[Lurch]

So I have my GX20, the K20D clone. And it is a great camera, no doubt.
However I have seen the cost of either new or 2nd hand K7's drop significantly even in the short time I've "been on the scene", to the point where even my poor arse could afford one.
However I'm concerned. I keep reading posts, articles, etc that say all kinds of negative things about the K7 - and I dont know what to believe.

So, is the K7 still a worth while upgrade from the 20? Am I going to be ruthlessly disappointed? Am I (even with the faults) going to so blown away from the step up that I'll still love it?

Your feedback would be appreciated.
- Lurch

[Digitalis]

well if you appreciate a well constructed metal camera the K7 will suit you just fine, I haven't had any lingering issues with my K-7. The only thing that did go wrong with mine was the front e-dial malfunctioned and caused erratic jumps in the shutter speed range which eventually made the camera unusable. I haven't seen any of the green striping issues from the sensor on my K7 either - though I updated the firmware of mine ASAP to keep this issue at bay.

those minor foibles are nothing compared to some of the more egregious bloopers other manufacturers have committed in the past e.g : Leica messed up real bad with the M8 - however, the positioning of the Live view button on the K-7 is really annoying.



My k7 is almost up to the 20K shutter count and it is still producing superb images:

[dlacouture]

If you're satisfied with the image quality of your GX20, then you'll equally satisfied with the K7...
It has marginally worse high-iso noise (seen at 100%), but noise is globally better handled (no stripes, no purple borders, etc).

In everything else, the K7 is better... Only gripe I had when I switched was the different ergonomic, but that's all...

[JohnBee]

I think it depends on what's important to you. The K-7 could be a real bargain if it falls within your needs.

Otherwise, I think the K-5 eclipsed the K-7 by using the same package design and improving on all its weaknesses. And in doing so, Pentax built the K-5 at the expense of the K-7. Which is why I think it depreciated so quickly.

Other than that, it looks as though the K-7 offers improvements over the GX20 with higher FPS, video, better LV(higher resolution), size etc. While loosing a little ground in the sensitivity and DR side of things. I've always suspected this to be a consequence of adding video to the system but that's just some wild unsubstantiated theory at best.

Anyways, that's what comes-up for me on this issue.
Maybe someone else will chime-in and share more tid-bits on matters.

JohnB

[Rondec]

The reasons to upgrade a K20 to a K7 would be for faster frames per second, better white balance, quicker auto focus (actually usable continuous auto focus), better ergonomics (IMO), 100 percent viewfinder, more compact body, better live view, video. The sensor is basically equivalent to the K20/GX 20.

The K5 is like the K7, with incremental improvements in every area, except with regard to the sensor, where it is a major jump forward with regard to dynamic range, high iso and video.

A lot depends on what type of shooting you do as to whether or not you will be satisfied with staying with GX20, versus upgrading to a newer body. No easy answer there. The GX20/K20 is a good camera, still gives excellent photo quality, but there have been improvements since it was released as well.

[Lurch]

Hmm... food for thought for sure.
The FPS would be nice, but I'd miss the high-ISO. If the K7's ergonomics are anything like the K-r (I have a K-r at work), I actually prefer the size, bulk, and weight of the 20 :/
Hmmm...

[MPrince]

Nutshell answer: Nothing.

[dlacouture]

Hmm... food for thought for sure.
The FPS would be nice, but I'd miss the high-ISO. If the K7's ergonomics are anything like the K-r (I have a K-r at work), I actually prefer the size, bulk, and weight of the 20 :/
Hmmm...

No no no, it's on par with the K20... Dual wheels, ISO/EV/RAW buttons, and so on...

My criticism came from the fact that I was perfectly attuned to the K20 ergonomics, everything was just at the right place for me.
And on the K7, although they kept the same external controls amount, there was just enough changes to throw me off for a good two months...

For example:
- they removed the Fn button...
- so they had to move the Fn/AF point selection toggle to the OK button (which is awkward!)
- so they had to move the ISO selection from the OK button to a dedicated ISO button...

So, where before you pressed OK with your thumb and dialed the ISO with your index, now you press on the ISo button with your index and dial the ISO with your thumb...

In the end, they just replaced one button by another (not in the same place), only to please those dumb reviewers that could not find the ISO selection shortcut (the OK button).

[Digitalis]

Nutshell answer: Nothing.

+1 ...apart from the annoying placement of the LV button...

[eddie1960]

+1 ...apart from the annoying placement of the LV button...

