Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-05-2010, 06:48 AM   #61
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 337
To be honest, as another K200D owner, it is not just looking at the K-7 compared to the K-5, but also the K-7 compared to the K-r and to a lesser extent the K-x. Look, anybody on here knows that the K-7 is a great camera, but you had the Pentax flagship model get whooped in important areas by its entry-level cohort. IMHO, the K-7 will never shake that perception.

I am itching to upgrade my K200D. It still takes amazing pictures and is a great weather-sealed model, but with two young kids myself, I could really use better AF and low-light shooting. I can't go above 800 ISO on the K200D without being annoyed at the noise.

Anyway, back on topic, I recently passed up a chance to pick up a like-new K-7 for under $700. I want a K-5 but don't like the price. I wouldn't mind a K-r, and may end up going that route. But personal attacks aside (I have a wife too, and know the feeling about dropping $1,500 on a camera with 2 young kids and a ton of expenses), I see what some of the others are saying about skipping the K-7.

11-05-2010, 07:52 AM   #62
Junior Member
Seamripper's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 35
Well, I guess my point originally was to say that I agree with the OP regarding the K5. I stated that it is the camera that is keeping me in the Pentax family right now even though I can't afford one. It looks to be an awesome unit and shows me that Pentax is on top of its game. I can't wait to get my hands on one.
I mentioned getting the K7 because it IS far better that the K200D is so many aspects and is within my budget. The main thing I never mentioned was I really need video and stills in one unit (sick of carrying around a separate video camera). It would be so convenient to switch to video on the fly.

I also do plan on using the camera for work and need something a little more advanced than the K200. The Kx and Kr are not an option for me in this regard. I need something at least semi professional.
11-05-2010, 08:45 AM   #63
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Definitely get a grip. I use my K7 all the time with the grip in place and its perfect. The camera doesn't feel just right without it.
OR ....... it feels absolutely perfect without it. I have the K7 and a grip and biggish hands - and I prefer it without the grip. IT all comes down to personal preference.

BTW - I love the lock on the dial. I don't even know I'm pressing it down now, it just comes naturally. My father was here recently with is little P&S and it was ALWAYS ending up oin some random setting, made me glad of the lock on my dial.
11-05-2010, 08:48 AM   #64
Pentaxian
panoguy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington, D.C.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,281
QuoteOriginally posted by 65535 Quote
do not bother with the k7 if you shoot any time before or after noon

i can't believe how shitty the sensor in it is.
You should try one sometime. It's the same sensor as in the K20D (which is far from shitty), plus much better metering, a more durable body, better WB, better AF, etc. all of which are vast improvements over the K200D.

K-7s can be had for ~$600 these days, so compared to a K-5 that's $1k to spend on other things.

BTW 65535, glad you like your new K-5. Where are the stunning photos? I liked your "before noon" shot from the K20D!


Last edited by panoguy; 11-05-2010 at 08:58 AM.
11-05-2010, 09:07 AM   #65
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by 65535 Quote
k7 is hated for good reason. It was a huge step down from the k20d wrt noise and color accuracy.
Geez...have you used one? That is pretty harsh.
The sensor is a bit old so it only is good to about ISO800 compared to your K200D.
And they added an incandescent sensor so it's more accurate for AWB indoors than the K20D.
It's got a body compatible w/ the K5 so if you buy an arca swiss plate, it'll be compatible when you can buy the K5 next year for $800.

You guys are so spoiled compared to the film days when were were happy w/ a good all purposed ISO400 film that wasn't grainy...LOL
11-05-2010, 09:17 AM   #66
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 407
I liked my K7, it was a definite step up from my k20, For what i needed it for, mostly landscape and macro it was a fine camera. High ISO sucked somewhat and that is its only real weakness.

The K5 is far better in high ISO and DR, but then it's twice the price currently so it should be.
11-05-2010, 09:18 AM   #67
Senior Member
65535's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 182
Original Poster
Worse than K20D.

Pics coming, I'm converting them now.

Don't get me wrong I like my K20D and in good lighting I got some beautiful results..... But the K-5 is on another plane of existence.

