A new K7 with the KX sensor? Please?

Dubious Drewski · 11-23-2009, 06:05 PM

I can't be the only one thinking this. The new Kx is about 1.5 stops cleaner than the K7 in all noise tests that I've seen. (Even after adjusting for the megapixel difference)

This is not a matter of simply wanting. I need this ability for the kind of work that I do, as I'm sure others do also.

I feel a little cheated, after having bought the K7, to see that this "entry level" camera outperforms it. Pentax needs install this new awesome sensor and release a "K7 Super". I'd snatch it up in the blink of an eye.

Who's with me?

**Ash** · 11-23-2009, 06:32 PM

A lot of people have expressed this in different places.
Sensor technology seems to be evolving faster than the cameras can be churned out of the factories. So, it's not unusual such a phenomenon happens.

But don't feel cheated - the K-7 still performs brilliantly, and ask yourself when you really need that ISO 3200 or 6400 shot...

Dubious Drewski · 11-23-2009, 06:49 PM

The reason I feel slightly cheated is that over the years, the K10, K20 and now the K7 have shown no real jumps in noise performance. Now suddenly the kx gets a sensor from a new manufacturer and with it a massive improvement in image quality, both in high and low iso ranges. And this camera was released quite quickly after the K7 was.

Originally posted by Ash

ask yourself when you really need that ISO 3200 or 6400 shot...

As a wedding photographer, I can assure you, clean iso 6400 would be useful for every single job. I am currently forced to use it all the time. When you're forced to shoot f2.8 and 1/50th, and the camera still needs iso 3200 to get the exposure, then clean iso 3200 and 6400 are essential. Like I already said. I do not WANT it, I NEED it.

rawr · 11-23-2009, 07:02 PM

I'm sort of with you.

If the K-7s (or whatever) performed as well as the K-x at higher ISO's, PLUS maybe offered a slightly higher resolution than the K-x (eg 14MP), then I might be inclined (after the introduction price settles down) to eventually sell both my K-x and K200D, since I presume the new K-7s would combine the best features of both - good high ISO, good IQ, good AF, video + weather sealing, top LCD, battery pack etc.

But I am in no rush. My current setup covers my needs pretty well.

**Rondec** · 11-23-2009, 07:12 PM

It will happen eventually, or there will be a newer, better sensor that comes out that beats the Kx sensor. I am not certain how video on the kx compares to the K7, also the 4 channel versus 2 channel output. There are plus and minuses to everything, although I do have to disagree with the comment that there were no real differences in noise performance between the K10 and the K20/7. There are huge differences. I have trouble shooting over iso 400 on the K10 and use pretty serious noise reduction on iso 800. I can shoot between 1600 and 3200 on the K20 with the same noise reduction on the K20 (I shoot RAW), so take that for what it is worth.

MSsuper · 11-23-2009, 07:13 PM

I'm sure Samsung is not resting on it's laurels. Just look at the fierce battle between Sony and Samsung in the LCD/LED TV battle. They both have the finance and know how for making top notch sensors.

Unless Samsung pulls out of the digital camera market completely, I am pretty sure they have Sony's new sensor under the microscope and they're frantically trying to work out how to make a better low noise sensor for the near future. Mark my words

**Ash** · 11-23-2009, 07:16 PM

Originally posted by Dubious Drewski

As a wedding photographer, I can assure you, clean iso 6400 would be useful for every single job. I am currently forced to use it all the time. When you're forced to shoot f2.8 and 1/50th, and the camera still needs iso 3200 to get the exposure, then clean iso 3200 and 6400 are essential. Like I already said. I do not WANT it, I NEED it.

Point taken, but does that mean you haven't been coping doing weddings to date without the K-x's high ISO capabilities? (rhetorical question)

I'd guess that the sensor in Pentax's next flagship model, whenever it comes out, will be even more impressive than the K-x's.

Dubious Drewski · 11-23-2009, 07:33 PM

Originally posted by Ash

Point taken, but does that mean you haven't been coping doing weddings to date without the K-x's high ISO capabilities? (rhetorical question)

Yes, that's correct. I have cringed at some of the photos I have been forced to give to the bride. A higher IQ for people who frequently need to push the envelope is always welcome.

Steve Beswick · 11-23-2009, 11:24 PM

If your really that worried about it, sell the K-7 and buy a K-x. Heck, you could probably almost buy two for what the K-7 is worth.

Jasvox · 11-23-2009, 11:33 PM

I shoot about 90% of the time at ISO100-800 which I think the K-7 produces a superior result in this range than the K-x. ISO to me isn't the Holy Grail of camera features...I am more interested in the vastly improved metering with the K-7 over any other past (or current) Pentax body....More beautifully taken photos depend on proper metering abilities than ISO abilities, in my opinion.

