So, last time I had some people criticize my efforts to try and give a fair comparison between the K7 and the KX. As far as I know, there has not currently been one real side by side comparison other than my previous one.
I took the advise I was given and went to re shoot.
The only thing I wish I did differently this time was I wish I had used MTF priority to discover the best aperture setting for the lens (which is f/4.0) Sorry =( I did shoot using F/5.6 so I hope that is okay with you.
Because this is a very big hassle to the camera store staff, I doubt I will have time to do this test again, as I *really* don't want to bother employees of another camera store.
Please note, Image Quality is very subjective, so I have uploaded both the RAWs and the Jpegs for you to download and compare for your selves.
The test conditions:
Tripod, 16-50mm DA* lens f/5.6@ 50mm, Av mode, RAW+, AWB, Single point (center) focus, and multi metering exposure, no EV compensation. Jpeg was at the max stars for the K7 and KX.
K7:
ISO 100-6400 using default settings and most aggressive settings (High NR start at ISO200)
KX:
ISO 100-12800 using default settings and most aggressive settings (High NR start at ISO400)
The environment this time was more of a dimly lit store, there were some bright lights pointing at really reflective objects so both cameras exhibited some minor blown highlights, but nothing major.
Image Quality:
Again please note, Image Quality is very subjective, so I have uploaded both the RAWs and the Jpegs for you to download and compare for your selves.
Jpeg Standard NR files the K7 seems to produce sharper, more detailed pictures, than the Kx, they both also have slightly different white balances, the K7 being darker.
At ISO800, the K7 has more noise, but again it's much more detailed, the Kx seems to be soft. This is also the case at ISO1600, and for both these ISOs I prefer the extra detail the K7 has to offer.
at ISO3200 it is the same case as the above, but it is now getting harder to debate which one is 'better'. K7 has more detail, but more noise, and Kx is much softer but less noise. I have not tried post processing any of the images, but post processing on the K7 might yield better images.
ISO6400 the KX is better than the K7.
KX is the only one with ISO12800 so it wins by default here.
With the Max NR on both the K7 and KX Again the K7's images are sharper and more detailed, again the K7 seems to have slightly darker pictures using AWB. Up until ISO800 I would say the noise levels between the two are the same.
At ISO1600 the K7 has more noise, but it is not by a huge amount, especially considering you are getting more detail with the image.
ISO3200 I would say is the same with ISO3200 on the normal settings. K7 more noise, but more detail, and KX less noise, but also less detail.
ISO6400 the KX is IMO much better than the K7, by a larger margin than with just the standard NR settings.
KX is the only one with ISO12800.
Overall conclusions for Jpeg quality: The quality of the K7 IMO because overall it produces more detail. It isn't really until ISO3200 where IMO that the Kx could be debated to be better.
So if you shoot often at ISO6400+ and like to use the in-body jpeg processing then get the KX.
I prefer to shoot RAW and then post process everything, I have not compared the RAW images to each other.
DOWNLOAD LINK: MEGAUPLOAD - The leading online storage and file delivery service