Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-18-2010, 06:01 PM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 288
How close is the K20D and K-7 on image quality?

Can you tell the difference with the eye? I don't really need video so if they are pretty close I could get the K20D. Thanks.

05-18-2010, 07:15 PM   #2
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Puerto Rico
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 115
I have both the k7 and the k20d. The k7 is more responsive than the k20 and also has extras like a bigger LCD, but IQ is about the same for both cameras.

Last edited by matoqui; 05-18-2010 at 07:19 PM. Reason: correction
05-18-2010, 07:20 PM   #3
Ole
Administrator
Ole's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,783
I upgraded form the K20D to the K-7 so I have experienced both.

Image quality is pretty close, it would be hard to tell which is which.

You need to upgrade the K20D to the latest firmware to get good shake reduction, whereas the K-7 is great out of the box.

The K-7 feels like a much nicer camera, compact, silent, and very responsive, but if you are going to make your decision on image quality alone it is hard to justify the extra cost of the K-7.
05-18-2010, 09:41 PM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,511
the k20d has better IQ especially in the high iso... but its not majorly different. k7 is probably a better choice for its AF improvements.

05-18-2010, 10:19 PM   #5
Loyal Site Supporter
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,295
I have both and am happier with the K-7. I find the K-7 meters much better when using manual glass and it controls shadows better as well. As the others have indicated, there are quite a few similar qualities as the sensor is very close between the two, but I would skip the k20d.
05-18-2010, 10:23 PM   #6
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
QuoteOriginally posted by justtakingpics Quote
Can you tell the difference with the eye? I don't really need video so if they are pretty close I could get the K20D. Thanks.
There's no discernible difference from what I can see.
The K20D retains more detail along the sensitivity curve by holding off noise a little longer.
Though within ISO200 - 1600, I doubt anyone could tell the difference with RAW data.

If you're a JPG shooter(on the other hand) then you have an entire different scenario since the K7 seems to have far better image processing than the K20D.
05-19-2010, 03:45 AM   #7
Veteran Member
frank's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,202
IQ wise both cameras are about the same.

But if you shoot w/ a flash, or if you shoot in JPG, the difference is pretty obvious. As some said above, the auto white balance w/ K7 is more accurate, and exposure is more consistant and better w/ K7 for flash photography.
05-19-2010, 10:29 AM   #8
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
IQ-wise, virtually *all* DSLR's are the same unless you're pixel peeping at 100%.

05-20-2010, 02:33 AM   #9
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 288
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
IQ-wise, virtually *all* DSLR's are the same unless you're pixel peeping at 100%.
I know what the statement means but this seems so different than everything I read in reviews. Can you explain a little bit by what you mean here? Do you mean raw? Also, what's pixel peeping?
05-20-2010, 02:47 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,296
Pixel peeping is looking closely at the image file, most likely 100%, at an image size most people won't print at, or have other people view at, but will worry over on their computer screen.

'IQ' is an interesting term. Technically, I can't see a huge difference in K20D and K-7 images. Of course, if you get an image with one camera and not with another, that's a big difference...
05-20-2010, 03:47 AM   #11
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,972
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
IQ-wise, virtually *all* DSLR's are the same unless you're pixel peeping at 100%.
In my experience this is untrue. The CCD sensor of my K10D and the CMOS sensor of my K-7 have different IQ's. In most cases I can tell what camera I used to take the photo just by looking at the image (and not at 100%). One isn't worse than the other by any stretch, but they are different.

That being said, the OP's question is a valid one.

I have never used the K20, but have logged about 40K exposures on my K-7 since purchase - ergonomically it is a better camera (K10 and K20 are the same - so I draw from my K10 experience), as well as viewfinder coverage, white balance, metering, almost silent shutter, much improved lcd, much faster AF, video, etc., etc.

The price disparity is no longer there between the K20 and K-7 now, so I don't really see much point in getting a K20 anymore.

c[_]
05-20-2010, 03:47 AM   #12
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: none of your business
Posts: 96
The statement is true with the disclaimes

At Base ISO

and

not including full frame cameras

because there IS a difference, and you can see in in web postings.

