Pentax K-7 vs canon T2i

**loveisageless** · 04-22-2010, 11:01 PM

I've been shooting with the K-7 for the past couple of months and it is a great camera. The most important functions have button access rather than having to search through layers of menues. I don't know about others, but my eyes start to glaze over when I have to flip through multiple screens on a 3" LCD. I found the K-7 to be much more intuitive than my previous Pentax DSLR, the K10D, for just this reason. I have found that the variability in the speed of the autofocus in low light situations is somewhat lens dependent. The Pentax DA and FA primes do not seem to have much of an issue is this regard. You may have read here that there is a Pentax lens review database that is part of this website. I highly recommend it for learning about the different series of Pentax lenses and user reviews and ratings. It also provides information on the average price being paid for each lens. I have only purchased a couple of my lenses new. You can get excellent lenses used. I highly recommend this forum's marketplace, Craig's List and ebay. There are threads here on the forum on what to look out for when purchasing used lenses. My experience with Pentax cameras spans 3 decades (way before digital). I have found their cameras to be well built and capable of producing gorgeous pictures. The K-7 is a solid camera yet compact and much lighter than the Canons I have tried out. One advantage of Pentax primes is that many of them have 49mm diameters which means they are smaller and lighter than comparable Canon lenses. Makes a difference when one needs to move quickly and agiley to keep up with 2-legged and 4-legged young ones:-) DSLRs are able to shoot in Jpeg and RAW formats. The Pentax K10D, K20D and the K-7 allow you to shoot both formats at the same time. This is great if you plan on making larger than 8x10 prints. The resolution possible with the K-7 is wonderful and post processing in RAW format just makes it that much more so. Sometimes I think the focus on technical specs and features obscures how muchof a great picture is due to a good sense of composition, proper lighting and the luck of catching just the right moment. I f one goes to the Pentax website, there is a gallery of Pentax user photographs. Interestingly enough, many of the best photos are ones taken with lenses that were rated as only so-so in image quality, etc.

Nubi · 04-22-2010, 11:57 PM

I think that K-7 is one of the most under-rated cameras every produced by Pentax. Maybe because of the pre release hype that the expectations got way too high, and initial noise chatter certainly killed some buzz. I think it is a camera that does not think like a digital camera. So film like. I love what they have done with the sensor. If one is starting out, it will take years to master K-7.

jct us101 · 04-23-2010, 01:10 AM

Originally posted by Nubi

I think that K-7 is one of the most under-rated cameras every produced by Pentax. Maybe because of the pre release hype that the expectations got way too high, and initial noise chatter certainly killed some buzz. I think it is a camera that does not think like a digital camera. So film like. I love what they have done with the sensor. If one is starting out, it will take years to master K-7.

I totally agree, just because it uses the older sensor that everyone loves in the K10D and the K20D doesn't mean that it's not bad now that there's a new Sony one in the K-x that has lower noise. It seems like the sensor is all that people care about too and the noise from it, when the rest of the camera is so capable. Look at what you can do with it too because it's water proof and has a metal frame, I would love to get one of these!

fractal · 04-23-2010, 01:24 AM

Take into account- are you willing to stand in the rain with your camera?

Most people don't like rain. Nor will they stand in it to shoot photos.

bymy141 · 04-23-2010, 06:08 AM

Originally posted by mikemike

I am shying away from the K-x because with only 12 MP because it would bring me up to the next print size (11x14) but it would still face the same problem. with 15 MP k-7 I'm hoping that I might be able to pull of a 12x18 with a great shot and feel comfortable that even with some cropping any shot would come out nicely on either 11x14 or 8x10.

I'm sorry Mike, but I think you are wrong on the Megapixel / print size thing here.
I started out with digital in 1999 with a Olympus 2.1 Mp camera.
I still have several A4 (297 mm x 210mm) prints that look absolutely acceptable.

The resolution difference between 12Mp and 15Mp is neglectible. Specially if you consider that many photos suffer from a little motion blur or out of focus issues.

