K7 or K5 Big difference?

**durr3** · 09-13-2011, 08:42 AM

I have decided to go for a Pentax DSLR since I have 5 M42 lenses that I can use. Is the K5 THAT much better than the K7? For the money?

Thanks

**boriscleto** · 09-13-2011, 08:44 AM

Yes...

**blackcloudbrew** · 09-13-2011, 08:46 AM

Yes indeed.

**durr3** · 09-13-2011, 08:47 AM

Well, that sums it up nicely! Thanks

**Just1MoreDave** · 09-13-2011, 10:04 AM

The body is the same - same size, displays, viewfinder, shutter, etc. So handling is the same, the optional grip is the same, etc.

The AF is different, supposed to be better, but as with all AF systems, it is not perfect and instant. They've added some features, like more user modes. I'm not sure if the GPS accessory works with the K-7. Video might be better in some way.

The main improvement is the sensor. Not the 2 megapixels more, the high ISO ability and the increased dynamic range. It's a really good sensor. The K-7's sensor is not bad but pales in comparison. At ISO 800 or more, K-5 photos will start to look better, and the gap widens as ISO increases.

Macario · 09-13-2011, 10:54 AM

Well, yes it is better. Is it that much better for the money? Depends on you. I choose the K-7 myself over the K-5 mainly because of the price, and I have not regretted the dicission. The K-7 is a fine camera. Yes the AF of the K-5 is faster they say, but for me the one in the K-7 is fast enough, even for the sports I shoot. The High ISO is better on the K-5, but then again, I do 99% in B&W anyway, so I do not mind the noise at all. And the Noise isn't that bad if you know how to expose with the K-7.

So basicly is the K-5 that much better that the K-7 for the money? It all depends on what you need for yourself

**crewl1** · 09-13-2011, 11:04 AM

The AF in the K-5 is better but you may not care unless you get AF lenses.

The sensor of the K-5 is much improved over the K-7 as far as low light IQ. I owned a K-7 for a short while but was spoiled by the sensor performance of my K-x so I was dissatisfied with the K-7 images in the shadow areas.

For example take a look at this thread - https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/157549-shutterbug-gives-...-review-2.html
In post #19 with a K-7 by tony3d there is a nice shot of a car steering wheel in daylight, but if you look under the dash in the shadow areas there is noise in the shadows.
You will not see that from a K-5.

Last edited by crewl1; 09-13-2011 at 11:11 AM.

elho_cid · 09-13-2011, 11:05 AM

The only advantage of K-7 is the slighty shorter shutter lag.

kenafein · 09-13-2011, 11:26 AM

The K-7s can be had for a good price used. The ergonomics are fantastic, same as the K-5. I think you would be very satisfied with it, but if you have money to burn the K-5 is a no brainer.

**Rondec** · 09-13-2011, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by Just1MoreDave

The body is the same - same size, displays, viewfinder, shutter, etc. So handling is the same, the optional grip is the same, etc.

The AF is different, supposed to be better, but as with all AF systems, it is not perfect and instant. They've added some features, like more user modes. I'm not sure if the GPS accessory works with the K-7. Video might be better in some way.

The main improvement is the sensor. Not the 2 megapixels more, the high ISO ability and the increased dynamic range. It's a really good sensor. The K-7's sensor is not bad but pales in comparison. At ISO 800 or more, K-5 photos will start to look better, and the gap widens as ISO increases.

Absolutely. My wife and i were walking around the other evening at sunset with our kids. She had our K5 and I had a K7. She shot until we left the park, whereas, I was done when the light levels dropped. I just couldn't push up my iso enough to compensate without my photos looking pretty sad.

The K7 is a really nice camera, it just doesn't have the dynamic range and ability to do high iso that the K5 has. You'd be surprised how often that is helpful in every day shooting.

**Lowell Goudge** · 09-13-2011, 05:56 PM

If you go back in time and look at each "pro" body from pentax with the exception of the k10 which went backwards in dynamic range, every camera has had some improvement in dynamic range over the previous model the k10 has the smallest DR of the lot, the k20 was a big improvement over k10 the k7 marginal over K20 and k5 big step over k7

I own all but the k20 and can see the differences and still use them all even the *istD.