Pixel peeping is what people do to justify spending thousands of dollars on camera gear.

If you want great IQ, buy great lens. There is just no other way around it. If you have to pixel peep to tell if your photos are sharp, they aren't.
05-20-2010, 03:54 AM   #13
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,947
QuoteOriginally posted by ll_coffee_lP Quote
In my experience this is untrue. The CCD sensor of my K10D and the CMOS sensor of my K-7 have different IQ's. In most cases I can tell what camera I used to take the photo just by looking at the image (and not at 100%). One isn't worse than the other by any stretch, but they are different.

That being said, the OP's question is a valid one.

I have never used the K20, but have logged about 40K exposures on my K-7 since purchase - ergonomically it is a better camera (K10 and K20 are the same - so I draw from my K10 experience), as well as viewfinder coverage, white balance, metering, almost silent shutter, much improved lcd, much faster AF, video, etc., etc.

The price disparity is no longer there between the K20 and K-7 now, so I don't really see much point in getting a K20 anymore.

c[_]
I agree. Unless you have mammoth hands, the only benefit to getting the K20 was the fact that it was cheaper. The prices are not that much different now, so that goes away.

The biggest things that I notice are that I have less difficulty getting in focus photos with AF-C, the white balance is actually correct (the K20 and K10 were off on Auto White Balance) and it feels better to use.

As far as if you take a photo of a static scene on a tripod, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference in the images. The K7 just is more likely to let you get the photo that you want in certain situations.
05-20-2010, 07:27 AM   #14
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,975
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
There's no discernible difference from what I can see.
The K20D retains more detail along the sensitivity curve by holding off noise a little longer.
Though within ISO200 - 1600, I doubt anyone could tell the difference with RAW data.

If you're a JPG shooter(on the other hand) then you have an entire different scenario since the K7 seems to have far better image processing than the K20D.
John,
I have both the K20D and the K7.
I tend to disagree about ISO 200-1600 in RAW when comparing the K20D and K7. I find that the K20D handles noise better in RAW .... I always shoot RAW.
Would you even go as far as suggesting that the K7 high ISO "situation" can be somewhat remedied by going JPEG instead of RAW?
Cheers.
JP
P.S.: any more news about your work flow on high ISO/K7?
05-20-2010, 08:32 AM   #15
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
QuoteOriginally posted by jpzk Quote
John,
I have both the K20D and the K7.
I tend to disagree about ISO 200-1600 in RAW when comparing the K20D and K7. I find that the K20D handles noise better in RAW .... I always shoot RAW.
Would you even go as far as suggesting that the K7 high ISO "situation" can be somewhat remedied by going JPEG instead of RAW?
Cheers.
JP
P.S.: any more news about your work flow on high ISO/K7?
From what I've seen, I've found to K7 to have what we could call a pleasant grain at ISO1600. Though what really stands here is where this grain does not come at the expense of detail at this particular level. Therefore... my conclusion is that the K7 and K20D are both capable of similar definition within that given range(200-1600).

The JPG however was aimed squarely at the K7's JPG processing capabilities in contrast to the K20D's JPG output. Which I find the K7 to be top notch in that respect. Though I really can't comment on the camera's onboard NR capabilities.

On the issue of my K7 NR workflow, I've received several offers for some K7 high ISO candidates and so I'm anxiously waiting those to get back onboard the NR train(so to speak )
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, dslr, k20d, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are you satisfied with the K-x image quality? rjm Pentax DSLR Discussion 37 01-21-2010 06:27 AM
How can I get good image quality from a K-x?? Manfred Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 38 12-20-2009 08:18 PM
K-7 image quality concern claude21 Pentax DSLR Discussion 31 06-26-2009 11:34 AM
Hot: The Online Photographer puts K20D in top 10, better image quality than D300" cateto Pentax News and Rumors 28 06-18-2008 07:16 AM
Some concern about image quality. Bart Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 07-23-2007 05:54 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:46 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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