Nevertheless, let's do the math on image size:

Horizontal # pixels = Sqrt (Mp) * 1.5
Vertical # pixles = Sqrt (Mp) / 1.5

So, the difference on the horizontal resolution between 12Mp and 15Mp is:
Sqrt(15,000,000) * 1.5 = 2582 versus: Sqrt(12,000,000)*1.5 = 2309
That is 11.8% increase only.

- Bert

mikemike · 04-23-2010, 07:31 AM

Originally posted by loveisageless

I've been shooting with the K-7 for the past couple of months and it is a great camera. The most important functions have button access rather than having to search through layers of menues. I don't know about others, but my eyes start to glaze over when I have to flip through multiple screens on a 3" LCD. I found the K-7 to be much more intuitive than my previous Pentax DSLR, the K10D, for just this reason. I have found that the variability in the speed of the autofocus in low light situations is somewhat lens dependent. The Pentax DA and FA primes do not seem to have much of an issue is this regard. You may have read here that there is a Pentax lens review database that is part of this website. I highly recommend it for learning about the different series of Pentax lenses and user reviews and ratings. It also provides information on the average price being paid for each lens. I have only purchased a couple of my lenses new. You can get excellent lenses used. I highly recommend this forum's marketplace, Craig's List and ebay. There are threads here on the forum on what to look out for when purchasing used lenses. My experience with Pentax cameras spans 3 decades (way before digital). I have found their cameras to be well built and capable of producing gorgeous pictures. The K-7 is a solid camera yet compact and much lighter than the Canons I have tried out. One advantage of Pentax primes is that many of them have 49mm diameters which means they are smaller and lighter than comparable Canon lenses. Makes a difference when one needs to move quickly and agiley to keep up with 2-legged and 4-legged young ones:-) DSLRs are able to shoot in Jpeg and RAW formats. The Pentax K10D, K20D and the K-7 allow you to shoot both formats at the same time. This is great if you plan on making larger than 8x10 prints. The resolution possible with the K-7 is wonderful and post processing in RAW format just makes it that much more so. Sometimes I think the focus on technical specs and features obscures how muchof a great picture is due to a good sense of composition, proper lighting and the luck of catching just the right moment. I f one goes to the Pentax website, there is a gallery of Pentax user photographs. Interestingly enough, many of the best photos are ones taken with lenses that were rated as only so-so in image quality, etc.

I still haven't made a commitment, I am waiting until I have an opportunity to go to a photo store which carries the pentax line up. So I can get a feel for the ergonomics and compare them side-by-side. I am thinking about going for the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 if I go with the K7.

yeatzee · 04-23-2010, 07:06 PM

Originally posted by Digitalis

I'll also point out that the resolution of the T2i is high enough that diffraction will become a major headache... only the very best lenses would be about to get the most out of an over stuffed sensor like that.

A great point that may or may not affect you. For me, its a deal changer.

mikemike · 04-23-2010, 08:11 PM

Originally posted by Digitalis

I'll also point out that the resolution of the T2i is high enough that diffraction will become a major headache... only the very best lenses would be about to get the most out of an over stuffed sensor like that.

I don't really buy into the concept of an "overstuffed sensor" the sensor could just be produced further along the Moore's Law curve. The focus of sensor design has shifted away from megapixels towards faster response and low light performance but more megapixels are just inevitable as you shrink the geometry of the semiconductor production process because the transistors that capture the image just get smaller and smaller.

A 15 MP point and shoot or an 8 MP cell phone camera might be "overstuffed" at this point but I don't think an 18 MP APS-C is.

yeatzee · 04-23-2010, 10:01 PM

didnt diffraction start to occur after F/5.6 on the Canon 7d's 18 MP sensor?

**Digitalis** · 04-24-2010, 04:13 AM

yeah about f/5.6 is where the diffraction limit occurs on 7D files, not to mention there is noise at the base ISO - yes you would have to print pretty big to see it, but it is there. So if you crop too much, you are magnifying the noise even at ISO100 - pretty sub par sensor performance as far as i'm concerned, as I said; the sensor is over stuffed..On the 7D (and T2i) Diffraction would become apparent at apertures f/11 and smaller: most f/4.5-5.6 slow as hell consumer zoom lenses from canon not to mention the some of the "higher grade" 24-105mm f/4 L IS - and 17-40mm f/4 L only perform decently at apertures of f/8 (about f/5.6 on APS-C) or smaller in regards to corner sharpness and whoops;you either way past the diffraction limit, or sitting on it*.

