Pentax K-7 "Image quality falls short" ??

Dianaljia · 07-15-2010, 09:53 PM

yeah i agree with what everyone's said above.

**Rondec** · 07-16-2010, 04:32 AM

The K7 has actually gotten several awards from different web sites, but a lot depends on what the particular reviewer is looking for. If you are used to shooting the K10, you will find the K7 more responsive in just about every way. There is definitely a one and a half to two stop advantage in high iso shooting from the K10 to K7 -- I would compare iso 800 on the K10 to iso 3200 on the K7 (RAW). The two areas where the K7 lags in the comparison are at low iso and the ability to turn of dark frame subtraction. One thing that isn't talked about a lot is the amazing auto white balance of the K7. This seriously reduces post processing time. The camera is just amazing, even in mixed lighting situations, at getting a great neutral white balance.

I am not certain why there is such an emphasis in reviews on jpeg engines. I post process all of my photos, whether I am shooting jpeg or RAW and I actually find it easier to shoot in RAW and do all my post processing in the same place. Global tweaks are easy and quick in most software packages out there today.

RubyT · 07-16-2010, 05:13 AM

My niece's wedding pictures were shot with a D80. I didn't see anything there I couldn't have done with my K20D.

**Aristophanes** · 07-16-2010, 05:59 AM

Compare it to other cameras:

DxOMark - Pentax K7

Try against the Nikon D90 and Canon 550D, really the closest competitors at the price point right now. Keep in mind the K-7 framerate is considerably higher than the other 2.

Then compare to the K-x.

Then throw in the Nikon D700 and see just how good the K-x is.

But when you look at the charts and graphs, the #'s are within a whisker of each other for the K-7 and its competition. The K-7 with the K-x sensor would be a killer.

Last edited by Aristophanes; 07-16-2010 at 06:54 AM.

GeneV · 07-16-2010, 06:12 AM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

Compare it to other cameras:

DxOMark - Pentax K7

Try against the Nikon D90 and Canon 550D, really the closest competitors at the price point right now. Keep in mind the K-7 framerate is considerably higher than the other 2.

Then compare to the K-x.

Then throw in the Nikon D700 and see just how good the K-x is.

But when you look at the charts and graphs, the #'s are within a whisker of each other for the K-7 and its competition. The K-7 witht eh K-x sensor would be a killer.

True. I don't own a K-7, but I wonder if the K-7 wouldn't lose a little something as a "studio" camera with the K-x sensor. If I'm setting up the light so that I don't go beyond ISO 400, I prefer the K20d. For travel or other situations of unpredictable light and limited ability to change it, the K-x rules.

DogLover · 07-16-2010, 08:34 AM

I have the utmost of respect for the Kx and its abilities, but honestly, I don't want the sensor from it in the K7. I love the "look" of the K7's sensor. High-ISO abilities would just be a small bonus for me as I would rarely use them. I would be really disappointed if Pentax went this way with the K7's successor. But hey, somebody's going to be disappointed no matter what they do.

siva.ss.kumar · 07-16-2010, 08:57 AM

I would love a K-7 with a K-x sensor like 15MP. My guess is the new rumored replacements for Nikon D90, Canon 50D would have 15+ MP. So Pentax should match that.
A K-x like (High ISO, DR) sensor with 15MP in a K-7 body with more video features would be awesome. No, I am not trying to start a rumour

SergioFromSF · 07-16-2010, 11:01 AM

If reviewers are comparing jpeg outputs between canon and pentax and canon always wins, it would be good for someone at Pentax or this forum (who has knowhow) to post or point to a link where custom jpeg settings can be set for K7 or Kx so that reviewers or current users of K7/Kx can quickly match Canon output and perhaps change their opinion on IQ.

LeeRunge · 07-16-2010, 11:14 AM

My K-7 image quality looks equal to a Canon T2i, xsi, and Nikon D40/90 that I have compared pictures with.

Coming from 3 other Canon's I think the K-7 at default settings is a little soft and not as saturated in color as Canon. This is "fixed" (If you want to look like Canon) either by setting up sharpness and saturation in the camera or in post production. I prefer the "neutral" look now although I didn't at first, it grew on me as you can saturate and sharpen easily in pp. Quality is not an issue compared to the Nikon/Canon D90/T2i that fits in the same price range as a K-7. If your comparing it to a FF it's no contest but those camera's with quality glass that is sealed cost around 3-5000 to start with the body and one good lens. I could not even find "sealed" in any of the Nikon lenses just the Canon L glass.