Having gone K10 (same functionality as the 20) i agree no negatives beyond live view button (drives me nuts when shooting manual lenses as i use the green button a lot)
As for the moving things around i too needed some time to get used to the smaller size and changed layout, but am more than happy now. I just added the grip son now i'm adapting to that but it's pretty intuitive

[JeffJS]

Without reading through everyone elses responses (to avoid bias), I'll give you mine. The K20d and K7 are two completely different cameras. Forget about video in my consideration here, I barely ever used it.

The body is smaller than the K20 so I found myself wanting the battery grip for the K7. With that, it was perfect for me. Well balanced with most lenses and with the camera body grip redesigned, very easy to hold and use.

I found that while results could get grainy (I say grainy because I didn't experience much actual color noise) at times, it was rare I couldn't use a photo because of too much noise.

The larger rear screen was great but at first, I didn't care for the new button layout. I didn't like the locking mode dial either (the one on the K5 is larger which makes it easier for me to use).

The K7 gives you a dedicated ISO button that is nice to have and if you're a green mode shooter, you don't have to hunt around for it. It's right there on the back.

I Did notice that the AF was faster and seemed more reliable. For example, I got my first ever bird in flight photo with it using the same lenses I had attempted it with on the K20d. AF tracking left something to be desired, which seems to be a (improving) issue with the Pentax DSLRs.

There are pros and cons to every camera. My whole point here, is once you learn to wrangle the K7, it will serve you quite well. I'm a tech chaser of sorts otherwise, I would probably still have My K7. Someone else here at PF is enjoying it now.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rolleiman2007/sets/72157622781481730/

[RonHendriks1966]

However I'm concerned. I keep reading posts, articles, etc that say all kinds of negative things about the K7 - and I dont know what to believe.

Well the K-7 is a nice camera with it's limitations, but they are not to worry about when you use a K20D, since there is no downside on a K-7 when you come from the K20D.

There are other camera's that can reach beyond the point of where K-7 can go, but then they are either more expensive or have a newly developed sensor inside.

I made some pretty descent pictures with K-7, so anyone who claims that it is not possible just isn't as good as photographer as he claims.

[jstevewhite]

So I have my GX20, the K20D clone. And it is a great camera, no doubt.
However I have seen the cost of either new or 2nd hand K7's drop significantly even in the short time I've "been on the scene", to the point where even my poor arse could afford one.
However I'm concerned. I keep reading posts, articles, etc that say all kinds of negative things about the K7 - and I dont know what to believe.

So, is the K7 still a worth while upgrade from the 20? Am I going to be ruthlessly disappointed? Am I (even with the faults) going to so blown away from the step up that I'll still love it?

Your feedback would be appreciated.
- Lurch

There is certainly nothing wrong with the K-7, at all. If you don't like the way your GX-20 works, it's a possible upgrade. I would advise you to take the money you have for the K-7 and put it in a piggy bank, though, as you won't see much *improvement* in anything image-related. Ergonomics are different, but not a LOT different. Body is smaller (too small, for me; I hadda put a battery grip on my K-5, which is the same body). I like the way the K20D feels in the hand much better, but the K-5 sensor is to die for. So I'd say keep using the GX-20 unless you really hate it (ergonomics), and save for the K-5 (or whatever comes next).

EDIT: I still have my K20D, and I'm not likely to get rid of it. It's still a perfectly functional camera and anytime I need to use two different lenses in rapid succession it's there with me.

[Lurch]

Again, thanks for all the comments guys - much appreciated.

Having slept on it; I think unless a K7 drops into my lap at "an offer I couldn't refuse", I will hang-on to the dollars to see what around the corner and jump then.

[hcc]

There is nothing wrong about the K-7. It is a great camera that was release in 2009 and was superseeded by an excellent successor (K-5). In its own times, the K-7 was at the leading edge in terms of metallic body, WR, ergonomics, viewfinder, controls, ...

If the K7's ergonomics are anything like the K-r (I have a K-r at work), I actually prefer the size, bulk, and weight of the 20 :/
Hmmm...

The K-5 re-uses the body and eronomics of the K-7. That says a lot about the outstanding ergonomics of the K-7. Simply the K-7 body design is by far superior to the ergonomics of the K-x and K-r.

Among all brands (Canikons, Sony, Oly, Pentax), the K-7 (and K-7) has the best body erogonomics in its class (entry and semi-pro dSLRs) IMO. I tried many dSLRs and the K-7 body is the first and only oe that fits immediately in my hands.