And you will be unable to make the most of those 18 megapixels on the 7D. In fact, you would be better off using a bloody 40D because at f/11 you would be getting basically the same resolution as a 40D from a 7D that far past the diffraction limit, and I'm not even accounting for the softening from the anti aliasing filter! Hence, why I use the fastest prime lenses I can get to stay under the diffraction limit- depending on the subject of course.

I'm getting a bit frustrated with camera manufacturers, the only reason why canon made an 18MP APS-C camera was to beat pentax. The sensor in the K-7 is good...it isn't great but I think pentax made a sensible choice in regards to pixel density. Canon are more interested in marketing than image quality these days it seems...Nikon have been doing well with their D300s D3s and D3X - the Sony A900** images have been said to be a bit noisy even at ISO200*** which tells me that sony have some more development to do in regards to their imaging pipeline in their cameras but they have made a start

/Rant

*The canon 24-70mm f/2.8L and 16-35mm f/2.8 L MKII are better performers in this regard, these two lenses typically achieve best performance in image quality at f/4~f/5.6 though the 16-35L is still pretty soft in the corners @16mm - they only clean up at f/7.1 on full frame - I'm not going to sugar coat it but these two lenses are frigging Bricks - not to mention expensive lenses so anyone buying a 7D or T2i in the hopes of getting higher resolution images had better start investing in quality lenses as well.

**which uses the same sensor as the D3X as far as I know

***Michael Reichman described the A900 as showing a bit of "texture" in the images at ISO 200 which I am interpreting as noise - or noise removal artefacts.

kytra · 04-24-2010, 04:47 AM

I own both a k-x (which I will sell in a short time) and a K7.

If you want to shoot fast sport action then definitely go for canon but prepare to dig for another 1000+ USD for a fast f2.8 lens to take advantage of the high resolution of the sensor and the harsh lighning that comes with sporting events.

For ALL the other purposes, even shoot normal action in available light, I would hands down recommend the K7.

It is a superior breed compared with the rebel in any department you want to look except fast focusing.

As others have pointed out, go in a shop and try to handle both, maybe purchase both with an option to return.

About the second hand market, Pentax K7 can use ALL the pentax lenses ever produced and with a 3 stop IS in-body feature (the k-x has 1.5-2 stops at best, but better high iso capabilities)

Best of luck!

Vote4Pedro · 04-27-2010, 05:45 PM

I have been stuck deciding between the K-x and the K-7 for a few months now... maybe I'll wait until Photokinia, lol! Now that the T2i is out, I have been considering it too, but I keep being drawn to Pentax.

Anyway, the biggest reason I haven't bought my Pentax yet is that like some have suggested, I think it would be a good thing to handle one first. I live in South Florida, and Pentax does not have any dealers here or in the entire state of Florida (what's up with that?). I am driving to D.C. in a few weeks and wouldn't mind making a quick detour to a shop that sells Pentax somewhere in route from Fort Lauderdale to D.C. Does anyone know a place on the East Coast below D.C. that sells pentax?

One more thing -- why is the K-7 twice as much as the K-x? Besides the WR and body, why the huge price difference? I would benefit from WR since I do a lot of outdoors stuff, but when it comes down to it, taking photos I believe is about the image quality. Does the K-x really have that much better IQ or is it almost negligible?

kytra · 04-28-2010, 03:54 AM

As one who handled and took photos with both, I can tell you hands down that the K7 for USD 900 is a killer deal (BH photo and others).

Superiority of K7 vs K-x?

1. Superior AF speed and AF points in viewfinder
2. More accurate metering
3. In-body focus adjustment
4. Superior image stabilizer
5. Superior sensor cleaning sistem
6. The quietest DSLR to date (the K-x mirror slap can be quite annoying)
7. Weather resistant
8. Can take grip
9. Superior image customization options
10. AF asist light

This is not a complete list, but just the above worth the $$ difference in my opinion.

