Has the K7 been officially discontinued?

rena · 01-14-2011, 06:20 AM

I was told by a salesperson that the K7 is being discontinued. I have yet to read or see any website mention this. Would it be wise to purchase a K7 if this is true?

ogl · 01-14-2011, 06:44 AM

Originally posted by rena

I was told by a salesperson that the K7 is being discontinued. I have yet to read or see any website mention this. Would it be wise to purchase a K7 if this is true?

No any such info from official site.

bobmaxja · 01-14-2011, 07:26 AM

Yes this was confirm

Here the info on Pentax Japan site confirming this

Digital SLR Camera Lineup (Discontinued Model) : Digital Cameras : Products : PENTAX

eddie1960 · 01-14-2011, 07:35 AM

I think it is market dependent for now I had read it would continue in some markets for a while while in others it would be discontinued right away. the Pentax link leads me to believe that has come to an end, though I'm sure there are still plenty in the new market that haven't sold through yet (i see them available on a lot of web sites still)
Too bad really i though the idea of having a 4 camera lineup was a good idea (5 if you count the 645d of course)
kx with step to kr and k7 with step to k5 (kind of like the idea of 500-750-1000-1500 price levels when i was in sales this would be an ideal lineup giving the option to meet all demands)

eddie1960 · 01-14-2011, 07:36 AM

and i do believe it was discontinued in Canada as we are not as big a market as the USA

Mr. Ben · 01-14-2011, 01:16 PM

I dunno, the K5 seems VERY similar and most of what you get in the K5 is simply improvements rather than added features. If I had to choose (now) between a K5 and K7, I would get the K5 in a heartbeat. The Kx and Kr do a fine job on the "low" end of the DSLR line.

eddie1960 · 01-14-2011, 01:21 PM

I wouldn't just because of the price difference. K7 body at BH today $868, K5 still 1470
that's the price of a very good lens to go with it in the difference. (i didn't actually i just got the 7 in November when i could have ordered a 5....in 2 years i'll pickup a 5 for about what i paid and then have 2 excellent cameras for what the one would have cost)

sevenarrow · 01-14-2011, 02:19 PM

Originally posted by rena

I was told by a salesperson that the K7 is being discontinued. I have yet to read or see any website mention this. Would it be wise to purchase a K7 if this is true?

The K-7 was a great camera when it first came out and it is still a great camera. If you ever need to send it in for repair in the future, I'm sure Pentax will have replacement parts for many years to come.

Even though the K-5 improved on high ISO performance and fps, and it has a few more bells and whistles, the K-7 is still a good performer at high ISO and fps. Once in a great while I need to use high ISO and so I prefer to use the K-5. But that's about the only advantage I see with the K-5. But like I said, the K-7's high ISO performance is still very good especially compared to the K10D and K20D. Everything is relative.

I have both the K-7 and K-5. For 99% of my photography, there is no difference in the quality of photos or capabilities between the two. Often, I'll do an entire photo shoot mistakenly thinking I'm using the K-5 and then realize it is the K-7 or vice versa! I can't readily tell the two apart while I'm using them or looking at their photos.

The K-5 has a few more bells and whistles but most of them I don't use anyway.

MrPetkus · 01-14-2011, 09:36 PM

When the K5 drops in price there won't be much of a reason to continue the K7.

aragondina · 01-16-2011, 07:50 AM

Originally posted by sevenarrow

But like I said, the K-7's high ISO performance is still very good especially compared to the K10D and K20D. Everything is relative.

Huh??? The K7 is the same noise wise and has less DR than the K10d, and falls behind the K20d at high ISO. It does do it faster though.

Originally posted by sevenarrow

I have both the K-7 and K-5. For 99% of my photography, there is no difference in the quality of photos or capabilities between the two. Often, I'll do an entire photo shoot mistakenly thinking I'm using the K-5 and then realize it is the K-7 or vice versa! I can't readily tell the two apart while I'm using them or looking at their photos. .

At base ISO it would be a little harder to see the difference, except for the almost 3 extra stops of DR the K5 has. You may not see it much depending on your monitor settings, but would certainly see it in print.

zackspeed · 01-16-2011, 08:30 AM

the k-7 has the same noise like the k10????what a nonsense

RonHendriks1966 · 01-16-2011, 10:54 AM

Originally posted by aragondina

Huh??? The K7 is the same noise wise and has less DR than the K10d, and falls behind the K20d at high ISO. It does do it faster though.

