Those who already have a K-7, would you rather have a K-x?

gnaztee · 10-26-2009, 07:53 AM

Originally posted by zxaar

Why, because it produces better images than k7 sensor.

Again, on photo forums I may be in the minority, but I don't believe that photos, after processing and printing will look any different between the different DSLRs available from any brand (excluding full-frame/aps-c differences, but even then...)

Pentaxor · 10-26-2009, 08:13 AM

from a K-7 owner's point of view regarding the k-x, high points of the k-x are colorful body and High ISO performance, other than that, it can never beat the K-7.

the k-x only works for beginners or someone who doesn't own a K-7 as a primary body yet and the budget for it. given the situation that money isn't a real issue but has to choose one body only, I believe there's no doubt what camera will they pick.

in short, an owner who would trade his K-7 for a k-x is either retarded or an idiot.

p.s. although I see the majority of the members (non-owners) here are vying for K-7, even if they don't have the budget for it now.

Sew-Classic · 10-26-2009, 08:26 AM

Originally posted by zxaar

Why, because it produces better images than k7 sensor.

From what I've seen so far, the high ISO jpeg images from the K-x are quite good, and I certainly wouldn't dispute your statement. What constitutes "better images" overall is going to be pretty subjective. There are plenty of folks that are of the opinion that their Canon, Nikon, Olympus, or Sony DSLR images are "better" than all other brands, and for them, they are.

Personally, I would hesitate to assume that everyone will share the opinion that the K-x will produice "better" images than the K-7 across the board. My own, subjective opinion is that the person holding the camera will be of more significance in image quality output than whether a K-x or K-7 is being used.

(For those not participating in the poll: 37 people would keep their K-7 and 2 would rather have the K-x as of this post)

mithrandir · 10-26-2009, 08:29 AM

The K7a will probably feature a sensor from a manufacturer other than Samsung.

Pentaxor · 10-26-2009, 08:47 AM

Originally posted by zxaar

Anyway if you want to really compare, imagine that if k-x sensor was in k7 body and then there was k7 as we have. Which one would you pick given both cost the same.
My guess is larger number of people will pick k7 with k-x sensor in it. Why, because it produces better images than k7 sensor.

better images in HIGH ISO jpegs, YES, BETTER images in terms of fine detail, sharpness and contrast, NO !!!

NOISE PROBLEMS? that's what RAW is for !!!

for me, I believe they should further improve the Sony sensor. until those shortcomings (include the K-7's body) that I mentioned about k-x are met, I'll reserve my budget for a newer body til next year.

WerTicus · 10-26-2009, 09:15 AM

yeah who cares about jpg output... no real photographer.

I dont think anyone has done a look at the RAW output from the kx yet have they?

glanglois · 10-26-2009, 12:33 PM

Given that I really dislike using flash, I hope my budget (someday) would allow:

K-7 or similar for outdoors. Dust/moisture resistance is critical. Won't let that go.

K-X or similar for more casual indoors photos. I don't do anything resembling studio work and I've spent too much time trying to get just the right balance of shutter speed, aperture, noise, DOF, etc. in churches, auditoriums, living rooms, etc. Even one more stop here would be helpful. And my family will appreciate the return to predictable lighting.

And before others report that they get great results indoors with their K7, I need to note that my hands are not as steady as many here. I often need a faster shutter than I'd like and you use. Perhaps a special case but certainly not a unique one!

jsherman999 · 10-26-2009, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by WerTicus

yeah who cares about jpg output... no real photographer.

I dont think anyone has done a look at the RAW output from the kx yet have they?

.

I care a great deal about jpeg output.

.

zxaar · 10-26-2009, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

better images in HIGH ISO jpegs, YES, BETTER images in terms of fine detail, sharpness and contrast, NO !!!

In my subjective opinion I do not agree with you. Fine detail, sharpness and contrast was the reason i prefered k-x over k7. I did handle k7 in shop, took my memory stick and shot photos from it at base isos.
Did the same with k-x, under same conditions I was not happy with what k7 produced.

Anhway do not want to go down arguing with you.

At the moment at base isos almost all slrs produce very good pcitures. At the best, at base iso they will be equal.

At high isos k-x is clearly better. No scope for debate here.

Originally posted by Pentaxor

NOISE PROBLEMS? that's what RAW is for !!!

Yaa k-x also saves raw and they are cleaner at higher isos.

Originally posted by Pentaxor

for me, I believe they should further improve the Sony sensor. until those shortcomings (include the K-7's body) that I mentioned about k-x are met, I'll reserve my budget for a newer body til next year.

