Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-01-2011, 08:30 AM   #1
Junior Member
ProgMtl's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Trabuco Canyon, CA
Posts: 49
K-5 or K-7?

I currently own a K-x and am pretty happy with it. I want to upgrade to either of the above for a lot of reasons (WR & viewfinder focal points being 2 of them).

I'm planning on keeping my K-x. I shoot almost exclusively outside (except for indoor shots of my 6 mo. old granddaughter).

I'm curious as to everyone's opinion on whether the K-5 is worth the extra $$ over the K-7? Would like some pros & cons as to why/why not.

Thanks

04-01-2011, 09:41 AM   #2
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by ProgMtl Quote
I currently own a K-x and am pretty happy with it. I want to upgrade to either of the above for a lot of reasons (WR & viewfinder focal points being 2 of them).

I'm planning on keeping my K-x. I shoot almost exclusively outside (except for indoor shots of my 6 mo. old granddaughter).

I'm curious as to everyone's opinion on whether the K-5 is worth the extra $$ over the K-7? Would like some pros & cons as to why/why not.

Thanks
IMO, the biggest advantages of the K-5 over the K-7 are the high-ISO performance, better dynamic range and faster AF. The biggest disadvantage is the cost, as the K-5 is substantially more expensive than the K-7. It really comes down to how important the advantages of the K-5 are to you (personally) and how much the difference in price matters to you (financially).

Last edited by dgaies; 04-01-2011 at 10:03 AM.
04-01-2011, 09:56 AM   #3
Junior Member
ProgMtl's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Trabuco Canyon, CA
Posts: 49
Original Poster
If shooting mostly outdoors (landscapes, etc.) does the high ISO come into play much? Not sure I'd really need the faster AF as I hike into most of the places and hang out for awhile (if that makes any sense).
04-01-2011, 10:01 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,545
dgaies is right on. If you really need those three things, then the K-5 is definitely worth twice the price. If you mainly shoot outside though, then I'd save the cash and use it to buy myself a few more lenses.

04-01-2011, 10:09 AM   #5
Veteran Member
gnaztee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Cornelius, OR
Posts: 752
I think for landscapes, the only advantage of K-5 over K-7 would be the Dynamic Range.
04-01-2011, 10:12 AM   #6
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Ubuntu_user Quote
dgaies is right on. If you really need those three things, then the K-5 is definitely worth twice the price. If you mainly shoot outside though, then I'd save the cash and use it to buy myself a few more lenses.
For most of last spring and summer I had both the K-x and K-7 and found that when I was using in situations where I needed high ISO (mostly indoors), I'd either use the K-x and wish it had the feel and build of the K-7 or use the K-7 and wish it had the high ISO performance of the K-x. So when the K-5 was released, I decided to replace them both and try and get the best of both worlds in one body.

As Ubuntu_user said, if you're mostly shooting outdoors, and are planning on keeping the K-x anyway (which can be used indoors for the times you want/need higher ISO), then the K-7 might be the better way to go. You'll save you quite a bit of money, which could be put towards a new lens or two if you so desire
04-01-2011, 10:42 AM   #7
Junior Member
ProgMtl's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Trabuco Canyon, CA
Posts: 49
Original Poster
Thanks for the input...I was pretty much thinking along those lines...just wanted some other reinforcement
04-01-2011, 03:58 PM   #8
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 299
is it really K-7 bad in high iso performance ?? i have seen the thread about it..
and to me ..it look fine and fabulous, :top:
about the AF speed , you can not go wrong with K-5

04-01-2011, 05:42 PM   #9
New Member
hebridean's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Western Isles
Posts: 21
To what degree if using the same lens in an outdoor shot where iso speed isn't an issue (base) do the K7/5 sensors differ in terms of rendition?

I presently have a K-r and it's not supposed to have much RAW headroom, but i usually manage to pull most images back into ordrer in Elements.
04-01-2011, 10:14 PM   #10
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,681
The dynamic range advantage of the K-5 over the K-7 at base ISO is barely appreciable, and whatever the K-7 could not do in one exposure it can do in three (HDR/tonemapping).

Sounds like for your application, even the K10D would suffice, and even excel (if you're happy with 10Mp). There are many other reasons to go with the K-5 over the K-7, but I'm not sure you're going to benefit from most of them.
04-02-2011, 09:15 AM   #11
Junior Member
ProgMtl's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Trabuco Canyon, CA
Posts: 49
Original Poster
I'm pretty much set on the K-7 now...the cost difference just is too much for me...if I was out all weekend, every weekend shooting I would pull the string, but spending the extra money towards more/better lenses is more appealing.

Thanks for all the input.
04-04-2011, 07:03 AM   #12
Veteran Member
cbaytan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Trabzon/Turkey
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,010
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
The dynamic range advantage of the K-5 over the K-7 at base ISO is barely appreciable,
.
I can not believe you are saying this Ash, or am I misunderstanding.
Attached Images
 
04-04-2011, 07:18 AM   #13
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,208
You don't say what lenses you are currently using, but it think you are on the right track for your style at the moment (it's not like k5 won't be available at lower prices down the road when the next model comes along)
A k7 with better lenses would do you more good than a k5 with the kit lens.
As for high iso The k7 is far better than i expected based on all the fuss made when it came out. I have no issues shooting it up to 1600 without even thinking about it, the amount of noise is easily dealt with and compared to my K10 at 1600 it's a dream, even at 6400 it outperforms my 10 at 1600 barely but it does)
and you have the kx for high iso back up
A k5 is a wonderful camera by all accounts but i'm not certain it will give you a lot of bang for your buck in real world shooting of your style.
04-04-2011, 12:05 PM   #14
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
The dynamic range advantage of the K-5 over the K-7 at base ISO is barely appreciable, and whatever the K-7 could not do in one exposure it can do in three (HDR/tonemapping).
QuoteOriginally posted by cbaytan Quote
I can not believe you are saying this Ash, or am I misunderstanding.
I think Ash was trying to say that at base ISO, the DR of the K-7 is large enough that you typically wouldn't make use of the higher DR of the K-5. And in those few cases where you would want higher DR than the K-7 offers at base ISO, you could always take multiple exposures and use HDR.
04-04-2011, 01:06 PM   #15
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,681
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
I think Ash was trying to say that at base ISO, the DR of the K-7 is large enough that you typically wouldn't make use of the higher DR of the K-5. And in those few cases where you would want higher DR than the K-7 offers at base ISO, you could always take multiple exposures and use HDR.
Yes, I understand the DxO data and know this sensor upgrade is nothing short of tremendous, however despite this data in real terms the IQ rendered by the K-7/K20D at ISO 100 is difficult to fault even on a single exposure (as long as it's not a long exposure ), but with tone-mapping it is always possible to gain and exceed the DR of a single K-5 exposure.
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!
camera, dslr, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k-x, k5, pentax k-5
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:31 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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