I was VERY close to getting a Canon 7d over the K-7. But in the end settled with Pentax because I think quality glass matters more and could by a K-7 and two DA* lenses for what a 7d and low quality glass would have cost, never mind the weather sealing would have been non-existent on the Canon glass. I really think Pentax should advertise more to the outdoors shooters as some people like taking pictures in the rain (I do).

I'm very happy with my Pentax choice so far and see no loss in quality vs the other crop sensor cameras. Even the high ISO performance on the K-7 seems to be fine with a little knowledge and post processing, it retains detail very well giving you the choice as to the noise reduction loss in quality.

The K-7 seems to be compared with 7d and D300s which cost almost twice as much for the body that alone is a compliment. I would love to see a FF from Pentax in the future with the build quality of the K-7.

Lee

CWyatt · 07-16-2010, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by siva.ss.kumar

I would love a K-7 with a K-x sensor like 15MP. My guess is the new rumored replacements for Nikon D90, Canon 50D would have 15+ MP. So Pentax should match that.

Where have you seen that Nikon is bumping megapixel count? Nikon is currently king of high-ISO with the 'Prince of Darkness' D3S, and with all but the other full frames, seems to be quite dedicated to 12MP-ish, unless they pull out some startling new sensor tech.
What would be the point in Pentax going from 14 to 18MP or so if it just means lower IQ?

ivoire · 07-16-2010, 02:06 PM

My K7 with the DA 12-24mm produces regular income and the clients rave about the photos (my contract 'boss' shoots with a Nikon D200 and Tokina 12-24mm and you would be hard pressed to tell the difference). Had I listened to reviews, I would have paid more for similar quality. His setup ran about $2200 new while mine was roughly $1600.

TiminyCricket · 07-16-2010, 11:34 PM

I noticed this just the other day. Like some others here it kinda' disappointed me seeing the comment from them about the image quality, considering they gave no real explanation for it. Still, when it comes time for me to finally replace my K10D I think I will likely skip over the K-7 and wait for whatever its successor ends up being. I haven't personally been able to try a K-7, but from what I've read I have my reservations over its high-ISO performance, as well as the AF performance. But I still think the K-7 is one hell of a camera, overall.

Originally posted by BethC

I'm just curious because I have never shot with anything other than my Pentax K10 and once with my brothers Canon something or other (probably about 5 years old) and I really love my K10. But I rarely ever read any great reviews on pentax. Maybe I"m reading the wrong stuff. In Popular Photography this month, in their "every DSLR tested and rated" once again pentax gets only 3 out of 5 stars and it says "Image quality fall short of similarly priced competitors" So I'm curious if Nikon and Canon really takes that much of a better picture? or is PP Magazine biased towards the two most common brands? I see it every time I pick up their magazine. Since I've never really used anything but my Pentax, I'm wondering how much better image quality must the other brands produce? Or is this just a biased publication and should I look elsewhere for my photography reading material?

Wheatfield · 07-17-2010, 08:45 AM

Pop Photography lost the last of the people who knew a whit when Keppler died.
Now they have about the same intelligence as a domestic turkey.
I'm quite sure they just open the box, and take pictures.
Pentax native settings are a little softer than Nikon, Canon and Sony, so the Pentax out of camera files are going to look a bit undersaturated, a little low contrast and a little softer than from the other guys cameras.
You want to match the look of a Canon, turn up the image controls a notch or two.

24X36NOW · 07-17-2010, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by LeeRunge

I would love to see a FF from Pentax in the future with the build quality of the K-7. Lee

So would I - been waiting a loooooong time...

