why upgrade to K7 from K20D?

WMBP · 05-20-2009, 09:31 PM

Is the K7 the successor to the K20D? Certainly looks that way. Or is it a fork in the road - with the K10D > K20D > K7 line going off in one direction (high-end consumer) so that a model to be announced later can go off in the other (pro): K10D > K20D > K30D or perhaps K1??? Anybody want to hazard a guess?

I'm trying to figure out right now why I might even want to consider buying a K7 given that I've got a K10D and a K20D already. I find the presence of video almost an annoyance - certainly not a plus. Have to see if the new sensor in the K7 really does produce better photos: I'm skeptical. The main thing I can see right now about the K7 that really grabs me is the big, very high-res display. I was chatting with another photographer the other day who was shooting with a Canon 50D: wow, the display on that camera is amazing, and it sounds like the Pentax K7 may have a similar display. But is it worth $1300? I doubt it.

Sounds like a number of folks in this forum are very pleased with the specs of the K7. I'm sure it's a terrific camera in itself. I just don't at the moment see it as a must-have upgrade for someone like me who has a K20D with plenty of life in it yet. What am I missing (if anything)?

Will

jct us101 · 05-20-2009, 09:33 PM

Because it's awesome.

**jbinpg** · 05-20-2009, 09:38 PM

I'm a birder. The new K-7's video plus audio will allow me to document birds in place that would have otherwise required a separate mike and recorder as well as a digicam. This will cut out at least two other pieces of equipment and shave off a pound or two from the total pack weight. That's just one reason based on released specs to date. Once the comparative images land on the websites, then we will probably have lots of other reasons.

Jack

tpeace · 05-20-2009, 09:42 PM

I'm sticking with the K20. Concluded that I'll get better back for the buck investing in more glass.

The only temptations the K7 holds for me would be the ability to run on AA batteries (apparently via the new grip) and the fact that its live view will work with auto-focus without going dark.

regards-t

RawheaD · 05-20-2009, 10:27 PM

I can't believe what some people are writing. Like seriously. Almost every aspect of the camera is an improvement over the K20D. There's nothing in the K20D that is worth saving it for (you can't even make the tried, and often true, "fewer MP = higher IQ during high ISO" argument, because the MP is the same).

So (a) yes, the K10D->K20D line is dead; it's been succeeded by the K-7 line. And (b) whether or not one should want to upgrade depends *entirely* on *your* needs, not the needs/wants of other members.

Take FPS; any nature photographer or sports photographer would call 3 fps a joke, and a 5.2 fps good/acceptable. I know a guy who bought a 30D over a 5D because of the FPS. He's a birder. If that's important for you, it's a no-brainer.

Take Live View. If you do macro photography, or, like me, do a lot of tilt photography, or astrophotography, you know how useful Live View is in nailing the focus. And frankly, Live View on K20D sucks so hard, it's too bad it's not even funny. The lowest end Canon Digital Rebel has Live View leaps and bounds better than the K20D. If that's important to you, then yes, it's worth $1300 MINUS whatever you can sell your K20D for (important information you left out). And let there be no mistake, there will be absolutely *no* reason why you would want to keep your K20D around, unless you want a sub for the K-7, in which case, the question you have to ask is not whether or not the K-7 is worth $1300 but rather whether a K-7 + a K20D as its sub is worth $1300.

Take mirror lockup. Again, if you do any kind of shooting where pinpoint sharpness is of utmost importance (extreme macro, astrophotography, etc.), then mirror lockup is crucial. No brainer.

And my favorite: digital bubble level. As a shooter who pathologically ends up tilting every single one of my shots by 1-2 degrees, always to the right, that by itself is worth almost $1300

If none of those things are important to you, well, then, you have your answer. You don't need to upgrade. Stick to what you have and buy another lens :-)

MRRiley · 05-21-2009, 11:32 AM

MODERATORS.... WHY are there TWO copies/versions or this thread going?

