[falconeye]

The 50D is blisteringly fast and dead accurate in AF-C mode when tracking.

In the AF.C test from the German magazine test (which I copied for K-7), the 40D came out significantly ahead of D300 (and 50D wouldn't be worse, I guess): 50% more shots (i.e. faster) and about 30% less out-of-focus, 93.6% vs. 90.0% in focus. The K-7 was more like the D300 results.

So, the 50D AF.C would most likely outperform a K-7. But the K-7 is more than fast enough for me. Interestingly, nobody ever complained about slow AF.C on D300

[pingflood]

Oh, not saying the K-7 is bad at all. I'm sure it is more than sufficient for the vast majority of shooting. And as you point out, the D300 is well regarded as performing nicely in continuous AF mode.

As for 40D vs 50D -- the 50D has gotten some comments about tracking better than the 40, from people like Art Morris (the bird pro photographer). Not sure what the differences are though... I do enjoy that I am getting my 6+ fps even when using continuous mode on birds and such, surprised that the D300 appears to slow down.

Don't suppose there's any way to get a copy of that test? Did they publish it online? I do speak a bit of German so could stumble through it.

[Pentaxor]

it's the predictive AF feature in AF-C, I believe ! focus is set at such distance in every millisec.

I'm just wondering why Pentax implement such speed at AF-C, if it can achieve 5.2 fps speed at AF-S. there must be a reason for it. anybody might have a clue on this?

[pingflood]

If you're referring to why AF-C slows down the frames/second so much, I am guessing it's a matter of processing power.

[falconeye]

Don't suppose there's any way to get a copy of that test? Did they publish it online? I do speak a bit of German so could stumble through it.

It's not online.
In my blog article, I referred back here where I once summarized the test:
-> https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/25521-magazine-review-...good-info.html

I still have a print copy and I may consider creating a PDF from it. Not sure about copyright issues though (it is one year old now).

[Torphoto]

AF on par with a 50D? I'd love for that to be the case, but I very seriously doubt it. The 50D is blisteringly fast and dead accurate in AF-C mode when tracking.

The 40D and 50D have the same af system in general, their afc is shutter priority ( af syncro or servo or something ), ie doesn't wait for focus. Also note that one needs to test similar speed lenses, ie NOT the 50-135 as it is slow to af vs the 70-200 usm but lets say give both a sigma 70-200 hsm lens and then try it, the K7 will surprise you! I didn't do bench mark tests but did compare in real world, the K7 is on par imho ie will get similar results, it has caught up to the point that a user will not immediately notice a difference between the 2. The D300's af I do consider better than either with the 70-200vr f.28 from what I have seen. Do note that the environment I have used them in is very uncontrolled and just apparent af speeds time to lock etc.

Case in point, during carnival here when I first was using the 50-135 AFC was near useless on the k20d and I was getting to many oof shots, switching to the 70mm and 40mm the faster af helped alot, to the point I was holding my own with out needing to switch to the d300. Another photog with a 40d and 5d next to me was suddenly surprised by the pentax, his lenses were not the canon usm but sigma and tamrons that did not af as fast. The lenses af speed plays alot into it and too many tests do not level the playing field, Pentax does need faster af IN THE LENSES but even then with the 50-135 on the K7 it can track to a level it won't be embarrassed by a 40/50d or d90. Hence again, on par.

[falconeye]

NOT the 50-135 as it is slow to af vs the 70-200 usm but lets say give both a sigma 70-200 hsm lens

Interesting comment.

So you say that Sigma 70-200 hsm II is considerably faster in AF speed than DA* 50-135? Despite AF lock delays some Sigma lenses are known for?

And how competitive is Sigma HSM II compared to Canon ring motors? I heard the latter are still faster.

[Torphoto]

Interesting comment.

So you say that Sigma 70-200 hsm II is considerably faster in AF speed than DA* 50-135? Despite AF lock delays some Sigma lenses are known for?

And how competitive is Sigma HSM II compared to Canon ring motors? I heard the latter are still faster.

Ah yes the usm is faster but now you have removed the extra sped advantage from the lens in the test, now you have 2 similar speed focusing lenses, or put at 50-135 tokina ( dog slow ) on the canon and test vs the 50-135 da*, now with that advantage removed retest and now see. The K20D is slow to afc but the k7 is improved, to the point it can actually track tho in small jumps well enough. Give the canon or nikon a lens that focuses just as fast ( or as slow depending ) and things suddenly change.

[jogiba]

It is an unfortunate thing to compare the professional level camera of Pentax with the Canon's entry level camera 500D. However, if you observe the two, you will get a disappointing conclusion.

1, Canon 500D has 15 million pixels, more than 14.6 million for K7.

2, Canon 500D has much cleaner picture than K-7. Just look at the comparasion
Canon EOS 500D Review - Image Quality | PhotographyBLOG

Pentax K-7 Review - Image Quality | PhotographyBLOG

It is seen that ISO3200 for 500D is just equivalent to ISO800 for K7

3, Canon 500D has FULL HD movie, but K7 does not have.

4, Canon 500D has almost all the functions that K7 boasts, such as Dynamic Range Expansion, Anti-Shake(Lens), Self-Cleaning, Fast Focus. In addition, Canon is known to have the accurate metering, in stead of dark Metering for Pentax.


In sum, there is nothing that is unique to K7 except the 100% viewfinder, but does it worth the extra $1500-$800=$700????????????

The worst thing for K7 is that the IQ does not improve much. It is a big drawback for Pentax.

I'd rather have a low-noise 10 million pixel camera than have a noisy 14.6 million camera, not to mention the fact that pixel # for 500D is 15 million.

In sum, 500D is much much better than K7. I will not spend extra money to become a Pentaxian.

Hey kid, just ask your mom for money to buy your 500D and go shoot some 20fps video so you could get a migrane.

[pingflood]

Ah yes the usm is faster but now you have removed the extra sped advantage from the lens in the test, now you have 2 similar speed focusing lenses, or put at 50-135 tokina ( dog slow ) on the canon and test vs the 50-135 da*, now with that advantage removed retest and now see. The K20D is slow to afc but the k7 is improved, to the point it can actually track tho in small jumps well enough. Give the canon or nikon a lens that focuses just as fast ( or as slow depending ) and things suddenly change.

Even if this is the case, which I do sort of doubt as Canon has been improving their AF system significantly over the years while Pentax is still more or less using the same thing, the point is sort of moot if you can't get lenses that perform as well in Pentax mount. Most of Canon's nicer glass focuses very very fast, and you do have to look at it as a system when in practical use.

Of course, if the lens is really slow mechanically then yes, it becomes quite the bottleneck and it doesn't matter much how good the body is...

[Torphoto]

Even if this is the case, which I do sort of doubt as Canon has been improving their AF system significantly over the years while Pentax is still more or less using the same thing, the point is sort of moot if you can't get lenses that perform as well in Pentax mount. Most of Canon's nicer glass focuses very very fast, and you do have to look at it as a system when in practical use.

Of course, if the lens is really slow mechanically then yes, it becomes quite the bottleneck and it doesn't matter much how good the body is...

Well you are correct and yes Pentax does need faster lenses with no doubt,

[tigrebleu]

It is an unfortunate thing to compare the professional level camera of Pentax with the Canon's entry level camera 500D. However, if you observe the two, you will get a disappointing conclusion.

1, Canon 500D has 15 million pixels, more than 14.6 million for K7.

Except for pro-grade L-series lenses, most Canon glass won't be able to match the resolution of that 15 Mpix sensor. The Pentax 50 F/1.4 will match the resolution of that 14.6 Mpix sensor, however.

And a slight 0.4 Mpix is not even worth to mention... It's only a few pix more in height and width.


2, Canon 500D has much cleaner picture than K-7. Just look at the comparasion
Canon EOS 500D Review - Image Quality | PhotographyBLOG

Pentax K-7 Review - Image Quality | PhotographyBLOG

It is seen that ISO3200 for 500D is just equivalent to ISO800 for K7

I agree. But the K-7 is a pre-production sample. However, I admit that Canon has excellent sensors and that thet are the leaders in high ISO noise vs. detail (IMHO). If I could take two things out of the DSLRs of competitors and put 'em in the Pentax DSLRs, it would be the Canon's CMOS sensors and the Nikon's i-TTL 3D flash metering.


3, Canon 500D has FULL HD movie, but K7 does not have.

True, Canon has more resolution. But Canon is only 20fps, which is jittery. Pentax does 1500 x 1000 at 30fps, which is smooth.


4, Canon 500D has almost all the functions that K7 boasts, such as Dynamic Range Expansion, Anti-Shake(Lens), Self-Cleaning, Fast Focus. In addition, Canon is known to have the accurate metering, in stead of dark Metering for Pentax.

Wrong. The new Pentax exposure metering is the second best improvement in the Pentax K family, AF speed and accuracy being the first. It's now as good as Canon's overall metering, but not yet close to Nikon's flash metering.

And you get:

1) A magnesium body, something that's only available on the Canon 50D, which is much heavier. The 500D feels like a plastic toy. But kids and girls like them.

2) A weather-sealed body, something that's only available in the 1D series with Canon.

3) A camera that can be used at -10 Celcius degrees, something no other DSLR is capable of (at least other manufacturers recommend NOT using their DSLRs below 0 Celcius).

4) An in-body stabilization, so you can use a Pentax 50mm F/1.4 lens wide open in much lower light than if you're using a non-IS Canon 50mm F/1.4 lens wide open.

5) In-camera horizon level indicator, something you can't find on a Canon body. You can also get a Nikon pro body to get such a feature.

6) In-camera HDR imaging, something you need to do with a software when using a Canon 500D.

7) A dust reduction system that WORKS. Chasseur d'images tested them some time ago and the Canon's was the worst of all, almost useless. Pentax and Sony did fair, and Olympus was very good. The K-7 now boasts a dust reduction system similar to that of the Olympus E-series. The Canon's dust reduction system did improved, but not enough to compete against Pentax or Olympus.

8) And so on... Like lots of high quality primes made specifically for digital APS-C. With Canon, you get very expensive primes made for film (and a few made-for digital full frame). And you get a lot of slow consumer zooms (with or without IS, something that will not help you freezing action).


In sum, there is nothing that is unique to K7 except the 100% viewfinder, but does it worth the extra $1500-$800=$700????????????

It's the addition of the features above that makes the K-7 such a unique camera. The price is similar to that of the Nikon D300, which also has weather seals. Making a DSLR impervious to rain, snow and dust means a more expensive DSLR... Just look at the Canon 1D series, the only Canon DSLRs to offer WS.


The worst thing for K7 is that the IQ does not improve much. It is a big drawback for Pentax.

I'd rather have a low-noise 10 million pixel camera than have a noisy 14.6 million camera, not to mention the fact that pixel # for 500D is 15 million.

Agreed, the Mpix race needs to slow down. The 50D rates no better (if not worse) than the 40D at high ISO, because the photosites have gone way too small. A 10 Mpix K-7 would have better high ISO noise, that's for sure. But 14.6 Mpix is still a good compromise in APS-C.


In sum, 500D is much much better than K7. I will not spend extra money to become a Pentaxian.

Cameras are tools, and everyone has its preferences. I thought about going full frame, and I would have prefered a Nikon D700 (rugged, with weather seals) than a Canon EOS 5D MkII (studio DSLR with no weather seals).

But it seems I'll stick to the APS-C right now, if only for the too expensive price. And you know, if I had to buy an APS-C DSLR tomorrow, I'd choose either the Nikon D300 or the Pentax K-7. Canon wouldn't even be on my list, because only its 1D and 1Ds bodies have weather seals. I shoot some (income-generating) pictures in rain, dust, sleet and snow and the WS is a must for me.

So if you like Canon better, go for Canon. You don't have to keep using Pentax... There's nothing wrong with Pentax, Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, Sigma and Fuji. Each one of these manufacturers makes very good products, each one with its strengths and weaknesses. It's the guy behind the camera, the one using the tool that matters, not the brand of the tool. So buy a 500D if you feel it's the tool you prefer.

[GLXLR]

The picture that shows K-7 noise is made with a pre-production sample. It doesn't have the production sensor and production firmware, so it is useless.

The production model is almost the same though, so it should be comparable.

OP, you should also realize that the T1i only has about a 1/2 to 1 stop difference between the K-7 if you turn on NR. Also, if we use your theory, then the D300 is not much better than the T1i either, since it offers neither higher resolution nor video recording, but it does offer the fantastic build quality, fast fps, weather proofing, fast AF system (compared to lower models anyhow), and viewfinder, all of which the K-7 provides and more (without the 51AF point focus). I don't think you have done enough homework...

[GLXLR]

amphysics, your claim of owning a K10D 2 years ago, (2007) brought me to a conclusion that within those years, you haven't really able to solve the noises or know how to use the K10D's full potential at all. don't get me wrong, but it sounds like you don't really have much experience yet with dSLRs. you are simply influenced by things written on paper rather than testing them out yourself. I'm extremely confident that you haven't really have any clues whatsoever.

anyway, I'll give you some things to think about. why do you think that the new 500D is sold at such a low price? there hasn't been a Canon Rebel series which broke the 1,000 dollar plateau. the Rebel series is the budget series of Canon and has one of the ugliest IQ, colors and contrast. if you would do some further research, why do you think that the Rebel 500D is also cheaper to it's older brother Canon 40D which came out 2 years ago? that should give you a clue. eventhough that I was a Nikon D80 shooter, I do admit that the Canon 40D was a monster during it's time. but the Rebels, they belong in the garbage bin.

C'mon... first people bash him for bashing Pentax but now you are bashing Canon? Rebels IQ is = to the 40D and 50D.

[Pentaxor]

C'mon... first people bash him for bashing Pentax but now you are bashing Canon? Rebels IQ is = to the 40D and 50D.

I dont mean to bash Canon but, which Rebel series was atleast equal or better than the 40D and 50D IQ-wise? or a Rebel with an 1/8000 shutter speed or with a pentaprism? the point here is, if you are going to make a comparison or pair something with another thing, atleast make sure that that camera is atleast at par. if I would put it in a sarcastic way, it would appear something like this, " guess what, I'm gonna buy me some matchbox car because it has all the features that a Ferrari Model toy car has. the only advantage of the Ferrari car, is because of it's nice paint job, that's all".