Ok guys, I'm making a decision soon - K7 with 50-135mm or K5?

crossover37 · 04-17-2011, 06:34 PM

So I'm set on making a decision soon. I will either buy a K7 with a 50-135mm f2.8 lens or a K5. I shoot outdoor portraits mostly and will occasionally shoot engagement parties and sometimes indoor events. I have the Kx now with a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens, FA 50mm f1.4, and the kit lens. I don't want to lose high ISO ability but am wondering if the k7 is that bad compared to the Kx. I keep hearing good things about the 50-135mm f2.8 and I'm sure the extra focal length would be great for portraits.

I can instead get the K5 but without the 50-135mm f2.8.

Some advice please.

psychdoc · 04-17-2011, 07:13 PM

I would get the 50-135 lens if I were in your shoes. I got some nice pics even with my old K2000

HEEGZ · 04-17-2011, 07:15 PM

The K-7 does struggle with high-ISO images and in my opinion it is the only shortcoming of the camera. If you do grab a K-7, keep your K-x for your high-ISO needs. If you want everything in one camera then you definitely want the K-5. Honestly, if you can afford to do so, I would recommend upgrading to it anyways. Out of curiosity, why not just get the 50-135 and use it on your K-x?

Winder · 04-17-2011, 07:21 PM

Originally posted by crossover37

So I'm set on making a decision soon. I will either buy a K7 with a 50-135mm f2.8 lens or a K5. I shoot outdoor portraits mostly and will occasionally shoot engagement parties and sometimes indoor events. I have the Kx now with a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens, FA 50mm f1.4, and the kit lens. I don't want to lose high ISO ability but am wondering if the k7 is that bad compared to the Kx. I keep hearing good things about the 50-135mm f2.8 and I'm sure the extra focal length would be great for portraits.

I can instead get the K5 but without the 50-135mm f2.8.

Some advice please.

I would probably get the K-7 and the 50-135mm. The K-5 body is going to keep going down in price, but the 50-135mm is not going to get any cheaper. As a rule of thumb I always go for good glass over bodies. Get an extended warranty on the 50-135mm.

crossover37 · 04-17-2011, 07:36 PM

HEEGZ - Thanks. So in your opinion, what would ISO 1600 on the Kx compare to on the K7? I can buy the 50-135mm and put it on my Kx but I want a professional body. The Kx is smaller and I would like to have a body that allows me to use a battery grip (I have large hands) and more controls on the body instead of having to go through the menu system. I can only get the K7 with the 50-135mm or the K5.

The ISO on the K7 is that bad that I should keep my K7? Is the High ISO on the K7 a lot better than the K2000? I had the K2000 and definitely had to upgrade because the High ISO was horrible.

geekette · 04-17-2011, 07:36 PM

The image quality of the K-7 isn't all that great i hear.. heard the k-x is even better than it. For me it's the K-X or K-5.

DogLover · 04-17-2011, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by geekette

The image quality of the K-7 isn't all that great i hear.. heard the k-x is even better than it. For me it's the K-X or K-5.

This is flat-out wrong. The only thing the Kx does better than than K7 is high-ISO.

HEEGZ · 04-17-2011, 08:44 PM

Originally posted by crossover37

HEEGZ - Thanks. So in your opinion, what would ISO 1600 on the Kx compare to on the K7? I can buy the 50-135mm and put it on my Kx but I want a professional body. The Kx is smaller and I would like to have a body that allows me to use a battery grip (I have large hands) and more controls on the body instead of having to go through the menu system. I can only get the K7 with the 50-135mm or the K5.

The ISO on the K7 is that bad that I should keep my K7? Is the High ISO on the K7 a lot better than the K2000? I had the K2000 and definitely had to upgrade because the High ISO was horrible.

The high ISO on the K-7 will be better than on your K2000 for certain. ISO 800, 1100, 1600 and 2200 are completely usable with no complaints IMO. Going off of other people's posts, the ISO 1600 on the K-x should be comparable in noise to the ISO 800 on the K-7, though the K-7 may have better rendering of the image when noise is not considered.