05-20-2009, 09:31 PM	#1
WMBP Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,482	why upgrade to K7 from K20D? Is the K7 the successor to the K20D? Certainly looks that way. Or is it a fork in the road - with the K10D > K20D > K7 line going off in one direction (high-end consumer) so that a model to be announced later can go off in the other (pro): K10D > K20D > K30D or perhaps K1??? Anybody want to hazard a guess? I'm trying to figure out right now why I might even want to consider buying a K7 given that I've got a K10D and a K20D already. I find the presence of video almost an annoyance - certainly not a plus. Have to see if the new sensor in the K7 really does produce better photos: I'm skeptical. The main thing I can see right now about the K7 that really grabs me is the big, very high-res display. I was chatting with another photographer the other day who was shooting with a Canon 50D: wow, the display on that camera is amazing, and it sounds like the Pentax K7 may have a similar display. But is it worth $1300? I doubt it. Sounds like a number of folks in this forum are very pleased with the specs of the K7. I'm sure it's a terrific camera in itself. I just don't at the moment see it as a must-have upgrade for someone like me who has a K20D with plenty of life in it yet. What am I missing (if anything)? Will

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Upgrade to K20D?	Tomzee93	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	09-30-2010 07:53 PM
which upgrade K20d or k7?	ozlizard	Pentax DSLR Discussion	62	07-06-2009 11:32 PM
why upgrade to K7 from K20D?	WMBP	Photographic Technique	43	05-25-2009 11:20 PM
Should I upgrade to the K20d ?....	ruemiser	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	02-23-2009 07:48 AM
K20D upgrade???	OrenMc	Pentax DSLR Discussion	20	12-01-2008 07:45 AM

05-20-2009, 09:33 PM	#2
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	Because it's awesome.

05-20-2009, 09:38 PM	#3
jbinpg Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Prince George, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,546	I'm a birder. The new K-7's video plus audio will allow me to document birds in place that would have otherwise required a separate mike and recorder as well as a digicam. This will cut out at least two other pieces of equipment and shave off a pound or two from the total pack weight. That's just one reason based on released specs to date. Once the comparative images land on the websites, then we will probably have lots of other reasons. Jack

05-20-2009, 09:42 PM	#4
tpeace Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 431	I'm sticking with the K20. Concluded that I'll get better back for the buck investing in more glass. The only temptations the K7 holds for me would be the ability to run on AA batteries (apparently via the new grip) and the fact that its live view will work with auto-focus without going dark. regards-t

05-20-2009, 10:27 PM	#5
RawheaD Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: MA, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 831	I can't believe what some people are writing. Like seriously. Almost every aspect of the camera is an improvement over the K20D. There's nothing in the K20D that is worth saving it for (you can't even make the tried, and often true, "fewer MP = higher IQ during high ISO" argument, because the MP is the same). So (a) yes, the K10D->K20D line is dead; it's been succeeded by the K-7 line. And (b) whether or not one should want to upgrade depends entirely on your needs, not the needs/wants of other members. Take FPS; any nature photographer or sports photographer would call 3 fps a joke, and a 5.2 fps good/acceptable. I know a guy who bought a 30D over a 5D because of the FPS. He's a birder. If that's important for you, it's a no-brainer. Take Live View. If you do macro photography, or, like me, do a lot of tilt photography, or astrophotography, you know how useful Live View is in nailing the focus. And frankly, Live View on K20D sucks so hard, it's too bad it's not even funny. The lowest end Canon Digital Rebel has Live View leaps and bounds better than the K20D. If that's important to you, then yes, it's worth $1300 MINUS whatever you can sell your K20D for (important information you left out). And let there be no mistake, there will be absolutely no reason why you would want to keep your K20D around, unless you want a sub for the K-7, in which case, the question you have to ask is not whether or not the K-7 is worth $1300 but rather whether a K-7 + a K20D as its sub is worth $1300. Take mirror lockup. Again, if you do any kind of shooting where pinpoint sharpness is of utmost importance (extreme macro, astrophotography, etc.), then mirror lockup is crucial. No brainer. And my favorite: digital bubble level. As a shooter who pathologically ends up tilting every single one of my shots by 1-2 degrees, always to the right, that by itself is worth almost $1300 If none of those things are important to you, well, then, you have your answer. You don't need to upgrade. Stick to what you have and buy another lens :-)

05-21-2009, 11:32 AM	#6
MRRiley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sterling, VA, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,275	MODERATORS.... WHY are there TWO copies/versions or this thread going?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search