[Buddha Jones]

My response to their 'review'

You guys are tools let alone morons.
1. "Not least because there’s an optional battery grip available – a first for Pentax" There have been battery grips around since the *ist D
2. Competition is a 'con' seriously... competition is a con.
3. You give the most advanced model in Pentax's line-up a lesser rating than their intro model, who;s doing your reviews, your nephews?
4. In camera HDR is a gimmick? Do you even know what HDR is?
5. And how in the world do you give this a 16/20 in value?

I conclude that this site is biased, uninformed and useless, making you guys, your site and your staff ****ing morons! Maybe you gave the K-m the highest level of praise because that is all you're photographic skill level is capable of using. Perhaps you should stick to P&S cameras and put the results for them on your POS site.

Have a great day!

[Pentaxor]

did somebody checked the exifs on those supposed photos from the K-7 production line?

[Ratmagiclady]

I agree about the quandry for a K20d owner (like myself). Based on what I've seen, there is ZERO reason to upgrade based on IQ. Thankfully the K20d has great IQ so I'm not unhappy in that area. So then it becomes a question of do you want/need the other features. For some, improved AF (with assist), video, smaller size, 900K dot display, etc tip the scales towards upgrade.

Well, happy with the image quality is happy with the image quality: I'm not likely to upgrade from the K20d to the K-7, anyway, unless maybe some requirements of mine change that that fits, and then, probably not till this model has been out for a while. I'm not an upgrade-every-model type, anyway. But this is OK. I like to be content.

If the K-7's *successor* packs some really super high-ISO in there, heehee. That's one area of high-performance that could really tempt me. It looks like a very 'shootable' camera, and has a lot of things that might commend it over a K20d ...at least if you didn't have one of these, in that regard, nicer finder and screen, etc, even if the final sensor and firmware combo doesn't turn out much different.

This review just seems entirely incompetent, though, If they didn't check basic facts, I'm not seeing it as trustworthy.

[nanok]

My response to their 'review'

You guys are tools let alone morons.
1. "Not least because there’s an optional battery grip available – a first for Pentax" There have been battery grips around since the *ist D
2. Competition is a 'con' seriously... competition is a con.
3. You give the most advanced model in Pentax's line-up a lesser rating than their intro model, who;s doing your reviews, your nephews?
4. In camera HDR is a gimmick? Do you even know what HDR is?
5. And how in the world do you give this a 16/20 in value?

I conclude that this site is biased, uninformed and useless, making you guys, your site and your staff ****ing morons! Maybe you gave the K-m the highest level of praise because that is all you're photographic skill level is capable of using. Perhaps you should stick to P&S cameras and put the results for them on your POS site.

Have a great day!

i think that's a bit harsh. i see your points, and others have stated them too, okay, they screwed up, and even did on some basic facts, but "it can happen to anybody". whay personally pisses me off is that reading the review is a waste of my time, there is no insight, no photographer behind the review, i don't need that kind of crap, nobody does, we can all read specs, thank you. if it was "some random guy writing some stuff to get hits" i wouldn't be so pissed, but this is an allegedly reputable publication, so what am i to think, there is no safe place for my reading time anymore? do i really have to privately contact/hunt down real photographers to ask them their thoughts on gear i am interested in?

i wouldn't mind the occasional misshap (okay, they don't know we've had an optional grip for ages, they, essentially, only heard about pentax yesterday, welcome to the club, glad you are aware of the brand now, next time please do your homework befor writing though), i wouldn't mind they like the k-m better than the k-7 overall (to each his own, different strokes for different folks, no problem there), as long as they have a point to make, and i can hear a photographers honest and to the point vision about that gear, instead of reading several pages of useless crap, which at the end is concluded along the lines "weeeeell, there's still nikon and canon, so i'm not suuure it's worth the trouble, even though the camera is great", why the hell did you bother writing the review, in that case? make a bloody point or get out (if you're not going to shit, get off the pot.)

to wrap this up, i am a bit worried that we seem to be so defensive -- and agressively so -- over here, why is that so? let's take a deep breath, and be a bit more reasonable, and maybe try to see the humor in it all, from time to time. in this particular case, the little value i see in this review (and little there is) seems to be humoristic to me, not enough of it to make me smile, but i have to try to find at least some sort of value, after wasting 1/2h of my life on it. but here is the really funny part: i think i have lost a lot more than this following this thread. why so much attention, and, in some cases, almost hate. take it easy

can't we all just get along?

[solar1]

If you had said:

Based on the testing of a *Pre-Production* K-7 body to that of a *Production* K20D body, there is ZERO reason to upgrade based on what I've seen...

How would that look instead?

I agree
Based on what I've seen, there is ZERO reason to upgrade based on IQ.

[Robert S Donovan]

It seems the K-7 is losing out to the competition on value. That explains the higher score of the K20D. Seems fair enough to me.

