[zxaar]

Based on my experience the K7 from ISO100-1600 takes more detailed pictures than the KX RAW and Jpeg (I did 2 comparisons) at 3200+ The K7 is more defined but noiser and the KX is softer so IMO they are similar, at 6400+ the Kx is clearly better.

I'm not too sure what testing you have done to back up these claims.

since there is not much difference between 14 and 12mp, i think at base isos you will have hard time showing decipherable difference for resolution in their images.
It seems k7 shows more detail but that is because it shows more noise too. For example the image i have put in this thread run some noise removal software and let me know how much detail you are left with. i tried and noise was gone but i was left with ultra soft image.

k7 is out for long time, and kx is new so give it little time and you will see equally good samples from it too.

[audiobomber]

about the softness. Here is one of the test shots i took in shop with k7.
This is base iso shot , iso 200.

and here is 100% crop from the file
(notice the noise and smudging of details).

The EXIF is missing from this photo. When I pick up a camera in a shop, I reset it to default values and go from there, because there's always some setting that's out of whack. A K-7 also has a lot of buttons that need to be checked.

I don't have a K-7, I have a K20, but I know there is something off here. There's no way these photos are even close to the K-7's normal output. My first guess would be camera shake from too low a shutter speed. Or maybe set for MF or Auto AF and wrong focal point.

[aleonx3]

I don't have the k-7 yet, but even if I do, I would not get the k-x since the only advantages of the k-x are low price, more color body choice and higher iso performance (which I don't use often). Other features on the k-7 are more useful for me (two dials, metering etc.).

[Pentaxor]

I don't have the k-7 yet, but even if I do, I would not get the k-x since the only advantages of the k-x are low price, more color body choice and higher iso performance (which I don't use often). Other features on the k-7 are more useful for me (two dials, metering etc.).

true ! you nailed that one ! that is also the reason that even when given the situation where both the k-x and K-7 are priced at 600 bucks, people would prefer the K7 over the new sensor K-x. some people question the value of the K-7 at 1,200. I believe the answer becomes more obvious if the K-7 is paired with the k-x at the same price bracket. the K-7 is just the way better camera overall.

---

Last edited by Pentaxor; 11-29-2009 at 11:14 AM.

[johnmflores]

.
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!

Exactly! I currently shoot with a K20d with a K-2000 as a second body. I thought about the K-7 as a primary body with the K20d as the backup, which would give me improved WB, AF, and FPS, but little in the way of improved IQ.

Going with a K20d/K-x setup would give me an interesting combination, as the K-x improves upon the K20d's high ISO (which I need) and AF while providing competitive FPS. I'd also have enough $$$ to get the DA* 55/F1.4 which, when paired to the K-x would give me a formidable low-light setup.

Indoors I can use
K20d + DA* 16-50/F2.8 + Flash (with focus assist lamp)
K-x + DA* 55/F1.4

Outdoors I can use
K20d + DA* 50-135/F2.8
K-x + DA* 16-50/F2.8


I'm coming to the conclusion that the K-x + DA* 55/F1.4 is the next logical step for my needs, and I'll wait for the K-7s or K-8 or whatever they call it to replace the K20d.

[jogiba]

I prefer the extra features on the K-7 like the 3" 920,000 dot LCD, stereo audio output etc.

[reeftool]

I don't own either so I can't vote but I have read through the replys with interest. The Kx seems to be quite a good camera for the price and thats a great thing for Pentax. However the K7 is a much better built camera with a lot of much better features, especially weather sealing. If someone doesn't need the more advanced features, then the Kx is by all means the better buy. The same arguement could also be made by Canon users that the Rebel might be a better buy than the 50D. There are also a few threads going currently where some users are saying their 6 MP K100's produce better high ISO shots than any of them.

A couple points I think are important that may be overlooked. Buy what you need. If you are an outdoors person and want to take bird and wildlife shots or an outdoor sports shooter, you should be looking at weathersealed and more ruggedly built camera bodies right off. While the Kx will work for that, it needs to be handled with a little more care and the other features such as better AF and faster burst the K7 offers are very important. However if you don't use the extra features the K7 has, you have probably wasted your money and the less expensive body would have been a better purchase. There are reasons the the Kx is almost half the price as the K7. They are the same reasons the Corolla is half the price as a Lexus.

