How Will A K-7 or K-X Make These Pictures Look Better?

Mike Bokeh · 08-28-2010, 02:04 PM

Hello, everybody.

I've been thinking about upgrading to a K-X or K-7 mainly due to their greater megapixel ratings of 12.4 and 14.6 respectively.

Right now, I'm using (and still loving) my three year old Pentax K100D, which is rated at 6.1 MP.

I never print anything larger than A4 (8"x10") and quite frankly, I'm satisfied with the two shots below.

So, can anyone tell me how the following two shots would look better had they been taken with the same lens on either a K-x or a K-7?

I know there a lot of "Which camera should I buy?" threads, but I thought if I showed examples it would help get a more accurate answer.

DA70mm @ f4.0 @ 1/180 second.

DA70mm @ f4.0 @ 1/30 second.

I didn't put a lot of effort into either of these shots other than using a tripod, and metering carefully.

Any advice appreciated.

Mike

krypticide · 08-28-2010, 02:50 PM

They wouldn't be any better. Just bigger resolution maybe.

sveinmb · 08-28-2010, 02:53 PM

No.

On the web or prints no larger than A4 you'll have no benefits with higher resolution sensor. However if you crop your images, there is a big difference in having a 2 megapixel or a 6 megapixel cropped result regarding how much detail is left in the image.

I don't think you should consider an upgrade for the megapixels alone. The K-7 is for instance a much more solid body, a lot faster autofocusing, better auto white balance, a lot better lcd screen, two control wheels (more direct control without looking for buttons), faster and more responsive menus, live view, much larger buffer (don't have to wait that much), weather sealing etc.

I've barey used the K-x and to me it didn't feel all that different from my K100, but it surely captures more details if you zoom in to 1:1.

The K100D is a very nice little camera capable of excellent image quality. Some still praise it for its vivid colors and noise free images even at largish iso values. I warn you however - if you buy a K-7 you'll never look back regarding how it handles and feels in your hand each time you're out shooting.. (but you might remember how much fun it was back when 6 megapixel images were completely noise free at 1:1 zoom level)

Mike.P® · 08-28-2010, 02:55 PM

You don't need higher resolution for those shots
You don't need better AF for those shots
You don't need better WB for those shots
You don't need higher FPS for those shots
You don't need better noise control for those shots

You don't need a different camera for those shots ......

hcc · 08-28-2010, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by sveinmb

...if you crop your images, there is a big difference in having a 2 megapixel or a 6 megapixel cropped result regarding how much detail is left in the image.

The K-7 is for instance a much more solid body, a lot faster autofocusing, better auto white balance, a lot better lcd screen, two control wheels (more direct control without looking for buttons), faster and more responsive menus, live view, much larger buffer (don't have to wait that much), weather sealing etc.

+1
Sveinmb has some excellent points. The K-7 is especially good value now that is worth to consider. It is a semipro camera with a lot of features.

MadAmos · 08-28-2010, 04:42 PM

Originally posted by sveinmb

No.

On the web or prints no larger than A4 you'll have no benefits with higher resolution sensor. However if you crop your images, there is a big difference in having a 2 megapixel or a 6 megapixel cropped result regarding how much detail is left in the image.

This is what I'd have said. I like the ability to grab a shot that might have been a bit wide and crop down and still have something printable.

**Ex Finn.** · 08-28-2010, 05:30 PM

No, K-7 will not produce output like that. Your pictures are as good as it gets. IMO.
Those images look like k100D magic.

Cheers, Mike.

Last edited by Ex Finn.; 08-28-2010 at 05:46 PM.

**bkpix** · 08-28-2010, 05:37 PM

No camera upgrade will improve those photos.

At 6 mp, you have plenty of resolution for 8x12.

You'll have to come up with another rationale for spending the money.

**Michaelina2** · 08-28-2010, 08:52 PM

Originally posted by bkpix

No camera upgrade will improve those photos.

At 6 mp, you have plenty of resolution for 8x12.

You'll have to come up with another rationale for spending the money.

Agree... your focus is wrong.

For better photographs... think PP software!

