Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Would you rather have a K-x?
I have a K-7 and I would rather keep it 11251.61%
I have a K-7 and would rather have a K-x 135.99%
I don't have a K-7 9242.40%
Voters: 217. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-03-2009, 11:11 PM   #91
Site Supporter
ebooks4pentax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 444
I have the K-7 which is really the best Pentax DSLR so far. I also purchased the K-x and it does have better Image Quality at high ISO. I use both but most of the time I prefer the K-7.

What I wish for is a K-7x. The technology and technical abilities of the K-7 with the same sensor as the K-x. 12.4 MP is the sweet spot for APS-C sensor.

12-03-2009, 11:58 PM   #92
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
in top 20 at amazon

k-x in top 20 now. Finally a cam for pentax that is selling well:


Top Selling DSLR Charts - Thursday December 3

Hopefully pentax would not look back from here.
12-04-2009, 08:06 AM   #93
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ontario
Posts: 750
There's no regrets about the k-7 for me at all. It's about 95% of everything I've ever wanted in a DSLR. In fact, I've had no regrets about getting one as early as I did (at the slightly higher price).
12-04-2009, 10:44 AM   #94
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: on the wall
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 715
QuoteOriginally posted by k10dbook Quote
12.4 MP is the sweet spot for APS-C sensor.
What is the basis for this statement?

12-04-2009, 10:59 AM   #95
Dom
Guest




I'm going to have to change my vote from not having a K-7 to I'd rather keep it.
12-07-2009, 03:07 AM   #96
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 359
Changed

I got the chance to test the K-X and K-7 this weekend. They're both great cameras, but I don't understand how anyone can choose the K-X if they can afford the K-7. The K-7 is a better camera in all respects except from IQ at ISO values higher than 1600. At ISO 200-1100 the K-7 provides more details.

Kind regards
.lars
12-07-2009, 03:43 AM   #97
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Recercare Quote
I got the chance to test the K-X and K-7 this weekend. They're both great cameras, but I don't understand how anyone can choose the K-X if they can afford the K-7. The K-7 is a better camera in all respects except from IQ at ISO values higher than 1600. At ISO 200-1100 the K-7 provides more details.

Kind regards
.lars
simple, plain idiotism ! otherwise nitpicking for something by someone who can't afford to spend much but pretends to have the means to. some people are just way over their heads thinking that spreading BS would make the cheaper k-x better overall. oh well, I guess this is another way of trying to mask one's K-7 envy.

Last edited by Pentaxor; 12-07-2009 at 03:54 AM.
12-07-2009, 06:28 AM   #98
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by Recercare Quote
I got the chance to test the K-X and K-7 this weekend. They're both great cameras, but I don't understand how anyone can choose the K-X if they can afford the K-7. The K-7 is a better camera in all respects except from IQ at ISO values higher than 1600. At ISO 200-1100 the K-7 provides more details.

Kind regards
.lars

well i did chose kx over k7. I shoot in fully manual mode 70% of my lenses are manual lenses. I chose iso, apperture, shutter. And i do not take my camera in bad weather. Almost all the features of k7 are useless to me, except for image quality.

If i had a choice better a camera that has a wonderful image quality and only provided me with four things i just mentioned, 1000 out of 1000 times i will pick cam with better image quality.
People chose different things for different reasons, there is no one rule for all.

12-07-2009, 06:29 AM   #99
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
simple, plain idiotism ! otherwise nitpicking for something by someone who can't afford to spend much but pretends to have the means to. some people are just way over their heads thinking that spreading BS would make the cheaper k-x better overall. oh well, I guess this is another way of trying to mask one's K-7 envy.
fanboy-ism at its best.

anyway your post was cheap shot at me, so here it goes:



in case you can not count there are 6 cameras in picture. I did not include all the film gear (mamiya + pentax) for you because they are in india and i am in japan.

Plus one camera i am holding.

So stop this nonsense that if someone did not buy your camera he could not afford it, it show you as an idiot.

Last edited by zxaar; 12-07-2009 at 06:57 AM.
12-07-2009, 11:44 AM   #100
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
fanboy-ism at its best.

anyway your post was cheap shot at me, so here it goes:



in case you can not count there are 6 cameras in picture. I did not include all the film gear (mamiya + pentax) for you because they are in india and i am in japan.

Plus one camera i am holding.

So stop this nonsense that if someone did not buy your camera he could not afford it, it show you as an idiot.
fanboy? DUH ! I'd be getting a D700 rather than a k-x, fyi.

do I hear guilt on your part? it sucks to be guilty isn't it? lemme recall, you are that guy who complains alot and cant get a decent photo with the K-7? I guess you'd stick to your gears because you don't know how to handle a great gadget. simple as that. blame it on the non-reliable, non-existing camera problem blah blahs that you are making a big deal of at dpreview as a source? that's your proof? so who's talking nonsense again? favor, please go back at me if you have seen atleast a fourth of the K-7 owners who exchanged theirs for a K-x. please give me a REAL number ! otherwise, HUSH !