[Pentaxor]

i think that's a bit harsh. i see your points, and others have stated them too, okay, they screwed up, and even did on some basic facts, but "it can happen to anybody". whay personally pisses me off is that reading the review is a waste of my time, there is no insight, no photographer behind the review, i don't need that kind of crap, nobody does, we can all read specs, thank you. if it was "some random guy writing some stuff to get hits" i wouldn't be so pissed, but this is an allegedly reputable publication, so what am i to think, there is no safe place for my reading time anymore? do i really have to privately contact/hunt down real photographers to ask them their thoughts on gear i am interested in?

i wouldn't mind the occasional misshap (okay, they don't know we've had an optional grip for ages, they, essentially, only heard about pentax yesterday, welcome to the club, glad you are aware of the brand now, next time please do your homework befor writing though), i wouldn't mind they like the k-m better than the k-7 overall (to each his own, different strokes for different folks, no problem there), as long as they have a point to make, and i can hear a photographers honest and to the point vision about that gear, instead of reading several pages of useless crap, which at the end is concluded along the lines "weeeeell, there's still nikon and canon, so i'm not suuure it's worth the trouble, even though the camera is great", why the hell did you bother writing the review, in that case? make a bloody point or get out (if you're not going to shit, get off the pot.)

to wrap this up, i am a bit worried that we seem to be so defensive -- and agressively so -- over here, why is that so? let's take a deep breath, and be a bit more reasonable, and maybe try to see the humor in it all, from time to time. in this particular case, the little value i see in this review (and little there is) seems to be humoristic to me, not enough of it to make me smile, but i have to try to find at least some sort of value, after wasting 1/2h of my life on it. but here is the really funny part: i think i have lost a lot more than this following this thread. why so much attention, and, in some cases, almost hate. take it easy

can't we all just get along?

what I'm concerned about are the samples that had been shown in the review if those were really from the production model with a v1.0 firmware. we don't want to see a wrong impression or someone suing someone for false publication. are those results really authentic? how can one come up with a production model's samples if the supposed units aren't even in the market yet? the question of credibility is a big deal.

fwiw, I wouldn't had questioned the integrity of the review if they indicated that they used a pre-production model ,which is more accurate and realistic.

[GLXLR]

It seems the K-7 is losing out to the competition on value. That explains the higher score of the K20D. Seems fair enough to me.

Wasn't the K20D around $1300 when it came out?

[nostatic]

If you had said:

Based on the testing of a *Pre-Production* K-7 body to that of a *Production* K20D body, there is ZERO reason to upgrade based on what I've seen...

How would that look instead?

Sure, but not sure that going from 0.3 to 1.0 is going to significantly change raw iq. Time will tell.

[jogiba]

It seems the K-7 is losing out to the competition on value. That explains the higher score of the K20D. Seems fair enough to me.

What DSLR built like the K-7 with HDR, HD video etc has better value ?

[Robert S Donovan]

Wasn't the K20D around $1300 when it came out?

They list the K20D @ £799.00 and the K-7 @ £1,199.00.

What DSLR built like the K-7 with HDR, HD video etc has better value ?

I think the point is that there are other cameras that offer a similar set of features at a similar or lower price (D90, D5000, 500D). Therefore, the K-7 (@ £1,199.00) does not represent a better value despite it's "pro" features (ie: you're getting what you pay for, but not at a steal). IMO Pentax has always been about value. When I bought my 1st K10D I got a heck of a lot more camera for the money than what Canikon was offering at that time. Times have changed and Pentax is merely playing catch-up. The K-7 looks like a wonderful camera. I'd be in line to buy one today if they had priced it under $1,000US. I'm sure it will get there eventually so I'll just have to wait.

[nanok]

what I'm concerned about are the samples that had been shown in the review if those were really from the production model with a v1.0 firmware. we don't want to see a wrong impression or someone suing someone for false publication. are those results really authentic? how can one come up with a production model's samples if the supposed units aren't even in the market yet? the question of credibility is a big deal.

fwiw, I wouldn't had questioned the integrity of the review if they indicated that they used a pre-production model ,which is more accurate and realistic.

that is a very specific point, and perhaps a good one. given the overall worthlessness of the text, i haven't even bothered to look at their samples (there are better ones and more varied, right here on the forums, from people who we can be pretty sure know how to hold a camera). maybe some of the complaints and concerns should be directed at pentax rather than just here or at the reviewers, and maybe the lawsuit or a bit of a shake would be in order, if you guys are right on that point.

all that being said, i still think we should be a bit more relaxed, i believe we are significantly smarter than this , as a community ("our users are smarter", remember?)