Jyrkira · 04-28-2010, 05:03 AM

Originally posted by RolloR

The T2i has got better features.

The K-7 is better physically.

I don't agree that T2i has got better features. It is lacking support for wireless flash use for example.

T2i has better features for video but I think K-7 has better features for still photos.

For example:

K-7 Pentaxprism / T2i pentamirror
K-7 Magnesium allow body / T2i plastic + metal chassic
K-7 5.2 fps / T2i 3.7 fps
K-7 30 -1/8000 shutter speed / T2i 30 - 1/4000

johnmflores · 04-28-2010, 06:31 AM

If you plan to shoot video of your child's first steps, first day at school and other firsts, then the K-7 and T2i may be poor choices. While there is a growing body of work showing how good dSLRs are becoming with shooting video, they are for the most part all staged shots with experienced camera operators at the helm. The K-7 and T2i (and nearly every video-capable dSLR AFAIK) do not autofocus in video mode. Combine that with the thinner depth of field of an APS-C sensor (when compared to consumer video cameras) and the lack of an usable focus assist features, and you're guaranteed to have blurry footage.

The only dSLR that I know of that provided autofocus with video is the Panasonic GH1, and even then it may not be as suitable as a good consumer videocamera for the kind of impromptu video that you will likely shoot. And its low-light performance suffers a bit.

So if video is important, then consider the following

A. A good consumer video camera plus a good still camera like the Pentax K-x
B. The Panasonic GH1.

04-24-2010, 04:13 AM	#25
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	yeah about f/5.6 is where the diffraction limit occurs on 7D files, not to mention there is noise at the base ISO - yes you would have to print pretty big to see it, but it is there. So if you crop too much, you are magnifying the noise even at ISO100 - pretty sub par sensor performance as far as i'm concerned, as I said; the sensor is over stuffed..On the 7D (and T2i) Diffraction would become apparent at apertures f/11 and smaller: most f/4.5-5.6 slow as hell consumer zoom lenses from canon not to mention the some of the "higher grade" 24-105mm f/4 L IS - and 17-40mm f/4 L only perform decently at apertures of f/8 (about f/5.6 on APS-C) or smaller in regards to corner sharpness and whoops;you either way past the diffraction limit, or sitting on it. And you will be unable to make the most of those 18 megapixels on the 7D. In fact, you would be better off using a bloody 40D because at f/11 you would be getting basically the same resolution as a 40D from a 7D that far past the diffraction limit, and I'm not even accounting for the softening from the anti aliasing filter! Hence, why I use the fastest prime lenses I can get to stay under the diffraction limit- depending on the subject of course. I'm getting a bit frustrated with camera manufacturers, the only reason why canon made an 18MP APS-C camera was to beat pentax. The sensor in the K-7 is good...it isn't great but I think pentax made a sensible choice in regards to pixel density. Canon are more interested in marketing than image quality these days it seems...Nikon have been doing well with their D300s D3s and D3X - the Sony A900* images have been said to be a bit noisy even at ISO200*** which tells me that sony have some more development to do in regards to their imaging pipeline in their cameras but they have made a start /Rant The canon 24-70mm f/2.8L and 16-35mm f/2.8 L MKII are better performers in this regard, these two lenses typically achieve best performance in image quality at f/4~f/5.6 though the 16-35L is still pretty soft in the corners @16mm - they only clean up at f/7.1 on full frame - I'm not going to sugar coat it but these two lenses are frigging Bricks - not to mention expensive lenses so anyone buying a 7D or T2i in the hopes of getting higher resolution images had better start investing in quality lenses as well. which uses the same sensor as the D3X as far as I know *Michael Reichman described the A900 as showing a bit of "texture" in the images at ISO 200 which I am interpreting as noise - or noise removal artefacts. Last edited by Digitalis; 04-24-2010 at 04:42 AM.*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Kx high ISO wins against Canon 550D / T2i	cyy47	Pentax DSLR Discussion	15	04-07-2010 10:08 PM
Would Pentax SMC 100-300mm f4.7-5.8 be a good airshow lens for a Canon T2i?	ImperfectSense	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	04-04-2010 12:56 PM
Canon T2i + Kmount lenes?	tryp-the-lyt	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	8	03-16-2010 07:33 PM
New Canon T2i with more HD functions, $800 to start	Samsungian	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	54	02-17-2010 11:47 AM
Preproduction Canon T2i Up at DXO	Samsungian	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	5	02-14-2010 09:26 AM

