[gnaztee]

Not sure I understand the premise of this thread. There's nothing wrong with my K-7. Are there photos circulating that show the K-7 is incapable of producing pro-caliber results? It seems strange to me to complain about Pentax's business practices on one hand, and then act like a consumer sucker on the other (you have to have the K-5 because it scored better on a lab test?). Silliness

[Rondec]

Exactly. That's my point. It was profit driven, totally forgoing what's best for their customers. If they did the right thing, they would have placed the customers first ahead of profits! It amazes me how people can see this as a good thing.

This is complete bunk. The "big feature" that the K7 brought on line compared to the K20 was video, pure and simple. That and a redesigned, improved body, with better white balance, faster frames per second, and quiet shutter. Remember that the K7 was released a year and a half ago when the only cameras that offered video were the D90 and a couple of full frame models from Canon. Video was a big deal (still is for some folks I guess).

In a sense it is like comparing the kx and kr. The kr does some things better, but it essentially has the same sensor as the kx. There are still plenty of people who prefer the K20 to the K7 and that is OK.

The K5 sensor was not available to Pentax a year and a half ago (it just came on line in the last four weeks), so I guess you are suggesting that it would have been better for Pentax to just skip a generation of upper end cameras, just in the hope that a "better sensor" would be forthcoming. Pentax picked the best sensor that was available and they could afford at that time and it isn't nearly as bad as you make out. Anyone would think that no one could take good photos before a year ago.

[aleonx3]

Exactly. That's my point. It was profit driven, totally forgoing what's best for their customers. If they did the right thing, they would have placed the customers first ahead of profits! It amazes me how people can see this as a good thing.

That is complete silliness on your part. Because you reasoning is based purely on after the fact, where hindsight is always 20/20. The production of k-7 has already begun before k-x sensor was available. Do you think that Pentax should have scrapped the production process and started over again by integrating the SONY k-x sensor into k-7 so that you would be happy with it? In fact the success of k-x probably helped them to abandon the samsung sensor in favor of the sony sensor. Without k-x and k-7, there would not be a k-5 as what we are witnessing today.

[GeneV]

I went the other way, I have never bought a grip so I don't get killed with that issue. Batteries would be nice, but the K7 was so far ahead of the K10/20 in metering that it seemed to be a waste for me to go the K20 route at least for me.

After common ergonomics, common batteries are the biggest deal to me. I really don't like having to carry numerous chargers with me. Thanks to the K7, I paid so little for the K20d that it made sense.

[Nass]

What I found a bit annoying about the K-7 was purchasing the "top" model, the LX successor (according to the marketing blurb) only to find that less than 6 month later the bottom model outperformed it at low ISO. That was impossible to know at the time. So I'd say in retrospect that the K-7 was overhyped by them, and hasn't lived up to expectation. I think it shows because used K-7s are dropping in price quite fast, especially used.

It's still a decent cam and I do enjoy taking pics with it, although it has also imparted a certain mistrust/annoyance with Pentax for me. Sure, I'd love a K-5 as it corrects the K-7's inadequacies, but having spent >£1k on a cam last year I just don't feel good about giving them another £1k. I'm sure companies like Pentax with all their fansites and fans behind them, would just love consumers to buy the latest and greatest cam every year because it has better feature a/b/c, but that's a product strategy that I'm not going to fall for.

Maybe the K-7 was just an unfortunate model/time to come into digital with as your first cam not being Pentax wonk, as you wouldn't be able to compare it to predecessors and you wouldn't know that the first iteration is shape/body, the second being technology/specs. Not sure if I could or actually would or could have done anything differetly either.

[FullertonImages]

I"ll be holding onto my K-7 for a long time. I actually find that they work quite well together. I still prefer the low ISO of the K-7 and the skin tones from it as well. They both give very different looks, so for me it's like having two tools. One looks better in some situations, and the other looks better in other situations.

Y'all need to cut the K-7 some slack. Maybe it wasn't the best sensor in the world, but it was still capable of making some excellent images. Keep in mind, as someone already mentioned, that this was first generation DSLR video, and I think it was the third camera to have it. Pentax was learning how to get video out of a sensor, and despite the marginal loss in IQ over the K20d, there were lots of new feature, like 4 channel read out, faster FPS, a much better shutter mchanism, a waaay better body, better AF, better AWB, better p-ttl flash exposures, and on and on. There are more way than just ISO and IQ to improve between generations.

I think the progression of the last three bodies makes sense. First they worked on all the smaller stuff, like refining the body, the interface, the shutter mechanism, and all that. Then the next time around They already got an awesome platform that is just in need of a top notch sensor.

[Wheatfield]

First off I very rarely print my pictures. I stream them from my computer to my 63" plasma where they look stunning! I could care less about the two million pixels. Sorry I just don't buy it.

So what in the name of Haysus are you whinging about.
Your pictures look stunning on a low resolution television screen.
What more should they be for you?
What are you not buying?
Or are we going back to your inability to do proper research before buying a product?