If I was shooting a lot of low light or action all the time, I may prefer the K-x over the K-7, but then again, I would probably be shooting a different system than Pentax if this was my subject matter and setting so frequently.

Jason

Dubious Drewski · 11-23-2009, 11:36 PM

Originally posted by Steve Beswick

If your really that worried about it, sell the K-7 and buy a K-x. Heck, you could probably almost buy two for what the K-7 is worth.

Well that's very obviously not a good solution to this problem. I'm not saying the Kx is a better camera. All features combined, the K7 is a far, far superior machine. Obviously.

I'm talking strictly high iso performance here. That's the attribute I've been needing for years now, and we Pentax users finally going to get it.

WerTicus · 11-24-2009, 01:22 AM

could not care less about megapixels

10 is heaps.

kx sensor as it is in k7 body and call it the k8 and you have a winner

ogl · 11-24-2009, 02:59 AM

K-7 is just a bit worse in RAW than K-x at ISO1600. If we apply colour NR (25) in LR, K-7 is the same, but it has better resolution. The both cameras have NR in RAW at ISO3200 and above.
K-x looks better from ISO3200. Yes. But, no any 1.5 stops.

I can say that K-x has better noise in shadows than K-7 and even than D300s at all ISO.
But, approx. 1/3 stops.

The both cameras has the same image processor - PRIME II.

Don't create new mythes.

zxaar · 11-24-2009, 03:18 AM

lets look at this way, this is the first time one can say that pentax outdone other similar cameras to which it is comparable. It is good sign for things to come.

h734790 · 11-24-2009, 04:27 AM

Originally posted by ogl

K-7 is just a bit worse in RAW than K-x at ISO1600. If we apply colour NR (25) in LR, K-7 is the same, but it has better resolution.

??? Are we talking about the same cameras?

Where can you see, exactly, that "better resolution"?

Take into account that K-7 was exposed one stop higher, thus it would be more fair to call it ISO 800 instead of ISO 1600!

Ps. Both images developed in L3 beta, so no luminance NR was applied.

11-23-2009, 06:05 PM	#1
Dubious Drewski Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Calgary Posts: 67	A new K7 with the KX sensor? Please? I can't be the only one thinking this. The new Kx is about 1.5 stops cleaner than the K7 in all noise tests that I've seen. (Even after adjusting for the megapixel difference) This is not a matter of simply wanting. I need this ability for the kind of work that I do, as I'm sure others do also. I feel a little cheated, after having bought the K7, to see that this "entry level" camera outperforms it. Pentax needs install this new awesome sensor and release a "K7 Super". I'd snatch it up in the blink of an eye. Who's with me?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-x Sony Sensor vs K-7 Samsung Sensor	karl79	Video Recording and Processing	9	09-23-2010 09:35 AM
K-7 Sensor	XH558	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	06-10-2010 11:56 PM
K-7 sensor vs K20d sensor	Mystic	Pentax News and Rumors	33	06-21-2009 03:01 AM
Sensor cleaning: Pec-Pads or Sensor Swabs	gadgetnu	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	29	09-24-2007 10:52 AM
Sensor cleaning > Sensor Swab > void warranty?	Twinky	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	07-28-2007 01:10 AM

11-23-2009, 06:32 PM	#2
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	A lot of people have expressed this in different places. Sensor technology seems to be evolving faster than the cameras can be churned out of the factories. So, it's not unusual such a phenomenon happens. But don't feel cheated - the K-7 still performs brilliantly, and ask yourself when you really need that ISO 3200 or 6400 shot...

11-23-2009, 06:49 PM	#3
Dubious Drewski Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Calgary Posts: 67 Original Poster	The reason I feel slightly cheated is that over the years, the K10, K20 and now the K7 have shown no real jumps in noise performance. Now suddenly the kx gets a sensor from a new manufacturer and with it a massive improvement in image quality, both in high and low iso ranges. And this camera was released quite quickly after the K7 was. Originally posted by Ash ask yourself when you really need that ISO 3200 or 6400 shot... As a wedding photographer, I can assure you, clean iso 6400 would be useful for every single job. I am currently forced to use it all the time. When you're forced to shoot f2.8 and 1/50th, and the camera still needs iso 3200 to get the exposure, then clean iso 3200 and 6400 are essential. Like I already said. I do not WANT it, I NEED it.

11-23-2009, 07:02 PM	#4
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	I'm sort of with you. If the K-7s (or whatever) performed as well as the K-x at higher ISO's, PLUS maybe offered a slightly higher resolution than the K-x (eg 14MP), then I might be inclined (after the introduction price settles down) to eventually sell both my K-x and K200D, since I presume the new K-7s would combine the best features of both - good high ISO, good IQ, good AF, video + weather sealing, top LCD, battery pack etc. But I am in no rush. My current setup covers my needs pretty well.