You have really no idea what you are talking about. Stop giving advice, start looking for some advice!

eddie1960 · 01-16-2011, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by aragondina

Huh??? The K7 is the same noise wise and has less DR than the K10d, and falls behind the K20d at high ISO. It does do it faster though.

At base ISO it would be a little harder to see the difference, except for the almost 3 extra stops of DR the K5 has. You may not see it much depending on your monitor settings, but would certainly see it in print.

I own to 10 and the 7
The seven at 1600 is abot where the 10 was at 800
At 3200 its about the 10 1600
So yep its better
Only edge i would give the 10 is at 100
Otherwise the 7 is better in every way
Dont know where you get your ideas but they are sadly misinformed
(k20 ive heard is about the same iso wise as the 7 or slightly less good-but ill leave that to people whove actually used both)

aragondina · 01-16-2011, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

You have really no idea what you are talking about. Stop giving advice, start looking for some advice!

Why don't you shut up as all you are doing is showing your ignorance. I've done the test, and here is the result.

This was done at ISO 1600, GX10 on the left (same sensor and RAW output as the K10d) and the K7 on the right (100% crops), shot RAW and converted using ACR default. As you can see, the GX10 actually has less noise and more DR than the K7. And before you bitch, the gx10 image is a little soft due to being slightly out of focus, but that doesn't affect the noise output.

Originally posted by eddie1960

I own to 10 and the 7
The seven at 1600 is abot where the 10 was at 800
At 3200 its about the 10 1600
So yep its better
Only edge i would give the 10 is at 100
Otherwise the 7 is better in every way
Dont know where you get your ideas but they are sadly misinformed

It's you fanboys who are misinformed. You hate to be told that your 4 year old camera can take just as good a pic, and maybe better than the newer model. All APS-C sensored cameras will give approximately the same RAW output at a given ISO up to ISO 1600, the newer models just do it faster and with more bells and whistles. Beyond ISO1600, the design of the sensor and how the manufacturer cooks the RAW output has a lot to do with how "noisy" the RAW file will look.

Want more proof?

From DXO Mark. Note at ISO 1600 the K10D has less S/N ratio than the K7, and the K20d is better than both the K10d and the K7. The only time the K7 is better than the K10d in noise is above 1600 because the K10d doesn't go any higher.

Then let's also look at DR, the K10d at ISO1600 has almost a full stop more DR than the K7 and about 2 stops more at ISO100.

The K7 is a better camera in just about every respect that the K10d except for IQ, and we all know that is because of the sensor chosen in that model. The new sensor in the K5 is revolutionary, just like the one in the K10d was. It took till now for APS-C to make a huge jump in IQ in the K5 and D7000. I suspect that for the next few years while we will see improvements in camera design we may only see incremental changes in IQ and not quantum leaps.

Ok now that I have shown you the truth you fanboys can start flaming. It seems that is what you are best at.

**Rondec** · 01-16-2011, 03:29 PM

I think it depends on the K10. I will just say that my K10 was very prone to banding at isos of over 800. It was much better than the K7 at low iso, but in particular, if you under exposed at all at higher iso, you would see significant banding show up all over the place. The metering on the K10 was really prone to underexposure and so even with EV compensation set at +1, I would still end up with photos unusable for this reason.

My K7 does not have this issue and so I can use high iso without difficulty on it. Now, you have said that your K10 does not have banding issues and if so, that is great. It may be that later runs of the sensors fixed issues with the early models. I know that the K200s which came out soon afterward didn't seem to have the same issues, with essentially the same sensor.

As far as over all shooting enjoyment, I would take the K7 over the K10 any day.

Edit: With regard to your comparison photos, did you resize the K10 photos up to the K7 size, or down size the K7 to 10 megapixel equivalent before doing your crops?

01-14-2011, 06:20 AM	#1
rena Closed Account Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Atlantic Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 25	Has the K7 been officially discontinued? I was told by a salesperson that the K7 is being discontinued. I have yet to read or see any website mention this. Would it be wise to purchase a K7 if this is true?

