K-7 vs 300D

vrrattko · 08-18-2011, 12:39 AM

Hi Peter,
I think it is a tradeoff between Nikon and Pentax system, you loose SR, access to some niche lenses, compactness etc. but gain better flash system, more sophisticated AF. If that's what you need then go for it. I wouldn't worry much about the lenses, both systems have excellent glass, some top Nikkors are more expensive, though. Still you can get excellent glass for reasonable price, like AF85 1.8 you mentioned...

TOUGEFC · 08-18-2011, 01:03 AM

Might be a good idea Peter to rent the Nikon camera and said lenses first and see how you like them and go from there

axl · 08-20-2011, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

Might be a good idea Peter to rent the Nikon camera and said lenses first and see how you like them and go from there

My wife had D90 at her work place so I have some idea of the layout and menus and ergos...

Anyway, since my PC dexided to crap out on me, I'll b sticking with K-7 for now...

axl · 08-20-2011, 10:09 AM

Originally posted by vrrattko

Hi Peter,
I think it is a tradeoff between Nikon and Pentax system, you loose SR, access to some niche lenses, compactness etc. but gain better flash system, more sophisticated AF. If that's what you need then go for it. I wouldn't worry much about the lenses, both systems have excellent glass, some top Nikkors are more expensive, though. Still you can get excellent glass for reasonable price, like AF85 1.8 you mentioned...

The SR would be an issue I assume, but AF would very good gain..
Niche lenses? I had FA31, 43, 77 and DA40 and sold all but 31, which I only keep because my wife likes it. So I guess the Pentax's niche lenses are not exactly what makes me stay with the system. Turns out I prefer traditional FOVs like 35 and 85mm equivalent on FF

Frogfish · 08-20-2011, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by axl

The SR would be an issue I assume, but AF would very good gain..

It would only be a gain if you are currently missing many shots, in your current spheres of photographic interest, due to the K7's AF ... and if the 300s can actually solve that issue for you and it's not an area that any camera would have difficulty handling.

axl · 08-20-2011, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by Frogfish

It would only be a gain if you are currently missing many shots, in your current spheres of photographic interest, due to the K7's AF ... and if the 300s can actually solve that issue for you and it's not an area that any camera would have difficulty handling.

I don't think I'm missing many (although I miss some) but then again my little one isn't all that mobile....yet

axl · 08-20-2011, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by Rondec

I think many people base high iso evaluation on jpegs and the K7 has a lousy jpeg engine at high iso, but in RAW there isn't that much difference.

I haven't shot JPEG since 2006 when I had my first DSLR...

And problem with K-7 (even with RAW) is that if you don't get the exposure to the right, even little bit of fill in light causes excessive noise anywhere above ISO400.

axl · 08-20-2011, 02:08 PM

Originally posted by Frogfish

See Eruditass' post. Now we understand the issue (a 3 month old) then I think by far the easiest, quickest and probably best way to improve the shots of your baby is to start bouncing a manual flash (e.g. Yongnuo YN560) off the ceilings/walls and maybe adding a Stofen diffuser or similar) - total cost ca. US$100 / £60. That's going to beat the pants off of the very small increase in ISO/DR from the 300D over the K7 for ambient light shooting. I'm certain you have a good flash already though ?

YONGNUO, photographic equipment, camera accessories, flash light, camera remote control, speedlite, photo equipment, LED photo light, flash trigger, camera wireless remote control, TTL cord

Great post in regards to helping Axl achieve the improvement he requires.

I think Axl has convinced himself he would be better off switching and is looking for some moral support

I know the feeling, I have convinced myself a D700 would give me something APS-C can not

I do use bounced flash (have 3 guns so I do try here and there) and have sucseeded to some degree with that style but most of the time I prefer natural light + when I bounced the flash mounted on camera it's still too bright for the little one and he becomes bit "murky" for a while and keeps frowning a bit too...

And no, I haven't convinced myself I need Nikon. I was more looking into what people of line up K vs line up F. Regardless of which background I come from...

Rondonc · 09-04-2011, 04:56 AM

Hi Axi

The D300 is an excellent camera fitted with the 18-200 VR lens. Having said that, I've just got rid of mine for the K7 as the D300 was too bulky for me. The K7 has a much better feel and handles well. As the sales splurge said in the 60's 'Just hold a Pentax'

Cheers

Rondonc

chattphotos · 09-04-2011, 06:07 PM

Originally posted by axl

Hi all,
and I'm not sure about WR...
Thanks

Axl, Pentax knew what they were doing when they said WR on the K-7 because it is 100% water resistant. I have shot a model in the pouring rain and also been splashed by Shamu (twice) My K-7 passed with flying colors I am not afraid of water anymore with this camera.

