[henryjing]

I have a K-x now, but I wanna a more professional camera.
I am now thinking about two options,
1. sell my K-x and buy K-7
2. keep K-x for backup and wait for a K-8 or FF
Any suggestion?

[flyer]

First off, have you got any use for a "more professional camera"?

You won't be able to tell the difference between a picture taken with the K-X or K7 (unless taken at high ISO, where the K-X rules), so why change?

[AndrewShirley]

I have a K10D and just don't feel I need to upgrade to K20 or K7. If anything I want to purchase a K-X for wedding photography. I would LOVE the K20/K7's new features, but I really want to see a new body come with AF and ISO performance to rival the competiton. Once that happens, I'm all over it.

[epqwerty]

I would suggest you wait for the next model to come out. The performance benefits of the k7 over the kx is so little that you'd really be paying for deflation value of the camera since they are both from the same generation.

[grainbelt]

As a K200D user, I can almost justify the K7 at its current ~900USD price.

That is mostly due to the limited high-ISO performance of the K200D and my desire for more manual control.

If I had a KX, that would be a tough sell.

[felixkh]

For those who want a better ISO performance camera, then go for the K-x. Otherwise go for the K7

[RioRico]

I agree with epqwerty. If you want a next-gen camera with more features, wait for the K8. If you get a K7 now, you'll just be drooling with frustration when 1) the K7s emerges later this year (with Kx-quality sensor) and 2) the K8 is released next year, with a notable kick in performance. Of course, if you have money to burn, and you want to make Pentoya shareholders happy, buy a K7. AND a K7s. AND a K8. And don't forget to collect the entire set of DA* lenses. Be the first on your block.

[Jasvox]

I'd ask yourself, How do you know what the next camera will have as far as features you can use that is not currently available with the K-x or K-7? Will that justify the waiting and premium price for the first 6 months of it's release? As far as waiting for FF from Pentax, I hope you aren't holding your breath while you are waiting...

Jason

[SteveM]

For those that are asking why not just keep the KX...there are features and functionailty other than ISO that someone might find important;.
- AF-assist lamp
- Stereo mic
- HDMI
- Cold and weather resistant
- Magnesium alloy body
- Electronic Level function
- Optional Grip with AA battery option
- rechargable batteries

Areas where the K-7 is better than the K-x;

- 5.2 fps vs 4.7 fps
- 77 segment AE vs 16 segment
- Pentaprism vs Pentamirror
- 1024 30fps vs 720 24fps
- 3.0 inch LCD with 921,000 dot resolution vs 2.7 inch, with 230,000 dot resolution
- True Mirror Lock-up vs 2 second timer
- Shutter speed of 1/8000 vs 1/6000
- Better low ISO performance due to higher resolution

Regarding waiting, we should see a replacement for the K-7 anywhere from 2 to 6 months (using the release from the k10, k10 GP, K20, K20 Titan, K7, K7s to map it out). The wildcard is the release of the 645d. That could put the schedule out of whack so who knows, you could be waiting a year or longer.

I really like the K-7...

Steve

[logic14]

I believe most if not all of the first group describe the K-7, not the K-x. The K-x body is not magnesium (ABS w/ SS chassis), it has no AF lamp, I don't believe it has stereo mic since there is only one mic port and no external connection. It is not have weather resistance seals, no HDMI port, and I don't believe there is anyone who makes a battery grip for it. Even if they did, it'd be something chincy like a k100d grip. It does take rechargeable AA batteries, which I miss from my k100dS to k10d upgrade.

Reasons for K-x purchase area ISO performance, better LCD layout and look than previous generation, better button wheel layout (imo), and size (for those who want small cameras). Now, if I can get that sensor with the k-7's ergonomics and customization, I'd be all for it, but you have two cameras that have great strenghts but glarish weaknesses (a relative term, sure).

[Jasvox]

I think SMC is stating overall why the K-7 is worth upgrading to, not what the K-x features. The things he listed on the first section are what the K-x lacks, not features.

Jason

[Gunsotsu]

The question you have to ask yourself is how is it worth it to wait on something that hasn't even been reliably rumored?

Just get the K-7 already.

[CWyatt]

I think he was saying that the K-7 has a lot of features over the K-x.

There are a lot of people here saying the K-7 has no real benefits over the K-x. That's totally wrong. What would be more realistic is whether the many benefits of the K-7 justify the higher price tag for your own photography.

There's a lot of really bad info going to someone choosing between a K-7 and K-x (or other).

K-7 versus K-x has been beaten to death. Another recent thread had a similar issue, I'll re-post some:

It seems that looking at a bunch of 100% test shot crops is giving people the impression the K-x is better than the K-7, and all the competition is better than the K-7. So why did I choose the K-7? It is a remarkable camera. It suits my needs far better than the Nikon or Canon alternatives. When buying the K-7 I never seriously considered the K-x and wouldn't if I bought it over again - I place a big emphasis on the advantages of the K-7.

There are a lot of differences and I won't list them all here as people has been over this a lot elsewhere. Suffice to say the K-x is a remarkably capable 'entry-level' type DSLR, and even provides some features matching higher-class competition. The K-7 is in a different league of cameras, and is superior to a greater or lesser degree in a lot of ways over the K-x. Even in its usually-listed major 'failing' - high ISO - the K-7 is comparable to D300S and 7D when shooting RAW.

I'll leave out a bunch of things here but off the top of my head: compared to the K-x the K-7 has the better viewfinder, better build, superior AF, AF points visibility, top LCD screen, much quieter shutter, slightly faster frames per second, slightly higher MP, front finger dial, weather-sealing. (I also forgot very short shutter black-out).

First off, have you got any use for a "more professional camera"?

You won't be able to tell the difference between a picture taken with the K-X or K7 (unless taken at high ISO, where the K-X rules), so why change?

Flyer's totally right: unless a better tool will help you take better photos, there's no point in it at all. If it will help, go for it. One thing I would say is that you also can't see a difference between a shot you missed with the K-x and one you got with the K-7. A loud shutter and no front finger dial would cause me to miss some shots.

If anything I want to purchase a K-X for wedding photography. I would LOVE the K20/K7's new features, but I really want to see a new body come with AF and ISO performance to rival the competiton.

For wedding I assume you would be shooting RAW, mostly using AF-single. This is exactly where the K-7 is on par with the competition in high ISO and AF speed.

The performance benefits of the k7 over the kx is so little

I need fast manual control, place a high value on the viewfinder, quiet shutter and AF viewpoint overlay. For me, those are not little performance benefits. It depends on your needs.

High ISO - K-x wins. It's slightly smaller, and a decent amount lighter. Apart from that, The K-7 is superior in every way. There's no way round it.

---------------------------------

Anyway, to go back to the original question about K-7 versus a later model, Jasvox has a good point. The K-7 is here now, it's gone down in price a lot since it was introduced. It's a very good camera. Any new one and you will paying the big upfront price.

However, be careful you're not trusting in gear to improve your photography.

[opiedog]

you have to handle a K7 to get the real feel of what it has over the Kx
while the Kx is a very capable camera in its own right, the K7 wins in just about all aspects except high ISO jpgs.

with the advent of Lightroom 3 beta 2's NR, the iso3200 shots from the K7 look even better and the High ISO difference w/ the kx continues to dwindle.

[henryjing]

Can my K-x get a grip?