Pentax K-x and K-7 size comparison

flippedgazelle · 04-09-2010, 07:06 PM

Originally posted by Bramela

Is the actual size the real issue. Though I am surprised at the evident difference, (The k-X does indeed look smaller) doesn't the issue between the two come down to technical points : MP"s/SR/Weatherproofing/Dust Removal System.
The difference in technical areas should be the deciding factor, to me at least.

I agree.

I would never let the size of the body dissuade me from using a lens.

kxuser · 04-09-2010, 07:11 PM

Bottom line to me, these are both fantastic cameras. They each have their strengths and weaknesses and should be applied to suit your needs. However you may use them.

knoxploration · 04-09-2010, 09:53 PM

Originally posted by Jon in SC

K7
Weight: 750 grams
Deminsions: 131x97x73mm

Kx
580 grams
deminsions: 123x92x68mm

That K-x weight is rather misleading, as it is with disposable (aka single-use / non-rechargeable) lithium batteries. Use NiMH rechargeables (which weigh significantly more), and the weight difference is quite a lot less.

Originally posted by flippedgazelle

Then perhaps there is an alignment issue with your K-x, if your comparison is being made with the same lens. The K7 and K-x share the same 11 point AF system.

They're not the same, they're *similar*. The K-7 accounts for light wavelength when determining focus (courtesy of an extra sensor the K-x lacks); the K-x doesn't account for this. The K-7 also includes a built-in AF assist lamp, and the K-x doesn't. The K-7 also allows AF fine tuning of lenses and the camera body; AFAICR the K-x doesn't.

Shahmatt · 04-09-2010, 11:55 PM

Originally posted by knoxploration

That K-x weight is rather misleading, as it is with disposable (aka single-use / non-rechargeable) lithium batteries. Use NiMH rechargeables (which weigh significantly more), and the weight difference is quite a lot less.

They're not the same, they're *similar*. The K-7 accounts for light wavelength when determining focus (courtesy of an extra sensor the K-x lacks); the K-x doesn't account for this. The K-7 also includes a built-in AF assist lamp, and the K-x doesn't. The K-7 also allows AF fine tuning of lenses and the camera body; AFAICR the K-x doesn't.

I agree, with NiMH batteries, the K-x weighs slightly more than 600g, which is a bit of a heft.

The lack of a AF lamp is kind of disappointing. It's the one thing about the camera that I will miss.

04-09-2010, 07:11 PM	#32
kxuser Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Brooklyn Posts: 71 Original Poster	bottom line Bottom line to me, these are both fantastic cameras. They each have their strengths and weaknesses and should be applied to suit your needs. However you may use them.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Image Size vs Document Size vs Resolution vs Resampling vs ... AHHHH!	veezchick	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	13	08-02-2010 03:57 PM
Pentax K-7 and K-x size comparison	boesgaard	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	02-26-2010 06:09 AM
COMPARISON-PENTAX-QUANTARAY	charliezap	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	02-13-2010 07:57 PM
50-250, 70-200 size comparison?	chrswggl	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	1	05-25-2009 02:16 PM
Pentax K-m size comparison with ME super, K200D & G1	yakiniku	Pentax News and Rumors	36	11-28-2008 07:52 AM

04-09-2010, 07:06 PM	#31
flippedgazelle Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: NJ, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,270	Originally posted by Bramela Is the actual size the real issue. Though I am surprised at the evident difference, (The k-X does indeed look smaller) doesn't the issue between the two come down to technical points : MP"s/SR/Weatherproofing/Dust Removal System. The difference in technical areas should be the deciding factor, to me at least. I agree. I would never let the size of the body dissuade me from using a lens.

04-09-2010, 09:53 PM	#33
knoxploration Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Knoxville, Tennessee Posts: 846	Originally posted by Jon in SC K7 Weight: 750 grams Deminsions: 131x97x73mm Kx 580 grams deminsions: 123x92x68mm That K-x weight is rather misleading, as it is with disposable (aka single-use / non-rechargeable) lithium batteries. Use NiMH rechargeables (which weigh significantly more), and the weight difference is quite a lot less. Originally posted by flippedgazelle Then perhaps there is an alignment issue with your K-x, if your comparison is being made with the same lens. The K7 and K-x share the same 11 point AF system. They're not the same, they're similar. The K-7 accounts for light wavelength when determining focus (courtesy of an extra sensor the K-x lacks); the K-x doesn't account for this. The K-7 also includes a built-in AF assist lamp, and the K-x doesn't. The K-7 also allows AF fine tuning of lenses and the camera body; AFAICR the K-x doesn't.

04-09-2010, 11:55 PM	#34
Shahmatt Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 68	Originally posted by knoxploration That K-x weight is rather misleading, as it is with disposable (aka single-use / non-rechargeable) lithium batteries. Use NiMH rechargeables (which weigh significantly more), and the weight difference is quite a lot less. They're not the same, they're similar. The K-7 accounts for light wavelength when determining focus (courtesy of an extra sensor the K-x lacks); the K-x doesn't account for this. The K-7 also includes a built-in AF assist lamp, and the K-x doesn't. The K-7 also allows AF fine tuning of lenses and the camera body; AFAICR the K-x doesn't. I agree, with NiMH batteries, the K-x weighs slightly more than 600g, which is a bit of a heft. The lack of a AF lamp is kind of disappointing. It's the one thing about the camera that I will miss.