01-14-2011, 02:19 PM	#8
sevenarrow Forum Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Colorado Springs, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 61	The K-7 is still a great camera Originally posted by rena I was told by a salesperson that the K7 is being discontinued. I have yet to read or see any website mention this. Would it be wise to purchase a K7 if this is true? The K-7 was a great camera when it first came out and it is still a great camera. If you ever need to send it in for repair in the future, I'm sure Pentax will have replacement parts for many years to come. Even though the K-5 improved on high ISO performance and fps, and it has a few more bells and whistles, the K-7 is still a good performer at high ISO and fps. Once in a great while I need to use high ISO and so I prefer to use the K-5. But that's about the only advantage I see with the K-5. But like I said, the K-7's high ISO performance is still very good especially compared to the K10D and K20D. Everything is relative. I have both the K-7 and K-5. For 99% of my photography, there is no difference in the quality of photos or capabilities between the two. Often, I'll do an entire photo shoot mistakenly thinking I'm using the K-5 and then realize it is the K-7 or vice versa! I can't readily tell the two apart while I'm using them or looking at their photos. The K-5 has a few more bells and whistles but most of them I don't use anyway.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
I am officially done with UPS	mustangjoey	General Talk	42	01-12-2011 02:22 AM
Officially homeless	pingflood	General Talk	13	09-07-2009 10:12 AM
I am officially excited about the K-7	dugrant153	Photographic Technique	11	05-27-2009 04:57 AM
K200D is officially discontinued	Sitting Bull	Pentax News and Rumors	35	03-07-2009 09:35 AM

01-14-2011, 06:44 AM	#2
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by rena I was told by a salesperson that the K7 is being discontinued. I have yet to read or see any website mention this. Would it be wise to purchase a K7 if this is true? No any such info from official site.

01-14-2011, 07:26 AM	#3
bobmaxja Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Laval, Quebec Canada Posts: 2,171	Yes this was confirm Here the info on Pentax Japan site confirming this Digital SLR Camera Lineup (Discontinued Model) : Digital Cameras : Products : PENTAX

01-14-2011, 07:35 AM	#4
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	I think it is market dependent for now I had read it would continue in some markets for a while while in others it would be discontinued right away. the Pentax link leads me to believe that has come to an end, though I'm sure there are still plenty in the new market that haven't sold through yet (i see them available on a lot of web sites still) Too bad really i though the idea of having a 4 camera lineup was a good idea (5 if you count the 645d of course) kx with step to kr and k7 with step to k5 (kind of like the idea of 500-750-1000-1500 price levels when i was in sales this would be an ideal lineup giving the option to meet all demands)

01-14-2011, 07:36 AM	#5
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	and i do believe it was discontinued in Canada as we are not as big a market as the USA

01-14-2011, 01:16 PM	#6
Mr. Ben Inactive Account Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 46	I dunno, the K5 seems VERY similar and most of what you get in the K5 is simply improvements rather than added features. If I had to choose (now) between a K5 and K7, I would get the K5 in a heartbeat. The Kx and Kr do a fine job on the "low" end of the DSLR line.

01-14-2011, 01:21 PM	#7
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	I wouldn't just because of the price difference. K7 body at BH today $868, K5 still 1470 that's the price of a very good lens to go with it in the difference. (i didn't actually i just got the 7 in November when i could have ordered a 5....in 2 years i'll pickup a 5 for about what i paid and then have 2 excellent cameras for what the one would have cost)

01-14-2011, 09:36 PM	#9
MrPetkus Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 387	When the K5 drops in price there won't be much of a reason to continue the K7.

01-16-2011, 07:50 AM	#10
aragondina Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Photos: Albums Posts: 117	Originally posted by sevenarrow But like I said, the K-7's high ISO performance is still very good especially compared to the K10D and K20D. Everything is relative. Huh??? The K7 is the same noise wise and has less DR than the K10d, and falls behind the K20d at high ISO. It does do it faster though. Originally posted by sevenarrow I have both the K-7 and K-5. For 99% of my photography, there is no difference in the quality of photos or capabilities between the two. Often, I'll do an entire photo shoot mistakenly thinking I'm using the K-5 and then realize it is the K-7 or vice versa! I can't readily tell the two apart while I'm using them or looking at their photos. . At base ISO it would be a little harder to see the difference, except for the almost 3 extra stops of DR the K5 has. You may not see it much depending on your monitor settings, but would certainly see it in print.

