K7 vs K-r

nocash99 · 11-01-2010, 11:17 AM

Of all the versus threads, I'm surprised this one is missing. Yes, two different levels and target users, but they are currently priced about the same....so some comparison is reasonable I think.

I'm in the market to upgrade from a k200d. I'd consider myself an above average shooter with a pentax limited lba.

I understand the technical differences and can compare features, but I'm still torn between these two bodies. I've never owned a higher end body, just pentax & nikon mid range bodies...so moving up to a high end body is attractive.

-Don't need the high ISO performance.
-Weather sealing is a nice, not a need.
-I consider the k200d autofocus performance very very bad, K-7 & K200d share the same autofocus system whereas K-r is upgraded.
-I don't think I would appreciate the two control wheels, but I've never owned a camera with two so I can't really say.

Any help nudging me in either direction?

Adam · 11-01-2010, 11:32 AM

It'd say K-r, just because it's newer and it doesn't seem like you need the features that the K-7 offers. Check our camera comparisons for more details on both bodies: Pentax K-5, Pentax K-r & Pentax K-x - Pentax Camera Comparison - PentaxForums.com

jeffrey r · 11-01-2010, 12:49 PM

Another K200D owner here itching to upgrade. First, I am not positive, but isn't the K7 AF system much better than the K200D? Anyway, between the K-7 and K-r is a touch choice, but I am leaning towards the K-r in that battle. However, the more amazing things I read about the K-5, I might just have to bite the bullet and go all out for the K-5. Though I'll wait some to see if the K-5 comes down in price. My K200D still continues to perform brilliantly, whatever shortcomings it might have.

timh · 11-01-2010, 02:13 PM

I'm a K200D user too, and in my mind the K-r is the winner out of those. You may not think you need the high-ISO performance but I'm sure it'll come in handy. The lack of weather sealing is, for me, a minor disadvantage but I'll miss the top LCD (that and the focus confirm points are why I didn't get a K-x). Smaller and lighter is also better, I reckon - buy another DA Limited if you absolutely must carry around an extra 150g!

I'll definitely be having a play with one when I'm in Tokyo next week, though I'll probably wait a few months for the price to drop before I actually get it - no pressing need for a new camera until Feb.

GrinMode · 11-01-2010, 04:04 PM

I guesss one has to consider the secondary light sensor of the K-7. It might be slower to AF than the K-r, but it might be more accurate in tungsten light.

I use a DS and also pondering on this.

chadci · 11-01-2010, 04:26 PM

At the risk of sounding ignorant, how much ISO does one really need and at what point is it just diminishing returns?

JHD · 11-01-2010, 05:14 PM

Once you experience the dual control wheels, there's no going back. Same with weather sealing, you never have to worry about getting caught in the rain or finding yourself in some situation where you wish you could have got the picture but. There have been a few occasions I had to cut things short on a cloudy day and quickly take cover with my Kx because I forgot to pack a plastic bag. Fortunately I wasn’t too far from my car. Never any worries with my K7.

I've never held a KR, but if it feels like the Kx and not the K7, then that's another consideration. The K7 feels like a serious camera whereas the Kx feels like a toy in my hands. Having them both really helps you to understand how much these things really matter.

IMO the obsession and chase for ultra high ISO performance has become the end all be all, but again having both the Kx and the K7 I don't see it that way. I solve my noise issues with Topaz Denoise and it works just fine for me. YMMV.

chadci · 11-01-2010, 06:29 PM

Thanks JHD. The K-7 really seems like it's overall a better fit for me but I've yet to decide as I'm not quite able to flop down my card.. have to wait until the holidays. Hopefully the post holiday deals will decide for me.

aleonx3 · 11-01-2010, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by JHD

Once you experience the dual control wheels, there's no going back. Same with weather sealing, you never have to worry about getting caught in the rain or finding yourself in some situation where you wish you could have got the picture but. There have been a few occasions I had to cut things short on a cloudy day and quickly take cover with my Kx because I forgot to pack a plastic bag. Fortunately I wasn’t too far from my car. Never any worries with my K7.

IMO the obsession and chase for ultra high ISO performance has become the end all be all, but again having both the Kx and the K7 I don't see it that way. I solve my noise issues with Topaz Denoise and it works just fine for me. YMMV.

Same here... once I get used to K-7 and K10D, there is no turning back - single dial just does not cut it for me - so, my next camera would be K-5.

kittykat46 · 11-01-2010, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by chadci

At the risk of sounding ignorant, how much ISO does one really need and at what point is it just diminishing returns?

It really depends on your photography interests.
As someone Coming from film, I mainly took photos at ISO100-200, no more than ISO 800.

As the low-light High-ISO capabilities of dSLRs improved dramatically, I have become more and more interested in low-light and available-light photography.

