K5 Vs K7

sir_bazz · 10-31-2010, 06:56 PM

Originally posted by aragondina

Only a moron would pay more to get less.

I think you just offended a lot of Canon 300D/350D/400D/450D/500D/1000D users.

bazz.

secateurs · 10-31-2010, 07:09 PM

Originally posted by aragondina

If Hoya had priced this the same at the K7 ($1300) when it launched they would have pre-sold a ton. Now except for the zealots and people with too much money, it will sit on the shelf till the price drops in 6 months to a year. In the mean time tens of thousands of D7000's will be sold. Hoya's loss is Nikons gain. Only a moron would pay more to get less.

This is yet to be proven. I don't see any k-5's sitting unbought on the shelf yet...

jonny1986 · 10-31-2010, 07:11 PM

personally i have tried the 7d and i dont consider it outperforming k5..it has better tracking but not better iq especially at low iso, it hasnt sr inbody that is soprecious especially if u use old manual lenses...it has many other feature that are amaizng and and ergonomics that is best in alittler body. the 7d is a tank. personally i found canon offering the less attracting at the moment in every field, probably only the 5d2 has something really compettive.

i mean if i need a pro camera i will buy a d3s over any 1ds series
a medium camera a 5d ina heartbeat, especially considring pentax is a apsc system while canon not and for sealed lenses u must put out tons more than pentax
littler body? canon is the worst offering again compared to kr.

if i were a prosport shooters or primarily a birder i would buy the d3s with long tele or even the 7d but in my opinion the k5 is more an all around camera, easily to shoot unseen with the little pancake, weather sealed with the da*, canon has not this flexibility. and now the kr and 645d make a perfect balanced system

i have shot two days ago some seagull in nice and i ended up with many keeper, probably the 7d with a 500 would have been better, but again it's not my priority.
and from what i see in the web not the priority aof 90 % of people that buy the 7d.

canon is leaving on the name and now on the movie side, photography speaking is the less interesting brand out there, outclased by nikon in pro level and by other manufacturer in medium and low class.

they have even lost their prerogative, the cleaner file at high iso.
im sure a long tele with an updated silent motor from pentax will increase massively the keep rating of k5.

jonny1986 · 10-31-2010, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by sir_bazz

I think you just offended a lot of Canon 300D/350D/400D/450D/500D/1000D users.

bazz.

my sister has bought one of these camera..i cant understand how these cameras can sell well even compared wth the old k200d. they are cheapy camera, but the cheapest i have ever tried, only some sony beat them.

jonny1986 · 10-31-2010, 07:21 PM

Originally posted by aragondina

It amazes me that some people are such retarded zealots that all they know is to attack when someone questions their beliefs. At the price it's at the k5 is the loser, it is not a more upscale camera, along the line of the 7d, but it's in line with the d7000, but it shouldn't be priced $400 more than the Nikon. Since you are in Europe you are used to paying higher prices so you probably don't care, but some of us do. If it were around a 5% difference it would be ok, but 18% is a lot of premium for blind brand loyalty.

Did you not notice that I praised the IQ of the K5 and said I was willing to shell out my hard earned money for it? I would if the price were in line with it's competitors offerings. It's not in the same league as the 7d, so it shouldn't be priced like it, that's all. If Hoya had priced this the same at the K7 ($1300) when it launched they would have pre-sold a ton. Now except for the zealots and people with too much money, it will sit on the shelf till the price drops in 6 months to a year. In the mean time tens of thousands of D7000's will be sold. Hoya's loss is Nikons gain. Only a moron would pay more to get less.

It's hard to get people to buy into a system that isn't Canon or Nikon, and being more expensive doesn't help that. Being a blind fanboy doesn't help the image of Pentax either.

the problem is the dollar is worth nothing at the moment...so ask obaa to stop pushing the usa economy with weak dolar and begin buying some dollar in the market....that's the popint...
in europe somebody , an italian in a france shop, has bought the pentax k5 at 989 euro plus rebate of 100 euro....in italy many web shop already sell it at 1080 euro in line with d7000 and lower than 7d...the 7d costed 1700 euro when come out, now it's an old camera and clearly is priced lower but u cannot compare the prices of a camera out from an year than a camera that is coming out right now...probably at christmas price will 1300 1200 dollar...if pentax put the camera in usa at 1200 dollar do u know how much would be in euro? 850 euro...so who will buy the camera in europe?

in addition u are praising the 7d a lot..ok

canon mark 2d is still selling at high price near it's beginning price
nikon d700 is always there at 2100 1900 euro
canon 7d has come from 1750 euro to 1300 1200 euro...

maybe your ubermensche camera is nto so perfect if it has lost more than a third of its price in a year or less

aleonx3 · 10-31-2010, 07:36 PM

Originally posted by aragondina

I don't think this is the place for a personal attack, but some people can't see the truth.