Cease obsessing over which new camera body and dedicate the next year to developing expertise with post processing software, like LR3. Once you master LR3... permit yourself to resume thinking about acquiring the least expensive hardware (computing power, camera body, monitor, printer, etc.) needed to drive it to the max.

IMHO: The key to digital success lies in knowing how to use quality post processing software. For example, many principles I learned using CP/M and Wordstar in 1980 remain relevant, today. On the other hand, my beloved TRS-80 was so yesterday the moment I bought it.

Psst...

"Software is forever. Hardware is not...." Pass the word.

My 2 cents... Cheers...

Laurentiu Cristofor · 08-28-2010, 10:53 PM

Originally posted by Mike Bokeh

So, can anyone tell me how the following two shots would look better had they been taken with the same lens on either a K-x or a K-7?

Usually people upgrade because they fail to take some shots and they expect the newer equipment to help them succeed next time. You didn't fail and if you are getting the shots you want all the time, then there is obviously no need for you to ever upgrade. When you'll start failing, then you can think of what feature might have helped you and then you can look for it in newer models.

Advantages of an upgrade are seen in really extreme situations that challenge your camera. Your shots don't really challenge your camera - you've shot stationary objects in good light - a compact camera can do that well (minus DOF).

Try to shoot a portrait in the evening under bulb light and check the details you can get in the eye of a person under those conditions, and maybe you'll discover the limitations of your camera.

Here's a shot I got with my K-7 at ISO 1600, with a 500mm lens, at 1/25:

Could I have obtained the same result with the K10D (the camera I upgraded to K-7 from)? I don't think so - noise would be greater and I don't think I could have used such a low exposure time without help from the K-7s quieter and faster shutter combined with its better SR.

Mike Bokeh · 08-29-2010, 09:33 AM

WOW!

I didn't expect so many suggestions to stay with the K100D!

Michaelina2, where is my focus off?

I really appreciate everyone's responses and advice.

I'll comment more later on, but I'm off to a birthday party right now.

Here are a few more shots for your perusal/ critique/enjoyment.
DA16-45mm @ 16mm @ f8.0 @ .7 seconds.

DA16-45mm @ 16mm @ f8.0 @ .7 seconds.

DA16-45mm @ 16mm @f8.0 @ .7 seconds.

Her beauty will never fade. DA70mm @ f2.8 @ 1/180 seconds.

DA50-200mm @ 160mm @ f8.0 @ 1/500 seconds.

By the way, the nice interior shots, and that of the statue were taken here: Planting Fields Arboretum State Historic Park and Coe Hall Is Located 1395 Planting Fields Road Oyster Bay, NY 11771

If you get the chance, visit this place. You'll be glad you did.

Keep the advice and comments coming.

Thanks,
Mike

dragonfly · 08-29-2010, 12:33 PM

Mike, I think you're doing fine. If you have money burning holes in your pockets there's always enough room in your bag for a second camera body.

**Ex Finn.** · 08-29-2010, 05:02 PM

You! can take good pictures, camera is just a tool.

muraii · 08-30-2010, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by Michaelina2

On the other hand, my beloved TRS-80 was so yesterday the moment I bought it.

Dungeons of Daggorath! I still have my TRS-80. And, introducing, OffTopicMaker!

Mike Bokeh, you have some nice shots there. The type on the books to the left of Superman looks a little soft, but you've got a pretty good eye for framing. I especially like the stairwell and the great highlights in the saxophone. These types of shots are why I'm waffling between bicycle and Pentax forums: so much eye candy and inspiration.

Cheers,

Daniel

**Rondec** · 08-30-2010, 12:50 PM

There are reasons to get new cameras, but they primarily have to do with increased cropping ability, improved auto focus, better controls, sealed body. If you are taking photos of non moving objects, architecture on a tripod then a lot of the benefits are probably wasted.

I think that Michael was saying that your focus should not be on new equipment, but maybe on new software.

