Originally posted by Tommot1965 crikey Ray..so the K7 isn't as good as the K5..thats good to hear for us K5 owners.
Rep added for your trouble old son
You are too kind.
A couple of notes that everyone should keep in mind:
This is f1.4. I almost never shoot wide open on any lens I own, because as good as the Pentax glass is, the difference between wide open and a bit stopped down is almost always significant.
We have not heard much about K7 focus issues. There is a poster on the other forums who reports FF in Tungsten with his K7 in the threads about the K5 FF issue. For the most part it seems as though we were all used to the K10/K20 AF performance, which the K7 at least seems to match, and by most reports exceeds in terms of speed.
Cameras and lenses all have certain tolerances and a given combination could be worse than another combination, or better for that matter. It can even be that a given lens or camera is out of specification and needs repair.
That being said, I have been using the K20 since it was introduced and while I thought the K7 might be better in low tungsten (after all it has the magic + sign in the SAFOX model name
) it looks like it is more or less just like the K20, at least in this test.
What does this mean? Well, while I know that others might well use the camera in ways where this will be a problem, clearly the K20 level of performance has worked for me for some time now, and I assume that the K7 has done so for others as well.
Since I do not shoot like this much (if ever) my next step is to check the camera at various f stops, and if it can be calibrated to hold DOF (even barely) in a test like this at even f4.0, it will do the job.
For critical macro shots, I presume LV is a better alternative anyway.
So, while it seems as though some are still seeing issues with the K5, and I may also after more real life shooting, I am still encouraged and think that the last upgrade has improved the K5 to the point that
for me it will be ok.
Ray