To answer you, no Pentax isn't bad on everything. The competition do make more well rounded cameras though, and in this case, for less money. I do plan to switch brands due to needing a full frame and Pentax doesn't seem interested in providing that. The IQ on the K5 is good enough to allow me to use it as a second body and utilize my existing lenses though. If the buffer can be changed in the firmware to give an average of a 3 second RAW burst then it would fit the bill, if not I would have to buy a second Nikon body also, and lose the in-body IS.

If the price were where it should be, around $1200, and the buffer shortfall can be corrected then I would snap one up right now and happily use my lenses.

I don't feel that the IS is worth an extra $400 when combined with slower focus and less accurate metering than the Nikon. I won't even discuss the Nikon flash system. If the K5 and the D7000 were the same price then one would have to make a choice and for Pentax that would be in body IS, and give up other things like the dual card slots and better tracking AF. With a $400 difference there should not be the need for choosing one feature over the other. Most if not all the options the competitors have should be included. (more money = more options)

You are certainly entitle to your opinion... why don't you get the D7000 and be happy rather grumbling about why the K-5 should be cheaper so you can buy it instead?

aleonx3 · 10-31-2010, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by aragondina

It amazes me that some people are such retarded zealots that all they know is to attack when someone questions their beliefs. At the price it's at the k5 is the loser, it is not a more upscale camera, along the line of the 7d, but it's in line with the d7000, but it shouldn't be priced $400 more than the Nikon. Since you are in Europe you are used to paying higher prices so you probably don't care, but some of us do. If it were around a 5% difference it would be ok, but 18% is a lot of premium for blind brand loyalty.

Did you not notice that I praised the IQ of the K5 and said I was willing to shell out my hard earned money for it? I would if the price were in line with it's competitors offerings. It's not in the same league as the 7d, so it shouldn't be priced like it, that's all. If Hoya had priced this the same at the K7 ($1300) when it launched they would have pre-sold a ton. Now except for the zealots and people with too much money, it will sit on the shelf till the price drops in 6 months to a year. In the mean time tens of thousands of D7000's will be sold. Hoya's loss is Nikons gain. Only a moron would pay more to get less.

It's hard to get people to buy into a system that isn't Canon or Nikon, and being more expensive doesn't help that. Being a blind fanboy doesn't help the image of Pentax either.

If you are smart why are you even spending a minute in this forum? why not say to yourself, hey, that is a no brainer.... for the price and feature D7K is the winner hands down....

(you obviously like the k-5 better deep down..

)

hcc · 10-31-2010, 08:16 PM - **1 Like**

To the Moderators and Administrators, as well as the Users:

Everyone is entitled to have an opinion and everyone must respect the opinion of others. Full stop.

This thread is becoming a series of 'personal' attacks and insults. It lost all its value and interests to the genuine Pentaxian community.

The www.pentaxforums.com is a discussions forum for Pentaxians and the forum is well known for its civilised discussions and respectful opinions.

Those who want to exchange blows, insults and attacks should go to other discussion forums....

This thread should stop here. (No more reply, no more post.)

Wheatfield · 10-31-2010, 09:34 PM

Originally posted by aragondina

It amazes me that some people are such retarded zealots that all they know is to attack when someone questions their beliefs.

I can't believe that a person could be so retarded as to attack someone who isn't going to change systems and sell of several dozen lenses because one fool on the internet says that a particular camera is a bad financial decision.
Not that I'm calling you a retard, but if it walks and quacks like a duck....
The price of the camera is the price of the camera. Get a life and get over it.

kittykat46 · 10-31-2010, 10:02 PM

Originally posted by aragondina

In my own unscientific test (in the store and on the street out front) it was a little bit faster, but not a lot. It still lags far behind the Canon 7d which, at least where I live is selling for about the same amount. I tested all 3 side by side

So I would say if focusing speed and tracking are what you need then the K5 isn't worth the upgrade. The IQ from the RAW test shots I took is much better than the K7 at higher ISO (1600+) so if that is important then maybe, but it is still priced too high compared to the competition. When the price comes down in 6 months then it may be worth while to upgrade.

The IQ at high ISO over 1600, also looks better than the Canon 7D, selling about the same price.
Purely for improved AF, perhaps not, for improved image quality, including over a number of equivalent Canon and Nikon models, definitely YES.

rjm · 10-31-2010, 10:36 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

The price of the camera is the price of the camera. Get a life and get over it.