08-28-2010, 02:04 PM	#1
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608	How Will A K-7 or K-X Make These Pictures Look Better? Hello, everybody. I've been thinking about upgrading to a K-X or K-7 mainly due to their greater megapixel ratings of 12.4 and 14.6 respectively. Right now, I'm using (and still loving) my three year old Pentax K100D, which is rated at 6.1 MP. I never print anything larger than A4 (8"x10") and quite frankly, I'm satisfied with the two shots below. So, can anyone tell me how the following two shots would look better had they been taken with the same lens on either a K-x or a K-7? I know there a lot of "Which camera should I buy?" threads, but I thought if I showed examples it would help get a more accurate answer. DA70mm @ f4.0 @ 1/180 second. DA70mm @ f4.0 @ 1/30 second. I didn't put a lot of effort into either of these shots other than using a tripod, and metering carefully. Any advice appreciated. Mike

08-28-2010, 08:52 PM	#9
Michaelina2 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: SE Michigan USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,300	Wanna secret? Originally posted by bkpix No camera upgrade will improve those photos. At 6 mp, you have plenty of resolution for 8x12. You'll have to come up with another rationale for spending the money. Agree... your focus is wrong. For better photographs... think PP software! Cease obsessing over which new camera body and dedicate the next year to developing expertise with post processing software, like LR3. Once you master LR3... permit yourself to resume thinking about acquiring the least expensive hardware (computing power, camera body, monitor, printer, etc.) needed to drive it to the max. IMHO: The key to digital success lies in knowing how to use quality post processing software. For example, many principles I learned using CP/M and Wordstar in 1980 remain relevant, today. On the other hand, my beloved TRS-80 was so yesterday the moment I bought it. Psst... *"Software is forever. Hardware is not...."* Pass the word. My 2 cents... Cheers...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Why can't they make something like this...	regor	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	22	03-20-2010 01:16 PM
What do you make of this?	Jimfear	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	10	01-25-2010 03:05 PM
how to make pictures smaler?	Mew	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	4	10-29-2009 04:47 PM
What do you make of this?	minavasht	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	03-22-2008 06:49 PM
Anyone make money from their pictures?	Buschmaster	General Talk	17	12-08-2007 11:52 AM

08-28-2010, 02:50 PM	#2
krypticide Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,079	They wouldn't be any better. Just bigger resolution maybe.

08-28-2010, 02:53 PM	#3
sveinmb Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Norway Posts: 127	No. On the web or prints no larger than A4 you'll have no benefits with higher resolution sensor. However if you crop your images, there is a big difference in having a 2 megapixel or a 6 megapixel cropped result regarding how much detail is left in the image. I don't think you should consider an upgrade for the megapixels alone. The K-7 is for instance a much more solid body, a lot faster autofocusing, better auto white balance, a lot better lcd screen, two control wheels (more direct control without looking for buttons), faster and more responsive menus, live view, much larger buffer (don't have to wait that much), weather sealing etc. I've barey used the K-x and to me it didn't feel all that different from my K100, but it surely captures more details if you zoom in to 1:1. The K100D is a very nice little camera capable of excellent image quality. Some still praise it for its vivid colors and noise free images even at largish iso values. I warn you however - if you buy a K-7 you'll never look back regarding how it handles and feels in your hand each time you're out shooting.. (but you might remember how much fun it was back when 6 megapixel images were completely noise free at 1:1 zoom level)

08-28-2010, 02:55 PM	#4
Mike.P® Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New Milton, Hampshire, UK Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,154	You don't need higher resolution for those shots You don't need better AF for those shots You don't need better WB for those shots You don't need higher FPS for those shots You don't need better noise control for those shots You don't need a different camera for those shots ......

08-28-2010, 02:58 PM	#5
hcc Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,002	Originally posted by sveinmb ...if you crop your images, there is a big difference in having a 2 megapixel or a 6 megapixel cropped result regarding how much detail is left in the image. The K-7 is for instance a much more solid body, a lot faster autofocusing, better auto white balance, a lot better lcd screen, two control wheels (more direct control without looking for buttons), faster and more responsive menus, live view, much larger buffer (don't have to wait that much), weather sealing etc. +1 Sveinmb has some excellent points. The K-7 is especially good value now that is worth to consider. It is a semipro camera with a lot of features.