11-05-2010, 09:32 AM   #68
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,763
I'll admit I skipped the upgrade to the K7, but I don't see the point in bashing it. I skipped that upgrade because other bodies offered things that I needed at less money.

IMHO, the bigger problem with the K7 was not the camera but the marketing, pricing and the position in the Pentax line. Had I not been able to get a K20d and K-x at a ridiculous bargain, my wish list might have been different. I remember at one point being able to pick up both a K20d AND a K-x for close to the same money as a single K7. The camera really has to rock to make that work.

11-05-2010, 09:35 AM   #69
Pentaxian
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,873
QuoteOriginally posted by dylansalt Quote
as good as the K5 is - it's not complete

it has crappy flash like all Pentax

I work around it with K10D but it would be totally unacceptable for me with the K5
I wouldn't go that far... as crappy; although I find that with K10D the WB with flash is mostly off and require PP to correct - shoot RAW; whereas with the K-7, it is pretty accurate. Besides, I also don't see anything wrong with P-TTL.

QuoteOriginally posted by kittykat46 Quote
I don't understand about the "Pentax crappy flash" blanket dismissal...

Pentax has made a very significant improvements in P-TTL from the K-7 onwards - it exposes accurately from my experience. I just stick on the external flash, turn it on and shoot. The bounce flash appears calibrated for use with a diffuser - and exposes just right with one.

I clearly disliked P-TTL on the K100D which sometimes underexposed for no apparent reason, then overexposed on other occasions when I dialed in +EV Flash exposure compensation.

I believe the K-5 may have some flash issue which needs a firmware fix...we'll see..
Kittykat46, I agree with you, my experience with the P-TTL is almost spot on with the external flash. However, this is based on Pentax flash as I am not sure if Metz or Sigma flash would yield similar result. I am quite happy with P-TTL with DA* and FA lenses, the results are consistent. Most of the time, I find people having problems with flash are user errors or not knowing how to do it properly. This is not limited on Pentax, but the other DSLR owners as well. Flash photography is completely different as it is not that trivial - people's perception is always why can't the camera and flash read my mind and give me an "auto" option.
11-05-2010, 10:02 AM   #70
Pentaxian
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,873
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffrey r Quote
To be honest, as another K200D owner, it is not just looking at the K-7 compared to the K-5, but also the K-7 compared to the K-r and to a lesser extent the K-x. Look, anybody on here knows that the K-7 is a great camera, but you had the Pentax flagship model get whooped in important areas by its entry-level cohort. IMHO, the K-7 will never shake that perception.

I am itching to upgrade my K200D. It still takes amazing pictures and is a great weather-sealed model, but with two young kids myself, I could really use better AF and low-light shooting. I can't go above 800 ISO on the K200D without being annoyed at the noise.

Anyway, back on topic, I recently passed up a chance to pick up a like-new K-7 for under $700. I want a K-5 but don't like the price. I wouldn't mind a K-r, and may end up going that route. But personal attacks aside (I have a wife too, and know the feeling about dropping $1,500 on a camera with 2 young kids and a ton of expenses), I see what some of the others are saying about skipping the K-7.
QuoteOriginally posted by Seamripper Quote
Well, I guess my point originally was to say that I agree with the OP regarding the K5. I stated that it is the camera that is keeping me in the Pentax family right now even though I can't afford one. It looks to be an awesome unit and shows me that Pentax is on top of its game. I can't wait to get my hands on one.
I mentioned getting the K7 because it IS far better that the K200D is so many aspects and is within my budget. The main thing I never mentioned was I really need video and stills in one unit (sick of carrying around a separate video camera). It would be so convenient to switch to video on the fly.

I also do plan on using the camera for work and need something a little more advanced than the K200. The Kx and Kr are not an option for me in this regard. I need something at least semi professional.
I can understand both of you owning K200D which is essentially a toned down version of K10D with less controls and WR features. But K-7 while at the same level as K10D but only better and shares in many respects to K20D has improvements in many areas as well - metering accuracy (77 segments), focus light, WB, on camera micro focus adjustment etc. just to name a few. Also, K-7 has the video feature which is not in k10D nor k20D. It sounds to me that your upgrade path is along the same line as the k-r rather than the k-5. There are some common features that you have compare to the k-r and K200D, pentamirror, single dial etc, but you gain high iso performance and also AF speed. The k-r also provides you with the video option as well.