01-16-2011, 08:30 AM	#11
zackspeed Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 527	the k-7 has the same noise like the k10????what a nonsense

01-16-2011, 10:54 AM	#12
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by aragondina Huh??? The K7 is the same noise wise and has less DR than the K10d, and falls behind the K20d at high ISO. It does do it faster though. You have really no idea what you are talking about. Stop giving advice, start looking for some advice!

01-16-2011, 12:39 PM	#13
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	Originally posted by aragondina Huh??? The K7 is the same noise wise and has less DR than the K10d, and falls behind the K20d at high ISO. It does do it faster though. At base ISO it would be a little harder to see the difference, except for the almost 3 extra stops of DR the K5 has. You may not see it much depending on your monitor settings, but would certainly see it in print. I own to 10 and the 7 The seven at 1600 is abot where the 10 was at 800 At 3200 its about the 10 1600 So yep its better Only edge i would give the 10 is at 100 Otherwise the 7 is better in every way Dont know where you get your ideas but they are sadly misinformed (k20 ive heard is about the same iso wise as the 7 or slightly less good-but ill leave that to people whove actually used both)

01-16-2011, 03:07 PM	#14
aragondina Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Photos: Albums Posts: 117	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 You have really no idea what you are talking about. Stop giving advice, start looking for some advice! Why don't you shut up as all you are doing is showing your ignorance. I've done the test, and here is the result. This was done at ISO 1600, GX10 on the left (same sensor and RAW output as the K10d) and the K7 on the right (100% crops), shot RAW and converted using ACR default. As you can see, the GX10 actually has less noise and more DR than the K7. And before you bitch, the gx10 image is a little soft due to being slightly out of focus, but that doesn't affect the noise output. Originally posted by eddie1960 I own to 10 and the 7 The seven at 1600 is abot where the 10 was at 800 At 3200 its about the 10 1600 So yep its better Only edge i would give the 10 is at 100 Otherwise the 7 is better in every way Dont know where you get your ideas but they are sadly misinformed It's you fanboys who are misinformed. You hate to be told that your 4 year old camera can take just as good a pic, and maybe better than the newer model. All APS-C sensored cameras will give approximately the same RAW output at a given ISO up to ISO 1600, the newer models just do it faster and with more bells and whistles. Beyond ISO1600, the design of the sensor and how the manufacturer cooks the RAW output has a lot to do with how "noisy" the RAW file will look. Want more proof? From DXO Mark. Note at ISO 1600 the K10D has less S/N ratio than the K7, and the K20d is better than both the K10d and the K7. The only time the K7 is better than the K10d in noise is above 1600 because the K10d doesn't go any higher. Then let's also look at DR, the K10d at ISO1600 has almost a full stop more DR than the K7 and about 2 stops more at ISO100. The K7 is a better camera in just about every respect that the K10d except for IQ, and we all know that is because of the sensor chosen in that model. The new sensor in the K5 is revolutionary, just like the one in the K10d was. It took till now for APS-C to make a huge jump in IQ in the K5 and D7000. I suspect that for the next few years while we will see improvements in camera design we may only see incremental changes in IQ and not quantum leaps. Ok now that I have shown you the truth you fanboys can start flaming. It seems that is what you are best at.

01-16-2011, 03:29 PM	#15
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,652	I think it depends on the K10. I will just say that my K10 was very prone to banding at isos of over 800. It was much better than the K7 at low iso, but in particular, if you under exposed at all at higher iso, you would see significant banding show up all over the place. The metering on the K10 was really prone to underexposure and so even with EV compensation set at +1, I would still end up with photos unusable for this reason. My K7 does not have this issue and so I can use high iso without difficulty on it. Now, you have said that your K10 does not have banding issues and if so, that is great. It may be that later runs of the sensors fixed issues with the early models. I know that the K200s which came out soon afterward didn't seem to have the same issues, with essentially the same sensor. As far as over all shooting enjoyment, I would take the K7 over the K10 any day. Edit: With regard to your comparison photos, did you resize the K10 photos up to the K7 size, or down size the K7 to 10 megapixel equivalent before doing your crops?