[snostorm]

Hi Rupert,

I seem to remember a guy with the same handle who on another forum, far, far away, had a K10, and after reading all the reviews and testimonials for the K20, he decided that the K20 wasn't enough of an upgrade . . . until he got a K20 and he was blown away -- couldn't say enough good things about the new cam, and wondered why he had waited so long. . .

I find the K-7 a much more responsive body -- I find the noise easier to process with significantly lower chroma noise at a given ISO setting, and I've found it much easier to change the settings I most often use. I used to limit my K20 to 800 for most of my birding, but I use 1250 quite a bit with the K-7 without worries. I'm sure that I'd probably be able to bump this up at least another stop with the Kx's sensor, but I'm not willing to sacrifice the performance, responsiveness or layout of the body.

I feel that improvement in performance, both in AF speed and accuracy, metering accuracy and overall handling improve my keeper percentage and allow shots I couldn't capture before to be more easily possible. The faster VF blackout times make it noticeably easier to track moving objects, and the improved AF C performance is pretty easily noticeable. The improved low light AF performance also allows me to get much more usable AF performance with slower max aperture lenses and lens/TC combos, so in this respect, my lenses perform that much better. I've gotten accurate (but admittedly slow) AF lock with lens/TC combos as slow as f9.3 max --

For me, this was a much more significant upgrade than for many other users who shoot more static scenes, and have different needs. YMMV, of course, but I'd give the K-7 a real trial with lenses you're most likely to use with it, and judge the IQ with your eyes instead of comparing numbers. You might be surprised. . . again. . .
-- otherwise, it really won't be that long until we have the K-7's successor. . .

Scott

[Rupert]

Hi Rupert,

I seem to remember a guy with the same handle who on another forum, far, far away, had a K10, and after reading all the reviews and testimonials for the K20, he decided that the K20 wasn't enough of an upgrade . . . until he got a K20 and he was blown away -- couldn't say enough good things about the new cam, and wondered why he had waited so long. . .

I find the K-7 a much more responsive body -- I find the noise easier to process with significantly lower chroma noise at a given ISO setting, and I've found it much easier to change the settings I most often use. I used to limit my K20 to 800 for most of my birding, but I use 1250 quite a bit with the K-7 without worries. I'm sure that I'd probably be able to bump this up at least another stop with the Kx's sensor, but I'm not willing to sacrifice the performance, responsiveness or layout of the body.

I feel that improvement in performance, both in AF speed and accuracy, metering accuracy and overall handling improve my keeper percentage and allow shots I couldn't capture before to be more easily possible. The faster VF blackout times make it noticeably easier to track moving objects, and the improved AF C performance is pretty easily noticeable. The improved low light AF performance also allows me to get much more usable AF performance with slower max aperture lenses and lens/TC combos, so in this respect, my lenses perform that much better. I've gotten accurate (but admittedly slow) AF lock with lens/TC combos as slow as f9.3 max --

For me, this was a much more significant upgrade than for many other users who shoot more static scenes, and have different needs. YMMV, of course, but I'd give the K-7 a real trial with lenses you're most likely to use with it, and judge the IQ with your eyes instead of comparing numbers. You might be surprised. . . again. . .
-- otherwise, it really won't be that long until we have the K-7's successor. . .

Scott

Scott...Who was that masked man....did he have Squirrels too? LOL! You are correct, and my problem now is similar to what I had way back then.....I read all about the wonders of the K20D, but there were none to be found to hold in my hands and use my SD card for a few sample shots. One finally showed up at Wolfs.......I took a few shots and instantly bought it and the DA*50-135. Now in this small Metroplex I live in of Dallas/Ft Worth (about 8 million people), there is not a single K7 to be found, so it is not possible for me to repeat my prior K20D experience. Having said that, I can only go by what I read, and I read a lot. The overwhelming % of what I read says the K7 will not match my K20D at high ISO's. All of the other features are perfect and just what I would want......well, I really have no use for video, but they are all doing it so I just have to accept it. Maybe if I could actually try one, the features and feel of the camera would push me to buy it?
As for the K20D, it is a fine camera, plenty capable for an amateur like me...or even an advanced shooter. If I had a K7 with the Kx sensor, I am betting I would be plenty happy...along with many others that require good high ISO usage. The K10D, although a nice camera that provided me with much satisfaction pales in comparison to the K20D, and going backwards never made a lick of sense to me.
Regards
Rupert

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

If I had a K7 with the Kx sensor, I am betting I would be plenty happy...along with many others that require good high ISO usage.

If it would only be that simple! But then we'd see threads like "K-x or K-7x - is it really worth $600 more?".

[bladerunner0427]

Put me on the list for a K-7x . . . PLEASE!! I'd gladly give up AA batteries.

[Pentaxor]

can't believe you guys would limit yourselves for a minimal upgrade. why don't shoot for the stars? Pentax K-8 FF dslr ! that would be a real treat .