Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-18-2010, 09:15 AM   #31
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,055
QuoteOriginally posted by tomw Quote
I have given this a good deal of thought and, for me, the jury is still out. Has Pentax made a DSLR that is worthy of its lenses, particularly the primes? I am inclined to believe that they need to worry less about affordability ( the k-x is the choice for people who are budget minded) and offer a DSLR that gives the rest of the brands a run for their money.
I believe that there are many in the Pentax camp who would pay the freight for such a DSLR. Perhaps, I am way off base; it won't be the first time.
I'm not going to bother reading this thread, I imagine you stirred up quite a hornet's nest of fanboyism.
But, you are quite right.
There are key areas where Pentax is lagging behind. Most notably is autofocus, which is still based on a system that was first introduced in a low end film camera about 8 years ago.
Anyone who actually picks up a Canon 7D will know what we are discussing.

04-18-2010, 09:59 AM   #32
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Anyone who actually picks up a Canon 7D will know what we are discussing.
Serious question:

I continue to see lens test reviews where achieved lens resolution is also given as ("manual", "AF average", "AF best", "AF worst"). While "AF best" and "manual" are typically very close, "AF worst" is almost never acceptable, the 7D being no exception.

It may be that the 7D AF system is faster and more versatile (more focus areas etc.). And has better AF.C. Whatever.

My serious question therefore is: Picking up a 7D, does it nail the focus more reliably than the K-7? I am having trouble to find reliable info about this particular topic and from lens reviews, I guess 7d and K-7 are about the same in this respect.
04-18-2010, 10:26 AM   #33
Veteran Member
Mr Hyde's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: NJ, USA
Posts: 761
QuoteOriginally posted by tomw Quote
I have given this a good deal of thought and, for me, the jury is still out. Has Pentax made a DSLR that is worthy of its lenses, particularly the primes? I am inclined to believe that they need to worry less about affordability ( the k-x is the choice for people who are budget minded) and offer a DSLR that gives the rest of the brands a run for their money.
I believe that there are many in the Pentax camp who would pay the freight for such a DSLR. Perhaps, I am way off base; it won't be the first time.
**Disclaimer**
I AM a total Pentax Fanboy. I have a K10D, K20D and a K-7. I"m not looking to switch to any other brand.

With that out of the way.....

Why are all you people giving Poor TomW a hard time? if you read his original post it seems pretty straight forward to me. He is saying that Pentax makes some of the best lenses available. He specifically mentions the Prime Lens lineup. He then basically asks why doesnt Pentax make a camera body that is on par with the quality of those Pro Quality lenses.

It seems to me that all he is asking is why doesnt Pentax have the perfect DSLR that we are all always asking for even if it would cost us more than what our usually budget minded selves would usually want to pay.

I have read boatloads of posts on this forum asking for the K-x sensor in the K-7, asking for faster autofocus, better AF-C capabilities, and more FPS just to name a few. And perhaps even a full frame sensor.

Wouldnt you guys want a pentax Camera just like the K-7 with all the stuff listed above? I would. And I'd buy it in a heartbeat. Would it be alot more expensive than what us Pentaxians are probably used to? I would think so, but I'm already saving my $$ for the next flagship Pentax DSLR, and I'll settle for just a few of those features.

So, please stop bashing TomW for asking why Pentax hasent made the camera that each one of us wants and would buy if we could afford it. I think we have all asked this same question in one way or another at some point.
04-18-2010, 12:25 PM   #34
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Plainfield Indiana
Photos: Albums
Posts: 45
Slip Sliding Away...

Being Sunday I tend to always look at the Indianapolis Star's advertising inserts to see if Pentax is being represented. Today was astonishing. Indy is having a Apring EXPO for camera and film and they mention that reps will be from just about every other DSLR except Pentax. I then went onto Robert's website, and found that they hardly even stock anything Pentax, including glass. I then found the Best Buy and HH Gregg inserts, and no Optio's, no K-7's, no KX's NOTHING. This Spring EXPO is supposed to be a big deal, why is no Pentax rep even there?

