K-7 First impressions... wow!

jct us101 · 06-06-2009, 06:47 PM

It almost looks smaller than the K-M.

Bart · 06-07-2009, 02:06 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

To be honest I didn't even notice... because the viewfinder was a pleasure to look into... like looking into a 35mm film camera again...

Thanks for your answer, creampuff.

Originally posted by mutedphotos

From what I understand, even with the smaller magnification, the overall size of the viewfinder is still slightly bigger than the K10/K20...

Less magnifacation & slightly bigger might cancel each other out.

It would seem that the split screen users will have to add an additional cost though

Bart · 06-07-2009, 02:08 AM

Originally posted by jct us101

It almost looks smaller than the K-M.

Yes, I noticed this as well.

**rparmar** · 06-07-2009, 04:48 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

People who say they don't need or want video really need to re-examine their mindset or shed off any old prejudices because it is just a BLAST to use.

I am glad you are enthusiastic but this comment was not necessary. People who don't need video are not necessarily prejudiced; they might just have different priorities or interests from yourself. It's not that difficult to understand.

For those that are into video I've written an article on Capturing Sound that might help.

séamuis · 06-07-2009, 05:10 AM

Originally posted by jct us101

It almost looks smaller than the K-M.

its not. not a lot bigger, but its bigger.

creampuff · 06-07-2009, 05:45 AM

Originally posted by rparmar

I am glad you are enthusiastic but this comment was not necessary. People who don't need video are not necessarily prejudiced; they might just have different priorities or interests from yourself. It's not that difficult to understand.

Suddenly I got a nanny to tell me what I can comment on...

Wonder why you're taking umbrage? Was this a sore point for you?

There are still people who can't buy into the idea that there ought to be video and who reason that having that capability in a camera somehow dilutes that photographic ideal of taking still images.
In this era of digital convergence, we all need to be open to new creative opportunities that technology offers.

séamuis · 06-07-2009, 05:57 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

Suddenly I got a nanny to tell me what I can comment on...

Wonder why you're taking umbrage? Was this a sore point for you?

There are still people who can't buy into the idea that there ought to be video and who reason that having that capability in a camera somehow dilutes that photographic ideal of taking still images.
In this era of digital convergence, we all need to be open to new creative opportunities that technology offers.

I have been against video in a DSLR since the first ones started showing up with it, but I have to admit.. being able to shoot video with a takumar lens sounds pretty neat. it wont be the reason I purchase a k-7, but I will be looking forward to it none the less.

panoguy · 06-07-2009, 07:44 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

Suddenly I got a nanny to tell me what I can comment on...

Wonder why you're taking umbrage? Was this a sore point for you?

There are still people who can't buy into the idea that there ought to be video and who reason that having that capability in a camera somehow dilutes that photographic ideal of taking still images.
In this era of digital convergence, we all need to be open to new creative opportunities that technology offers.

<sarcasm> I take umbrage at the whole "back LCD display" idea!

My rant is that Pentax is wasting their time and technology on this "crutch" for people who cannot simply wait until later to see their shots or adjust their settings with the top panel and a few dials! We did that not too long ago in the "film days" so why this pointless "feature" of a 3" VGA LCD!!?!!

</sarcasm>

Ignore the umbrage. Some people can't look on the sunny side of $1,000,000.00!

séamuis · 06-07-2009, 07:48 AM

Originally posted by panoguy

<sarcasm> I take umbrage at the whole "back LCD display" idea!

My rant is that Pentax is wasting their time and technology on this "crutch" for people who cannot simply wait until later to see their shots or adjust their settings with the top panel and a few dials! We did that not too long ago in the "film days" so why this pointless "feature" of a 3" VGA LCD!!?!!

</sarcasm>

Ignore the umbrage. Some people can't look on the sunny side of $1,000,000.00!

personally I do in fact find the back LCD useless. I almost never use mine other than for changing settings. I have had the review function turned off ever since I first got my K110D. it will be turned off when I get a K-7.

Duck Dodgers · 06-07-2009, 08:05 AM

Agreed. Review function turned off here, too. Can't get rid of the rear display, though...computerized cameras are virtually impossible to operate to their full potential without menus nowadays.

**rparmar** · 06-07-2009, 08:51 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

Suddenly I got a nanny to tell me what I can comment on...

Wonder why you're taking umbrage? Was this a sore point for you?

I think I explained myself well enough the first time. Apparently it's ok for you to post your opinion but if I post mine you call me names. Obviously you're just looking for a fight. Sorry, won't give you one. I'm gone after this post.

