Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-30-2012, 02:07 AM   #16
Senior Member
keyofnight's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 128
Damn. I was planning on buying a used K-7 sometime later this year…but I guess that's a terrible plan. Damn. Back to the drawing board, I suppose.

04-30-2012, 02:26 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Chaos_Realm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,251
QuoteOriginally posted by keyofnight Quote
Damn. I was planning on buying a used K-7 sometime later this year…but I guess that's a terrible plan. Damn. Back to the drawing board, I suppose.
I'm not sure if you've read the thread but I think your getting the wrong impression of this camera.

Is it the best? No. Is it very capable? Most certainly
04-30-2012, 03:03 AM   #18
Loyal Site Supporter
Bruce Clark's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Brookfield, Victoria
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,768
My one and only DSLR is a K-7 which I have had for over 3 years. I can't say I have experienced any problems with it at all. Obviously I can't compare it's performance relative to any other camera, Pentax or otherwise but at this stage I have no intention of upgrading.
04-30-2012, 03:04 AM   #19
Veteran Member
ihasa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: West Midlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,054
Well all the info about the K7 vs Kx/K5 image quality has always been readily available on the web. If you buy a K7 knowing this, you are saying to yourself 'I just want a more 'pro' feeling camera with weather sealing, and accept I'm going to have to work within it's limitations'. At lower ISO's the K7 is fine, although possibly not quite as clean at 1:1 if staring at huge enlargements of your pictures is what you like to do! So, notwithstanding it's clearly not as good a sensor at high ISOs, I think saying it is 'dick' is possibly a bit strong, and if it's not fulfilling your expectations... you ... um... should have done a bit more homework before you pulled the trigger!

FWIW I use the K7 at ISOs up to 2000, and although noise is there in abundance when I pixel peep, it's not so bad in the image as a whole. As a self described 'big film shooter', try comparing the noise at ISO 800 with the grain of an ISO 100 high-end print film such as Reala ;P

04-30-2012, 03:08 AM   #20
Senior Member
noVICE's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 165
To the OP.
I am sure you have done this, but I would check that your Highlight Correction and Shadow Correction (under D-range Setting) are both turned off. I made the foolish mistake of not checking that and taking a whole heap of shots with them on and the amount of noise they generated was quite astonishing.
BTW, I love my K7. I will admit that high iso photography is not its forte, but otherwise it is an amazing piece of kit and if you pair it with some good glass you have yourself a damn fine DSLR.
04-30-2012, 03:12 AM   #21
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,243
I shot with a K7, first alongside a K20 and then as a back up to my K5 and it isn't that bad. Sure the sensor has more noise and less dynamic range than the kx, but it cleans up fine. It is important to get your exposure right, because underexposure with the K7 can be brutal -- that's where you see your noise. If yours isn't exposing correctly, then you need to get it fixed. Mine was pretty much right on.

K7 at iso 1600.

04-30-2012, 03:41 AM   #22
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Nass's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The British Isles
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,251
K7 doesn't like underexposure. Once I realised this and made sure that if I were going to be off, be off on the side of a bit over rather than a bit under, it made all the difference.
04-30-2012, 03:57 AM   #23
Senior Member
keyofnight's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 128
QuoteOriginally posted by Chaos_Realm Quote
I'm not sure if you've read the thread but I think your getting the wrong impression of this camera.

Is it the best? No. Is it very capable? Most certainly
I've read. (;

I was just hoping the noise performance would be a little better than I hear it is—it's a bit of a deal breaker for me. I love playing with silhouettes, shadows, and low light.

I wish I could try one out.

04-30-2012, 04:16 AM   #24
Pentaxian
RobG's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canberra
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,715
QuoteOriginally posted by wizofoz Quote
I have a K-x, K-7 and K-5
There is absoloutely no way the K-x is better than the K-7 at low ISO levels. There is no way the K-7 behaves in the way you describe. I believe you have a faulty camera. Possible a wonky exposure meter. Have you tried doing a manual exposure calculation and using those settings on the camera?
Here is a shot by the K-7 at ISO 2000 in mixed lighting. Looks pretty good to me
The shot you posted is really interesting, because I don't think I could possibly have achieved an image of that quality with my K7 at ISO2000. I generally avoid going over ISO400 because the noise becomes too high. Having read the comments of others however, I think I'll try resetting the camera to the factory defaults to see if something I have changed has caused the camera to exaggerate the noise - even in RAW.
04-30-2012, 04:30 AM - 2 Likes   #25
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
Well I have to agree that the K-7 isn't up for modern challenge, but I always feld that my K-7 was far more superior to the K-x (no matter what all others think and say).