There are plenty of real-life situations where usable ISO6400 would be very welcome. Museums, Indoor performances without flash, all kinds of Indoor activities....you name it.

creampuff · 11-01-2010, 09:36 PM

The K-7 has the edge in terms of handling and build quality over the K-r and the WR is nice. But where the the key performance indicators of image quality, high ISO, AF and fps are concerned, the K-r definitely is way ahead of the K-7. So if I had to choose between the two, it would be K-r hands down. But if the K-5 could be considered budget wise, it would be the K-5 without any hesitation.

KxBlaze · 11-01-2010, 10:19 PM

I say go for the K7. If you do not need the high ISO, I think the K7 is still a better camera in many other regards. Maybe one exception is the AF system, I do not know for sure that the Kr is that much better than the K7 because I do not own either. Having said that, the WR (biggest deal for me), 2 dials (it is really that much more convenient), I think it feels a bit better in my hand, 2 more MP, Pentaprism viewfinder, better video and HDMI out and just $60 more is worth it.

**I think I just talked myself into buying a K7.

chadci · 11-02-2010, 05:18 AM

Thanks guys.

My current camera ( a superzoom) the Canon SX20 is goes to ISO 1600. Set to that on a 15 second shutter and a boost of exposure I can make the middle of the night look like mid afternoon if I need to. Some of the shots I've seen at higher ISO levels just get, hmm, grainy.

The WR and overall build quality of the K-7 wins for me. I'm always very careful but I've lost a lot of weight over the past 2 years and have been able to do a lot more hiking. Accidents happen, part of life... as is getting caught in the rain and liking pina coladas.

I don't know how important a higher level of ISO is to me because I've not used it and I'm not confident that I would if I had it. I'm going to keep researching as I have time to do so but as of right now I think the K-7 is winning the race to my credit card bill. The K-5 at roughly $1500 is just too rich for my blood.

JHD · 11-02-2010, 06:54 AM

Wait 18 months and the K5 will be passé. If you still want a K5, it will be much more reasonably priced. In the meantime the K7 is still a very fine camera.

**tomwil** · 11-02-2010, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by JHD

In the meantime the K7 is still a very fine camera.

... If the K-7 survives a drop when the strap post fails.

The K-r uses the older traditional strap method which is more secure because the lug is part of the metal chassis.

11-01-2010, 11:17 AM	#1
nocash99 New Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Ottawa Posts: 13	K7 vs K-r Of all the versus threads, I'm surprised this one is missing. Yes, two different levels and target users, but they are currently priced about the same....so some comparison is reasonable I think. I'm in the market to upgrade from a k200d. I'd consider myself an above average shooter with a pentax limited lba. I understand the technical differences and can compare features, but I'm still torn between these two bodies. I've never owned a higher end body, just pentax & nikon mid range bodies...so moving up to a high end body is attractive. -Don't need the high ISO performance. -Weather sealing is a nice, not a need. -I consider the k200d autofocus performance very very bad, K-7 & K200d share the same autofocus system whereas K-r is upgraded. -I don't think I would appreciate the two control wheels, but I've never owned a camera with two so I can't really say. Any help nudging me in either direction?

11-01-2010, 11:32 AM	#2
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,595	It'd say K-r, just because it's newer and it doesn't seem like you need the features that the K-7 offers. Check our camera comparisons for more details on both bodies: Pentax K-5, Pentax K-r & Pentax K-x - Pentax Camera Comparison - PentaxForums.com Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

11-01-2010, 12:49 PM	#3
jeffrey r Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: New Jersey, USA Posts: 337	Another K200D owner here itching to upgrade. First, I am not positive, but isn't the K7 AF system much better than the K200D? Anyway, between the K-7 and K-r is a touch choice, but I am leaning towards the K-r in that battle. However, the more amazing things I read about the K-5, I might just have to bite the bullet and go all out for the K-5. Though I'll wait some to see if the K-5 comes down in price. My K200D still continues to perform brilliantly, whatever shortcomings it might have.

11-01-2010, 02:13 PM	#4
timh Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Wales Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 445	I'm a K200D user too, and in my mind the K-r is the winner out of those. You may not think you need the high-ISO performance but I'm sure it'll come in handy. The lack of weather sealing is, for me, a minor disadvantage but I'll miss the top LCD (that and the focus confirm points are why I didn't get a K-x). Smaller and lighter is also better, I reckon - buy another DA Limited if you absolutely must carry around an extra 150g! I'll definitely be having a play with one when I'm in Tokyo next week, though I'll probably wait a few months for the price to drop before I actually get it - no pressing need for a new camera until Feb.

11-01-2010, 04:04 PM	#5
GrinMode Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 249	I guesss one has to consider the secondary light sensor of the K-7. It might be slower to AF than the K-r, but it might be more accurate in tungsten light. I use a DS and also pondering on this.

