Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-26-2010, 06:34 PM   #1
Senior Member
Praestigium's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 139
Difference between cameras?

Hey guys, question.

I've often been told that the Lens is what really influences the colours of a picture as well as how sharp it is. If that is the case, then what is the difference between say the K-x and the K-7? or the K20D even?

How much more 'umph' if you will can one achieve by taking the same picture, with the same lens, using a more expensive camera?

Thanks!

07-26-2010, 09:02 PM   #2
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,912
19 or so threads already going on K-x vs K-7, K-7 vs K20D etc :-) You should go to Amazon or pentaxusa.com and read the specs for the basics about features...

The cost of the camera is deceptive. They all are about 90% the same, imagewise. It is the bells and whistles that make them different, and more capable for the other 10%.
07-26-2010, 09:07 PM - 1 Like   #3
Veteran Member
KxBlaze's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,594
That difference is kind of hard to explain without doing a side by side comparison. Some can tell the difference between 12MP and 14MP while others cannot. I have a Kx and my friend has a K7 and while I have not taken the same picture with both cameras to compare, I have seen pictures from both and I can barely (if at all) tell a difference between IQ when using the kit camera on both cameras.

But yes I think a lens has the most affect on IQ. You can see a huge difference from a Limited to a $50 lens.
07-26-2010, 09:09 PM   #4
Senior Member
Praestigium's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 139
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by SpecialK Quote
19 or so threads already going on K-x vs K-7, K-7 vs K20D etc :-) You should go to Amazon or pentaxusa.com and read the specs for the basics about features...

The cost of the camera is deceptive. They all are about 90% the same, imagewise. It is the bells and whistles that make them different, and more capable for the other 10%.
I tried

All I would see would be things such as slightly more megapixels between cameras, different ISO levels, being able to AF faster etc etc

But I guess my real question is, how much influence does the body have over the sharpness and colours of a picture?

07-26-2010, 09:29 PM - 1 Like   #5
hcc
Pentaxian
hcc's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,533
QuoteOriginally posted by Praestigium Quote
I tried

All I would see would be things such as slightly more megapixels between cameras, different ISO levels, being able to AF faster etc etc

But I guess my real question is, how much influence does the body have over the sharpness and colours of a picture?
KxBlaze already answered. The lens has the most amazing impact on IQ and his comment is "spot on". +1

If you shoot RAW, there will be negligible differences between most recent cameras. If you shoot JPEG, the in-camera PP may generate some minor differences. The most advanced camera will have the most PP options, giving you a better range of options to improve your photos.

Last edited by hcc; 07-26-2010 at 09:31 PM. Reason: Typos
07-26-2010, 09:33 PM   #6
Senior Member
Praestigium's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 139
Original Poster
Woops, I must have been typing my answer when you Posted KxBlaze, apologies, I only just read it now.

I made it a habit to shoot RAW thankfully, thanks for the answers guys!
07-26-2010, 09:51 PM   #7
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
The differences that "matter" is that the higher end bodies have better controls which makes using the camera faster/easier (eg 2 e-dials, dedicated switch for focus mode etc), weather resistance, and probably build better/tougher and more likely to survive the punishment of "pro" work like grinding out a couple of thousand shutter actuations covering a wedding every weekend.
07-27-2010, 05:21 AM   #8
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 106
QuoteOriginally posted by Praestigium Quote
Hey guys, question.

I've often been told that the Lens is what really influences the colours of a picture as well as how sharp it is. If that is the case, then what is the difference between say the K-x and the K-7? or the K20D even?

How much more 'umph' if you will can one achieve by taking the same picture, with the same lens, using a more expensive camera?

Thanks!
i think that even a basic dslr like the kx will deliver stunning result even when used with a kit lens. the 'umph' can be obtained by composition, lighting and shooting an interesting subject. however the higher price of the semi pro and pro models is for people who want easier access to the settings rather than digging thru menus like on the k-x.

07-27-2010, 08:08 AM   #9
Veteran Member
DaveHolmes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,501
QuoteOriginally posted by hcc Quote
If you shoot RAW, there will be negligible differences between most recent cameras. If you shoot JPEG, the in-camera PP may generate some minor differences.
With the sheer capacity of todays memory cards is there any reason to shoot in JPEG at all if your camera shoots in RAW?

or rephrased

Are there any benefits to shooting in JPEG over RAW?

Cheers
07-27-2010, 08:12 AM   #10
Pentaxian
Pablom's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Jerusalem
Posts: 1,940
viewfinder.

though all APS-C viewfinders suck, some suck less than others
07-27-2010, 08:29 AM   #11
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,912
QuoteOriginally posted by DaveHolmes Quote
With the sheer capacity of todays memory cards is there any reason to shoot in JPEG at all if your camera shoots in RAW?

or rephrased

Are there any benefits to shooting in JPEG over RAW?