All this vitriol at someone who just pointed out - correctly I might add - that the K-5 does not compete very well if the Nikon D7000 undercuts it in on price.

Price is a fluid and flexible quantity, and strongly affects the perceived value of a product. Pentax made a mistake (from a PR standpoint) in the MSRP of the K-5, but what matters now is the retail pricing in the various markets against the competition.

If you are brand agnostic and looking for a new dSLR, you are going to be judging a camera in part on it's price. Whether the K-5 is cheaper or more expensive than the D7000 has especially significant consequences, given the similarity of the two models and the near synchronous release.

In the Japanese market at least the K-5 (preorder) and D7000 body sell for the same money. I think this is "fair market value" at least relative to each other. If where you happen to live the K-5 is much more expensive, it would be very hard to recommend it over the D7000.

**Ash** · 10-31-2010, 11:27 PM

Well to the person asking the question then, the answer is go and buy the D7000.

For others, the features of the K-5 can easily favour it over the D7000 and make the price difference less of an issue.

kittykat46 · 10-31-2010, 11:29 PM

To me, this thread has become utterly hopeless and useless.
The Original Poster was asking about the relative merits of the K-7 vs K-5 in terms of performance , not even asking about the price of the D7000

It has become just an argument over the K-5 vs. D7000 pricing and, for some, why the K-5 is not worth the money...

yanzhi0714 · 11-01-2010, 01:46 AM - **1 Like**

yes i would like to know more about the k-7 too. other than higher iso (above 1600 as i read?) noisiness and the chance of getting shutter blur around 1/80 - 1/160 (not sure, just out of my head from read info), does it stand up to its current price tag as well? or should i just get a k-r (another out of topic, sorry!)?

Thank you.

Col · 11-01-2010, 01:58 AM

Originally posted by yanzhi0714

yes i would like to know more about the k-7 too. other than higher iso (above 1600 as i read?) noisiness and the chance of getting shutter blur around 1/80 - 1/160 (not sure, just out of my head from read info), does it stand up to its current price tag as well? or should i just get a k-r (another out of topic, sorry!)?

Thank you.

Given the price points I'm surprised there isn't a thread on that question. I can't help as I've gone K20d to K-5

11-01-2010, 01:58 AM	#30
Col Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Stansted Essex Photos: Gallery Posts: 614	Kr or K7? Originally posted by yanzhi0714 yes i would like to know more about the k-7 too. other than higher iso (above 1600 as i read?) noisiness and the chance of getting shutter blur around 1/80 - 1/160 (not sure, just out of my head from read info), does it stand up to its current price tag as well? or should i just get a k-r (another out of topic, sorry!)? Thank you. Given the price points I'm surprised there isn't a thread on that question. I can't help as I've gone K20d to K-5

10-31-2010, 06:56 PM	#16
sir_bazz Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 184	Originally posted by aragondina Only a moron would pay more to get less. I think you just offended a lot of Canon 300D/350D/400D/450D/500D/1000D users. bazz.

10-31-2010, 07:09 PM	#17
secateurs Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Adelaide, Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 250	Originally posted by aragondina If Hoya had priced this the same at the K7 ($1300) when it launched they would have pre-sold a ton. Now except for the zealots and people with too much money, it will sit on the shelf till the price drops in 6 months to a year. In the mean time tens of thousands of D7000's will be sold. Hoya's loss is Nikons gain. Only a moron would pay more to get less. This is yet to be proven. I don't see any k-5's sitting unbought on the shelf yet...

10-31-2010, 07:11 PM	#18
jonny1986 Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: italy Posts: 411	personally i have tried the 7d and i dont consider it outperforming k5..it has better tracking but not better iq especially at low iso, it hasnt sr inbody that is soprecious especially if u use old manual lenses...it has many other feature that are amaizng and and ergonomics that is best in alittler body. the 7d is a tank. personally i found canon offering the less attracting at the moment in every field, probably only the 5d2 has something really compettive. i mean if i need a pro camera i will buy a d3s over any 1ds series a medium camera a 5d ina heartbeat, especially considring pentax is a apsc system while canon not and for sealed lenses u must put out tons more than pentax littler body? canon is the worst offering again compared to kr. if i were a prosport shooters or primarily a birder i would buy the d3s with long tele or even the 7d but in my opinion the k5 is more an all around camera, easily to shoot unseen with the little pancake, weather sealed with the da*, canon has not this flexibility. and now the kr and 645d make a perfect balanced system i have shot two days ago some seagull in nice and i ended up with many keeper, probably the 7d with a 500 would have been better, but again it's not my priority. and from what i see in the web not the priority aof 90 % of people that buy the 7d. canon is leaving on the name and now on the movie side, photography speaking is the less interesting brand out there, outclased by nikon in pro level and by other manufacturer in medium and low class. they have even lost their prerogative, the cleaner file at high iso. im sure a long tele with an updated silent motor from pentax will increase massively the keep rating of k5.