Of course, if you opted for the k-5 (a semi professional model), then you have to determine whether that option (fits your budget) is for you. As in almost all electronic purchases, time is always on your side, if you are patient enough, you will likely get the same if not more for less money.
11-05-2010, 10:07 AM   #71
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I don't want to turn this thread into a K5 versus K7 thread, but I do want to say that the K7 isn't a horrible camera. Granted, the sensor is not very good and it suffers over about iso 800. At the same time, there have been a lot of other improvements along the way since the K200 that would allow a dad to take better photos of his kids. Auto focus is a lot better, camera works better with flash, and auto white balance is a lot better. I agree that the K5 is probably better in every respect to the K7 (or at least equal), but it is pretty important to stay in a budget too.

Agreed. Just because the K5 is a "game changer", that's no reason to be so harsh on the K7, and it is certainly not a "hated" body as stated earlier. Just limit your ISO number on top and go to town. It's actually an excellent camera and has been very good to me. Don't get me wrong, I will buy a K5 as soon as it drops to $1400 (it makes me physically ill to pay top dollar for anything), but I will still be using my K7 as a second body for probably another year or so. Eventually, when the K5 price bottoms out, then I'll replace my K7.
11-05-2010, 11:01 AM   #72
Senior Member
65535's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 182
Original Poster
SAMPLE TIME!

Here are some pics. Every one has had exposure and fill pushed in Lightoom. WB was adjusted on purpose... some are warmer, some cooler... The camera was dead on every time.

ISO 12800 got a lot of use. Generally it was extremely clean with natural/film looking noise. The fact that I pushed them about 1.5 stops in LR made the noise much more visible but not unpleasant.


16-50 did well. Was great to have the flexibility in fov. However, it cannot compare to a prime lens and that's the honest truth.

When I re-buy the 31 I should be all set

Did not use my 360FGZ because I have not played with it yet... no idea how to use it. Onboard flash had PERFECT skintones and exposure but being a direct flash made for extremely ugly photos (i hate the direct-flash look)

Out of 99 photos camera misfocused in four of the cases, and that was with the AF illuminator turned off.


EDIT: WTF happened to the EXIF data????? It was on the original files! The clean ones are ISO3200. The grainy ones are ISO12800
Attached Images
         
11-05-2010, 11:10 AM   #73
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,509
QuoteOriginally posted by 65535 Quote
SAMPLE TIME!

Here are some pics. Every one has had exposure and fill pushed in Lightoom. WB was adjusted on purpose... some are warmer, some cooler... The camera was dead on every time.
This looks like mixed and difficult light... but... there's something about the colors that I don't like and which I've seen in several of the K-5 samples so far: A strange purple color where I would expect bluish.
11-05-2010, 01:42 PM   #74
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
This looks like mixed and difficult light... but... there's something about the colors that I don't like and which I've seen in several of the K-5 samples so far: A strange purple color where I would expect bluish.
Ditto...colors all look off except maybe the last photo.
Looks like it's having a hard time balancing daylight w/ incandescent (blue + orange).
I would have run a flash w/ a CTS gel to overpower that ugly mixed lighting...
11-05-2010, 01:45 PM   #75
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by kenyee Quote
Ditto...colors all look off except maybe the last photo.
Looks like it's having a hard time balancing daylight w/ incandescent (blue + orange).
I would have run a flash w/ a CTS gel to overpower that ugly mixed lighting...
Wondering if a good portion of the light is coming from the projector in the front of the room. That could be part of the difficulty in WB.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
*ist, battery, camera, dslr, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k100d, k5, pentax k-5, size, switch
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WOW!!!! whbroker Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 09-27-2010 12:36 PM
wow... Yassarian Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 1 09-19-2010 05:25 PM
Macro Wow! This is different! eaglem Post Your Photos! 12 04-23-2010 07:27 PM
WOw! ronald_durst Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 12-03-2007 11:22 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:17 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top