I think pentax should dump samsung sensors altogether and have only sony sensors.

creampuff · 10-26-2009, 03:50 PM

zxaar, first off, Pentax uses SD cards, not a memory stick...
Now if you pick up and test a K-7 in the shop, the camera would almost certainly be Firmware Ver. 1.0. Pentax has already updated the firmware version to include quite a number of documented and undocumented tweaks, bug fixes and improvements. Personally I do feel these have improved the high ISO results a little. While Pentax has done a creditable job putting a good sensor and image processing algorithm into an entry-level camera, based on the sum total of features available the K-7 is imo the far better camera. High ISO is not the whole story.

Pentaxor · 10-26-2009, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by zxaar

In my subjective opinion I do not agree with you. Fine detail, sharpness and contrast was the reason i prefered k-x over k7. I did handle k7 in shop, took my memory stick and shot photos from it at base isos.
Did the same with k-x, under same conditions I was not happy with what k7 produced.

Anhway do not want to go down arguing with you.

At the moment at base isos almost all slrs produce very good pcitures. At the best, at base iso they will be equal.

At high isos k-x is clearly better. No scope for debate here.

Yaa k-x also saves raw and they are cleaner at higher isos.

I think pentax should dump samsung sensors altogether and have only sony sensors.

I dunno ! the majority doesn't seem to agree with you though. and that ratio is worth considering as well. the k-x has it's chance to prove itself, but as far as we can see, you're the only one who seems confident enough to state that, which is a bit unusual especially when people have already a k-x. some of my complaints and the complaints coming from other people are the ones that I stated. probably we got eye-defects or something.

p.s. maybe a firmware upgrade solves that problem.

zxaar · 10-26-2009, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

I dunno ! the majority doesn't seem to agree with you though.

about what???

If i am reading dpr correctly majority seems to agree on one point that at higher iso k-x produces best results in any pentax dslr till now.

Originally posted by Pentaxor

and that ratio is worth considering as well. the k-x has it's chance to prove itself,

ask the question like this - would you want a k7 with k-x sensor. Keeping everything else the same as k7 and put the price same as k7.

Ask people would they buy k7 with k-x sensor or with k7 original sensor. You will be surprised.

Originally posted by Pentaxor

but as far as we can see, you're the only one who seems confident enough to state that,

i am not complaining, i did not buy the cam that did not produce files as i wished it would have at base isos. But no complains, there is no reason for it.

what i got out of k7 based on it, my opinion was 1000 $ is too much and was not a good buy.

zxaar · 10-26-2009, 08:03 PM

Originally posted by creampuff

zxaar, first off, Pentax uses SD cards,

yes SD card, thank you.

Pentaxor · 10-26-2009, 08:45 PM

zxaar, I believe you are trying to validate your purchase of the k-x too much by saying that it's better camera or better investment because of the base ISO that you are debating. although the results that you are saying are still questionable. aside from that subject, you mentioned the price difference between the two. the k-x and the K-7 are not similar. they are priced and built differently according to which people they are being marketed. thus, show the major differences between the two cameras. does the two cameras serve their purpose for the intended market? YES ! is the K-x the better camera and investment due to debatable subjective IQ and price tag? NO ! obviously you are complaining too much about the K-7 price tag on the things that you don't want to pay for. it is not an entry-level camera, that's why. it's that simple.

let's have a poll and ask people here if they are willing to give up or trade for a K-7. unless we see a majority of those k-x owners not willing to trade their k-x for a K-7, you could be right. but the fact that they want to trade their k-x, speaks in itself that High ISO performance is not the defining factor. I didn't include the detail and sharpness issue because that is debatable on your part and I would disagree about it with you just the same. so stating the other parameters brings an obvious conclusion, the k-x is just not better than the K-7 overall.

jsherman999 · 10-26-2009, 08:51 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

let's have a poll and ask people here if they are willing to give up or trade for a K-7. unless we see a majority of those k-x owners not willing to trade their k-x for a K-7, you could be right. but the fact that they want to trade their k-x, speaks in itself that High ISO performance is not the defining factor..

.

Because of the price difference, to make it an honest question we may want to ask:

Given the chance, would you trade your K-7 for a K-x + FA 35 f/2? (Or DA 35ltd)?

Now, that would be a tough choice!

