[zackspeed]

the K-X sensor has better dynamic range through out the entire ISO range

more DR, better photo, end of story

you can manipulate contrast, colour, sharpness

you cannot create dynamic range where there is none, unless you shoot HDR, but HDR can only work under specific conditions

And in 100% of your pictures do you using the complete range?
The different is not to see in most of my pictures.
And 20% of my pictures are military and airliners.....with lots of high contrast..........
And somebody is paying for that works.....
No,so simple it is not to compare with good and bad.

[Pentaxor]

in fairness to the video capabilities of the current dslrs, I believe the camera manufacturers are trying to tap the video cam market by introducing this feature or let's say compete in the video category against the camcorders. though still in the process of perfecting which are essential for video recording. there are still a few glitches that needs to be solved, like longer recording time, portability (though this is solved by EVIL/Mirrorless dslrs, but only with small optics since longer optics could be a hindrance), memory buffer, artifacts, motion fluidity, ISO noises, NR efficiency, banding issues, maximum zoom + magnification, sensor overheating, AF, AE, full manual exposure control (ISO, shutterspeed and aperture speed), and etc...etc...

these issues could be solved by developing or improving or installing better sensors, a CCD seems likely a better choice than a CMOS in this department, install a high buffer capacity, implementation and improvement of software-based digital maximum zooming, install better hardware and software that affects the things that are mentioned earlier.

[Asahiflex]

------

Somehow I think you're the one on the forum that knows all

[zackspeed]

??
was i am telling anything wrong?

Regards andy

[Christopher M.W.T]

??
was i am telling anything wrong?

Regards andy

I know your the man with all the answers!

We're dying for some crumbs here!

[FullertonImages]

the K-X sensor has better dynamic range through out the entire ISO range

more DR, better photo, end of story

you can manipulate contrast, colour, sharpness

you cannot create dynamic range where there is none, unless you shoot HDR, but HDR can only work under specific conditions

Right. Because DR is the only thing that makes for a good looking photo. The bottom line is that just about every in focus K-x photo I've seen is noticeably softer than just about every in focus K-7, K20d, or K10d photo I've seen. All that high ISO and DR didn't come for free. And thanks to all that DR, K-x photo frequently put out flat looking photos with no contrast that require more PP to make them pop and look like K-7 photos do SOOC, but without the sharpness. Sure, you can manipulate color, contrast, and sharpness, but in my opinion, it will never look as good as if it was recorded that way. Don't get me wrong, I havea K-x as well, and I like it alot for the right situations. But when I'm outside in the daylight, I would reach for my K10 before I would reach for my K-x.

[geojazz]

No drugs here, but I can read and I know what sells. The key to selling is to differentiate yourself from the competition -- pretty tough to do with just still photography on your SLR at this point. So many awesome SLRs out there, somehow you have to have a better package and this where video comes in.

I have to agree , I have been shooting with Pentax Since 1978, I would say that what sells is to not just sell a product that does both ( Photo and Video). I would suggest a Line of Cameras that does still & video, and one line that has a stronger concentration on still photography. I am not alone in having a preference to shoot with a camera that only takes still pictures but I understand the all in one crowd wanting a camera that takes pictures and video well. If Pentax were to cater to a wider audience they would have greater market penetration.

[FullertonImages]

I have to agree , I have been shooting with Pentax Since 1978, I would say that what sells is to not just sell a product that does both ( Photo and Video). I would suggest a Line of Cameras that does still & video, and one line that has a stronger concentration on still photography. I am not alone in having a preference to shoot with a camera that only takes still pictures but I understand the all in one crowd wanting a camera that takes pictures and video well. If Pentax were to cater to a wider audience they would have greater market penetration.

That doesn't really make sense. Not from the standpoint of selling cameras atleast. Video is one of the hottest selling items on DSLRs rigt now. And it being openly embraced by 95% of the market. Mostly it's two groups, entry level people who are moving up from P&S cameras and want to take videos of their kids, and professionals. Pro's are swallowing this stuff up. There's no denying that salable content is rapidly moving towards a higher concentration of web based stuff. So the ability of a photojournalist to grab still frames and a quick video clip for the web is huge. More and more video production companies are integrating 5dmkII's and 7d's into their workflows.

And to my knowledge, having video in a DSLR doesn't take something away, so it's not like you're losing out. Just don't shoot videos. But the idea of having one body that does both and one that focuses on stills, doesn't make sense to me. Would the still only body be inferior? Or would Pentoyatax withold features from their still and video body so that they could put them in the pure still body? Neither of those scenarios would work. If the camera without ideo was the lower end camera, then that would cut out the moving up people who want that feature. The K-x wasa brilliant move on Pentoytax's part, because it is EXACTLYwhat people moving up from P&S's want. If there was to be a middle line, or if the K-7 became the middle and something came out above, well, if the middle didn't have video, then it would lessen the chances of people from entry level moving up, because why would they want to move up to something that is lacking a feature they currently have? If for whatever the top camera is doesn't have video, then is would largely turn off the pro crowd that a top level camera should be being designed for.