10-31-2010, 07:12 PM	#19
jonny1986 Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: italy Posts: 411	Originally posted by sir_bazz I think you just offended a lot of Canon 300D/350D/400D/450D/500D/1000D users. bazz. my sister has bought one of these camera..i cant understand how these cameras can sell well even compared wth the old k200d. they are cheapy camera, but the cheapest i have ever tried, only some sony beat them.

10-31-2010, 07:21 PM	#20
jonny1986 Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: italy Posts: 411	Originally posted by aragondina It amazes me that some people are such retarded zealots that all they know is to attack when someone questions their beliefs. At the price it's at the k5 is the loser, it is not a more upscale camera, along the line of the 7d, but it's in line with the d7000, but it shouldn't be priced $400 more than the Nikon. Since you are in Europe you are used to paying higher prices so you probably don't care, but some of us do. If it were around a 5% difference it would be ok, but 18% is a lot of premium for blind brand loyalty. Did you not notice that I praised the IQ of the K5 and said I was willing to shell out my hard earned money for it? I would if the price were in line with it's competitors offerings. It's not in the same league as the 7d, so it shouldn't be priced like it, that's all. If Hoya had priced this the same at the K7 ($1300) when it launched they would have pre-sold a ton. Now except for the zealots and people with too much money, it will sit on the shelf till the price drops in 6 months to a year. In the mean time tens of thousands of D7000's will be sold. Hoya's loss is Nikons gain. Only a moron would pay more to get less. It's hard to get people to buy into a system that isn't Canon or Nikon, and being more expensive doesn't help that. Being a blind fanboy doesn't help the image of Pentax either. the problem is the dollar is worth nothing at the moment...so ask obaa to stop pushing the usa economy with weak dolar and begin buying some dollar in the market....that's the popint... in europe somebody , an italian in a france shop, has bought the pentax k5 at 989 euro plus rebate of 100 euro....in italy many web shop already sell it at 1080 euro in line with d7000 and lower than 7d...the 7d costed 1700 euro when come out, now it's an old camera and clearly is priced lower but u cannot compare the prices of a camera out from an year than a camera that is coming out right now...probably at christmas price will 1300 1200 dollar...if pentax put the camera in usa at 1200 dollar do u know how much would be in euro? 850 euro...so who will buy the camera in europe? in addition u are praising the 7d a lot..ok canon mark 2d is still selling at high price near it's beginning price nikon d700 is always there at 2100 1900 euro canon 7d has come from 1750 euro to 1300 1200 euro... maybe your ubermensche camera is nto so perfect if it has lost more than a third of its price in a year or less

10-31-2010, 07:36 PM	#21
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	Originally posted by aragondina I don't think this is the place for a personal attack, but some people can't see the truth. To answer you, no Pentax isn't bad on everything. The competition do make more well rounded cameras though, and in this case, for less money. I do plan to switch brands due to needing a full frame and Pentax doesn't seem interested in providing that. The IQ on the K5 is good enough to allow me to use it as a second body and utilize my existing lenses though. If the buffer can be changed in the firmware to give an average of a 3 second RAW burst then it would fit the bill, if not I would have to buy a second Nikon body also, and lose the in-body IS. If the price were where it should be, around $1200, and the buffer shortfall can be corrected then I would snap one up right now and happily use my lenses. I don't feel that the IS is worth an extra $400 when combined with slower focus and less accurate metering than the Nikon. I won't even discuss the Nikon flash system. If the K5 and the D7000 were the same price then one would have to make a choice and for Pentax that would be in body IS, and give up other things like the dual card slots and better tracking AF. With a $400 difference there should not be the need for choosing one feature over the other. Most if not all the options the competitors have should be included. (more money = more options) You are certainly entitle to your opinion... why don't you get the D7000 and be happy rather grumbling about why the K-5 should be cheaper so you can buy it instead?