Originally posted by creampuff

In this era of digital convergence, we all need to be open to new creative opportunities that technology offers.

Still no reason to slag those who want a camera to be first and foremost a camera.

krypticide · 06-07-2009, 09:00 AM

I also thought video was unnecessary on a DSLR, but after seeing what can be done and then dreaming about the artistic and technical possibilities (video is just so much more difficult to get right than photos), I'm quite excited. I think its inexorable that video will start to show up on pretty much all DSLRs...

Ratmagiclady · 06-07-2009, 09:03 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

There are still people who can't buy into the idea that there ought to be video and who reason that having that capability in a camera somehow dilutes that photographic ideal of taking still images.
In this era of digital convergence, we all need to be open to new creative opportunities that technology offers.

Well, I think there's plenty of us out here who didn't care much whether or not Pentax put its resources toward developing video capability, especially if it brought the price up, or caused compromises elsewhere. Looks like it isn't getting in the *way,* so, well, that's fine.

If I get hold of a K-7 down the road, I might even use that feature but I wouldn't go out of my way for it.

jsherman999 · 06-07-2009, 09:26 AM

Originally posted by séamuis

personally I do in fact find the back LCD useless. I almost never use mine other than for changing settings. I have had the review function turned off ever since I first got my K110D. it will be turned off when I get a K-7.

Seriously? I have auto-preview turned off, but I often manually bring up one out of every couple shots just to make sure exposure and sometimes DOF is what I expected.

With M lenses, I always do this - green button is nice, but I gotta be sure.

Isn't ignoring the back LCD completely giving up one of the advantages digital has over film?

.

Fototim · 06-07-2009, 09:34 AM

I try to look at HD in DSRL this way:
HD probably means that more people will buy the camera. And that probably means that the R&D cost pr produced unit will be lower. So despite my lack of need (as if thats something wrong) I don't mind HD in a new DSRL.

BTW. Most people seem to "need" Coca Cola. I don't. I honestly think I can live a perfectly happy life without that need.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5... Wow wow wow wow wow!! Hugely impressive.	65535	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	85	11-08-2010 08:45 PM
WOW!!!!	whbroker	Pentax DSLR Discussion	18	09-27-2010 12:36 PM
wow...	Yassarian	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	1	09-19-2010 05:25 PM
WOW	wandat	Welcomes and Introductions	0	06-06-2007 04:12 AM

06-06-2009, 06:47 PM	#31
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	It almost looks smaller than the K-M.

06-07-2009, 02:06 AM	#32
Bart Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: WW community of Pentax users Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,646	Originally posted by creampuff To be honest I didn't even notice... because the viewfinder was a pleasure to look into... like looking into a 35mm film camera again... Thanks for your answer, creampuff. Originally posted by mutedphotos From what I understand, even with the smaller magnification, the overall size of the viewfinder is still slightly bigger than the K10/K20... Less magnifacation & slightly bigger might cancel each other out. It would seem that the split screen users will have to add an additional cost though

06-07-2009, 02:08 AM	#33
Bart Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: WW community of Pentax users Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,646	Originally posted by jct us101 It almost looks smaller than the K-M. Yes, I noticed this as well.

06-07-2009, 04:48 AM	#34
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Originally posted by creampuff People who say they don't need or want video really need to re-examine their mindset or shed off any old prejudices because it is just a BLAST to use. I am glad you are enthusiastic but this comment was not necessary. People who don't need video are not necessarily prejudiced; they might just have different priorities or interests from yourself. It's not that difficult to understand. For those that are into video I've written an article on Capturing Sound that might help.

06-07-2009, 05:10 AM	#35
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	Originally posted by jct us101 It almost looks smaller than the K-M. its not. not a lot bigger, but its bigger.

06-07-2009, 05:45 AM	#36
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953 Original Poster	Originally posted by rparmar I am glad you are enthusiastic but this comment was not necessary. People who don't need video are not necessarily prejudiced; they might just have different priorities or interests from yourself. It's not that difficult to understand. Suddenly I got a nanny to tell me what I can comment on... Wonder why you're taking umbrage? Was this a sore point for you? There are still people who can't buy into the idea that there ought to be video and who reason that having that capability in a camera somehow dilutes that photographic ideal of taking still images. In this era of digital convergence, we all need to be open to new creative opportunities that technology offers.

