Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-15-2009, 06:20 PM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 141
Is the K7 a significant improvement over the K20D?

You guys might remember my thread a few months back when I was looking for a second body. I've just done a paid shoot for some advertising so my budget is going to stretch much further than what I expected.

My question is how much of an improvement is the K7 over the K20D in real-world use? I'm more interested in things like exposure, white-balance, AF speed + accuracy and general usability rather than fancy features like video.

I'll be either going with a second K20D or a K7 and my existing K20D.

Thanks

11-15-2009, 06:42 PM   #2
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
This has been a well discussed topic.
My impression is that if video is of no use to you, and you're OK with the K20D's AF speed and fps speed, the K20D is worth sticking with until we see what Pentax has to offer next in a flagship model.

See here for more discussion on the comparison:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/62837-upgrade-k20d-k7.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/66180-another-k7-k20d-...ison-test.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/everything-else/60937-why-upgrade-k7-k20d.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/66057-what-i-like-...ared-k20d.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-beginners-corner-q/68939-k7-vs-k20d.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/65963-k-7-high-iso...-high-iso.html
11-15-2009, 07:03 PM   #3
Pentaxian
LeDave's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,904
better low-light AF, AF assist lamp, 100 percent view in viewfinder, hd video recording, 77 segment metering, horizontal level correction, lens distortion correction, chromatic aberration correction, ultrasonic sound dust removal, 5.2 fps, quiet shutter sound, magnesium alloy construction, hdmi port, 1/8000 shutter speed, 3.0 lcd with 920,000 pixels, and probably some others i can't think of at the moment.
11-15-2009, 07:44 PM   #4
Veteran Member
frank's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,202
If you shoot indoor w/ flash, I'd say the K-7 improved alot over previous Pentax dSLR cameras. The exposure is far accurate and reliable w/ K-7 and a flash.

The other major improvements have been addressed already here at the forum. But to me here are the major factors for upgrading:
1. works a lot better w/ flash (but Pentax does need a better flash w/ faster recharging cycle)
2. much shorter shutter lag
3. much quieter shutter sound
4. improved auto white balance and exposure
5. better LCD screen (for easier MF in LV)
6. better look and feel (w/o grip on)

All the other improvements are not really bid deals to me.

11-15-2009, 09:39 PM   #5
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,157
QuoteOriginally posted by nobbsie Quote
You guys might remember my thread a few months back when I was looking for a second body. I've just done a paid shoot for some advertising so my budget is going to stretch much further than what I expected.

My question is how much of an improvement is the K7 over the K20D in real-world use? I'm more interested in things like exposure, white-balance, AF speed + accuracy and general usability rather than fancy features like video.

I'll be either going with a second K20D or a K7 and my existing K20D.

Thanks
The K-7 is faster. It's much faster.
Exposure is better, white balance is at least as good, it is certainly as consistent, If the AF is more accurate, I haven't noticed, but it get's there quicker.
The IQ is about the same. I think the measurebators say it is noisier at higher ISO. If it is, I haven't noticed, but I don't shoot much high ISO stuff. I found the K20 was good to ISO640, I don't push the K-7 past that point.
One of the nice things about using primes is that I don't need to shoot high ISO to squeak optical quality out of my lenses.

If you think a faser camera will give you a better chance at getting the pictures you want, then the K-7 is an improvement.
If the K20 is all you need in a camera, the K-7 isn't going to do much for you.
A few more conveniences, but that's about it.
11-15-2009, 10:46 PM   #6
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,193
QuoteOriginally posted by nobbsie Quote
I'm more interested in things like exposure, white-balance, AF speed + accuracy and general usability rather than fancy features like video.
You mention AF speed. The K-7 is definitely improved in that aspect.

You also mention white balance. This suggests indoor shooting. Note the the K-7 is the first Pentax DSLR which will not slightly front-focus under Tungsten light.
11-16-2009, 03:39 AM   #7
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 141
Original Poster
Thanks for the replies. In general the only thing I've found occasionally frustrating with the K20D is the low-light AF speed (nothing wrong with accuracy though). I have no problems getting the shot with it or my K100D for that matter.