11-23-2009, 07:12 PM	#5
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	It will happen eventually, or there will be a newer, better sensor that comes out that beats the Kx sensor. I am not certain how video on the kx compares to the K7, also the 4 channel versus 2 channel output. There are plus and minuses to everything, although I do have to disagree with the comment that there were no real differences in noise performance between the K10 and the K20/7. There are huge differences. I have trouble shooting over iso 400 on the K10 and use pretty serious noise reduction on iso 800. I can shoot between 1600 and 3200 on the K20 with the same noise reduction on the K20 (I shoot RAW), so take that for what it is worth.

11-23-2009, 07:13 PM	#6
MSsuper Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 48	I'm sure Samsung is not resting on it's laurels. Just look at the fierce battle between Sony and Samsung in the LCD/LED TV battle. They both have the finance and know how for making top notch sensors. Unless Samsung pulls out of the digital camera market completely, I am pretty sure they have Sony's new sensor under the microscope and they're frantically trying to work out how to make a better low noise sensor for the near future. Mark my words

11-23-2009, 07:16 PM	#7
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Originally posted by Dubious Drewski As a wedding photographer, I can assure you, clean iso 6400 would be useful for every single job. I am currently forced to use it all the time. When you're forced to shoot f2.8 and 1/50th, and the camera still needs iso 3200 to get the exposure, then clean iso 3200 and 6400 are essential. Like I already said. I do not WANT it, I NEED it. Point taken, but does that mean you haven't been coping doing weddings to date without the K-x's high ISO capabilities? (rhetorical question) I'd guess that the sensor in Pentax's next flagship model, whenever it comes out, will be even more impressive than the K-x's.

11-23-2009, 07:33 PM	#8
Dubious Drewski Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Calgary Posts: 67 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ash Point taken, but does that mean you haven't been coping doing weddings to date without the K-x's high ISO capabilities? (rhetorical question) Yes, that's correct. I have cringed at some of the photos I have been forced to give to the bride. A higher IQ for people who frequently need to push the envelope is always welcome.

11-23-2009, 11:24 PM	#9
Steve Beswick Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Ontario, California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,736	If your really that worried about it, sell the K-7 and buy a K-x. Heck, you could probably almost buy two for what the K-7 is worth.

11-23-2009, 11:33 PM	#10
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	I shoot about 90% of the time at ISO100-800 which I think the K-7 produces a superior result in this range than the K-x. ISO to me isn't the Holy Grail of camera features...I am more interested in the vastly improved metering with the K-7 over any other past (or current) Pentax body....More beautifully taken photos depend on proper metering abilities than ISO abilities, in my opinion. If I was shooting a lot of low light or action all the time, I may prefer the K-x over the K-7, but then again, I would probably be shooting a different system than Pentax if this was my subject matter and setting so frequently. Jason

11-23-2009, 11:36 PM	#11
Dubious Drewski Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Calgary Posts: 67 Original Poster	Originally posted by Steve Beswick If your really that worried about it, sell the K-7 and buy a K-x. Heck, you could probably almost buy two for what the K-7 is worth. Well that's very obviously not a good solution to this problem. I'm not saying the Kx is a better camera. All features combined, the K7 is a far, far superior machine. Obviously. I'm talking strictly high iso performance here. That's the attribute I've been needing for years now, and we Pentax users finally going to get it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-24-2009, 01:22 AM	#12
WerTicus Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Perth Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,514	could not care less about megapixels 10 is heaps. kx sensor as it is in k7 body and call it the k8 and you have a winner

11-24-2009, 02:59 AM	#13
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	K-7 is just a bit worse in RAW than K-x at ISO1600. If we apply colour NR (25) in LR, K-7 is the same, but it has better resolution. The both cameras have NR in RAW at ISO3200 and above. K-x looks better from ISO3200. Yes. But, no any 1.5 stops. I can say that K-x has better noise in shadows than K-7 and even than D300s at all ISO. But, approx. 1/3 stops. The both cameras has the same image processor - PRIME II. Don't create new mythes.

11-24-2009, 03:18 AM	#14
zxaar Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: kobe/japan Posts: 510	lets look at this way, this is the first time one can say that pentax outdone other similar cameras to which it is comparable. It is good sign for things to come.

11-24-2009, 04:27 AM	#15
h734790 New Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Szeged, Hungary Posts: 19	Originally posted by ogl K-7 is just a bit worse in RAW than K-x at ISO1600. If we apply colour NR (25) in LR, K-7 is the same, but it has better resolution. ??? Are we talking about the same cameras? Where can you see, exactly, that "better resolution"? Take into account that K-7 was exposed one stop higher, thus it would be more fair to call it ISO 800 instead of ISO 1600! Ps. Both images developed in L3 beta, so no luminance NR was applied.