Pentax's users are typically the purists and the photography fanatics and all of that. Their cameras have consistently been smaller, lighter, more compact, than the competition, and have had outstanding IQ for a while. But no company grows by catering to the people that already like them. Pentax has figured outthat it can't just keep being a niche player. The current user group is a limited user group tht isn't growing. Meanwhile, the group of people that want better ISO, more FPS, more video features, is growing rapidly and is a much larger group to begin with. I think the k-7 and K-x have both been brilliant steps in being true to what Pentax has been about, while at the same time opening them up to a larger user base. People who want outstanding build quality, size, weight, and IW gotthat all in the K-7. But people who wanted more FPS, better AF and video features, also got that in the K-7. People who don't want video are free to not use it.

K-7 and K-x are both selling very well, and more importantly, are atracting way more attention to Pentax than previous cameras. The difference is very tangible. I shot the Teva Mountain Games last June and this June. One year apart. Last year, the vast majority of other pro's who talked to me would say things like, "Whoa, Pentax, I didn't know they still made cameras." This year, I had 3 or 4 people say things like, "Oh, you shoot with Pentax? That's cool. I've been hearing a lot of good stuff about them lately." In one year's time, the winds have totally changed from my experience. If they continue on their current path, I think that Pentax will have at least double it's current market share percentage in 5 years, and will again be a serious contender in the market.

[pop4]

One thing I want to say to Pentax about body design. For the next dSLR, please, please please, put the cable release jack back on the left hand side of the camera!!

Having it where it is on the K-7 means that the cable release gets in the way of the hand, and makes even adjusting the camera composition a big pain.

[arbib]

Guess I'll my 2c on a K5 or whatever it's called

K5 Pro End
-Slightly larger than K7
-21mp (seems to be rumored... 18mp OK)
-3" LCD/top LCD
-Duel SDXD slots
-1/8000
-1/250 flash sync
-Full tether to computers (wireless would be nice with those new WiFi cards)
-Great High performance at ISO 3200....I mean like ISO 500 now as K20d user
-All AF points are f/2.8 Portrait or landscape orientation
-Faster SR
-Faster AF
-Buffer for up to 25 raw at a time (unlimited JPG 4*)
-5 fps at full res 21mp
-8 fps at a lower res like 12mp
-100% VF
-Add a Split RF center Focus Screen with lit up AF points as an accessory (Why do we have to go to a 3rd party?? Why??)
-Grip with AA and or Lithium option
-1080x768 30-fps HD Video for those that may use it
-Weather Sealed

UNDER $2,300.00 new and in a year or so.... around $1,700.00

Why not... it all spec anyway
Could happen.... It could......

[monochrome]

Video costs money. Spec a still-only camera with extra still-only features at the video price point, without the video.

[Winder]

K-7 and K-x are both selling very well, and more importantly, are atracting way more attention to Pentax than previous cameras. The difference is very tangible. I shot the Teva Mountain Games last June and this June. One year apart. Last year, the vast majority of other pro's who talked to me would say things like, "Whoa, Pentax, I didn't know they still made cameras." This year, I had 3 or 4 people say things like, "Oh, you shoot with Pentax? That's cool. I've been hearing a lot of good stuff about them lately." In one year's time, the winds have totally changed from my experience. If they continue on their current path, I think that Pentax will have at least double it's current market share percentage in 5 years, and will again be a serious contender in the market.

I have been shooting Canon and Olympus for several years, and the K-7 is the first Pentax I have had an interest in since I sold my 67II. The 645D and K-7 both show Pentax is moving in the right direction and producing bodies that fit the needs of serious users. They still have some ground to make up, but they have made major strides in the last year.

Better sensor
Better AF
Better SR

They make improvements in those 3 areas and they can compete with anyone......

Improving the lens line-up would also help

[nosnoop]

Video costs money.

Hardly, as there is no extra hardware required.
The small amount of software development is more than paid for many times over in increased sales.

[FullertonImages]

Hardly, as there is no extra hardware required.
The small amount of software development is more than paid for many times over in increased sales.

Correct. Plus, people who don't video are less annoyed by just not using it, than people who wanted video are annoyed by not having it.

[Caat]

Hardly, as there is no extra hardware required.
The small amount of software development is more than paid for many times over in increased sales.

Correct. Plus, people who don't video are less annoyed by just not using it, than people who wanted video are annoyed by not having it.

Also haven't Pentax have paid the greatest development cost already by introducing video in the K-7 and K-x? Once you've done it once the cost of further developments of video, for example 1080p and adapting to new sensors, is lessened I would think.