View Poll Results: Would you rather have a K-x?
I have a K-7 and I would rather keep it	112	51.61%
I have a K-7 and would rather have a K-x	13	5.99%
I don't have a K-7	92	42.40%
Voters: 217. You may not vote on this poll

10-26-2009, 07:53 AM	#16
gnaztee Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: West Palm Beach, FL Posts: 772	Originally posted by zxaar Why, because it produces better images than k7 sensor. Again, on photo forums I may be in the minority, but I don't believe that photos, after processing and printing will look any different between the different DSLRs available from any brand (excluding full-frame/aps-c differences, but even then...)

10-26-2009, 08:13 AM	#17
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	from a K-7 owner's point of view regarding the k-x, high points of the k-x are colorful body and High ISO performance, other than that, it can never beat the K-7. the k-x only works for beginners or someone who doesn't own a K-7 as a primary body yet and the budget for it. given the situation that money isn't a real issue but has to choose one body only, I believe there's no doubt what camera will they pick. in short, an owner who would trade his K-7 for a k-x is either retarded or an idiot. p.s. although I see the majority of the members (non-owners) here are vying for K-7, even if they don't have the budget for it now.

10-26-2009, 08:26 AM	#18
Sew-Classic Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Ohio, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 238	Originally posted by zxaar Why, because it produces better images than k7 sensor. From what I've seen so far, the high ISO jpeg images from the K-x are quite good, and I certainly wouldn't dispute your statement. What constitutes "better images" overall is going to be pretty subjective. There are plenty of folks that are of the opinion that their Canon, Nikon, Olympus, or Sony DSLR images are "better" than all other brands, and for them, they are. Personally, I would hesitate to assume that everyone will share the opinion that the K-x will produice "better" images than the K-7 across the board. My own, subjective opinion is that the person holding the camera will be of more significance in image quality output than whether a K-x or K-7 is being used. (For those not participating in the poll: 37 people would keep their K-7 and 2 would rather have the K-x as of this post)

10-26-2009, 08:29 AM	#19
mithrandir Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,895	The K7a will probably feature a sensor from a manufacturer other than Samsung.

10-26-2009, 08:47 AM	#20
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by zxaar Anyway if you want to really compare, imagine that if k-x sensor was in k7 body and then there was k7 as we have. Which one would you pick given both cost the same. My guess is larger number of people will pick k7 with k-x sensor in it. Why, because it produces better images than k7 sensor. better images in HIGH ISO jpegs, YES, BETTER images in terms of fine detail, sharpness and contrast, NO !!! NOISE PROBLEMS? that's what RAW is for !!! for me, I believe they should further improve the Sony sensor. until those shortcomings (include the K-7's body) that I mentioned about k-x are met, I'll reserve my budget for a newer body til next year.

10-26-2009, 09:15 AM	#21
WerTicus Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Perth Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,514	yeah who cares about jpg output... no real photographer. I dont think anyone has done a look at the RAW output from the kx yet have they?

10-26-2009, 12:33 PM	#22
glanglois Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Madison, Wis., USA Posts: 1,506	Given that I really dislike using flash, I hope my budget (someday) would allow: K-7 or similar for outdoors. Dust/moisture resistance is critical. Won't let that go. K-X or similar for more casual indoors photos. I don't do anything resembling studio work and I've spent too much time trying to get just the right balance of shutter speed, aperture, noise, DOF, etc. in churches, auditoriums, living rooms, etc. Even one more stop here would be helpful. And my family will appreciate the return to predictable lighting. And before others report that they get great results indoors with their K7, I need to note that my hands are not as steady as many here. I often need a faster shutter than I'd like and you use. Perhaps a special case but certainly not a unique one!

10-26-2009, 02:03 PM	#23
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Originally posted by WerTicus yeah who cares about jpg output... no real photographer. I dont think anyone has done a look at the RAW output from the kx yet have they? . I care a great deal about jpeg output. .

10-26-2009, 03:07 PM	#24
zxaar Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: kobe/japan Posts: 510	Originally posted by Pentaxor better images in HIGH ISO jpegs, YES, BETTER images in terms of fine detail, sharpness and contrast, NO !!! In my subjective opinion I do not agree with you. Fine detail, sharpness and contrast was the reason i prefered k-x over k7. I did handle k7 in shop, took my memory stick and shot photos from it at base isos. Did the same with k-x, under same conditions I was not happy with what k7 produced. Anhway do not want to go down arguing with you. At the moment at base isos almost all slrs produce very good pcitures. At the best, at base iso they will be equal. At high isos k-x is clearly better. No scope for debate here. Originally posted by Pentaxor NOISE PROBLEMS? that's what RAW is for !!! Yaa k-x also saves raw and they are cleaner at higher isos. Originally posted by Pentaxor for me, I believe they should further improve the Sony sensor. until those shortcomings (include the K-7's body) that I mentioned about k-x are met, I'll reserve my budget for a newer body til next year. I think pentax should dump samsung sensors altogether and have only sony sensors.