What you forget is that even with it's poor dynamic range and high iso noise even the k10 is way ahead of film.

**Ex Finn.** · 09-13-2011, 06:13 PM

I used to carry two bodies, one with ISO 100 and the other with ISO 400

.

**Lowell Goudge** · 09-14-2011, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by Ex Finn.

I used to carry two bodies, one with ISO 100 and the other with ISO 400

.

Me Too, and I still carry 2 bodies, one with a long lens and one with a not so long lens.

My upgrade approach has always been to retain my old gear as a second body / back up.

mysticcowboy · 09-16-2011, 04:49 PM

The K-5 not only has better high ISO performance, it has a noticeably wider dynamic range. If I remember right, the K-5 has the about same dynamic range at 800 ISO as the K-7 at 100. That's significant. Also, K-5 raw files can be shot in 14bit, as opposed to the K-7's 12 bit, which gives more information in the image files. The files that the K-7 produces are good. In good light, there will be little difference. With photos taken in less than ideal light, the extra information that the K-5 captures gives a lot more room for tweaking the image. The K-5 sensor really is the best APS-C sensor around today.

Culture · 09-20-2011, 12:29 AM

Which one will you choose, a the current k-5 or a k-5 with a cropped sensor. The reason why I ask this is that most people tend to crop their shots anyway.

The impression i get is that most people will like to own a full frame. But if all the specs and performance are the same why will you still go with a full-frame instead of a cropped sensor.

09-13-2011, 06:13 PM	#12
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	I used to carry two bodies, one with ISO 100 and the other with ISO 400.

09-14-2011, 01:37 PM	#13
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	Originally posted by Ex Finn. I used to carry two bodies, one with ISO 100 and the other with ISO 400. Me Too, and I still carry 2 bodies, one with a long lens and one with a not so long lens. My upgrade approach has always been to retain my old gear as a second body / back up.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
I think in this case, the camera body is making a big difference.	sjwaldron	Pentax DSLR Discussion	11	10-26-2010 01:50 PM
Is there a big difference between an f1.2 and an f1.4 lens?	jeryst	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	78	07-22-2010 09:48 PM
classic pentax lenses, big difference between supers and standard pentax	Genshu	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	04-20-2010 04:52 PM
(The Big shock) CANON 7D - NIKON D300S & PENTAX K-x ISO PERFORMANCE (The Big shock)	starscream	Pentax DSLR Discussion	21	01-14-2010 05:17 AM
DA21: Why such a big difference between these two tests ?	pcarfan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	01-01-2009 06:20 PM

09-13-2011, 08:42 AM	#1
durr3 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Mississippi Photos: Albums Posts: 144	K7 or K5 Big difference? I have decided to go for a Pentax DSLR since I have 5 M42 lenses that I can use. Is the K5 THAT much better than the K7? For the money? Thanks

09-13-2011, 08:44 AM	#2
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Yes...

09-13-2011, 08:46 AM	#3
blackcloudbrew Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Cotati, California USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,460	Yes indeed.

09-13-2011, 08:47 AM	#4
durr3 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Mississippi Photos: Albums Posts: 144 Original Poster	Well, that sums it up nicely! Thanks

09-13-2011, 10:04 AM	#5
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	The body is the same - same size, displays, viewfinder, shutter, etc. So handling is the same, the optional grip is the same, etc. The AF is different, supposed to be better, but as with all AF systems, it is not perfect and instant. They've added some features, like more user modes. I'm not sure if the GPS accessory works with the K-7. Video might be better in some way. The main improvement is the sensor. Not the 2 megapixels more, the high ISO ability and the increased dynamic range. It's a really good sensor. The K-7's sensor is not bad but pales in comparison. At ISO 800 or more, K-5 photos will start to look better, and the gap widens as ISO increases.