07-16-2010, 11:01 AM	#23
SergioFromSF Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: San Francisco Photos: Albums Posts: 45	jpeg vs. raw If reviewers are comparing jpeg outputs between canon and pentax and canon always wins, it would be good for someone at Pentax or this forum (who has knowhow) to post or point to a link where custom jpeg settings can be set for K7 or Kx so that reviewers or current users of K7/Kx can quickly match Canon output and perhaps change their opinion on IQ.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Binoculars - Compact "Quality" Budget	UnknownVT	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	04-12-2010 12:17 PM
Short film "Paddleboat Pirates" shot on Pentax K7s	MangoFan	Video Recording and Processing	1	03-10-2010 05:10 AM
Pentax Photo Browser "View Image" resolution?	BobG	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	3	04-13-2009 03:56 PM
"scratched unaffect image quality"	Gooshin	Photographic Technique	29	11-02-2008 07:43 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

07-15-2010, 09:53 PM	#16
Dianaljia New Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: United States Posts: 1	yeah i agree with what everyone's said above.

07-16-2010, 04:32 AM	#17
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	The K7 has actually gotten several awards from different web sites, but a lot depends on what the particular reviewer is looking for. If you are used to shooting the K10, you will find the K7 more responsive in just about every way. There is definitely a one and a half to two stop advantage in high iso shooting from the K10 to K7 -- I would compare iso 800 on the K10 to iso 3200 on the K7 (RAW). The two areas where the K7 lags in the comparison are at low iso and the ability to turn of dark frame subtraction. One thing that isn't talked about a lot is the amazing auto white balance of the K7. This seriously reduces post processing time. The camera is just amazing, even in mixed lighting situations, at getting a great neutral white balance. I am not certain why there is such an emphasis in reviews on jpeg engines. I post process all of my photos, whether I am shooting jpeg or RAW and I actually find it easier to shoot in RAW and do all my post processing in the same place. Global tweaks are easy and quick in most software packages out there today.

07-16-2010, 05:13 AM	#18
RubyT Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: TN Photos: Gallery Posts: 621	My niece's wedding pictures were shot with a D80. I didn't see anything there I couldn't have done with my K20D.

07-16-2010, 05:59 AM	#19
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Compare it to other cameras: DxOMark - Pentax K7 Try against the Nikon D90 and Canon 550D, really the closest competitors at the price point right now. Keep in mind the K-7 framerate is considerably higher than the other 2. Then compare to the K-x. Then throw in the Nikon D700 and see just how good the K-x is. But when you look at the charts and graphs, the #'s are within a whisker of each other for the K-7 and its competition. The K-7 with the K-x sensor would be a killer. Last edited by Aristophanes; 07-16-2010 at 06:54 AM.

07-16-2010, 06:12 AM	#20
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Aristophanes Compare it to other cameras: DxOMark - Pentax K7 Try against the Nikon D90 and Canon 550D, really the closest competitors at the price point right now. Keep in mind the K-7 framerate is considerably higher than the other 2. Then compare to the K-x. Then throw in the Nikon D700 and see just how good the K-x is. But when you look at the charts and graphs, the #'s are within a whisker of each other for the K-7 and its competition. The K-7 witht eh K-x sensor would be a killer. True. I don't own a K-7, but I wonder if the K-7 wouldn't lose a little something as a "studio" camera with the K-x sensor. If I'm setting up the light so that I don't go beyond ISO 400, I prefer the K20d. For travel or other situations of unpredictable light and limited ability to change it, the K-x rules.

07-16-2010, 08:34 AM	#21
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	I have the utmost of respect for the Kx and its abilities, but honestly, I don't want the sensor from it in the K7. I love the "look" of the K7's sensor. High-ISO abilities would just be a small bonus for me as I would rarely use them. I would be really disappointed if Pentax went this way with the K7's successor. But hey, somebody's going to be disappointed no matter what they do.

07-16-2010, 08:57 AM	#22
siva.ss.kumar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Chennai, India Photos: Albums Posts: 534	I would love a K-7 with a K-x sensor like 15MP. My guess is the new rumored replacements for Nikon D90, Canon 50D would have 15+ MP. So Pentax should match that. A K-x like (High ISO, DR) sensor with 15MP in a K-7 body with more video features would be awesome. No, I am not trying to start a rumour