[Urkeldaedalus]

I think the point is that there are other cameras that offer a similar set of features at a similar or lower price (D90, D5000, 500D). Therefore, the K-7 (@ £1,199.00) does not represent a better value despite it's "pro" features (ie: you're getting what you pay for, but not at a steal). IMO Pentax has always been about value. When I bought my 1st K10D I got a heck of a lot more camera for the money than what Canikon was offering at that time. Times have changed and Pentax is merely playing catch-up. The K-7 looks like a wonderful camera. I'd be in line to buy one today if they had priced it under $1,000US. I'm sure it will get there eventually so I'll just have to wait.

This skews whatever way you want your argument to go, as the K-7 also compares favorably with the features of the Nikon D300 that is $250 more (based on Amazon.com prices. The Canon 50D, conversely, is $100 less based from the same source) If I wanted to argue that it was a good value, I'd compare it to the tier slightly above it, if I wanted to argue that it wasn't a good value, I'd compare it to the cameras priced below. The truth is that it fits pretty well in between both tiers, which I feel is fine for a new camera of its type.

This is why arguing the reviewers final ratings is a waste of time, as the final ratings are arrived at arbitarily. I personally feel reviewers should leave number ratings out of it because people focus on them too much. This is why the Online Photographer is such a good source -- it never pretends to be anything but subjective.

As for those who think the camera is priced too high, I don't feel this is the case. Even if I personally wish it was cheaper for my own sake, as I am planning to buy one, the camera does appear to be selling well (from comments about current preorders) at its current price. I agree that after this first wave of cameras comes out, Pentax should aggressively lower its prices to keep pace with the competition (and semi pro models from the other brands). However, expecting it to be that much cheaper than its competition when it first is released is both unrealistic and unfair.

[jogiba]

They list the K20D @ £799.00 and the K-7 @ £1,199.00.



I think the point is that there are other cameras that offer a similar set of features at a similar or lower price (D90, D5000, 500D). Therefore, the K-7 (@ £1,199.00) does not represent a better value despite it's "pro" features (ie: you're getting what you pay for, but not at a steal). IMO Pentax has always been about value. When I bought my 1st K10D I got a heck of a lot more camera for the money than what Canikon was offering at that time. Times have changed and Pentax is merely playing catch-up. The K-7 looks like a wonderful camera. I'd be in line to buy one today if they had priced it under $1,000US. I'm sure it will get there eventually so I'll just have to wait.

The K-7 is the same price as the K20D when it came out and I see many bought it because it was a great value compared to the competition and I bet the K-7 will sell as fast as they can make them when it comes out.

[Pentaxor]

They list the K20D @ £799.00 and the K-7 @ £1,199.00.



I think the point is that there are other cameras that offer a similar set of features at a similar or lower price (D90, D5000, 500D). Therefore, the K-7 (@ £1,199.00) does not represent a better value despite it's "pro" features (ie: you're getting what you pay for, but not at a steal). IMO Pentax has always been about value. When I bought my 1st K10D I got a heck of a lot more camera for the money than what Canikon was offering at that time. Times have changed and Pentax is merely playing catch-up. The K-7 looks like a wonderful camera. I'd be in line to buy one today if they had priced it under $1,000US. I'm sure it will get there eventually so I'll just have to wait.

the K20D was sold at 1,200 U.S. dollar , 1,400 in other territories.

remember that the U.S. dollar took a huge beating last year. so the 800 sterling is a fair amount. also consider that the K-7's current pricing in the U.K. is also based on the current demand of the unit in the U.K. market.

I dont believe that the other camera brands within the APS-C category have something similar to offer as compared to that of the K-7. mind you that you don't forget the shutter speed (which is a big deal for me now) of those other cameras and the body composite of those cameras as well. the K-7 has a magnesium alloy with steel substructure as opposed to aluminum alloy or plastic construction.


there is the 77 segment metering sensor, dust and weather sealed/resistant body w/ tolerance up to -10 C. lastly, don't forget that the strongest ace of the Pentax semi pro series is the in-body shake reduction system. now I didn't see these features on those 3 cameras that you've mentioned.

with those kinds of features that the K-7 have, it would be foolish to put it at the same price category as the 3 other camera models. 1000 and under price value would be unthinkable. the 1,200 initial price or even if they increased it to 1,300 price is a steal, IMO. with those features, I would still consider it as a bargain.

now, it is quite logical and understandable that the D90, D5000, and the Rebel T1i are under 1,000 and never competed against the price bracket of the K-7. they can't compete with it's features and take the risk of having the people decide what or which camera is better under the same price catalogue (that's suicide).

now, inorder to compete fairly with the K-7, they needed to lower their prices which is the logical thing to do.

anyway, who doesn't want the K-7 to be sold under 1,000? I'm sure everybody would love to buy it under 1k. but that is unrealistic as of this moment. and yeah, I want to buy a Ferrari with the price of a Honda.