10-26-2009, 03:50 PM	#25
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	zxaar, first off, Pentax uses SD cards, not a memory stick... Now if you pick up and test a K-7 in the shop, the camera would almost certainly be Firmware Ver. 1.0. Pentax has already updated the firmware version to include quite a number of documented and undocumented tweaks, bug fixes and improvements. Personally I do feel these have improved the high ISO results a little. While Pentax has done a creditable job putting a good sensor and image processing algorithm into an entry-level camera, based on the sum total of features available the K-7 is imo the far better camera. High ISO is not the whole story.

10-26-2009, 07:26 PM	#26
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by zxaar In my subjective opinion I do not agree with you. Fine detail, sharpness and contrast was the reason i prefered k-x over k7. I did handle k7 in shop, took my memory stick and shot photos from it at base isos. Did the same with k-x, under same conditions I was not happy with what k7 produced. Anhway do not want to go down arguing with you. At the moment at base isos almost all slrs produce very good pcitures. At the best, at base iso they will be equal. At high isos k-x is clearly better. No scope for debate here. Yaa k-x also saves raw and they are cleaner at higher isos. I think pentax should dump samsung sensors altogether and have only sony sensors. I dunno ! the majority doesn't seem to agree with you though. and that ratio is worth considering as well. the k-x has it's chance to prove itself, but as far as we can see, you're the only one who seems confident enough to state that, which is a bit unusual especially when people have already a k-x. some of my complaints and the complaints coming from other people are the ones that I stated. probably we got eye-defects or something. p.s. maybe a firmware upgrade solves that problem.

10-26-2009, 08:00 PM	#27
zxaar Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: kobe/japan Posts: 510	Originally posted by Pentaxor I dunno ! the majority doesn't seem to agree with you though. about what??? If i am reading dpr correctly majority seems to agree on one point that at higher iso k-x produces best results in any pentax dslr till now. Originally posted by Pentaxor and that ratio is worth considering as well. the k-x has it's chance to prove itself, ask the question like this - would you want a k7 with k-x sensor. Keeping everything else the same as k7 and put the price same as k7. Ask people would they buy k7 with k-x sensor or with k7 original sensor. You will be surprised. Originally posted by Pentaxor but as far as we can see, you're the only one who seems confident enough to state that, i am not complaining, i did not buy the cam that did not produce files as i wished it would have at base isos. But no complains, there is no reason for it. what i got out of k7 based on it, my opinion was 1000 $ is too much and was not a good buy.

10-26-2009, 08:03 PM	#28
zxaar Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: kobe/japan Posts: 510	Originally posted by creampuff zxaar, first off, Pentax uses SD cards, yes SD card, thank you.

10-26-2009, 08:45 PM	#29
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	zxaar, I believe you are trying to validate your purchase of the k-x too much by saying that it's better camera or better investment because of the base ISO that you are debating. although the results that you are saying are still questionable. aside from that subject, you mentioned the price difference between the two. the k-x and the K-7 are not similar. they are priced and built differently according to which people they are being marketed. thus, show the major differences between the two cameras. does the two cameras serve their purpose for the intended market? YES ! is the K-x the better camera and investment due to debatable subjective IQ and price tag? NO ! obviously you are complaining too much about the K-7 price tag on the things that you don't want to pay for. it is not an entry-level camera, that's why. it's that simple. let's have a poll and ask people here if they are willing to give up or trade for a K-7. unless we see a majority of those k-x owners not willing to trade their k-x for a K-7, you could be right. but the fact that they want to trade their k-x, speaks in itself that High ISO performance is not the defining factor. I didn't include the detail and sharpness issue because that is debatable on your part and I would disagree about it with you just the same. so stating the other parameters brings an obvious conclusion, the k-x is just not better than the K-7 overall.

10-26-2009, 08:51 PM	#30
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Originally posted by Pentaxor let's have a poll and ask people here if they are willing to give up or trade for a K-7. unless we see a majority of those k-x owners not willing to trade their k-x for a K-7, you could be right. but the fact that they want to trade their k-x, speaks in itself that High ISO performance is not the defining factor.. . Because of the price difference, to make it an honest question we may want to ask: Given the chance, would you trade your K-7 for a K-x + FA 35 f/2? (Or DA 35ltd)? Now, that would be a tough choice!