If you want to get a professional body and can afford the K-5, then my advice is to get the K-5. If you really need the lens and a pro body then get the K-7 I think you will be okay with a f/2.8 lens and ISO 800 to 1600 if you have decent NR software skills. For a final thought, I recently tried my K-7 in an extremely dark arcade with a 35mm f2.4 prime lens wide open using high ISO and ambient light. Have a look here:

Incredible Pizza 2011 - a set on Flickr

This was shot in almost complete darkness at ISO 3200 on my K-7 with the only light being reflected from a nearby game. The untouched original is in the link above as well.

Originally posted by DogLover

This is flat-out wrong. The only thing the Kx does better than than K7 is high-ISO.

I agree with DogLover completely, though the K-x is smaller and lighter.

**crewl1** · 04-17-2011, 09:00 PM

If you have gotten used to the high ISO of your K-x you will most likely not be happy with the K-7 since you are now spoiled.

Don't get me wrong, the K-7 is a great camera but I also got one after having a K-x and found that I would use it only during outdoor daylight situations. I would keep coming back to the K-x for night and indoor shooting.

Ultimately I sold the K-7 and bought the K-5. Now the K-x stays in the case as I use the K-5 for everything.

aleonx3 · 04-17-2011, 09:16 PM

If you are getting good at flash photography, k-7 will likely be sufficient - unless you want some high iso shots. Sooner or later you will want to get a camera with all the convenient features. Agree with other posters, get the 50-135mm first.... then decide on whether you need the k-7 or k-5.

crossover37 · 04-17-2011, 09:27 PM

Thanks guys. So would the K5 coupled with my Tamron 28 - 75mm f2.8 give me great results compared to the 50-135mm f2.8? I love my Tamron but maybe the K5 with my existing lenses will still give me even more awesome images because of the amazing sensor on the K5. What do you all think?

HEEGZ · 04-17-2011, 09:33 PM

If it were me, I would buy the K-5. Your Tamron should be a fine match with it. The only issue I see is you don't have a FL over 75mm, if that was part of your motivation for getting the longer DA* lens. I guess it depends on how badly you need new lenses. I think crewl1 hit the nail on the head though and you may be frustrated with the K-7 after using the K-x.

Just had a look at the Tamron on the lens reviews and I think it will serve as an excellent match to the K-5. The K-5 should serve you for a long time and you can gradually build up your lens collection.

**manishved** · 04-17-2011, 09:37 PM

I would use the K-7/K-x with the 50-135mm for now. While the lens prices may actually go up, K-5 prices are expected to fall.

Winder · 04-18-2011, 08:49 AM

Originally posted by crossover37

HEEGZ - Thanks. So in your opinion, what would ISO 1600 on the Kx compare to on the K7? I can buy the 50-135mm and put it on my Kx but I want a professional body. The Kx is smaller and I would like to have a body that allows me to use a battery grip (I have large hands) and more controls on the body instead of having to go through the menu system. I can only get the K7 with the 50-135mm or the K5.

The ISO on the K7 is that bad that I should keep my K7? Is the High ISO on the K7 a lot better than the K2000? I had the K2000 and definitely had to upgrade because the High ISO was horrible.

Are you shooting RAW or JPEG?

The K-7 (RAW) can match the Canon 7D or Nikon D300 up to 3200 if you know what you are doing and shooting RAW. The JPEG engine in the K-7 is not as good as Canon or Nikon.

I can take the K-7 with my Sigma 50mm f/1.4 and Lightroom 3.3 and I have no trouble getting really good results at 1600-2200 range. With a little extra processing I have shot 3200 and still had good 11x14 prints, but there was some extra time and work involved.

scathontiphat · 04-18-2011, 09:19 AM

I would always spend money on good glass over bodies. Lenses (barring an out of warranty SDM failure) will last you several bodies, while there will always be a newer, nicer body to lust after.

Originally posted by manishved

While the lens prices may actually go up, K-5 prices are expected to fall.

All bodies start to get cheaper eventually, but i think it might be a quite a while until the K-5 really starts to drop. After the earthquake it seems like every single sale on the K-5 ended and prices have gone up a bit.

04-17-2011, 06:34 PM	#1
crossover37 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 214	Ok guys, I'm making a decision soon - K7 with 50-135mm or K5? So I'm set on making a decision soon. I will either buy a K7 with a 50-135mm f2.8 lens or a K5. I shoot outdoor portraits mostly and will occasionally shoot engagement parties and sometimes indoor events. I have the Kx now with a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens, FA 50mm f1.4, and the kit lens. I don't want to lose high ISO ability but am wondering if the k7 is that bad compared to the Kx. I keep hearing good things about the 50-135mm f2.8 and I'm sure the extra focal length would be great for portraits. I can instead get the K5 but without the 50-135mm f2.8. Some advice please.

