[daverowe]

so i love everything about the k10d, except for the usable iso range. i would looove to switch to the D3, but my financial situation will not allow it. i'm curious as to what you think is a better step up. the k20 or the k7. is there any difference in the iso handling between the two. what is the highest high quality usable iso range on the two? i really dont care about all the little new filter add ons that the k7 has. i absolutely love the color that the k10 produces. is it different in the other two? i appologize if this topic has already been covered. one other thing, i love shooting in very bright conditions. is the k20 any better than the k10 at handling high exposures? i know the k7 is suppose to have some sort of highlight compensation mode. thanks a bunch, david.

[Lowell Goudge]

I went to the K7, I decided against the K20 for one reason.

I use a lot of older manual glass, as well as teleconverters on my Sigma APO70-200F2.8 EX

The K10 and K20 are not the best at metering with old lenses or with teleconverters because the bright focusing screen used impacts metering to the point that the camera is correcting exposure with the known wide open aperture, for the metering issues. with a teleconverter, specifically the sigma ones that feed the lens aperture through uncorrected, this causes an error, and with manual lenses it simply does not know the aperture.

The K7 was reported from firld tests (and I can now confirm) that metering with older lenses and teleconverters is much improved.

as for high ISO, on the K10 I was somewhat hesitant to shoot above ISO 400 unless I really had to, but with the K7 I have no issue at all shooting at ISO 800. FOr me, shen using long lenses this is a big benefit. 1-2 stops at least makes a really big difference in what is possible.

I also find the shake reduction on the K7 seems a little better than the K10.

I have done some shots with a 500mm lens hand held at 1/40th with surprising results.

[LeDave]

There is very minimal differences in the two for high ISO, although some say that the K20D has a slight upper hand but the differences are too small to outweigh the improved autofocusing of speed, in low light, and accuracy of the K-7. With it comes an improved superior metering, AF assist lamp, and white balance, 100 percent viewfinder coverage, and ultrasonic dust removal, all in a lightweight sturdy magnesium alloy construction.

I would definitely go for the K-7 due to the improved technology. Sure the high ISO isn't that much different and you will save money going for the K20D, but only if you don't mind sloppier AF.

[sebberry]

Do you use the exposure bracketing button on the K10D at all? I really like how it is set up, holding the button and turning the front dial for either 3 or 5 shots and the rear dial to set the EV range, it's a brilliant little interface.

The K7 has ditched this and you now need to fiddle around in the menus to set it up. Many will say that you either plan to bracket shots or you don't and you don't need quick access to it, but I disagree.

So, it sounds like the K7 and the K20D are on-par with eachother in terms of low-light performance. If you like the overall interface of the K10D then I would say go with the K20D. You'd be saving a few hundred dollars too.