[jpzk]

I have the K10D, the K20D and soon this week, the K7.
I chose it because of its faster AF, (I tried it in low lighting conditions) faster FPS rate, shutter quietness, (important in bird/wildlife shoots), better rear screen for reviewing pics, great handling with the grip (I also ordered that), great and bright viewfinder ... and more.
Those are attributes of the K7 which appealed to me at first because I do nearly 100% of my photos "in the wild".
I am not worried about noise anymore (I was for a while) because I shoot RAW 100% of the time and from the test pics I took, the "noise" is rather like "grain" and is easily taken care of in PP.
In spite of positive reviews regarding this noise issue with the Kx "winning" over the K7, I am quite sure of my choice. I did handle the Kx at the store ... it was "OK" in my hands. Admitedly, I have not taken it for testing.
Time will tell and I will certainly post a few pics in due time, with the K7.
Will I be disappointed? Time will also tell, but I doubt that.

JP

[audiobomber]

I don't have a K-7 but I wouldn't trade my K20D for a new K-x. I handled one in a store on the weekend. It feels like a toy compared to my K100D Super, and I was surprised at how close they were in size. I'm still considering the K-x to replace the K100, but I'm hesitating. Most of the photos I've seen have been underwhelming and there's too much negative buzz regarding IQ from some users. The K100DS has some serious shortcomings, but I love the IQ and it works better with my Sigma flash than my K20D does. I may keep the K-100 and wait for a K-8 to upgrade the K20.

[Recercare]

well it is because i was talking about sensor performance, and not camera as a whole.

you see, i shoot in manual mode so in a camera i only want apperture control shutter control and iso settting.
Since 90% of my lenses are manual focus, liveview is also important. Hence all extra features of k7 are not useful for me. This is why given a choice and if they both cost same i will still pick kx over k7. That poll keeps everything the same and only changes sensor. Hypothetical but proves the point that people think kx has better sensor than k7.

What on earth are you talking about? When using manual focus the viewfinder is quite important, and the K-7's viewfinder is better. A weather sealed body, top-LCD and high resolution display are also important (IMO) even when shooting manual. Then finally you have the ergonomic difference such as two dials and better grip.

The K-7 seems like a better camera unless you always shoot at ISO 3200 or higher.

Kind regards
.lars

[barondla]

Have the K10D, K20D, and K-7 (also old DS). Haven't played with a KX yet. Unless its an incredible structural improvement over the previous entry level bodies I would never get rid of the K-7.

1st, none of the previous other Sony sensors I have shot (all but new KX) look as nice as the Samsung sensor. The 14.6 sensor has an image quality that I prefer to any Sony sensor in Pentax body. Like the color better, like the 3 dimensional look better.

2nd, The K-7 is on whole a much better built body than the K10,20D. The only lapse is the rubber port covers. The K20D sounds like its shaking itself apart at 3fps. The K-7 is silky at 5 fps. The K-7 does every thing better than the K20D (as does the K20d vs K10D). The AWB is incredible in incandesent lighting (best of any brand DSLR I have tried). All other DSLR I have tried are pathetic in this, easily beaten by a P&S!

3rd, the Viewfinder of the K-7 makes the dim, low contrast, tunnel view of the Penta mirror cameras look bad. A good DSLR should have a glass prism for the finder. Nothing else will do.

4th, the missing top lcd screen and af focus point viewfinder read outs in the KX are severe handicaps. Also the lack of two control dials is a major hinderance.

5th, wouldn't want to give up multiple exposure noise reduction of K-7. In this instance with tripod and still subject it will whack the KX for low noise. Also wouldn't want to give up the hirez rear lcd, rear mounted wireless remote sensor, etc.

The KX does one thing better than the K-7 - better high ISO quality. That might be made up with after market noise reduction programs. The K-7 strengths can't be made for with software.

I will keep the K-7. Now if they could make the grip as comfortable as the K20D (distance from front of grip to back is farther than K20D and too far a stretch for my small hands) and put my external SR switch back, I would be even more happy.

thanks
barondla

Check out POINT & SHOOT CONTEST #25 in compact camera forum. Enter #26. Any brand camera.