04-17-2011, 08:44 PM	#8
HEEGZ Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Missouri Photos: Albums Posts: 258	Originally posted by crossover37 HEEGZ - Thanks. So in your opinion, what would ISO 1600 on the Kx compare to on the K7? I can buy the 50-135mm and put it on my Kx but I want a professional body. The Kx is smaller and I would like to have a body that allows me to use a battery grip (I have large hands) and more controls on the body instead of having to go through the menu system. I can only get the K7 with the 50-135mm or the K5. The ISO on the K7 is that bad that I should keep my K7? Is the High ISO on the K7 a lot better than the K2000? I had the K2000 and definitely had to upgrade because the High ISO was horrible. The high ISO on the K-7 will be better than on your K2000 for certain. ISO 800, 1100, 1600 and 2200 are completely usable with no complaints IMO. Going off of other people's posts, the ISO 1600 on the K-x should be comparable in noise to the ISO 800 on the K-7, though the K-7 may have better rendering of the image when noise is not considered. If you want to get a professional body and can afford the K-5, then my advice is to get the K-5. If you really need the lens and a pro body then get the K-7 I think you will be okay with a f/2.8 lens and ISO 800 to 1600 if you have decent NR software skills. For a final thought, I recently tried my K-7 in an extremely dark arcade with a 35mm f2.4 prime lens wide open using high ISO and ambient light. Have a look here: Incredible Pizza 2011 - a set on Flickr This was shot in almost complete darkness at ISO 3200 on my K-7 with the only light being reflected from a nearby game. The untouched original is in the link above as well. Originally posted by DogLover This is flat-out wrong. The only thing the Kx does better than than K7 is high-ISO. I agree with DogLover completely, though the K-x is smaller and lighter. Last edited by HEEGZ; 04-17-2011 at 09:03 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Making a decision on the K-5	ruemiser	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	10-31-2012 04:33 AM
I need Decision help?	Rupert	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	10-09-2010 12:21 PM
Need help on making a decision	oatman911	Pentax Compact Cameras	1	12-28-2009 08:56 AM
K-7 Hard Decision	tsmith	Pentax News and Rumors	24	05-23-2009 01:07 AM
Need help making a decision	paden501	Pentax DSLR Discussion	22	01-29-2008 07:55 PM

04-17-2011, 07:13 PM	#2
psychdoc Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Bham Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 949	I would get the 50-135 lens if I were in your shoes. I got some nice pics even with my old K2000

04-17-2011, 07:15 PM	#3
HEEGZ Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Missouri Photos: Albums Posts: 258	The K-7 does struggle with high-ISO images and in my opinion it is the only shortcoming of the camera. If you do grab a K-7, keep your K-x for your high-ISO needs. If you want everything in one camera then you definitely want the K-5. Honestly, if you can afford to do so, I would recommend upgrading to it anyways. Out of curiosity, why not just get the 50-135 and use it on your K-x?

04-17-2011, 07:21 PM	#4
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Originally posted by crossover37 So I'm set on making a decision soon. I will either buy a K7 with a 50-135mm f2.8 lens or a K5. I shoot outdoor portraits mostly and will occasionally shoot engagement parties and sometimes indoor events. I have the Kx now with a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens, FA 50mm f1.4, and the kit lens. I don't want to lose high ISO ability but am wondering if the k7 is that bad compared to the Kx. I keep hearing good things about the 50-135mm f2.8 and I'm sure the extra focal length would be great for portraits. I can instead get the K5 but without the 50-135mm f2.8. Some advice please. I would probably get the K-7 and the 50-135mm. The K-5 body is going to keep going down in price, but the 50-135mm is not going to get any cheaper. As a rule of thumb I always go for good glass over bodies. Get an extended warranty on the 50-135mm.