04-18-2010, 12:30 PM   #35
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteOriginally posted by ghillindy1 Quote
Being Sunday I tend to always look at the Indianapolis Star's advertising inserts to see if Pentax is being represented. Today was astonishing. Indy is having a Apring EXPO for camera and film and they mention that reps will be from just about every other DSLR except Pentax. I then went onto Robert's website, and found that they hardly even stock anything Pentax, including glass. I then found the Best Buy and HH Gregg inserts, and no Optio's, no K-7's, no KX's NOTHING. This Spring EXPO is supposed to be a big deal, why is no Pentax rep even there?
probably because there aren't many pentax reps in total.
04-18-2010, 02:01 PM   #36
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,296
I'm not a pentax fanboy and I'm not 'bashing', I just think there are problems with the original question and subsequent posts. For example saying the K-7 is behind in high ISO, when it's sensor is not noisier than the best APS-C of Canon and Nikon, is misleading. High ISO RAW is similar, jpeg is noisier and retains much more detail to allow use of superior PP software. Some people might like more jpeg noise removal, I only shoot RAW so I don't really know.

The K-7 competes very well with the latest and greatest APS-C cameras from Canon and Nikon. Depending on your views and on facts, it is behind in some areas, like continuous AF and continuous frame rate. It is ahead in some areas, like size, shooting functions, shutter sound.

For my needs, it's superior to the 7D and D300S because it's smaller, quieter, offers great ergonomics and functionality, while having similar fast single AF.

Now we can pick and choose areas people want bigger improvement on (like AF-C), but the fact is that the K-7 competes very well with the absolute best APS-C cameras yet made. I fail to see how it isn't a good match for the Pentax limiteds, known for great build quality and small size. The K-7 is extremely well built, by far the smallest camera in its class, as well as quiet and responsive.
04-18-2010, 02:21 PM   #37
Veteran Member
jct us101's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rohnert Park, CA
Posts: 3,695
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Serious question:

I continue to see lens test reviews where achieved lens resolution is also given as ("manual", "AF average", "AF best", "AF worst"). While "AF best" and "manual" are typically very close, "AF worst" is almost never acceptable, the 7D being no exception.

It may be that the 7D AF system is faster and more versatile (more focus areas etc.). And has better AF.C. Whatever.

My serious question therefore is: Picking up a 7D, does it nail the focus more reliably than the K-7? I am having trouble to find reliable info about this particular topic and from lens reviews, I guess 7d and K-7 are about the same in this respect.
Every Canon XXD series (where the 7D fits in, but the older cameras that I've all used had the same 19 point autofocus system with 5 cross points in the center) that I've used (the 20D and the 30D) had focusing on any subject that was amazingly fast. It's kind of hard to describe it in relationship to the K-7 because I've never used it, but if you're using one of those cameras (and this is why so many shorts shooters and wildlife shooters such as birders use them) then the focus is nearly instant if you're using the AF. I'm not sure if I'm just not sure how all this works, but it seems like the AF was always continuous if you put it on C-AF (continuous shooting AF), but also if you put it just on single shot the autofocus would still work great. I think you're talking about tracking AF though, which the camera uses the crossed sensor points to track subjects in the center of the frame.

Did that make sense?
04-18-2010, 03:08 PM   #38
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by tomw Quote
What I am saying is that for a few more money., I believe they could deliver a better AF, better high ISO results, and better low light capability.
i agree with a lot of what you are saying, but this thing i do not agree.

i believe that any company because of competition puts the best that it has in their best models. Pentax's bellwether product at the time is k7. (kx came little late).
Now even if user is ready to pay few more dollars pentax could not have given better AF that time. (better weather sealing may be).

To understand this lets say d3s is nikon's best low light camera. If you say that for few more dollars they could have offered better low light camera. Not possible, because this is the best they could do.

In my opinion k100d was fine camera for its time. K7 is fine body with not so fine sensor (which probably is point of OP).