09-13-2011, 10:54 AM	#6
Macario Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Hoek van Holland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,393	Well, yes it is better. Is it that much better for the money? Depends on you. I choose the K-7 myself over the K-5 mainly because of the price, and I have not regretted the dicission. The K-7 is a fine camera. Yes the AF of the K-5 is faster they say, but for me the one in the K-7 is fast enough, even for the sports I shoot. The High ISO is better on the K-5, but then again, I do 99% in B&W anyway, so I do not mind the noise at all. And the Noise isn't that bad if you know how to expose with the K-7. So basicly is the K-5 that much better that the K-7 for the money? It all depends on what you need for yourself

09-13-2011, 11:04 AM	#7
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	The AF in the K-5 is better but you may not care unless you get AF lenses. The sensor of the K-5 is much improved over the K-7 as far as low light IQ. I owned a K-7 for a short while but was spoiled by the sensor performance of my K-x so I was dissatisfied with the K-7 images in the shadow areas. For example take a look at this thread - https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/157549-shutterbug-gives-...-review-2.html In post #19 with a K-7 by tony3d there is a nice shot of a car steering wheel in daylight, but if you look under the dash in the shadow areas there is noise in the shadows. You will not see that from a K-5. Last edited by crewl1; 09-13-2011 at 11:11 AM.

09-13-2011, 11:05 AM	#8
elho_cid Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Prague Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,199	The only advantage of K-7 is the slighty shorter shutter lag.

09-13-2011, 11:26 AM	#9
kenafein Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Southern California Photos: Albums Posts: 4,082	The K-7s can be had for a good price used. The ergonomics are fantastic, same as the K-5. I think you would be very satisfied with it, but if you have money to burn the K-5 is a no brainer.

09-13-2011, 03:06 PM	#10
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,652	Originally posted by Just1MoreDave The body is the same - same size, displays, viewfinder, shutter, etc. So handling is the same, the optional grip is the same, etc. The AF is different, supposed to be better, but as with all AF systems, it is not perfect and instant. They've added some features, like more user modes. I'm not sure if the GPS accessory works with the K-7. Video might be better in some way. The main improvement is the sensor. Not the 2 megapixels more, the high ISO ability and the increased dynamic range. It's a really good sensor. The K-7's sensor is not bad but pales in comparison. At ISO 800 or more, K-5 photos will start to look better, and the gap widens as ISO increases. Absolutely. My wife and i were walking around the other evening at sunset with our kids. She had our K5 and I had a K7. She shot until we left the park, whereas, I was done when the light levels dropped. I just couldn't push up my iso enough to compensate without my photos looking pretty sad. The K7 is a really nice camera, it just doesn't have the dynamic range and ability to do high iso that the K5 has. You'd be surprised how often that is helpful in every day shooting.

09-13-2011, 05:56 PM	#11
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	If you go back in time and look at each "pro" body from pentax with the exception of the k10 which went backwards in dynamic range, every camera has had some improvement in dynamic range over the previous model the k10 has the smallest DR of the lot, the k20 was a big improvement over k10 the k7 marginal over K20 and k5 big step over k7 I own all but the k20 and can see the differences and still use them all even the *istD. What you forget is that even with it's poor dynamic range and high iso noise even the k10 is way ahead of film.

09-16-2011, 04:49 PM	#14
mysticcowboy Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: port townsend, wa Photos: Albums Posts: 968	The K-5 not only has better high ISO performance, it has a noticeably wider dynamic range. If I remember right, the K-5 has the about same dynamic range at 800 ISO as the K-7 at 100. That's significant. Also, K-5 raw files can be shot in 14bit, as opposed to the K-7's 12 bit, which gives more information in the image files. The files that the K-7 produces are good. In good light, there will be little difference. With photos taken in less than ideal light, the extra information that the K-5 captures gives a lot more room for tweaking the image. The K-5 sensor really is the best APS-C sensor around today.

09-20-2011, 12:29 AM	#15
Culture Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Vaasa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 818	Which one will you choose, a the current k-5 or a k-5 with a cropped sensor. The reason why I ask this is that most people tend to crop their shots anyway. The impression i get is that most people will like to own a full frame. But if all the specs and performance are the same why will you still go with a full-frame instead of a cropped sensor.