06-07-2009, 05:57 AM	#37
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	Originally posted by creampuff Suddenly I got a nanny to tell me what I can comment on... Wonder why you're taking umbrage? Was this a sore point for you? There are still people who can't buy into the idea that there ought to be video and who reason that having that capability in a camera somehow dilutes that photographic ideal of taking still images. In this era of digital convergence, we all need to be open to new creative opportunities that technology offers. I have been against video in a DSLR since the first ones started showing up with it, but I have to admit.. being able to shoot video with a takumar lens sounds pretty neat. it wont be the reason I purchase a k-7, but I will be looking forward to it none the less.

06-07-2009, 07:44 AM	#38
panoguy Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,327	Originally posted by creampuff Suddenly I got a nanny to tell me what I can comment on... Wonder why you're taking umbrage? Was this a sore point for you? There are still people who can't buy into the idea that there ought to be video and who reason that having that capability in a camera somehow dilutes that photographic ideal of taking still images. In this era of digital convergence, we all need to be open to new creative opportunities that technology offers. <sarcasm> I take umbrage at the whole "back LCD display" idea! My rant is that Pentax is wasting their time and technology on this "crutch" for people who cannot simply wait until later to see their shots or adjust their settings with the top panel and a few dials! We did that not too long ago in the "film days" so why this pointless "feature" of a 3" VGA LCD!!?!! </sarcasm> Ignore the umbrage. Some people can't look on the sunny side of $1,000,000.00!

06-07-2009, 07:48 AM	#39
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	Originally posted by panoguy <sarcasm> I take umbrage at the whole "back LCD display" idea! My rant is that Pentax is wasting their time and technology on this "crutch" for people who cannot simply wait until later to see their shots or adjust their settings with the top panel and a few dials! We did that not too long ago in the "film days" so why this pointless "feature" of a 3" VGA LCD!!?!! </sarcasm> Ignore the umbrage. Some people can't look on the sunny side of $1,000,000.00! personally I do in fact find the back LCD useless. I almost never use mine other than for changing settings. I have had the review function turned off ever since I first got my K110D. it will be turned off when I get a K-7.

06-07-2009, 08:05 AM	#40
Duck Dodgers Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: in the 24½th Century! Photos: Gallery Posts: 439	Agreed. Review function turned off here, too. Can't get rid of the rear display, though...computerized cameras are virtually impossible to operate to their full potential without menus nowadays.

06-07-2009, 08:51 AM	#41
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Originally posted by creampuff Suddenly I got a nanny to tell me what I can comment on... Wonder why you're taking umbrage? Was this a sore point for you? I think I explained myself well enough the first time. Apparently it's ok for you to post your opinion but if I post mine you call me names. Obviously you're just looking for a fight. Sorry, won't give you one. I'm gone after this post. Originally posted by creampuff In this era of digital convergence, we all need to be open to new creative opportunities that technology offers. Still no reason to slag those who want a camera to be first and foremost a camera.

06-07-2009, 09:00 AM	#42
krypticide Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,079	I also thought video was unnecessary on a DSLR, but after seeing what can be done and then dreaming about the artistic and technical possibilities (video is just so much more difficult to get right than photos), I'm quite excited. I think its inexorable that video will start to show up on pretty much all DSLRs...

06-07-2009, 09:03 AM	#43
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Originally posted by creampuff There are still people who can't buy into the idea that there ought to be video and who reason that having that capability in a camera somehow dilutes that photographic ideal of taking still images. In this era of digital convergence, we all need to be open to new creative opportunities that technology offers. Well, I think there's plenty of us out here who didn't care much whether or not Pentax put its resources toward developing video capability, especially if it brought the price up, or caused compromises elsewhere. Looks like it isn't getting in the way, so, well, that's fine. If I get hold of a K-7 down the road, I might even use that feature but I wouldn't go out of my way for it.

06-07-2009, 09:26 AM	#44
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Originally posted by séamuis personally I do in fact find the back LCD useless. I almost never use mine other than for changing settings. I have had the review function turned off ever since I first got my K110D. it will be turned off when I get a K-7. Seriously? I have auto-preview turned off, but I often manually bring up one out of every couple shots just to make sure exposure and sometimes DOF is what I expected. With M lenses, I always do this - green button is nice, but I gotta be sure. Isn't ignoring the back LCD completely giving up one of the advantages digital has over film? .

06-07-2009, 09:34 AM	#45
Fototim Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Norway Posts: 268	I try to look at HD in DSRL this way: HD probably means that more people will buy the camera. And that probably means that the R&D cost pr produced unit will be lower. So despite my lack of need (as if thats something wrong) I don't mind HD in a new DSRL. BTW. Most people seem to "need" Coca Cola. I don't. I honestly think I can live a perfectly happy life without that need.