04-22-2010, 11:01 PM	#16
loveisageless Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Oakland, California Photos: Albums Posts: 1,250	I've been shooting with the K-7 for the past couple of months and it is a great camera. The most important functions have button access rather than having to search through layers of menues. I don't know about others, but my eyes start to glaze over when I have to flip through multiple screens on a 3" LCD. I found the K-7 to be much more intuitive than my previous Pentax DSLR, the K10D, for just this reason. I have found that the variability in the speed of the autofocus in low light situations is somewhat lens dependent. The Pentax DA and FA primes do not seem to have much of an issue is this regard. You may have read here that there is a Pentax lens review database that is part of this website. I highly recommend it for learning about the different series of Pentax lenses and user reviews and ratings. It also provides information on the average price being paid for each lens. I have only purchased a couple of my lenses new. You can get excellent lenses used. I highly recommend this forum's marketplace, Craig's List and ebay. There are threads here on the forum on what to look out for when purchasing used lenses. My experience with Pentax cameras spans 3 decades (way before digital). I have found their cameras to be well built and capable of producing gorgeous pictures. The K-7 is a solid camera yet compact and much lighter than the Canons I have tried out. One advantage of Pentax primes is that many of them have 49mm diameters which means they are smaller and lighter than comparable Canon lenses. Makes a difference when one needs to move quickly and agiley to keep up with 2-legged and 4-legged young ones:-) DSLRs are able to shoot in Jpeg and RAW formats. The Pentax K10D, K20D and the K-7 allow you to shoot both formats at the same time. This is great if you plan on making larger than 8x10 prints. The resolution possible with the K-7 is wonderful and post processing in RAW format just makes it that much more so. Sometimes I think the focus on technical specs and features obscures how muchof a great picture is due to a good sense of composition, proper lighting and the luck of catching just the right moment. I f one goes to the Pentax website, there is a gallery of Pentax user photographs. Interestingly enough, many of the best photos are ones taken with lenses that were rated as only so-so in image quality, etc.

04-22-2010, 11:57 PM	#17
Nubi Guest	I think that K-7 is one of the most under-rated cameras every produced by Pentax. Maybe because of the pre release hype that the expectations got way too high, and initial noise chatter certainly killed some buzz. I think it is a camera that does not think like a digital camera. So film like. I love what they have done with the sensor. If one is starting out, it will take years to master K-7.

04-23-2010, 01:10 AM	#18
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	Originally posted by Nubi I think that K-7 is one of the most under-rated cameras every produced by Pentax. Maybe because of the pre release hype that the expectations got way too high, and initial noise chatter certainly killed some buzz. I think it is a camera that does not think like a digital camera. So film like. I love what they have done with the sensor. If one is starting out, it will take years to master K-7. I totally agree, just because it uses the older sensor that everyone loves in the K10D and the K20D doesn't mean that it's not bad now that there's a new Sony one in the K-x that has lower noise. It seems like the sensor is all that people care about too and the noise from it, when the rest of the camera is so capable. Look at what you can do with it too because it's water proof and has a metal frame, I would love to get one of these!

04-23-2010, 01:24 AM	#19
fractal Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,547	Take into account- are you willing to stand in the rain with your camera? Most people don't like rain. Nor will they stand in it to shoot photos.

