[kolouch]

But only 3.5 fps at full resolution is also unreal. Come on, even the K-m can do this

Hope you've right. 3.5 fps at full resolution is realy old school :-) Hope that will be 5+ FPS at full res

[falconeye]

It's this holder (with the ground glass still on it) that can be seen on the leaked press photos. Although I do not know why that was done; to obscure things perhaps?

I mean this (from the actual photo):

Ok, I see what you mean. I previously had already compared my K20D mirror box with the press photo in high magnification and gamma and noticed no significant difference (I didn't take measures though).

So, I think you're wrong.

What you see is not the ground plate. You see the reflection of the ground plate which is still in place.

Would you see the ground plate, you would see that the edges would be minimally non parallel (because of being at a 45° angle).

Would you see the reflection of the ground plane, you would see a virtual image of the ground plane as if it would be in the focus plane, i.e., with perfectly parallel edges.

I think the latter is true.


In any case, what folks have measured (probably) is a reflected image (of the ground plate) and its size will be smaller than the mount opening where the relative difference in size will depend on the shooting distance which is inknown for the K-7 press kit photo.

- end of analysis -

[Kenn100D]

so variable FPS depending on the MP IQ. which 5.2 FPS @ 14.6MP goes faster but lower MP count.
-Abstract (patent) for more Dynamic Range.
-Small Body
-More Battery Life
-New AF system
-New Grip
-?

[RiceHigh]

AF surprise - depends on how you define "surprise".
But yes, the camera offers two focus systems - one for optical viewfinder and one for live view and video. And performance for the optical system is better than before, and the performance may be a surprise for those that states that Pentax can't do a camera with fast, reliable and sensitive autofocus.

I believe they can but still have reservations if Pentax is really *willing* to do it this time.

Back to almost ten years ago, Pentax did have the SAFOX VI (in MZ-30) and VII (in MZ-S) which focus far more quicker and accurate than *any* of the Pentax SAFOX VIII DSLRs.

Since the SAFOX VIII has "acquired" such a infamous bad name during these years, I think it will be very unwise for Pentax to use it in the K-7. IF they have improved/debugged the system, they should give it a new name, say, SAFOX IX.

[janneman]

Me too but unforunately the only thing Ogl etc. have spoken about is fps. I think one of them mentioned something about the AF being a surprise but this means is anyone's guess.

I am afraid "we" are to blame. maybe not you and me personally but IIRC, most "gripes" about the Pentax system, at least the most vented gripes, or at least the gripes of the noisiest members of any Pentax forum were all about fps. Followed ofcourse by AF, but there was more fuss about fps....

Personally I can live with K20D's AF and fps but as usual they can be improved (guess what, even Nikons and canons AF can be improved, , there is also room for improvement of Fuji's DR and even the Canon 1DsMkIX IQ can be improved...).
And if I had to choose anything, I'd have AF improvements over fps any given day.
And ofcourse high ISO capabilities. SR is fine as it is, any better and it will be useless as he object tend to move while the sensor is stable.

[gazonk]

No, RH said "100% 1.0x" and Om81 said " " which means that this info was speculated but wrong. Because, as you said, if true, no disappointment here ...

He wasn't quoting RH directly, so it could also be interpreted as a disappointment over 1.0x. Given all the talk about the magnifying VF patent, 1.0x IS a disappointment, I was personally hoping for 1.1x-1.2x - giving a FF-equivalent VF. But as I said, still better than the competition...

[Asahiflex]

Ok, I see what you mean. I previously had already compared my K20D mirror box with the press photo in high magnification and gamma and noticed no significant difference (I didn't take measures though).

So, I think you're wrong.

What you see is not the ground plate. You see the reflection of the ground plate which is still in place.

Would you see the ground plate, you would see that the edges would be minimally non parallel (because of being at a 45° angle).

Would you see the reflection of the ground plane, you would see a virtual image of the ground plane as if it would be in the focus plane, i.e., with perfectly parallel edges.

I think the latter is true.


In any case, what folks have measured (probably) is a reflected image (of the ground plate) and its size will be smaller than the mount opening where the relative difference in size will depend on the shooting distance which is inknown for the K-7 press kit photo.

- end of analysis -

I still think I'm right though. Proof: what with the loose space below what you call the mirror in the K-7 photo? I have changed the screens in K10D's and K20D's many times.





Edit: on the other hand it would be strange that the screen does not have a tab. So maybe it cannot be proven from these photos, as the K-7 can be completely different as far as the mirror box goes.

[ogl]

The VF's area is rather stange.

[janneman]

I believe they can but still have reservations if Pentax is really *willing* to do it this time.

Back to almost ten years ago, Pentax did have the SAFOX VI (in MZ-30) and VII (in MZ-S) which focus far more quicker and accurate than *any* of the Pentax SAFOX VIII DSLRs.

Since the SAFOX VIII has "acquired" such a infamous bad name during these years, I think it will be very unwise for Pentax to use it in the K-7. IF they have improved/debugged the system, they should give it a new name, say, SAFOX IX.