08-28-2010, 04:42 PM	#6
MadAmos Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 50	Originally posted by sveinmb No. On the web or prints no larger than A4 you'll have no benefits with higher resolution sensor. However if you crop your images, there is a big difference in having a 2 megapixel or a 6 megapixel cropped result regarding how much detail is left in the image. This is what I'd have said. I like the ability to grab a shot that might have been a bit wide and crop down and still have something printable.

08-28-2010, 05:30 PM	#7
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	No, K-7 will not produce output like that. Your pictures are as good as it gets. IMO. Those images look like k100D magic. Cheers, Mike. Last edited by Ex Finn.; 08-28-2010 at 05:46 PM.

08-28-2010, 05:37 PM	#8
bkpix Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Creswell, Oregon Photos: Albums Posts: 568	No camera upgrade will improve those photos. At 6 mp, you have plenty of resolution for 8x12. You'll have to come up with another rationale for spending the money.

08-28-2010, 10:53 PM	#10
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by Mike Bokeh So, can anyone tell me how the following two shots would look better had they been taken with the same lens on either a K-x or a K-7? Usually people upgrade because they fail to take some shots and they expect the newer equipment to help them succeed next time. You didn't fail and if you are getting the shots you want all the time, then there is obviously no need for you to ever upgrade. When you'll start failing, then you can think of what feature might have helped you and then you can look for it in newer models. Advantages of an upgrade are seen in really extreme situations that challenge your camera. Your shots don't really challenge your camera - you've shot stationary objects in good light - a compact camera can do that well (minus DOF). Try to shoot a portrait in the evening under bulb light and check the details you can get in the eye of a person under those conditions, and maybe you'll discover the limitations of your camera. Here's a shot I got with my K-7 at ISO 1600, with a 500mm lens, at 1/25: Could I have obtained the same result with the K10D (the camera I upgraded to K-7 from)? I don't think so - noise would be greater and I don't think I could have used such a low exposure time without help from the K-7s quieter and faster shutter combined with its better SR.

08-29-2010, 09:33 AM	#11
Mike Bokeh Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Queens, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 608 Original Poster	WOW! I didn't expect so many suggestions to stay with the K100D! Michaelina2, where is my focus off? I really appreciate everyone's responses and advice. I'll comment more later on, but I'm off to a birthday party right now. Here are a few more shots for your perusal/ critique/enjoyment. DA16-45mm @ 16mm @ f8.0 @ .7 seconds. DA16-45mm @ 16mm @ f8.0 @ .7 seconds. DA16-45mm @ 16mm @f8.0 @ .7 seconds. Her beauty will never fade. DA70mm @ f2.8 @ 1/180 seconds. DA50-200mm @ 160mm @ f8.0 @ 1/500 seconds. By the way, the nice interior shots, and that of the statue were taken here: Planting Fields Arboretum State Historic Park and Coe Hall Is Located 1395 Planting Fields Road Oyster Bay, NY 11771 If you get the chance, visit this place. You'll be glad you did. Keep the advice and comments coming. Thanks, Mike

08-29-2010, 12:33 PM	#12
dragonfly Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: on the wall Photos: Gallery Posts: 715	Mike, I think you're doing fine. If you have money burning holes in your pockets there's always enough room in your bag for a second camera body.

08-29-2010, 05:02 PM	#13
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	You! can take good pictures, camera is just a tool.

08-30-2010, 11:12 AM	#14
muraii Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 31	Originally posted by Michaelina2 On the other hand, my beloved TRS-80 was so yesterday the moment I bought it. Dungeons of Daggorath! I still have my TRS-80. And, introducing, OffTopicMaker! Mike Bokeh, you have some nice shots there. The type on the books to the left of Superman looks a little soft, but you've got a pretty good eye for framing. I especially like the stairwell and the great highlights in the saxophone. These types of shots are why I'm waffling between bicycle and Pentax forums: so much eye candy and inspiration. Cheers, Daniel

08-30-2010, 12:50 PM	#15
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,652	There are reasons to get new cameras, but they primarily have to do with increased cropping ability, improved auto focus, better controls, sealed body. If you are taking photos of non moving objects, architecture on a tripod then a lot of the benefits are probably wasted. I think that Michael was saying that your focus should not be on new equipment, but maybe on new software.