So yes, the only thing you can't do is shoot underwater, but anything else, you'll be fine!

johnmflores · 09-06-2011, 06:09 AM

K-r is cheap and better than K-7 in terms of ISO

StepOne · 09-06-2011, 06:21 AM

Originally posted by chattphotos

Axl, Pentax knew what they were doing when they said WR on the K-7 because it is 100% water resistant. I have shot a model in the pouring rain and also been splashed by Shamu (twice) My K-7 passed with flying colors I am not afraid of water anymore with this camera.

So yes, the only thing you can't do is shoot underwater, but anything else, you'll be fine!

This is plain crap

Who said else than you that is 100% weather resistant? Should not have been something more like waterproof?

In my opinion D300s is the better camera. If you can live with size (200g more). Both are WR. And d300s will keep value far better. Who's buying K-7 now and how much would pay for it?

Frogfish · 09-06-2011, 07:39 AM

Originally posted by StepOne

This is plain crap

Who said else than you that is 100% weather resistant? Should not have been something more like waterproof?

In my opinion D300s is the better camera. If you can live with size (200g more). Both are WR. And d300s will keep value far better. Who's buying K-7 now and how much would pay for it?

I think Ash is talking about the older D300 not the D300s - big price, and performance, difference.

chattphotos · 09-07-2011, 04:15 PM

Originally posted by StepOne

This is plain crap

Who said else than you that is 100% weather resistant? Should not have been something more like waterproof?

Do you own a K-7?

I have tested the K-7 WR to the max, Pentax says they designed the camera to be weather/water/dust-resistant. I shot in the rain for an hour and then a few months later, I was splashed by Shamu, my camera and WR lenses still work perfectly! I checked the seals, no water permeation at all. So it's a personal testament to a good design!

chattphotos · 09-07-2011, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

K-r is cheap and better than K-7 in terms of ISO

If I remember correctly, the K-r has no AF illumination... a highly valued element for us semi-pro photographers.

09-04-2011, 06:07 PM	#40
chattphotos Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: TN Posts: 53	WR Originally posted by axl Hi all, and I'm not sure about WR... Thanks Axl, Pentax knew what they were doing when they said WR on the K-7 because it is 100% water resistant. I have shot a model in the pouring rain and also been splashed by Shamu (twice) My K-7 passed with flying colors I am not afraid of water anymore with this camera. So yes, the only thing you can't do is shoot underwater, but anything else, you'll be fine!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K10D opinion needed from canon 300d (Digital Rebel) users	Andrews	Pentax DSLR Discussion	21	03-04-2008 10:16 PM

08-18-2011, 12:39 AM	#31
vrrattko Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 753	Hi Peter, I think it is a tradeoff between Nikon and Pentax system, you loose SR, access to some niche lenses, compactness etc. but gain better flash system, more sophisticated AF. If that's what you need then go for it. I wouldn't worry much about the lenses, both systems have excellent glass, some top Nikkors are more expensive, though. Still you can get excellent glass for reasonable price, like AF85 1.8 you mentioned...

08-18-2011, 01:03 AM	#32
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Might be a good idea Peter to rent the Nikon camera and said lenses first and see how you like them and go from there

08-20-2011, 10:05 AM	#33
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by TOUGEFC Might be a good idea Peter to rent the Nikon camera and said lenses first and see how you like them and go from there My wife had D90 at her work place so I have some idea of the layout and menus and ergos... Anyway, since my PC dexided to crap out on me, I'll b sticking with K-7 for now...

08-20-2011, 10:09 AM	#34
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by vrrattko Hi Peter, I think it is a tradeoff between Nikon and Pentax system, you loose SR, access to some niche lenses, compactness etc. but gain better flash system, more sophisticated AF. If that's what you need then go for it. I wouldn't worry much about the lenses, both systems have excellent glass, some top Nikkors are more expensive, though. Still you can get excellent glass for reasonable price, like AF85 1.8 you mentioned... The SR would be an issue I assume, but AF would very good gain.. Niche lenses? I had FA31, 43, 77 and DA40 and sold all but 31, which I only keep because my wife likes it. So I guess the Pentax's niche lenses are not exactly what makes me stay with the system. Turns out I prefer traditional FOVs like 35 and 85mm equivalent on FF

08-20-2011, 11:37 AM	#35
Frogfish Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Shanghai Posts: 4,490	Originally posted by axl The SR would be an issue I assume, but AF would very good gain.. It would only be a gain if you are currently missing many shots, in your current spheres of photographic interest, due to the K7's AF ... and if the 300s can actually solve that issue for you and it's not an area that any camera would have difficulty handling.