04-23-2010, 06:08 AM	#20
bymy141 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,563	Originally posted by mikemike I am shying away from the K-x because with only 12 MP because it would bring me up to the next print size (11x14) but it would still face the same problem. with 15 MP k-7 I'm hoping that I might be able to pull of a 12x18 with a great shot and feel comfortable that even with some cropping any shot would come out nicely on either 11x14 or 8x10. I'm sorry Mike, but I think you are wrong on the Megapixel / print size thing here. I started out with digital in 1999 with a Olympus 2.1 Mp camera. I still have several A4 (297 mm x 210mm) prints that look absolutely acceptable. The resolution difference between 12Mp and 15Mp is neglectible. Specially if you consider that many photos suffer from a little motion blur or out of focus issues. Nevertheless, let's do the math on image size: Horizontal # pixels = Sqrt (Mp) * 1.5 Vertical # pixles = Sqrt (Mp) / 1.5 So, the difference on the horizontal resolution between 12Mp and 15Mp is: Sqrt(15,000,000) * 1.5 = 2582 versus: Sqrt(12,000,000)*1.5 = 2309 That is 11.8% increase only. - Bert

04-23-2010, 07:31 AM	#21
mikemike Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: New Orleans Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,053 Original Poster	Originally posted by loveisageless I've been shooting with the K-7 for the past couple of months and it is a great camera. The most important functions have button access rather than having to search through layers of menues. I don't know about others, but my eyes start to glaze over when I have to flip through multiple screens on a 3" LCD. I found the K-7 to be much more intuitive than my previous Pentax DSLR, the K10D, for just this reason. I have found that the variability in the speed of the autofocus in low light situations is somewhat lens dependent. The Pentax DA and FA primes do not seem to have much of an issue is this regard. You may have read here that there is a Pentax lens review database that is part of this website. I highly recommend it for learning about the different series of Pentax lenses and user reviews and ratings. It also provides information on the average price being paid for each lens. I have only purchased a couple of my lenses new. You can get excellent lenses used. I highly recommend this forum's marketplace, Craig's List and ebay. There are threads here on the forum on what to look out for when purchasing used lenses. My experience with Pentax cameras spans 3 decades (way before digital). I have found their cameras to be well built and capable of producing gorgeous pictures. The K-7 is a solid camera yet compact and much lighter than the Canons I have tried out. One advantage of Pentax primes is that many of them have 49mm diameters which means they are smaller and lighter than comparable Canon lenses. Makes a difference when one needs to move quickly and agiley to keep up with 2-legged and 4-legged young ones:-) DSLRs are able to shoot in Jpeg and RAW formats. The Pentax K10D, K20D and the K-7 allow you to shoot both formats at the same time. This is great if you plan on making larger than 8x10 prints. The resolution possible with the K-7 is wonderful and post processing in RAW format just makes it that much more so. Sometimes I think the focus on technical specs and features obscures how muchof a great picture is due to a good sense of composition, proper lighting and the luck of catching just the right moment. I f one goes to the Pentax website, there is a gallery of Pentax user photographs. Interestingly enough, many of the best photos are ones taken with lenses that were rated as only so-so in image quality, etc. I still haven't made a commitment, I am waiting until I have an opportunity to go to a photo store which carries the pentax line up. So I can get a feel for the ergonomics and compare them side-by-side. I am thinking about going for the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 if I go with the K7.

04-23-2010, 07:06 PM	#22
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Originally posted by Digitalis I'll also point out that the resolution of the T2i is high enough that diffraction will become a major headache... only the very best lenses would be about to get the most out of an over stuffed sensor like that. A great point that may or may not affect you. For me, its a deal changer.

04-23-2010, 08:11 PM	#23
mikemike Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: New Orleans Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,053 Original Poster	Originally posted by Digitalis I'll also point out that the resolution of the T2i is high enough that diffraction will become a major headache... only the very best lenses would be about to get the most out of an over stuffed sensor like that. I don't really buy into the concept of an "overstuffed sensor" the sensor could just be produced further along the Moore's Law curve. The focus of sensor design has shifted away from megapixels towards faster response and low light performance but more megapixels are just inevitable as you shrink the geometry of the semiconductor production process because the transistors that capture the image just get smaller and smaller. A 15 MP point and shoot or an 8 MP cell phone camera might be "overstuffed" at this point but I don't think an 18 MP APS-C is.