04-17-2011, 07:36 PM	#5
crossover37 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 214 Original Poster	HEEGZ - Thanks. So in your opinion, what would ISO 1600 on the Kx compare to on the K7? I can buy the 50-135mm and put it on my Kx but I want a professional body. The Kx is smaller and I would like to have a body that allows me to use a battery grip (I have large hands) and more controls on the body instead of having to go through the menu system. I can only get the K7 with the 50-135mm or the K5. The ISO on the K7 is that bad that I should keep my K7? Is the High ISO on the K7 a lot better than the K2000? I had the K2000 and definitely had to upgrade because the High ISO was horrible.

04-17-2011, 07:36 PM	#6
geekette Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 528	The image quality of the K-7 isn't all that great i hear.. heard the k-x is even better than it. For me it's the K-X or K-5.

04-17-2011, 08:12 PM	#7
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by geekette The image quality of the K-7 isn't all that great i hear.. heard the k-x is even better than it. For me it's the K-X or K-5. This is flat-out wrong. The only thing the Kx does better than than K7 is high-ISO.

04-17-2011, 09:00 PM	#9
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	If you have gotten used to the high ISO of your K-x you will most likely not be happy with the K-7 since you are now spoiled. Don't get me wrong, the K-7 is a great camera but I also got one after having a K-x and found that I would use it only during outdoor daylight situations. I would keep coming back to the K-x for night and indoor shooting. Ultimately I sold the K-7 and bought the K-5. Now the K-x stays in the case as I use the K-5 for everything.

04-17-2011, 09:16 PM	#10
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	If you are getting good at flash photography, k-7 will likely be sufficient - unless you want some high iso shots. Sooner or later you will want to get a camera with all the convenient features. Agree with other posters, get the 50-135mm first.... then decide on whether you need the k-7 or k-5.

04-17-2011, 09:27 PM	#11
crossover37 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 214 Original Poster	Thanks guys. So would the K5 coupled with my Tamron 28 - 75mm f2.8 give me great results compared to the 50-135mm f2.8? I love my Tamron but maybe the K5 with my existing lenses will still give me even more awesome images because of the amazing sensor on the K5. What do you all think?

04-17-2011, 09:33 PM	#12
HEEGZ Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Missouri Photos: Albums Posts: 258	If it were me, I would buy the K-5. Your Tamron should be a fine match with it. The only issue I see is you don't have a FL over 75mm, if that was part of your motivation for getting the longer DA* lens. I guess it depends on how badly you need new lenses. I think crewl1 hit the nail on the head though and you may be frustrated with the K-7 after using the K-x. Just had a look at the Tamron on the lens reviews and I think it will serve as an excellent match to the K-5. The K-5 should serve you for a long time and you can gradually build up your lens collection.

04-17-2011, 09:37 PM	#13
manishved Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: N. Calif Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,651	I would use the K-7/K-x with the 50-135mm for now. While the lens prices may actually go up, K-5 prices are expected to fall.

04-18-2011, 08:49 AM	#14
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Originally posted by crossover37 HEEGZ - Thanks. So in your opinion, what would ISO 1600 on the Kx compare to on the K7? I can buy the 50-135mm and put it on my Kx but I want a professional body. The Kx is smaller and I would like to have a body that allows me to use a battery grip (I have large hands) and more controls on the body instead of having to go through the menu system. I can only get the K7 with the 50-135mm or the K5. The ISO on the K7 is that bad that I should keep my K7? Is the High ISO on the K7 a lot better than the K2000? I had the K2000 and definitely had to upgrade because the High ISO was horrible. Are you shooting RAW or JPEG? The K-7 (RAW) can match the Canon 7D or Nikon D300 up to 3200 if you know what you are doing and shooting RAW. The JPEG engine in the K-7 is not as good as Canon or Nikon. I can take the K-7 with my Sigma 50mm f/1.4 and Lightroom 3.3 and I have no trouble getting really good results at 1600-2200 range. With a little extra processing I have shot 3200 and still had good 11x14 prints, but there was some extra time and work involved.

04-18-2011, 09:19 AM	#15
scathontiphat Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: UK Photos: Albums Posts: 42	I would always spend money on good glass over bodies. Lenses (barring an out of warranty SDM failure) will last you several bodies, while there will always be a newer, nicer body to lust after. Originally posted by manishved While the lens prices may actually go up, K-5 prices are expected to fall. All bodies start to get cheaper eventually, but i think it might be a quite a while until the K-5 really starts to drop. After the earthquake it seems like every single sale on the K-5 ended and prices have gone up a bit.