With the K-7:
04-30-2012, 04:38 AM   #26
Site Supporter
Chaos_Realm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,251
QuoteOriginally posted by RobG Quote
The shot you posted is really interesting, because I don't think I could possibly have achieved an image of that quality with my K7 at ISO2000. I generally avoid going over ISO400 because the noise becomes too high. Having read the comments of others however, I think I'll try resetting the camera to the factory defaults to see if something I have changed has caused the camera to exaggerate the noise - even in RAW.
I'm not sure resetting to defaults is the best, as I think it has High ISO NR on, There was a thread kicking about that outlined how to get the most out of the K-7 sensor at high ISO's but I cant lay my hands on it right now. Will Update when I find It
04-30-2012, 04:49 AM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 307
QuoteOriginally posted by runslikeapenguin Quote
.....Snip...... Even the auto modes on the K7 are almost black all the time. And if i open up to grab some shadow detail ALL my highlights blow the **** out pretty much always. its like BOOM Highlight head shot, PICTURE MEGA KILL!!

Has anyone else experienced this? or is it just me? All my firware is up to date and im using the same manual lenses that i did with my Kx.
Is there some magic setting in this camera? a button to turn off the suck option?
You say you ar having trouble with the Auto Modes on you Manual Lenses? For starters these two terms don't necesarly go together.... Are you getting the same bad results on auto/kit lenese? Suggest starting in full Manual mode before expermenting in other modes.

You might (if you haven't already) read this 'how to' for sucessfully using Manual lenes on the K7/K5

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-lens-articles/110657-how-use-meter...k-x-k-7-a.html
04-30-2012, 05:19 AM   #28
Pentaxian
RobG's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canberra
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,715
QuoteOriginally posted by Chaos_Realm Quote
I'm not sure resetting to defaults is the best, as I think it has High ISO NR on, There was a thread kicking about that outlined how to get the most out of the K-7 sensor at high ISO's but I cant lay my hands on it right now. Will Update when I find It
Thanks! Even at 400 ISO I find the shadow noise on the K7 irritating. I took a bunch of photos of airliners on Saturday and even though the light was good, the shadow noise really detracted. Maybe I'm expecting too much, but the conditions weren't that challenging.

By the way - to the OP - the K7 is a great camera. If you want to shoot in low light, it's not the right choice. I also have a K200 and it produces better results for astrophotography than the K7, IMO. But for general photography, there's a lot of features on the K7 I miss on the K200. Just being able to adjust the bias on the program mode for shutter speed or aperture is a big point in its favour. The shutter on the K7 is faster and quieter, which helps in wildlife or action photography.

PS Have a look at this review of the K7.
PPS I just turned off shadow correction - I suspect that it's the main source of my irritation.

Last edited by RobG; 04-30-2012 at 05:47 AM. Reason: more info
04-30-2012, 05:46 AM   #29
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by keyofnight Quote
I've read. (;

I was just hoping the noise performance would be a little better than I hear it is—it's a bit of a deal breaker for me. I love playing with silhouettes, shadows, and low light.

I wish I could try one out.
It's no where near as bad as the OP posted. I have shot with ti up to 3200 iso and been able to get more than usable results with proper PP. I never use the highlight shadow correction or jpeg. I frequently shoot in b/w so I'm not concerned with a little noise since I will likely add some grain to smooth the noise out at high iso

iso 3200 +2ev (eek)

still works ok though, but yep noisy (for that matter I saw shots from several cameras that night and they all were noisy the light was almost non existant)




Mostly though I try and stick iso 640 and below whre light allows - but that would be true of any camera i use

iso 1250



iso 160




I's till no K5, but it is a very capable camera. I find it meters better than the K10 or ist ds. Can't speak to the kx because the one i bought i returned after a week, i just didn't like it aside from it's light ability. K10 is still better at iso 100 but i think that is more to do with the ccd sensor.
04-30-2012, 05:52 AM   #30
Site Supporter
LaurenOE's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,487
I agree. I LOVED everything about my K7 except the sensor. It was a big disappointment. I had to really try to get good quality images. That's not to say it took "bad" images, just not what I had experienced with my *istD and K10. The K5 got it right, and by the end of today, I should have another!
Reply

Bookmarks
  • 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!
battery, camera, dslr, grip, hands, k5, k7, kx, photography, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Suggestion Shopping Links are Terrible builttospill Site Suggestions and Help 8 11-10-2011 02:49 PM
How do I fix these terrible pictures? robdrobd Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 28 01-07-2011 03:21 PM
My K20D takes terrible images with my 645 lenses, why? drougge Pentax DSLR Discussion 23 06-01-2010 10:19 AM
A terrible new year Syb General Talk 16 01-09-2009 11:03 PM
New K200D - terrible color JN99 Pentax DSLR Discussion 61 07-31-2008 07:01 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:38 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com 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?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top