Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-21-2010, 05:25 PM   #16
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
You will have to decide what you value more - high ISO or more advanced features and customisation, pentaprism and weather sealing.

12-22-2010, 12:34 AM   #17
Site Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Israel
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 933
QuoteOriginally posted by Stafflover Quote
Body's get replaced, not disposed. You see the number of people here still using
k10/k20 and some of them make nicer pictures than people with k-7/k-5
Right. My daughter uses my old K10D with great success.

Looking at agiotage that hits the forums when new camera comes out, I have to conclude that bodies in fact do get disposed. Unfortunately.
12-22-2010, 01:00 AM   #18
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 299
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
You will have to decide what you value more - high ISO or more advanced features and customisation, pentaprism and weather sealing.
oke ..thanks.. i will reconsidered it... but what about speed AF from both ? don't you think K-r has little bit advantage in low light ?
12-22-2010, 12:10 PM   #19
New Member

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9
I told myself that my next camera would have weatherproofing because I've been caught in a few rainstorms and didn't want to stop shooting (and hate the plastic bag hacks), so a used K-7 was the best choice. In addition, I knew I would eventually upgrade to a used K-5 in a year or two, so having very similar interfaces would make the transition smooth.

Like what Ash said, you need to think how often you'll be shooting in situations requiring high ISO or weatherproofing and go from there.

As for AF performance, I'm sure both are better than what you're upgrading from. So unless you're shooting sports, I wouldn't stress that too much. You learn to adapt to the gear.

12-24-2010, 09:25 AM   #20
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
The K7 is not a bad camera when it comes to low light ... it's just that many other cameras on the market are better (Kx, Kr, K5 and recent CaNikons amongst others). That doesn't mean you can't take great shots with it in low light !

I am in the same boat as you in a way. I have the K7 now and the K5 will be arriving in a couple of weeks ... however I will need to have 2 bodies this year (for some commercial shoots) and I have been debating whether to sell the K7 (it's actually up for sale where I live now) and get the Kr (for the new sensor and AF) or stick with the K7 for the factors already listed in this thread and for the fact that the K5 & K7 share an almost identical interface (which would make it very easy during a shoot).
This thread actually swings me back towards keeping the K7 because I know it can take some great low light shots - the K7's focus assist & pentaprism facing off against the Kr's better high ISO performance.

And then there is something else which I didn't realise made sooooo much difference until I bought the Tamron 17-50 last weekend, even though I have several very fast lenses. The lense makes a huge difference to the ability of any given camera to focus quickly and efficiently - even in low light.

These were all taken in low light, as you can see, and yet I had almost immediate focus lock for every one of them (K7 & T 17-50).
12-24-2010, 09:54 AM   #21
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by Boris Quote
I think it is rather easy. If you can stand the worse viewfinder of K-r, then it is no-brainer - K-r. Otherwise it will have to be K-7. Keep in mind that camera today is pretty much disposable item. In 2 years since now it will be old and in 3 years since now it will be ancient. In 5 years you will be effectively forced to upgrade.

If like you say you use manual glass, then K-7 with viewfinder magnifying eyecap and a split screen focusing screen (prepare to do some shimming) may be the best course of action.

One point though, in low ISO K-7 is not superb. It is ok, but no more than that. Oh yes, I have it, so I happen to know what I am talking about.
The k7 with a split screen is great, i put in a k3 screen (old nikon adapted to size by vendor) and didn't need to use the shim (haven't done a critical focus test yet, but it does seem right on target) it's a joy to use, I use a pentax M+3 eye[piece to offset by my prescription value. at the rate my eyes are deteriorating i figure i have a couple of years before i have to use my glasses with this set up
after the k10 i feel the high iso benefit outweighs the low iso drop (it may not be kx/r or k5 high iso but it's a damn site better than a k10

  • 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!
af, body, camera, cons, dslr, guys, iso, k-7, k-r, lcd, photography, pros, weather
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:33 PM. | See also:, 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?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]