[Class A]

I compiled some of my experience with the K-7 video mode into a three part blog article.

Very nice, thanks (most sounded familiar, though ).

I think you want to relabel your "IQ buster" to "IQ booster". Otherwise it seems to express the opposite of what it is intended for.

---

Last edited by Class A; 06-30-2009 at 08:34 PM.

[falconeye]

"IQ buster" to "IQ booster"

You're right. It's a bad name anyway. Changed to "IQ master" (still a bad name, though

[Ishpuini]

I compiled some of my experience with the K-7 video mode into a three part blog article.

It may contain some interesting tricks and bits for those interested in the video feature.

Tx Falk! Again a very interesting blog post!

Did you use the microphone with the dead cat (=windshield) of without? If so, would you say it is a useful asset?

I would be very interested to see you video PP tool in final production version. It does seem to make a difference indeed.

I wasn't very interested in the video mode to begin with, but I'll do some experimenting with it once I get my K-7. I've had some ideas since the announcement, but I'll remain a still photographer above all.

Tx again!!

Wim

[falconeye]

Did you use the microphone with the dead cat (=windshield) of without? If so, would you say it is a useful asset?

Because the early firmware had problems with the stereo microphone (now fixed in fw 1.0), I didn't make many tests of this. But I assume there is a reason why the dead cat is in the box. I guess you really need it if there is wind outside.

[falconeye]

New blog entry:
Pentax K-7 Concluding Review Report



I now published my concluding review. The Alpha Test is going to end and this will be my last article as an alpha tester. Which is a good thing, now with K-7s flying out everywhere

Here is my verdict, copied from the blog:

Pentax K-7
★★★★☆
Editor's Choice
"APS-C SLR camera"
(5 stars not assigned in category; as of 2009, July 1st)

Note: Interpretation as meant in the blog is this: I do prefer the K-7 over D90, D300 and 50D. Where in the D300, I dislike its bulk and missing video option. So, it is partly a personal preference. But hey, I am the editor

[digital_aspirin]

A big thank you Falk, for your effort and detailed and objective tests you've performed. I hope you would keep on updating your blog with new articles.

I'm a K10D owner and I think K-7 will be a forward leap. I doubt it'll make me a better photographer though.

[jacksonpritt]

I notice the initial post mentions a "kit lens" with the K-7, but right now it is only available as the body with no lens...

Will the K-7 eventually be released with a kit lens, or is that incorrect?

[falconeye]

Will the K-7 eventually be released with a kit lens, or is that incorrect?

Yes, from what I see in online stores, it comes in three bundles:
- body ~1299
- normal kit (body + 18-55 WR) ~1349
- double kit (normal + 50-200 WR) ~1499
(prices to vary but it gives you an idea about relation)

The K-7's kit lenses are great value because they are weather resistant. Personally, I would recommend the normal kit because there are more contrasty tele zooms out there ...

Unfortunately, I didn't see the BG4 battery grip bundled. It is rather expensive.

[robjmitchell]

Thanks for all the effort Falk!

[Yohan Pamudji]

Brilliant work all around. I hope you get to test the next Pentax DSLR before it's rolled out!

[Class A]

New blog entry:
Pentax K-7 Concluding Review Report

Thanks Falk! Great effort with all your tests.

Puts the "What Digital Camera" "review" to shame!
But that's a bad way to praise your review(s). They are great on an absolute level.

Hope that Pentax wakes up and revives the "Remote Assistant" or provides some other means of tethered shooting. I pointed to the many applications you list from the "Dear Pentax" thread.

BTW, what a lovely lens, that CZ 50/1.4. Does it have a K-mount? Do you know how it compares against the Pentax FA 50/1.4?

[falconeye]

BTW, what a lovely lens, that CZ 50/1.4. Does it have a K-mount? Do you know how it compares against the Pentax FA 50/1.4?

Thanks for the nice words.

Yes, the CZ 50/1.4 is PK mount with A aperture setting, manual focus only.
I don't have the FA 50/1.4. Generally speaking, it has great sharpness, contrast, colors and bokeh. Its weak point is some flair (light seams) fully open which makes it less than ideal for night cityscape shots.

[Class A]

Thanks for the info on your gorgeous lens.

I don't have the FA 50/1.4.

It has great sharpness starting with f/2.8. Below that, it isn't super sharp and loses quite some contrast, especially at f/1.4. It also is capable of some spectacular flare patterns.

Bokeh is usable but not super fantastic. Foreground bokeh is better than background bokeh, one wishes it were the other way round. The bokeh is, I believe, better than that of the Pentax 50/1.7 which is sharper in the 1.7-2.8 range but trades that in for not quite as usable bokeh (the 50/1.4 apparently has some aspherical aberrations intentionally left uncorrected).

BTW, why did you regard having more than 77 metering zones as a plus in your review conclusion? What is it you can improve on with even more metering zones?

[Maffer]

Well, I would imagine if there is large amount of zones, say 1000, for metering it becomes easier to make an algorithm which is able to give more or less weight for overexposed bits of the scene. For example shooting thru a thick bush with strong backlight there can be hundreds of tiny little areas which might be overexposed but have otherwise very little meaning for overall result. Thus, a 10 zone metering system would more likely cause problems calculation a good exposure because 1/10 of the zone would be measured as overexposed should it contain one tiny overexposed spot which would really not matter.

[falconeye]

BTW, why did you regard having more than 77 metering zones as a plus in your review conclusion? What is it you can improve on with even more metering zones?

I didn't want to exclude the possibility that Nikon's high end meter can in some difficult cicumstances provide a more accurate metering. Because I didn't test this out (actually, I don't know), I just made a remark relating to the spec sheets. 1000 simply is closer to 10 million than 77; and 77 closer than 11

To tell the truth, I am wondering how the 1,500,000 "zones" from the LV feed are used in metering (the meter in the prism blacks out). I've seen more than 1 stop difference in metering between LV and prism. Another interesting question ...

But the difference is bigger on the ISO side (i.e., the difference in plain shutter/aperture setting) are smaller, like 20%. Somewhere deep down in the algorithm, there must be a little man telling that increasing ISO isn't hurting nobody as long as no highlight is burned (LV tends to increase ISO if it is safe). Another interesting question ...