08-20-2011, 01:56 PM	#36
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by Frogfish It would only be a gain if you are currently missing many shots, in your current spheres of photographic interest, due to the K7's AF ... and if the 300s can actually solve that issue for you and it's not an area that any camera would have difficulty handling. I don't think I'm missing many (although I miss some) but then again my little one isn't all that mobile....yet

08-20-2011, 02:03 PM	#37
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by Rondec I think many people base high iso evaluation on jpegs and the K7 has a lousy jpeg engine at high iso, but in RAW there isn't that much difference. I haven't shot JPEG since 2006 when I had my first DSLR... And problem with K-7 (even with RAW) is that if you don't get the exposure to the right, even little bit of fill in light causes excessive noise anywhere above ISO400.

08-20-2011, 02:08 PM	#38
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by Frogfish See Eruditass' post. Now we understand the issue (a 3 month old) then I think by far the easiest, quickest and probably best way to improve the shots of your baby is to start bouncing a manual flash (e.g. Yongnuo YN560) off the ceilings/walls and maybe adding a Stofen diffuser or similar) - total cost ca. US$100 / £60. That's going to beat the pants off of the very small increase in ISO/DR from the 300D over the K7 for ambient light shooting. I'm certain you have a good flash already though ? YONGNUO, photographic equipment, camera accessories, flash light, camera remote control, speedlite, photo equipment, LED photo light, flash trigger, camera wireless remote control, TTL cord Great post in regards to helping Axl achieve the improvement he requires. I think Axl has convinced himself he would be better off switching and is looking for some moral support I know the feeling, I have convinced myself a D700 would give me something APS-C can not I do use bounced flash (have 3 guns so I do try here and there) and have sucseeded to some degree with that style but most of the time I prefer natural light + when I bounced the flash mounted on camera it's still too bright for the little one and he becomes bit "murky" for a while and keeps frowning a bit too... And no, I haven't convinced myself I need Nikon. I was more looking into what people of line up K vs line up F. Regardless of which background I come from...

09-04-2011, 04:56 AM	#39
Rondonc New Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: South Yorkshire Posts: 7	Hi Axi The D300 is an excellent camera fitted with the 18-200 VR lens. Having said that, I've just got rid of mine for the K7 as the D300 was too bulky for me. The K7 has a much better feel and handles well. As the sales splurge said in the 60's 'Just hold a Pentax' Cheers Rondonc

09-06-2011, 06:09 AM	#41
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	K-r is cheap and better than K-7 in terms of ISO

09-06-2011, 06:21 AM	#42
StepOne Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Botosani Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 285	Originally posted by chattphotos Axl, Pentax knew what they were doing when they said WR on the K-7 because it is 100% water resistant. I have shot a model in the pouring rain and also been splashed by Shamu (twice) My K-7 passed with flying colors I am not afraid of water anymore with this camera. So yes, the only thing you can't do is shoot underwater, but anything else, you'll be fine! This is plain crap Who said else than you that is 100% weather resistant? Should not have been something more like waterproof? In my opinion D300s is the better camera. If you can live with size (200g more). Both are WR. And d300s will keep value far better. Who's buying K-7 now and how much would pay for it?

09-06-2011, 07:39 AM	#43
Frogfish Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Shanghai Posts: 4,490	Originally posted by StepOne This is plain crap Who said else than you that is 100% weather resistant? Should not have been something more like waterproof? In my opinion D300s is the better camera. If you can live with size (200g more). Both are WR. And d300s will keep value far better. Who's buying K-7 now and how much would pay for it? I think Ash is talking about the older D300 not the D300s - big price, and performance, difference.

09-07-2011, 04:15 PM	#44
chattphotos Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: TN Posts: 53	Originally posted by StepOne This is plain crap Who said else than you that is 100% weather resistant? Should not have been something more like waterproof? Do you own a K-7? I have tested the K-7 WR to the max, Pentax says they designed the camera to be weather/water/dust-resistant. I shot in the rain for an hour and then a few months later, I was splashed by Shamu, my camera and WR lenses still work perfectly! I checked the seals, no water permeation at all. So it's a personal testament to a good design!

09-07-2011, 04:23 PM	#45
chattphotos Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: TN Posts: 53	Originally posted by johnmflores K-r is cheap and better than K-7 in terms of ISO If I remember correctly, the K-r has no AF illumination... a highly valued element for us semi-pro photographers.