Originally posted by gary1952 I am really trying to curb my remarks about the k-7. I have one, and the k-20 and the k-x.
My personal views on the k-7.
This is the way I explain it to people who ask me. Only my opionion guys.
You see a Corvet in the show room, So you buy it. What a thrill. You drive it for a while and think this thing is reall running bad. You pop the hood and find a VW engine in it. The k-7
You go out and buy a Volkswagon, and damn the thing is running like a spotted ape. You pop the hood and find the dealer put in the Corvet engine in it. The K-x
I really think the Pentax is going to change with the next round of DSLR's. I personally really like the design and the in body IS. I think it is an award winning combo. Now they just need to fix the sensor. After that Pentax will have the respect it deserves. In the prosummer market. The K-x is already the best starter DSLR on the market.
I hope they also expand to the pro level. Then it is a shoe in for pentax. In my opionion only. It is the small persentage of pro's and semi pros who give the products like Canon and Nikon such a good name, and very good advertising for them.
My fingers are crossed.....
Ha, very interesting analogy! What people need to realize is the K-7's IQ is beast, but at low low low ISO (in this case ISO 100) the K10d/K200d sensor is better (IMO). I mean check out my images with the K-7 on my flickr.... all sharp (unless they weren't meant to be).
Originally posted by Timd When I saw this, I though, oh no, another reason for feeling disappointed (I own a K200). In fact, I am feeling better. While the K-7 undoubtably has more features, the IQ of the K200 is still good.
Personally I think the K200 is under-rated (a true sleeper)
The K200d will ALWAYS hold a place in my heart. Its the very first camera I have ever owned. Its also given me my favorite images thus far.
I do think the K-7 is a fantastic upgrade from the K200d though, and definitely worth a look.
Originally posted by Rondec I never owned a K200, but I did own a K10 (same sensor). At iso 100, that sensor is amazing. Really does give great results. The problem for me was that it really dropped off fast as you got over iso 400 and I could hardly use it over iso 800. I am sure the K7 sequel will be better in some ways than the K7, but I very much doubt that it will beat the low iso shooting of the K10/200/2000 sensor.
Yes, these were taken at ISO 100... and I tend to agree with you. Im really craving the IQ of the C
n 5d mark II for macro work right now. Lord V can crop the hell out of those images and yet still get sharper images that I do with the K-7 :ugh:
Originally posted by bdery I think, honestly, that the difference in sharpness is marginal. The difference in contrast is much more important, and leads you to believe sharpness is strongly different.
It mainly shows that the sensors deliver different results, and that the engineers at Pentax tweaked them differently. By appying less contrast on the K7's sensor, they probably improve the noise figures. Or it's just a choice they made, "because"... or whatever.
I wouldn't obsess about it. To get a more realistic "real life" comparison, the best way to proceed would be to set the camera exactly the way you plan on using it (tweaking everything to your taste) THEN compare results. You'll see which performs more to your liking.
I'd say its a mixture of both contrast and fine sharpness.... both non-marginal IMO. The K200d does have more fine sharpness from what I can see for sure.
Im by no means obsessing about it, its just a little nagging thing I wanted to finally try and post here. The camera's are basically how I like them already, so from SOC Jpeg's/RAW's I prefer the k200d based off of these images. PP makes this not a big deal, even with my rudimentary skills in gimp (curves, USM, saturation, done). The K-7 is a vastly superior camera and enables me to get the shots the K200d would never, but pure IQ at low ISO (where I shoot macro's) the K200d beats the k-7.
Originally posted by creampuff Basically it is a CMOS vs CCD comparison. Give me CMOS anyday, the K-7 delivers more accurate colors, better WB and better exposure.
All (well almost all) can be EASILY fixed in PP.
-------------------------------------------------------
For the record:
#1 - I hate the AWB of the K-7. In daylight it is terrible. When I am shooting in crazy hard conditions (bar with multicolored different type of lights) the K-7 is incredibly good..... but I almost never shoot in those conditions so the fact that the K-7 struggles with normal situations sucks.
#2 - Both the K-7 and K200d are not good in my eyes at ISO 400. In my mind they should both be better. Yes I have never shot film, so no I do not know how much grain there was :ugh: