My take on the K-7 after a few months.

pcarfan · 10-10-2009, 04:52 AM

I wrote this as a response to a p.m.. Thought it may be helpful for others. I also want to point out, that from early on, when people were whining about high iso (some even left Pentax) , I always maintained that K-7 jpeg sucks for iso and is amazing when processed in RAW. Now, DPR has confirmed my findings.

"................Firstly, I never yearned for a higher IQ than what the K10D could deliver at iso 100 and 200 and I see absolutely no reason to upgrade for IQ. I am quickly finding out, given my yearning for the ultimate in IQ, only iso 100 and 200 are suitable with any camera however good they may be in high iso (a camera that is very good in iso 800 compared to another only means that it is less shitty at iso 800 than the other, nothing else....so, high iso comparisons IMO only compares how much less another camera sucks, as none of them give the ultimate IQ). (P.S: But, high iso is still very useful in certain situation)

Secondly, I only upgraded because I was needing a camera for my work and I bought the K-7 and use the K10D for work, so money wasn't a big decision when I bought the K-7.

But, I am so very glad I did it. The K-7 does everything the K10D can and more, what better reason to upgrade ?, and the following is my very conservative praises of the K-7 (I don't want my enthusiasm towards the camera to overemphasize the positives so I will try to hold it back a bit).

The K10D had lots of sample variations, I think (as mine had good AF even in mild darkness, except AF-C which sucked royally, and mine had random metering, except in spot metering). Compared to my K10D, the K-7 meters perfectly to my taste with and without P-TTL flash. With the K10D, every new scene needed me to take a few test shots and adjust the exposure before taking that first good shot, there is absolutely no need for that with the K-7. Metering is just as easy as pointing and shooting. (I've gotten my money's worth with this alone).

I absolutely love the AF adjustment for each lens, made a huge difference with most of my lenses.

I am not too sure about AF. In testing conditions I see a huge improvement in how fast the AF-C locks indoors, I just haven't really tested it in the field yet. I think it will be a definite improvement over the K10D. (In AF-C testing indoors, when I move my K10D from one part of the room to the other, I have to wait a bit before it locks focus on the the new scene, the K-7 most of the time is already locked focus even before my eyes drop down to check the confirmation). But, with my very limited test outdoors I am afraid it is still not perfect and my hunch is Canikons are still better at it. AF in low light is marginally better without the green assist light, but is perfect with the green assist light ON in AF-S.

High iso: IMO both the k20D and the K-7 are a definite improvement over the K10D, but then again all three give the ultimate IQ only at iso 100 and 200. But, when pushed as in say sharpening beyond good taste the K10D images at iso 100 deteriorates among the sharpening edges and start to show dark lines before showing any noise, but the K-7 images even at iso 100 will start to show noise more than just the sharpening artifacts along the edges. But, this is when pushed beyond the limits, so not overly relevant but I know there is a tremendous hidden baseline noise in the k-7 images when pushed. K-7 JPEG shows a whole lot more noise than the K10D at iso 200 and 400, but then the K10D get worse. But, when processing RAW which is what I do, I used K10D below iso 400, and I can say I easily use the K-7 upto iso 1600. For faces I used iso 200 and less with the K10D, and I can easily use up to iso 800 with the K-7). So, even though I only really like images shot at 100 and 200 for showcasing purposes, the higher iso definitely comes in handy for family snapshots taken without flash.

AWB is a joy and is frankly voodoo magic. I know raw wb can be changed, but I never could get the skin tones correct in RAW when the WB is messed up indoors, the K-7 has perfect AWB indoors. So, WB is also as simple as just pointing the camera and shooting. I LOVE it.

I enjoy the auto-iso feature more with the K-7, but again I am preferring to shoot at iso 100, so not very well used.

In general usability, I am loving the K-7. The minor changes to the size and shape is making a huge difference to me in daily use. I am loving the feel of the camera in my hand, and i am just shooting intuitively. Carrying the camera with the DA21 and and the FA43 (one in the pocket) is a joy, what a package.

SR is possibly improved as well. Sensor cleaning is tremendously better too.

Therefore, the K-7 has removed most of the sluggishness of the K10D. Some say they don't see much improvements in IQ with primes vs zooms or zeiss vs Tamron etc...but, I see a huge difference in IQ and rendering when it comes to lenses, but I see no IQ differences between most cameras at low iso's.

With the K-7 and the Pentax primes, I am enjoying photography more.........................

ll_coffee_lP · 10-10-2009, 05:28 AM

Very well put.

Two little items that I would like to add - because they are of importance to me, are: the 100% viewfinder (booyah!), and the amazing LCD. The K-7 is a wonderful tool.

c[_]

pcarfan · 10-10-2009, 05:59 AM

Shoot forgot the 100% viewfinder...that is as an improvement as the metering and AWB for me. I am not finding the higher res. LCD to be that useful now, as I am still not able to replicate what I want on it. May be I have to play with the settings a bit more, until I am confident that what I see in the LCD is indicative of what I will end up with my RAW images. Currently they are too far apart.

ll_coffee_lP · 10-10-2009, 10:36 AM

Agreed, however checking the LCD to see if your image is in focus is definitely easier (for me) - so that's a bonus. I shoot RAW as well, so the output on the screen is never indicative of the washed out image that you get when you check on the computer.

Auto orientation and having all the settings available are definite improvements.

Just finished an E-session (this morning) and the K-7 worked beautifully!

c[_]

aleonx3 · 10-10-2009, 11:51 AM

Thanks for the detail and field experience report, I definitely look forward to the upgrade to K-7.

Barnster · 10-10-2009, 04:05 PM

Good report!With the prices of the K20 and the K7 over here over here in Australia being a matter of a few hundred dollars difference,your report on the K7 has confirmed that paying the extra for the K7 would be the wise choice.I'm looking forward in getting my hands on one.

ordinaryimages · 10-13-2009, 10:18 PM

I find the K-7 a pleasure to use in Manual.

CypherOz · 10-13-2009, 10:45 PM

The K-7 is the best so far from Pentax. I love mine.

nulla · 10-14-2009, 03:55 AM

Originally posted by CypherOz

The K-7 is the best so far from Pentax. I love mine.

Just love using this camera. My biggest joy comes from the fact it is great shooting flash and it is also great to use in low light situations with fast lenses.

stanleyk · 10-14-2009, 04:22 AM

I finally got the K7 last Friday. I am absolutely thrilled with it. I'm a K10 and K20 owner. And I agree with all of the above especially the manual mode, viewfinder, and LCD. I'm an almost 100% ISO 100-400, M mode, and Raw shooter. This camera is exactly what I wanted.

I don't really use autofocus, but it appears to greatly improved over the K20/10.

Love the ergonomics.

I couldn't be happier.

alexeyga · 10-14-2009, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by stanleyk

I finally got the K7 last Friday. I am absolutely thrilled with it. I'm a K10 and K20 owner. And I agree with all of the above especially the manual mode, viewfinder, and LCD. I'm an almost 100% ISO 100-400, M mode, and Raw shooter. This camera is exactly what I wanted.

I don't really use autofocus, but it appears to greatly improved over the K20/10.

Love the ergonomics.

I couldn't be happier.

I don't really want to question your reasons, but why get the K7 if you don't use the AF? K20 is just as capable and tack sharper AF aside....

lesmore49 · 10-14-2009, 10:41 AM

I have a K10D and a KM. I appreciate your comparison between the K10D and the K7. I really like my K10D, but I'm glad to hear that the K7 does well.

I realize that MP's are not everything, but I do wish the K7 had more MP's than the K20D's 14.6.

I also wish the K7's ISO went beyond 6400...the KX is 12,800...the new top of the line Nikon is 102,800.

Yes....yes....I know the Nikon I'm talking about is a top Pro cameras and yes...comparisons are odious....but 6400 ISO is not much these days.

I would like to have around 25,000 ISO and for it to be a useful ISO...not grainy as H, E, double hockey sticks as we say here in Western Canada.

I'm pleased to hear about the AF...I would like the Pentax K7 or whatever follows the K7 to have AF ...in all light to be the equivalent of Canon or Nikon at it's price point.

While I'm at it...not to do with the K7....but Pentax please bring out a competitor with Pentax or Takumar on the lens in the 10-20 range.

I can't get a Tokina 11-16 F2.8, just the Sigma 10-20....and don't pull a Pentax 12-24 at $ 1299 Cdn....

10-10-2009, 04:52 AM	#1
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	My take on the K-7 after a few months. I wrote this as a response to a p.m.. Thought it may be helpful for others. I also want to point out, that from early on, when people were whining about high iso (some even left Pentax) , I always maintained that K-7 jpeg sucks for iso and is amazing when processed in RAW. Now, DPR has confirmed my findings. "................Firstly, I never yearned for a higher IQ than what the K10D could deliver at iso 100 and 200 and I see absolutely no reason to upgrade for IQ. I am quickly finding out, given my yearning for the ultimate in IQ, only iso 100 and 200 are suitable with any camera however good they may be in high iso (a camera that is very good in iso 800 compared to another only means that it is less shitty at iso 800 than the other, nothing else....so, high iso comparisons IMO only compares how much less another camera sucks, as none of them give the ultimate IQ). (P.S: But, high iso is still very useful in certain situation) Secondly, I only upgraded because I was needing a camera for my work and I bought the K-7 and use the K10D for work, so money wasn't a big decision when I bought the K-7. But, I am so very glad I did it. The K-7 does everything the K10D can and more, what better reason to upgrade ?, and the following is my very conservative praises of the K-7 (I don't want my enthusiasm towards the camera to overemphasize the positives so I will try to hold it back a bit). The K10D had lots of sample variations, I think (as mine had good AF even in mild darkness, except AF-C which sucked royally, and mine had random metering, except in spot metering). Compared to my K10D, the K-7 meters perfectly to my taste with and without P-TTL flash. With the K10D, every new scene needed me to take a few test shots and adjust the exposure before taking that first good shot, there is absolutely no need for that with the K-7. Metering is just as easy as pointing and shooting. (I've gotten my money's worth with this alone). I absolutely love the AF adjustment for each lens, made a huge difference with most of my lenses. I am not too sure about AF. In testing conditions I see a huge improvement in how fast the AF-C locks indoors, I just haven't really tested it in the field yet. I think it will be a definite improvement over the K10D. (In AF-C testing indoors, when I move my K10D from one part of the room to the other, I have to wait a bit before it locks focus on the the new scene, the K-7 most of the time is already locked focus even before my eyes drop down to check the confirmation). But, with my very limited test outdoors I am afraid it is still not perfect and my hunch is Canikons are still better at it. AF in low light is marginally better without the green assist light, but is perfect with the green assist light ON in AF-S. High iso: IMO both the k20D and the K-7 are a definite improvement over the K10D, but then again all three give the ultimate IQ only at iso 100 and 200. But, when pushed as in say sharpening beyond good taste the K10D images at iso 100 deteriorates among the sharpening edges and start to show dark lines before showing any noise, but the K-7 images even at iso 100 will start to show noise more than just the sharpening artifacts along the edges. But, this is when pushed beyond the limits, so not overly relevant but I know there is a tremendous hidden baseline noise in the k-7 images when pushed. K-7 JPEG shows a whole lot more noise than the K10D at iso 200 and 400, but then the K10D get worse. But, when processing RAW which is what I do, I used K10D below iso 400, and I can say I easily use the K-7 upto iso 1600. For faces I used iso 200 and less with the K10D, and I can easily use up to iso 800 with the K-7). So, even though I only really like images shot at 100 and 200 for showcasing purposes, the higher iso definitely comes in handy for family snapshots taken without flash. AWB is a joy and is frankly voodoo magic. I know raw wb can be changed, but I never could get the skin tones correct in RAW when the WB is messed up indoors, the K-7 has perfect AWB indoors. So, WB is also as simple as just pointing the camera and shooting. I LOVE it. I enjoy the auto-iso feature more with the K-7, but again I am preferring to shoot at iso 100, so not very well used. In general usability, I am loving the K-7. The minor changes to the size and shape is making a huge difference to me in daily use. I am loving the feel of the camera in my hand, and i am just shooting intuitively. Carrying the camera with the DA21 and and the FA43 (one in the pocket) is a joy, what a package. SR is possibly improved as well. Sensor cleaning is tremendously better too. Therefore, the K-7 has removed most of the sluggishness of the K10D. Some say they don't see much improvements in IQ with primes vs zooms or zeiss vs Tamron etc...but, I see a huge difference in IQ and rendering when it comes to lenses, but I see no IQ differences between most cameras at low iso's. With the K-7 and the Pentax primes, I am enjoying photography more.........................