Cheers
If you only need small images to email, jpgs are useful.
Many people complain about the "fussing" and time needed to convert RAW, but they don't understand the procedure, so that is a normal response. It can be a quite simple and quick process with enormous benefits.
07-27-2010, 08:31 AM   #12
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montco, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 135
QuoteOriginally posted by DaveHolmes Quote
With the sheer capacity of todays memory cards is there any reason to shoot in JPEG at all if your camera shoots in RAW?

or rephrased

Are there any benefits to shooting in JPEG over RAW?

Cheers
Some of the "scene" modes use JPEG. Also, continuous shooting may be faster when using JPEG? According to the manual for my K2000:

Continuous shooting (Hi):
When JPEG quality is set to 10M, up to 5 frames are taken continuously at approximately 3.5 fps. The shooting interval will increase as the camera buffer memory fills up.

Continuous shooting (Lo):
When JPEG quality is set to 10M, pictures are taken continuously at approximately 1.1 fps until the SD Memory Card is full.

NOTE: When the File Format is RAW, up to 4 frames for (Continuous shooting (Hi))
or up to 7 frames for (Continuous shooting (Lo)) can be taken continuously.

I'm not entirely sure how to read this...
07-27-2010, 12:25 PM   #13
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
Lens is the most significant factor in sharpness, assumign the pixel counts are close to similar. That is, the difference between 12MP and 14MP is practically insignificant - the lens determines sharpness (assuming you aren't limited by your own technique). But if you're comparing a 6MP camera to a 14MP one, then the pixel count might matter a bit more depending on how large you are printing.

Color is not primarily determined by the lens. It's not really even primarily determiend by the camera - at least, not in the sense of one camera having hugely different colors from another. It's largely just a matter of the White Balance setting. You can get get pretty mcuh any color you want by setting WB appropriately, or perhaps tweaking things in PP. Differences between lenses or cameras are pretty insignificant here, ubless you happen to already be such an expert that you're among the tiny percentage of the population whod be able to spot the incredibly subtle differences that might actually depend on the equipment as opposed to the settings.

The camera mostly matters in determining how easy it is to take the picture in the first place and the amount of control over the process you have - not so much the quality of the picture. Except in very low light, where differences in high ISO performance can be more noticeable (but still, only to a point).
07-27-2010, 06:41 PM   #14
hcc
Pentaxian
hcc's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,533
QuoteOriginally posted by wedge Quote
Some of the "scene" modes use JPEG. Also, continuous shooting may be faster when using JPEG? According to the manual for my K2000:

Continuous shooting (Hi):
When JPEG quality is set to 10M, up to 5 frames are taken continuously at approximately 3.5 fps. The shooting interval will increase as the camera buffer memory fills up.

Continuous shooting (Lo):
When JPEG quality is set to 10M, pictures are taken continuously at approximately 1.1 fps until the SD Memory Card is full.

NOTE: When the File Format is RAW, up to 4 frames for (Continuous shooting (Hi))
or up to 7 frames for (Continuous shooting (Lo)) can be taken continuously.

I'm not entirely sure how to read this...
Wedge,
There are several solid threads on continuous shooting in this forum that you should read. RAW is not recommended for long continuous shooting sequence, especially with the K-x.

Simply, it all depends how many shots do you intend to take during a sequence of continous shooting, the speed of your SD card, the amount of in-camera PP, and what camera buffer size you have. As soon as the buffer size is full and saturated, the camera will slow down sharply. For example, the K-x has a smaller buffer size than the K-7 and it fills up very quickly.

With my K-7, I shoot JPEG 6Mp to be able to shoot some relatively long Hi continuous shooting sequences, and I switch off all in-camera PP incl. lens correction, high-ISO correction ....

Last edited by hcc; 07-27-2010 at 06:41 PM. Reason: Typos
07-27-2010, 07:42 PM   #15
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montco, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 135
QuoteOriginally posted by hcc Quote
Wedge,
There are several solid threads on continuous shooting in this forum that you should read. RAW is not recommended for long continuous shooting sequence, especially with the K-x.

Simply, it all depends how many shots do you intend to take during a sequence of continous shooting, the speed of your SD card, the amount of in-camera PP, and what camera buffer size you have. As soon as the buffer size is full and saturated, the camera will slow down sharply. For example, the K-x has a smaller buffer size than the K-7 and it fills up very quickly.

With my K-7, I shoot JPEG 6Mp to be able to shoot some relatively long Hi continuous shooting sequences, and I switch off all in-camera PP incl. lens correction, high-ISO correction ....
Oh, I almost never use the continuous shooting functions...I was just theorizing on the valid need for JPEG, even on a camera that can shoot in RAW. I've done it maybe 3 or 4 times with "meh" results. I made a nice "flipbook" of my then-3-year-old swinging a golf club with better form than I'll ever have, and another of some kids on a slip-n-slide.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, lens, pentax help, photography, picture
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA vs. F? What's the difference? PentaxForums-User Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 12-23-2009 08:37 AM
DA 18-55 vs. DA 18-55 II What is the Difference? Tbear Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 06-11-2009 04:16 AM
K and A difference JCSullivan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 03-04-2008 01:02 AM
And the Difference is ? Jesus Photographic Technique 15 09-26-2007 02:13 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:09 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top