Last edited by Pentaxor; 12-07-2009 at 12:39 PM.
12-07-2009, 12:04 PM   #101
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote


ran out of funds?

btw, your camera lineup is not impressive, you could had bought those without spending a fortune right now. and please, spare me of showing a MAMIYA ZD BACK if you have one because those are for people who have the real cash for it and knew what they're doing. otherwise, HUSH !

since you spend a lot of time reading or looking for whatever boohoo problems the K-7 have, maybe you could look for whatever problems your current gears have as well, including your much beloved k-x. oh, I just remembered, you're more interested in IQ and not any other problems that the k-x have (really nitpicking, eh?). I bet my P&S can kick your k-x's IQ around anytime of the day or night at BASE ISO. or haven't you known that yet?
12-07-2009, 12:16 PM   #102
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 112
Relax, Pentaxxor. This isn't dpreview.

It's not the gear that makes the photo, remember? If you shoot at base ISO and don't need shallow DOF, then sure, a point and shoot would work just fine. But the benefits of a DSLR are many, K7 and KX included. But why pay more for K7 features if you won't be using them?

I don't need weather sealing or a top mount LCD or even focus point indicators. My shooting style is such that I like to focus and recompose, typically at ISO 3200 or more with a low shutter sped, and I like the shallow DOF that a DSLR gives. K-X is perfect for me with in body SR on my DA 21mm pancake. It's one of the most portable low-light DSLR setups available!

Also, many tests put the K-X sensor about 1 full stop better than the K7 at higher ISOs. True, low high ISO noise does NOT make it a better camera overall, but it tips the scale for some. To each his own, right?

C'mon, we shoot PENTAX. If we wanted to have ridiculous discussions like this, we should go to dpreview cannon vs Nikon thread.

Last edited by erickallemeyn; 12-07-2009 at 12:21 PM.
12-07-2009, 02:27 PM   #103
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
fanboy? DUH ! I'd be getting a D700 rather than a k-x, fyi.

do I hear guilt on your part? it sucks to be guilty isn't it? lemme recall, you are that guy who complains alot and cant get a decent photo with the K-7? I guess you'd stick to your gears because you don't know how to handle a great gadget. simple as that. blame it on the non-reliable, non-existing camera problem blah blahs that you are making a big deal of at dpreview as a source? that's your proof? so who's talking nonsense again? favor, please go back at me if you have seen atleast a fourth of the K-7 owners who exchanged theirs for a K-x. please give me a REAL number ! otherwise, HUSH !
this is what you got after made to look as an i d i o t.

your point was i can not afford k7.

your second point was i should learn to take photos. So here it is my profile at 1x.com , judged by other photographers.

1x.com - Onexposure

not museum worthy but good enough.
12-07-2009, 02:48 PM   #104
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by erickallemeyn Quote
Relax, Pentaxxor. This isn't dpreview.

It's not the gear that makes the photo, remember? If you shoot at base ISO and don't need shallow DOF, then sure, a point and shoot would work just fine. But the benefits of a DSLR are many, K7 and KX included. But why pay more for K7 features if you won't be using them?

I don't need weather sealing or a top mount LCD or even focus point indicators. My shooting style is such that I like to focus and recompose, typically at ISO 3200 or more with a low shutter sped, and I like the shallow DOF that a DSLR gives. K-X is perfect for me with in body SR on my DA 21mm pancake. It's one of the most portable low-light DSLR setups available!

Also, many tests put the K-X sensor about 1 full stop better than the K7 at higher ISOs. True, low high ISO noise does NOT make it a better camera overall, but it tips the scale for some. To each his own, right?

C'mon, we shoot PENTAX. If we wanted to have ridiculous discussions like this, we should go to dpreview cannon vs Nikon thread.
its difficult for him to understand.
12-07-2009, 03:07 PM   #105
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by erickallemeyn Quote
Relax, Pentaxxor. This isn't dpreview.

It's not the gear that makes the photo, remember? If you shoot at base ISO and don't need shallow DOF, then sure, a point and shoot would work just fine. But the benefits of a DSLR are many, K7 and KX included. But why pay more for K7 features if you won't be using them?

I don't need weather sealing or a top mount LCD or even focus point indicators. My shooting style is such that I like to focus and recompose, typically at ISO 3200 or more with a low shutter sped, and I like the shallow DOF that a DSLR gives. K-X is perfect for me with in body SR on my DA 21mm pancake. It's one of the most portable low-light DSLR setups available!

Also, many tests put the K-X sensor about 1 full stop better than the K7 at higher ISOs. True, low high ISO noise does NOT make it a better camera overall, but it tips the scale for some. To each his own, right?

C'mon, we shoot PENTAX. If we wanted to have ridiculous discussions like this, we should go to dpreview cannon vs Nikon thread.

dont worry. I'm aware of that. I just want to point out that some people can be boneheads and can't see what a real advantage is from a make-believe one, especially regarding base-ISOs. putting aside the DOF differences, determining base ISO superiority nowadays doesn't really give or atleast really show a real advantage of one dslr camera over the other, no matter what camera brand it is. if we want to see a real advantage, you must have an dSLR camera lower than a 100 ISO. the old film SLRs have them and so does other P&S cameras. that is if we talk about BASE ISO. it is nonsense to discuss about comparing dslr cameras with the same base ISO of 100, because there isn't a real advantage as to NOISE. if we are going to talk about DR, well we are talking about the wrong cameras to compare with. the K7 nor the K-x aren't the best HDR cameras, so it is pointless. neither cameras impresses me in that department. better do it during post-processing.

High ISO superiority is another discussion, but as the name implies, it says HIGH ISO.

Last edited by Pentaxor; 12-09-2009 at 12:53 PM.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, k-7, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:39 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top