07-16-2010, 11:14 AM	#24
LeeRunge Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 993	My K-7 image quality looks equal to a Canon T2i, xsi, and Nikon D40/90 that I have compared pictures with. Coming from 3 other Canon's I think the K-7 at default settings is a little soft and not as saturated in color as Canon. This is "fixed" (If you want to look like Canon) either by setting up sharpness and saturation in the camera or in post production. I prefer the "neutral" look now although I didn't at first, it grew on me as you can saturate and sharpen easily in pp. Quality is not an issue compared to the Nikon/Canon D90/T2i that fits in the same price range as a K-7. If your comparing it to a FF it's no contest but those camera's with quality glass that is sealed cost around 3-5000 to start with the body and one good lens. I could not even find "sealed" in any of the Nikon lenses just the Canon L glass. I was VERY close to getting a Canon 7d over the K-7. But in the end settled with Pentax because I think quality glass matters more and could by a K-7 and two DA* lenses for what a 7d and low quality glass would have cost, never mind the weather sealing would have been non-existent on the Canon glass. I really think Pentax should advertise more to the outdoors shooters as some people like taking pictures in the rain (I do). I'm very happy with my Pentax choice so far and see no loss in quality vs the other crop sensor cameras. Even the high ISO performance on the K-7 seems to be fine with a little knowledge and post processing, it retains detail very well giving you the choice as to the noise reduction loss in quality. The K-7 seems to be compared with 7d and D300s which cost almost twice as much for the body that alone is a compliment. I would love to see a FF from Pentax in the future with the build quality of the K-7. Lee

07-16-2010, 01:39 PM	#25
CWyatt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,291	Originally posted by siva.ss.kumar I would love a K-7 with a K-x sensor like 15MP. My guess is the new rumored replacements for Nikon D90, Canon 50D would have 15+ MP. So Pentax should match that. Where have you seen that Nikon is bumping megapixel count? Nikon is currently king of high-ISO with the 'Prince of Darkness' D3S, and with all but the other full frames, seems to be quite dedicated to 12MP-ish, unless they pull out some startling new sensor tech. What would be the point in Pentax going from 14 to 18MP or so if it just means lower IQ?

07-16-2010, 02:06 PM	#26
ivoire Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,381	My K7 with the DA 12-24mm produces regular income and the clients rave about the photos (my contract 'boss' shoots with a Nikon D200 and Tokina 12-24mm and you would be hard pressed to tell the difference). Had I listened to reviews, I would have paid more for similar quality. His setup ran about $2200 new while mine was roughly $1600.

07-16-2010, 11:34 PM	#27
TiminyCricket Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: New Jersey Posts: 76	I noticed this just the other day. Like some others here it kinda' disappointed me seeing the comment from them about the image quality, considering they gave no real explanation for it. Still, when it comes time for me to finally replace my K10D I think I will likely skip over the K-7 and wait for whatever its successor ends up being. I haven't personally been able to try a K-7, but from what I've read I have my reservations over its high-ISO performance, as well as the AF performance. But I still think the K-7 is one hell of a camera, overall. Originally posted by BethC I'm just curious because I have never shot with anything other than my Pentax K10 and once with my brothers Canon something or other (probably about 5 years old) and I really love my K10. But I rarely ever read any great reviews on pentax. Maybe I"m reading the wrong stuff. In Popular Photography this month, in their "every DSLR tested and rated" once again pentax gets only 3 out of 5 stars and it says "Image quality fall short of similarly priced competitors" So I'm curious if Nikon and Canon really takes that much of a better picture? or is PP Magazine biased towards the two most common brands? I see it every time I pick up their magazine. Since I've never really used anything but my Pentax, I'm wondering how much better image quality must the other brands produce? Or is this just a biased publication and should I look elsewhere for my photography reading material?

07-17-2010, 08:45 AM	#28
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Pop Photography lost the last of the people who knew a whit when Keppler died. Now they have about the same intelligence as a domestic turkey. I'm quite sure they just open the box, and take pictures. Pentax native settings are a little softer than Nikon, Canon and Sony, so the Pentax out of camera files are going to look a bit undersaturated, a little low contrast and a little softer than from the other guys cameras. You want to match the look of a Canon, turn up the image controls a notch or two.

07-17-2010, 01:17 PM	#29
24X36NOW Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: CT, USA Posts: 498	Originally posted by LeeRunge I would love to see a FF from Pentax in the future with the build quality of the K-7. Lee So would I - been waiting a loooooong time...