I see your point but I must disagree. Basically , with a few minor hardware tweaks and better algoritms (that alone can do miracles according to a friend who lectures maths.) the new AF can be much better. Now, if they still use the SAFOX VIII they must call it SAFOX VIII, possibly SAFOX VIII+.
This way it will be known for waht it is and peaople accept that.
Now, if you call it SAFOX IX, it won't be long before forums and reviews point out that it is basically a SAFOX VIII. And then pentax will be in big trouble for that.
Also, given teh nature of people in general, people will say of th SAFOX VIII+ "Yes, there really is improvement". If you call it SAFOX IX people will say "no, not much improvement, it is just like the VIII". That is human nature for you.

[falconeye]

He wasn't quoting RH directly

Oh yes, he was. In his own strange way of quoting ... The first half of his sentences were the quote and the latter half his response

RH: Viewfinder: 100% and 1.0X *Traditional* Optical Viewfinder
Om81: Viewfinder: 100% and 1.0X

[janneman]

I still think I'm right though. Proof: what with the loose space below what you call the mirror in the K-7 photo? I have changed the screens in K10D's and K20D's many times.
.

images taken at diffeent angles?

[Ishpuini]

I still think I'm right though. Proof: what with the loose space below what you call the mirror in the K-7 photo? I have changed the screens in K10D's and K20D's many times.

Edit: on the other hand it would be strange that the screen does not have a tab. So maybe it cannot be proven from these photos, as the K-7 can be completely different as far as the mirror box goes.

I must say I tend to agree with Asahiflex. The K-7 picture fragment corresponds with what I saw when exchanging my screen on my K20D.

Wim

[Caat]

I am afraid "we" are to lame. maybe not you and me personally but IIRC, most "gripes" about the Pentax system, at least the most vented gripes, or at least the gripes of the noisiest members of any Pentax forum were all about fps. Followed ofcourse by AF, but there was more fuss about fps....

Personally I can live with K20D's AF and fps but as usual they can be improved (guess what, even Nikons and canons AF can be improved, , there is also room for improvement of Fuji's DR and even the Canon 1DsMkIX IQ can be improved...).
And if I had to choose anything, I'd have AF improvements over fps any given day.
And ofcourse high ISO capabilities. SR is fine as it is, any better and it will be useless as he object tend to move while the sensor is stable.

I agree. And anyway to get the most out of high fps Pentax would need to improve AF first (esp. tracking performance).

I think the main reason people were griping about the whole fps issue is that it is one of the headline specifications: i.e. Megapixels, Shutter speeds, flash sync, FPS

Even though AF performance is arguably more important than the last three (and the first once you've reached 14.6mp) it isn't easily quantified and doesn't appear in those specs. So for that reason in adverts, sales, and marketing a low fps is noticed more than AF.

I think this is why people whine about it. This isn't to say I wouldn't like 5fps as I think this is fast enough to most purposes but more is always nice but not needed by me anyway. Although I can understand why people like (and need) high fps.

[Rush2112]

Whilst I have already published all those known things which are almost 100% certain at my Blog for tens days now, there are many other more important things about the K-7 which are still not yet known. So, based on what I have heard so far. Here they are:

Sensor: 14.6 to 15 MP new Samsung sensor - debugged version of the old one used in the K20D: Less Noisy, More Functions for LV and Movie

Metering System: New 77-segment 7x11 (Seven Eleven? ;->) equally divided metering system - more advanced

AF System: Still SAFOX VIII 11-point AF hardware with tweaked AF software algorithms and should respond faster and better at low light

WB System: New More Advanced and Accurate Auto WB system and algorithms

HD Video: uncertain about 1920x1080 or 1280x720, no one talks about the frame rates concretely so far. (Whilst it is certain the Movie is there)

Viewfinder: 100% and 1.0X *Traditional* Optical Viewfinder

Any other things that you have heard that are "sensible"??

It seems that the leak-proof works of Hoya/Pentax have been doing very well this time, and we hear no more new news these few days! :-(

Maybe we have to wait until May 18 or 19, i.e., just a few number of days before May 21 that we can know more.. Too bad..

Nice specs on that viewfinder, being 100% x 1.0x is dooable on APS-C, as the prism wouldn't have to be nearly as big as a full frame comparison. I'd be pretty happy about that if I were a pentaxian as it would be the best specced APS-C viewfinder in any current DSLR.

I shoot with a 100% coverage viewfinder on one of my other DSLR's and really enjoy knowing the edges of the frame are legit. Much better than a 100% view on the LCD only.

Carl

[falconeye]

I still think I'm right though. Proof: what with the loose space below what you call the mirror in the K-7 photo? I have changed the screens in K10D's and K20D's many times.
[...]
Edit: on the other hand it would be strange that the screen does not have a tab. So maybe it cannot be proven from these photos, as the K-7 can be completely different as far as the mirror box goes.

Beware of the trap

Don't look at the K20D photo you posted. Take your K20D and look at it directly.

You'll notice that it will look exactly as the mirror box in the K-7 press kit photo (which shows the reflected ground plate) and not like in the K20D photo you posted. Even the faint details coming from the ocular are the same ...

I think the differences are due to the fact that the K-7 press kit photo was taken from a slight angle and not exactly horizontally (like the K20D photo).