and the autofocus was much improved and very accurate in normal mode.(tracking AF still needs improvement) The K-7/samsung sensor is also known for having nice colours, and the exposure on the K-7 is usually spot on in natural lighting.
The other thing to consider is that if you later decide you want high ISO performance you can always pick up a kx/kr and have a second body. K-7 now plus Kr in 6 months would probably be similar in price to K-5 now.
Cheers
Rob

[mattdm]

Regarding decisions between two cameras, K-r is about to enter the market in October and I hope K-x's price will drop a bit...

I would really not count on this. The K-x is already at a bargain-basement price level and it's unlikely to go down more. It may even go up a bit if the K-r stays near its list price for a few months.

[r0ckstarr]

Consider getting the grip also, with 2 batteries you can shoot for a stupid-long time.
Enjoy your new toy.

With 1 battery you can shoot for a stupid long time.