11-01-2010, 04:26 PM	#6
chadci Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: 46107 Posts: 54	At the risk of sounding ignorant, how much ISO does one really need and at what point is it just diminishing returns?

11-01-2010, 05:14 PM	#7
JHD Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,406	Once you experience the dual control wheels, there's no going back. Same with weather sealing, you never have to worry about getting caught in the rain or finding yourself in some situation where you wish you could have got the picture but. There have been a few occasions I had to cut things short on a cloudy day and quickly take cover with my Kx because I forgot to pack a plastic bag. Fortunately I wasn’t too far from my car. Never any worries with my K7. I've never held a KR, but if it feels like the Kx and not the K7, then that's another consideration. The K7 feels like a serious camera whereas the Kx feels like a toy in my hands. Having them both really helps you to understand how much these things really matter. IMO the obsession and chase for ultra high ISO performance has become the end all be all, but again having both the Kx and the K7 I don't see it that way. I solve my noise issues with Topaz Denoise and it works just fine for me. YMMV.

11-01-2010, 06:29 PM	#8
chadci Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: 46107 Posts: 54	Thanks JHD. The K-7 really seems like it's overall a better fit for me but I've yet to decide as I'm not quite able to flop down my card.. have to wait until the holidays. Hopefully the post holiday deals will decide for me.

11-01-2010, 06:45 PM	#9
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	Originally posted by JHD Once you experience the dual control wheels, there's no going back. Same with weather sealing, you never have to worry about getting caught in the rain or finding yourself in some situation where you wish you could have got the picture but. There have been a few occasions I had to cut things short on a cloudy day and quickly take cover with my Kx because I forgot to pack a plastic bag. Fortunately I wasn’t too far from my car. Never any worries with my K7. IMO the obsession and chase for ultra high ISO performance has become the end all be all, but again having both the Kx and the K7 I don't see it that way. I solve my noise issues with Topaz Denoise and it works just fine for me. YMMV. Same here... once I get used to K-7 and K10D, there is no turning back - single dial just does not cut it for me - so, my next camera would be K-5.

11-01-2010, 09:18 PM	#10
kittykat46 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 923	Originally posted by chadci At the risk of sounding ignorant, how much ISO does one really need and at what point is it just diminishing returns? It really depends on your photography interests. As someone Coming from film, I mainly took photos at ISO100-200, no more than ISO 800. As the low-light High-ISO capabilities of dSLRs improved dramatically, I have become more and more interested in low-light and available-light photography. There are plenty of real-life situations where usable ISO6400 would be very welcome. Museums, Indoor performances without flash, all kinds of Indoor activities....you name it.

11-01-2010, 09:36 PM	#11
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	The K-7 has the edge in terms of handling and build quality over the K-r and the WR is nice. But where the the key performance indicators of image quality, high ISO, AF and fps are concerned, the K-r definitely is way ahead of the K-7. So if I had to choose between the two, it would be K-r hands down. But if the K-5 could be considered budget wise, it would be the K-5 without any hesitation.

11-01-2010, 10:19 PM	#12
KxBlaze Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,602	I say go for the K7. If you do not need the high ISO, I think the K7 is still a better camera in many other regards. Maybe one exception is the AF system, I do not know for sure that the Kr is that much better than the K7 because I do not own either. Having said that, the WR (biggest deal for me), 2 dials (it is really that much more convenient), I think it feels a bit better in my hand, 2 more MP, Pentaprism viewfinder, better video and HDMI out and just $60 more is worth it. **I think I just talked myself into buying a K7.

11-02-2010, 05:18 AM	#13
chadci Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: 46107 Posts: 54	Thanks guys. My current camera ( a superzoom) the Canon SX20 is goes to ISO 1600. Set to that on a 15 second shutter and a boost of exposure I can make the middle of the night look like mid afternoon if I need to. Some of the shots I've seen at higher ISO levels just get, hmm, grainy. The WR and overall build quality of the K-7 wins for me. I'm always very careful but I've lost a lot of weight over the past 2 years and have been able to do a lot more hiking. Accidents happen, part of life... as is getting caught in the rain and liking pina coladas. I don't know how important a higher level of ISO is to me because I've not used it and I'm not confident that I would if I had it. I'm going to keep researching as I have time to do so but as of right now I think the K-7 is winning the race to my credit card bill. The K-5 at roughly $1500 is just too rich for my blood.

11-02-2010, 06:54 AM	#14
JHD Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,406	Wait 18 months and the K5 will be passé. If you still want a K5, it will be much more reasonably priced. In the meantime the K7 is still a very fine camera.

11-02-2010, 07:23 AM	#15
tomwil Site Supporter Join Date: May 2009 Location: Maryland USA Posts: 778	Originally posted by JHD In the meantime the K7 is still a very fine camera. ... If the K-7 survives a drop when the strap post fails. The K-r uses the older traditional strap method which is more secure because the lug is part of the metal chassis.