Since I only have two assignments between now and March I might just wait it out and see how things pan out.
11-25-2009, 08:59 PM   #8
Veteran Member
FHPhotographer's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,298
wheatfield, I don't think it's appropriate to include the danasoft.com sign in your posts. I don't care what danasoft says about how secure it is blah blah blah, I don't want to see my isp information in your posts. Please remove it,
Brian

11-25-2009, 09:14 PM   #9
Veteran Member
rormeister's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 626
QuoteOriginally posted by FHPhotographer Quote
wheatfield, I don't think it's appropriate to include the danasoft.com sign in your posts. I don't care what danasoft says about how secure it is blah blah blah, I don't want to see my isp information in your posts. Please remove it
+1 It's just plain insulting.
11-25-2009, 09:16 PM   #10
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,620
QuoteOriginally posted by FHPhotographer Quote
wheatfield, I don't think it's appropriate to include the danasoft.com sign in your posts. I don't care what danasoft says about how secure it is blah blah blah, I don't want to see my isp information in your posts. Please remove it,
Brian
Seeing your info. in that post is a little like seeing your own reflection in a mirror.
When you leave, your reflection goes with you
11-25-2009, 09:45 PM   #11
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 173
Any time you visit a site on the internet, your IP address and hostname are transmitted. It's like sending a letter, anyone you send one to has your return information. As for how they know your ISP and physical location, it's part of your host name. For example, my hostname is xxx.hsd1.co.comcast.net. This tells you that I A. that I have comcast, and B. that I'm in Colorado. The server side script to echo this information is literally one line:

<?= "IP: {$_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR']}<br>Host: {$_SERVER['REMOTE_HOST']}" ?>

It seems intrusive at first but it's actually fairly innocuous. What is actually far more intrusive are stores that search your browsing history through cookies to suggest things you may be interested in. I love going to Amazon and seeing suggested buys that are things that I were reading about on the internet, but hadn't actually searched for on their site.
11-25-2009, 11:22 PM   #12
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
I think it depends upon what you need.

For me, coming from K10D, which shares much with K20 where it really counts, the K7 was worth while.

The big points for me were the much improved metering over K10D/K20D with the77 segment metering.

I was not happy with the K10 Metering when using legacy lenses, and in this respect the K20 was the same, the K7 is much improved in this area.

The other big issue, and for paid photog, it may be important is the quiet shutter.

As others have said, if you don't want to go crazy over the rest of the bells and wistles, the K20 would also make an excellent camera.

I do note however, compared to the K10D, I think the K7 shake reduction seems much better, especially with long lenses.

I have posted some amazing shots with 500mm at 1/40 hand held. I am not sure the K10D or K20D can do as well
11-26-2009, 11:08 AM   #13
Veteran Member
PentaxPoke's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,411
Now that I have spent quite a bit of time in different venues with my K-7, I notice that I am doing a lot less post processing. The exposure is just so good, along with the white balance, that I rarely need to "tweak" things like I do with the k20d. I shoot RAW+, but I seem to rarely need to use the RAW any more.

I really like the k-20d, but the K-7 is just so responsive and accurate, that I really think it was worth the upgrade.

Last edited by PentaxPoke; 11-26-2009 at 11:34 AM.
11-26-2009, 01:12 PM   #14
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
QuoteOriginally posted by PentaxPoke Quote
Now that I have spent quite a bit of time in different venues with my K-7, I notice that I am doing a lot less post processing. The exposure is just so good, along with the white balance, that I rarely need to "tweak" things like I do with the k20d. I shoot RAW+, but I seem to rarely need to use the RAW any more.

I really like the k-20d, but the K-7 is just so responsive and accurate, that I really think it was worth the upgrade.
can I convert you to the JPEG only club?

I use the K10D, and K7 and have worked long and hard to figure out all the tweeks in jpeg settings to get what I want.

But I have to agree the K7 metering is much better
11-26-2009, 04:09 PM   #15
Veteran Member
PentaxPoke's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,411
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
can I convert you to the JPEG only club?
Lately, it seems like I am a member of that club! Since I use a 16GB card though, I am not sacrificing anything really by shooting RAW+. I don't often fill the card before I download it.
Reply

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, improvement, k20d, k7, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Significant camera drop. noahpurdy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 03-25-2010 05:40 AM
People My significant other half, drooling over an hamburger. the swede Post Your Photos! 8 11-17-2009 09:48 AM
K20D AF-C improvement? jsherman999 Pentax DSLR Discussion 10 03-27-2008 06:45 PM
Significant K200D features ? Confused Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 01-31-2008 02:03 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:55 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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