04-23-2010, 10:01 PM	#24
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	didnt diffraction start to occur after F/5.6 on the Canon 7d's 18 MP sensor?

04-24-2010, 04:47 AM	#26
kytra Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Bucharest Posts: 482	I own both a k-x (which I will sell in a short time) and a K7. If you want to shoot fast sport action then definitely go for canon but prepare to dig for another 1000+ USD for a fast f2.8 lens to take advantage of the high resolution of the sensor and the harsh lighning that comes with sporting events. For ALL the other purposes, even shoot normal action in available light, I would hands down recommend the K7. It is a superior breed compared with the rebel in any department you want to look except fast focusing. As others have pointed out, go in a shop and try to handle both, maybe purchase both with an option to return. About the second hand market, Pentax K7 can use ALL the pentax lenses ever produced and with a 3 stop IS in-body feature (the k-x has 1.5-2 stops at best, but better high iso capabilities) Best of luck!

04-27-2010, 05:45 PM	#27
Vote4Pedro Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL Posts: 62	I have been stuck deciding between the K-x and the K-7 for a few months now... maybe I'll wait until Photokinia, lol! Now that the T2i is out, I have been considering it too, but I keep being drawn to Pentax. Anyway, the biggest reason I haven't bought my Pentax yet is that like some have suggested, I think it would be a good thing to handle one first. I live in South Florida, and Pentax does not have any dealers here or in the entire state of Florida (what's up with that?). I am driving to D.C. in a few weeks and wouldn't mind making a quick detour to a shop that sells Pentax somewhere in route from Fort Lauderdale to D.C. Does anyone know a place on the East Coast below D.C. that sells pentax? One more thing -- why is the K-7 twice as much as the K-x? Besides the WR and body, why the huge price difference? I would benefit from WR since I do a lot of outdoors stuff, but when it comes down to it, taking photos I believe is about the image quality. Does the K-x really have that much better IQ or is it almost negligible?

04-28-2010, 03:54 AM	#28
kytra Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Bucharest Posts: 482	As one who handled and took photos with both, I can tell you hands down that the K7 for USD 900 is a killer deal (BH photo and others). Superiority of K7 vs K-x? 1. Superior AF speed and AF points in viewfinder 2. More accurate metering 3. In-body focus adjustment 4. Superior image stabilizer 5. Superior sensor cleaning sistem 6. The quietest DSLR to date (the K-x mirror slap can be quite annoying) 7. Weather resistant 8. Can take grip 9. Superior image customization options 10. AF asist light This is not a complete list, but just the above worth the $$ difference in my opinion.

04-28-2010, 05:03 AM	#29
Jyrkira Senior Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Finland Posts: 215	Originally posted by RolloR The T2i has got better features. The K-7 is better physically. I don't agree that T2i has got better features. It is lacking support for wireless flash use for example. T2i has better features for video but I think K-7 has better features for still photos. For example: K-7 Pentaxprism / T2i pentamirror K-7 Magnesium allow body / T2i plastic + metal chassic K-7 5.2 fps / T2i 3.7 fps K-7 30 -1/8000 shutter speed / T2i 30 - 1/4000

04-28-2010, 06:31 AM	#30
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	If you plan to shoot video of your child's first steps, first day at school and other firsts, then the K-7 and T2i may be poor choices. While there is a growing body of work showing how good dSLRs are becoming with shooting video, they are for the most part all staged shots with experienced camera operators at the helm. The K-7 and T2i (and nearly every video-capable dSLR AFAIK) do not autofocus in video mode. Combine that with the thinner depth of field of an APS-C sensor (when compared to consumer video cameras) and the lack of an usable focus assist features, and you're guaranteed to have blurry footage. The only dSLR that I know of that provided autofocus with video is the Panasonic GH1, and even then it may not be as suitable as a good consumer videocamera for the kind of impromptu video that you will likely shoot. And its low-light performance suffers a bit. So if video is important, then consider the following A. A good consumer video camera plus a good still camera like the Pentax K-x B. The Panasonic GH1.