[Peter Zack]

barondla, all very good points and I haven't read every comment posted to this thread but each of us has different needs. For me High ISO is important and the K20. K-7 sensor just does not cut it. And de-noising software is not the best answer. I want a clean high ISO image straight out of the camera. There's more to a high ISO shot than noise control. Chroma issues and loss of detail are huge factors in the end print results.

When I compare my K10D and K20D images, the look of the 2 sensors is different, yes but the differences are not so great (say shooting at ISO 100 or 200 in daytime of a landscape) that I'd toss the K10D image. I don't have as much issue with the look of the Sony sensor.

So bottom line. Put the KX sensor in the K-7 and I'd find a way to buy 2 right now.

[jpzk]

Enough already for me: I'll just have to wait until the K7 arrives and test it.
If it is not to par AT ALL with what I am expecting, you will see it on this website as a "For Sale" or returned to the store ... within 10 days of purchase for full refund.
Back later when the "noisy one" is tested.
JP

[zxaar]

Have the K10D, K20D, and K-7 (also old DS). Haven't played with a KX yet. Unless its an incredible structural improvement over the previous entry level bodies I would never get rid of the K-7.

1st, none of the previous other Sony sensors I have shot (all but new KX) look as nice as the Samsung sensor. The 14.6 sensor has an image quality that I prefer to any Sony sensor in Pentax body. Like the color better, like the 3 dimensional look better.

my k100d had sony sensor and absolutely loved it. It seems that there are quite a lot of people who like sony sensors (in various makes like sony, pentax , nikon).

2nd, The K-7 is on whole a much better built body than the K10,20D.

exactly this is why this is not fair poll. Put both sensors in same body and then ask again. People would prefer camera with k-x sensor.

The only lapse is the rubber port covers. The K20D sounds like its shaking itself apart at 3fps. The K-7 is silky at 5 fps. The K-7 does every thing better than the K20D (as does the K20d vs K10D). The AWB is incredible in incandesent lighting (best of any brand DSLR I have tried). All other DSLR I have tried are pathetic in this, easily beaten by a P&S!

3rd, the Viewfinder of the K-7 makes the dim, low contrast, tunnel view of the Penta mirror cameras look bad. A good DSLR should have a glass prism for the finder. Nothing else will do.

4th, the missing top lcd screen and af focus point viewfinder read outs in the KX are severe handicaps. Also the lack of two control dials is a major hinderance.

5th, wouldn't want to give up multiple exposure noise reduction of K-7. In this instance with tripod and still subject it will whack the KX for low noise. Also wouldn't want to give up the hirez rear lcd, rear mounted wireless remote sensor, etc.

You have put many things and i now wonder how i managed more than one month and still working with k-x with all the shortcomming you mentioned. Clearly its useless compared to k7. Correct.

The KX does one thing better than the K-7 - better high ISO quality. That might be made up with after market noise reduction programs. The K-7 strengths can't be made for with software.

I will keep the K-7. Now if they could make the grip as comfortable as the K20D (distance from front of grip to back is farther than K20D and too far a stretch for my small hands) and put my external SR switch back, I would be even more happy.

thanks
barondla

Check out POINT & SHOOT CONTEST #25 in compact camera forum. Enter #26. Any brand camera.

Everything is good in talk, except for one thing is in the end what comes out of the camera that matters the most.
If the camera you hold dances and changes colors and do all that fancy things, but if it does not cut it in terms of image quality all is waste.

Doing better at high isos is not the only thing, at base isos it seems k-x has better DR too. So all you are saying is that the only thing that kx does better is take better pictures and that counts for nothing compared to all the bell and wistles of k7.

[Pentaxor]

barondla, all very good points and I haven't read every comment posted to this thread but each of us has different needs. For me High ISO is important and the K20. K-7 sensor just does not cut it. And de-noising software is not the best answer. I want a clean high ISO image straight out of the camera. There's more to a high ISO shot than noise control. Chroma issues and loss of detail are huge factors in the end print results.

When I compare my K10D and K20D images, the look of the 2 sensors is different, yes but the differences are not so great (say shooting at ISO 100 or 200 in daytime of a landscape) that I'd toss the K10D image. I don't have as much issue with the look of the Sony sensor.

So bottom line. Put the KX sensor in the K-7 and I'd find a way to buy 2 right now.

how bout choosing between a potential FF Pentax dslr and a potential Pentax dslr with a much improved Sony sensor?