10-31-2010, 07:42 PM	#22
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	Originally posted by aragondina It amazes me that some people are such retarded zealots that all they know is to attack when someone questions their beliefs. At the price it's at the k5 is the loser, it is not a more upscale camera, along the line of the 7d, but it's in line with the d7000, but it shouldn't be priced $400 more than the Nikon. Since you are in Europe you are used to paying higher prices so you probably don't care, but some of us do. If it were around a 5% difference it would be ok, but 18% is a lot of premium for blind brand loyalty. Did you not notice that I praised the IQ of the K5 and said I was willing to shell out my hard earned money for it? I would if the price were in line with it's competitors offerings. It's not in the same league as the 7d, so it shouldn't be priced like it, that's all. If Hoya had priced this the same at the K7 ($1300) when it launched they would have pre-sold a ton. Now except for the zealots and people with too much money, it will sit on the shelf till the price drops in 6 months to a year. In the mean time tens of thousands of D7000's will be sold. Hoya's loss is Nikons gain. Only a moron would pay more to get less. It's hard to get people to buy into a system that isn't Canon or Nikon, and being more expensive doesn't help that. Being a blind fanboy doesn't help the image of Pentax either. If you are smart why are you even spending a minute in this forum? why not say to yourself, hey, that is a no brainer.... for the price and feature D7K is the winner hands down.... (you obviously like the k-5 better deep down.. )

10-31-2010, 08:16 PM - 1 Like	#23
hcc Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,001	To the Moderators and Administrators, as well as the Users: Everyone is entitled to have an opinion and everyone must respect the opinion of others. Full stop. This thread is becoming a series of 'personal' attacks and insults. It lost all its value and interests to the genuine Pentaxian community. The www.pentaxforums.com is a discussions forum for Pentaxians and the forum is well known for its civilised discussions and respectful opinions. Those who want to exchange blows, insults and attacks should go to other discussion forums.... This thread should stop here. (No more reply, no more post.)

10-31-2010, 09:34 PM	#24
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,975	Originally posted by aragondina It amazes me that some people are such retarded zealots that all they know is to attack when someone questions their beliefs. I can't believe that a person could be so retarded as to attack someone who isn't going to change systems and sell of several dozen lenses because one fool on the internet says that a particular camera is a bad financial decision. Not that I'm calling you a retard, but if it walks and quacks like a duck.... The price of the camera is the price of the camera. Get a life and get over it.

10-31-2010, 10:02 PM	#25
kittykat46 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 923	Originally posted by aragondina In my own unscientific test (in the store and on the street out front) it was a little bit faster, but not a lot. It still lags far behind the Canon 7d which, at least where I live is selling for about the same amount. I tested all 3 side by side So I would say if focusing speed and tracking are what you need then the K5 isn't worth the upgrade. The IQ from the RAW test shots I took is much better than the K7 at higher ISO (1600+) so if that is important then maybe, but it is still priced too high compared to the competition. When the price comes down in 6 months then it may be worth while to upgrade. The IQ at high ISO over 1600, also looks better than the Canon 7D, selling about the same price. Purely for improved AF, perhaps not, for improved image quality, including over a number of equivalent Canon and Nikon models, definitely YES.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-31-2010, 10:36 PM	#26
rjm Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Kyoto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 72	Originally posted by Wheatfield The price of the camera is the price of the camera. Get a life and get over it. All this vitriol at someone who just pointed out - correctly I might add - that the K-5 does not compete very well if the Nikon D7000 undercuts it in on price. Price is a fluid and flexible quantity, and strongly affects the perceived value of a product. Pentax made a mistake (from a PR standpoint) in the MSRP of the K-5, but what matters now is the retail pricing in the various markets against the competition. If you are brand agnostic and looking for a new dSLR, you are going to be judging a camera in part on it's price. Whether the K-5 is cheaper or more expensive than the D7000 has especially significant consequences, given the similarity of the two models and the near synchronous release. In the Japanese market at least the K-5 (preorder) and D7000 body sell for the same money. I think this is "fair market value" at least relative to each other. If where you happen to live the K-5 is much more expensive, it would be very hard to recommend it over the D7000.

10-31-2010, 11:27 PM	#27
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Well to the person asking the question then, the answer is go and buy the D7000. For others, the features of the K-5 can easily favour it over the D7000 and make the price difference less of an issue.

10-31-2010, 11:29 PM	#28
kittykat46 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 923	To me, this thread has become utterly hopeless and useless. The Original Poster was asking about the relative merits of the K-7 vs K-5 in terms of performance , not even asking about the price of the D7000 It has become just an argument over the K-5 vs. D7000 pricing and, for some, why the K-5 is not worth the money...

11-01-2010, 01:46 AM - 1 Like	#29
yanzhi0714 Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Melbourne Posts: 42	yes i would like to know more about the k-7 too. other than higher iso (above 1600 as i read?) noisiness and the chance of getting shutter blur around 1/80 - 1/160 (not sure, just out of my head from read info), does it stand up to its current price tag as well? or should i just get a k-r (another out of topic, sorry!)? Thank you.