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
People Where as the last 12 months gone???	Mechan1k	Post Your Photos!	16	12-21-2012 10:33 PM
People 5 of 9 months	icywarm	Photo Critique	3	07-17-2010 08:22 PM
Landscape Months apart	pnuk	Photo Critique	6	02-05-2010 01:58 PM
Bailey at 6.5 Months	synnyster	Post Your Photos!	5	06-09-2009 02:53 PM
Two months at the cabin	StarDust	Post Your Photos!	0	08-13-2008 01:08 AM

10-10-2009, 05:28 AM	#2
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	Very well put. Two little items that I would like to add - because they are of importance to me, are: the 100% viewfinder (booyah!), and the amazing LCD. The K-7 is a wonderful tool. c[_]

10-10-2009, 05:59 AM	#3
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978 Original Poster	Shoot forgot the 100% viewfinder...that is as an improvement as the metering and AWB for me. I am not finding the higher res. LCD to be that useful now, as I am still not able to replicate what I want on it. May be I have to play with the settings a bit more, until I am confident that what I see in the LCD is indicative of what I will end up with my RAW images. Currently they are too far apart.

10-10-2009, 10:36 AM	#4
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	Agreed, however checking the LCD to see if your image is in focus is definitely easier (for me) - so that's a bonus. I shoot RAW as well, so the output on the screen is never indicative of the washed out image that you get when you check on the computer. Auto orientation and having all the settings available are definite improvements. Just finished an E-session (this morning) and the K-7 worked beautifully! c[_]

10-10-2009, 11:51 AM	#5
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	Thanks for the detail and field experience report, I definitely look forward to the upgrade to K-7.

10-10-2009, 04:05 PM	#6
Barnster Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Mid North Coast,Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,016	Good report!With the prices of the K20 and the K7 over here over here in Australia being a matter of a few hundred dollars difference,your report on the K7 has confirmed that paying the extra for the K7 would be the wise choice.I'm looking forward in getting my hands on one.

10-13-2009, 10:18 PM	#7
ordinaryimages New Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Kentucky Bluegrass Photos: Gallery Posts: 10	I find the K-7 a pleasure to use in Manual.

10-13-2009, 10:45 PM	#8
CypherOz Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Adelaide Posts: 246	The K-7 is the best so far from Pentax. I love mine.

10-14-2009, 03:55 AM	#9
nulla Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 1,560	Originally posted by CypherOz The K-7 is the best so far from Pentax. I love mine. Just love using this camera. My biggest joy comes from the fact it is great shooting flash and it is also great to use in low light situations with fast lenses.

10-14-2009, 04:22 AM	#10
stanleyk Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Taylor, Texas Posts: 1,018	I finally got the K7 last Friday. I am absolutely thrilled with it. I'm a K10 and K20 owner. And I agree with all of the above especially the manual mode, viewfinder, and LCD. I'm an almost 100% ISO 100-400, M mode, and Raw shooter. This camera is exactly what I wanted. I don't really use autofocus, but it appears to greatly improved over the K20/10. Love the ergonomics. I couldn't be happier.

10-14-2009, 08:56 AM	#11
alexeyga Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Montreal, Canada Posts: 838	Originally posted by stanleyk I finally got the K7 last Friday. I am absolutely thrilled with it. I'm a K10 and K20 owner. And I agree with all of the above especially the manual mode, viewfinder, and LCD. I'm an almost 100% ISO 100-400, M mode, and Raw shooter. This camera is exactly what I wanted. I don't really use autofocus, but it appears to greatly improved over the K20/10. Love the ergonomics. I couldn't be happier. I don't really want to question your reasons, but why get the K7 if you don't use the AF? K20 is just as capable and tack sharper AF aside....

10-14-2009, 10:41 AM	#12
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,349	I have a K10D and a KM. I appreciate your comparison between the K10D and the K7. I really like my K10D, but I'm glad to hear that the K7 does well. I realize that MP's are not everything, but I do wish the K7 had more MP's than the K20D's 14.6. I also wish the K7's ISO went beyond 6400...the KX is 12,800...the new top of the line Nikon is 102,800. Yes....yes....I know the Nikon I'm talking about is a top Pro cameras and yes...comparisons are odious....but 6400 ISO is not much these days. I would like to have around 25,000 ISO and for it to be a useful ISO...not grainy as H, E, double hockey sticks as we say here in Western Canada. I'm pleased to hear about the AF...I would like the Pentax K7 or whatever follows the K7 to have AF ...in all light to be the equivalent of Canon or Nikon at it's price point. While I'm at it...not to do with the K7....but Pentax please bring out a competitor with Pentax or Takumar on the lens in the 10-20 range. I can't get a Tokina 11-16 F2.8, just the Sigma 10-20....and don't pull a Pentax 12-24 at $ 1299 Cdn....