[Tony3d]

Are you completely daft?
Everything companies do is profit driven. If what they do is also good for their customer base, they are rewarded by profits.
Evidently, the marketplace doesn't agree with your view, since by all accounts, the K7 was a very good seller indeed, and brought several notable improvements, such as AF speed, a metering system that worked, an AF system that was relatively colour blind and much better ergonomics.

Or perhaps you would have preferred to whine about a 12mp K7?
Because I am sure you would have been the first on the block to complain about 2 fewer megapixels, judging by your activity on this thread.

Tony, you need to get away from the computer for a while and go take some pictures. And do better research before you buy your next camera, not that it will likely affect your level of disappointment with whatever you buy.

First off I very rarely print my pictures. I stream them from my computer to my 63" plasma where they look stunning! I could care less about the two million pixels. Sorry I just don't buy it. Pentax is really in no position to dictate to the market.

[Pentaxor]

I guess one reason I feel ripped off is when I bought my K7 I read on Pentax's own site that the sensor in the K7 was redesigned to provide better noise control, only come to find out that the noise, and dynamic range is no better, if not worse than the previous model. I'm sorry, but that just rubs me the wrong way. Then I go on dxomark to find out the sensor scores worse than a 3 year old Cannon Rebel! I thought I was buying a top flight camera. I know people will say the handling is so great, and all the buttons are in just the right place, and the build quality is excellent. I'm not disputing non of that, but let's face it folks to release such a great camera, then equip it with a sensor that's out performed by a 3 year old Rebel, just aggravates me. Then just some six months or so later bring out a KX that has a better performing sensor tells me Pentax knew what they were doing. At the time the K7 was released they could have put in a much better sensor, fact is they didn't. You can say all you want about how great the camera is in other respects, but let's admit it the all important sensor, is what captures your picture. I would think that would be more important than a built in level! I think Pentax had a chance to make a real statement back then, instead they chose to grab up as much money as they could with the K7, then bring out the camera the K7 should have been. I say shame on Pentax, and whoever made that sensor decision hopefully was fired. Sorry, that's just my opinion.

I can understand your frustration and disappointment especially if you have a high expectations with the camera. it is true that the K-7's sensor is underwhelming compared to it's k-x little brother and is not as good or at par with other certain cameras. although if we would learn to live/accept or go over it's only obvious limitation (HIGH ISO IQ over 1600/3200), it is still a great camera. it is one heck of a camera at low ISOs to what was then high ISO and now mid ISOs 800. good at 1600 and usable 3200. it is a great camera of it's generation at a certain point.













til I see other people or myself that there is something unpleasant with these images or unable to produce great ones, then the K-7 is really a big disappointment.

[JeffJS]

I am jealous, why I can't take pictures like this? May I as what is lens and the firmware version of you K7? Thanks.

I have to admit, that's an expensive picture to take in my case.. Here's how..

k7js7566 mFA85f14 SIN Nov1. Day 1, Single In November. K7, FA*85mm f1:1.4. Experiment using a reflector to kill shadows typically cast by flash. - JeffJS's Album: Single In November - PentaxForums.com

I could just as easily have done it with a different lens however but for the Single In November game, the FA*85 is the lens I chose to use.

I have to also admit that I'm a bit happy you're jealous. Makes me glad that I can sometimes wow the crowd. Doesn't happen often.

[REM]

I will hold on to my K-7 until it breaks and repairs are too costly, or is lost or stolen. It is my first DSLR and there are features I still haven't explored or used in detail yet. I've taken good care of it and havent really used it alot (low number of shutter actuations compared to some folks on here). I havent had the need to shoot in high ISO situations and usually shoot at 400 and below ISO.

Barring the three circumstances above, I will probably get another camera in 4-5 years, if I do it like a computer refresh cycle that I normally do. If the camera still works, then it will be used as a backup. The K-7 is still a very capable camera.

[yeatzee]

only to find that less than 6 month later the bottom model outperformed it at low ISO.

Im sure you meant high ISO

[Nass]

Im sure you meant high ISO

Heh, yes of course.

*bonk head with mallet*

[Lowell Goudge]

OK

For all those monday morning quarterbacks and second guessers who use hindsight to determine whether they are going to make a good purchase or not, lets play a little game.

It takes about 1 year to develop a new camera, and after the first 2 months the chip and processors are locked in,

Now, let's imagine, the sensors are changing at 1 new one every 4 months.

The president dictates that you must only work on one camera, and it must be the latest available all the time,

At this rate, you would get nothing accomplished.

So all those who feel ripped off, stop your bitching. The K7 is a good camera, at a good price.

18 months from now, when the K5 is at the end of it's life you will bitch again saying that you were ripped off. OK Fine, dont buy anything. just sit on the fence and do nothing. Then all you will bitch about is the fact that you don't have any photos at all.

If I felt this way, I would be totally pissed about paying $2300 cdn for my *istD in 2003. But you know what. I still have it, I still use it, and it still takes great shots that are more than the resolution of my 22inch monitor.

When I bought it, I imagined that the payback was about 7500 shots. After that, Every photo was free. Think about your camera that way. At todays prices you only need to shoot for about 3 months before the processing alone to get film developed and scanned would put you at the payback point.

[Ex Finn.]

My K7 is a keeper till it quits.