04-18-2010, 03:14 PM   #39
Veteran Member
yeatzee's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Temecula
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,675
The only thing Pentax is lagging behind in regards to Auto focus is AF-C which is a feature I never use.

I've played with the D90 and 50d recently and both in AF-S were slightly better than my Pentax K200d. According to everyone here, the K-7 is better than my camera so they should be entirely on par with eachother. AF-C on the other hand is noticeably different when I compared our three cameras. I can't make any comment regarding the k-7, until mine arrives, in the AF-C department.
04-18-2010, 05:10 PM   #40
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by jct us101 Quote
Did that make sense?
No, unfortunately, you didn't try to understand my question.

What you said (speed) is measured and covered by review reports well enough.
04-18-2010, 05:43 PM   #41
Veteran Member
jct us101's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rohnert Park, CA
Posts: 3,695
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
No, unfortunately, you didn't try to understand my question.

What you said (speed) is measured and covered by review reports well enough.
Oh, sorry. I never used the continuous autofocus when I had those cameras, since what I did was mostly landscape and things like that, but I figured I would try to help out a little bit.
04-18-2010, 06:03 PM   #42
Veteran Member
Tuner571's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,550
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
i agree with a lot of what you are saying, but this thing i do not agree.

i believe that any company because of competition puts the best that it has in their best models. Pentax's bellwether product at the time is k7. (kx came little late).
Now even if user is ready to pay few more dollars pentax could not have given better AF that time. (better weather sealing may be).

To understand this lets say d3s is nikon's best low light camera. If you say that for few more dollars they could have offered better low light camera. Not possible, because this is the best they could do.

In my opinion k100d was fine camera for its time. K7 is fine body with not so fine sensor (which probably is point of OP).
I agree, the K7 is a fine camera but the sensor really is lacking for such a nice piece of equipment. I really hope Pentax resolves this issue when a new camera body is released. It sure would be nice to have a camera like that K20D with a sensor from the K-x in terms of ISO performance.
04-18-2010, 08:43 PM   #43
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,055
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Serious question:

I continue to see lens test reviews where achieved lens resolution is also given as ("manual", "AF average", "AF best", "AF worst"). While "AF best" and "manual" are typically very close, "AF worst" is almost never acceptable, the 7D being no exception.

It may be that the 7D AF system is faster and more versatile (more focus areas etc.). And has better AF.C. Whatever.

My serious question therefore is: Picking up a 7D, does it nail the focus more reliably than the K-7? I am having trouble to find reliable info about this particular topic and from lens reviews, I guess 7d and K-7 are about the same in this respect.
My friend who uses a 7D is quite smitten with the AF. Apparently it not only has incredible tracking ability, but it can "hand off" the subject from one sensor to another if it thinks the photographer has lost track. Very useful for anything that moves erratically.
My impression is that it is also somewhat faster than the K7. I haven't quantified this.
04-19-2010, 02:27 AM   #44
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by jct us101 Quote
Oh, sorry. I never used the continuous autofocus when I had those cameras, since what I did was mostly landscape and things like that, but I figured I would try to help out a little bit.
Not my question again. Why do you answer? Challenge? Don't you know that people who only post because of the challenge are disqualified?

QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
My friend who uses a 7D is quite smitten with the AF. Apparently it not only has incredible tracking ability, but it can "hand off" the subject from one sensor to another if it thinks the photographer has lost track. Very useful for anything that moves erratically.
My impression is that it is also somewhat faster than the K7. I haven't quantified this.
I can easily believe this. However, my question was about the accuracy of the central focus point. I am really under the impression that contrast AF is more accurate than phase AF and wanted to know if this is any different with the 7D.
04-19-2010, 02:29 AM   #45
Veteran Member
jct us101's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rohnert Park, CA
Posts: 3,695
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Not my question again. Why do you answer? Challenge? Don't you know that people who only post because of the challenge are disqualified?
Where did it ever say that? Either way, no I usually try to give some help on the forum no matter what. I guess more times than not it's not what the person wanted, or the person is just incredibly rude to me in return. Whatever.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, pentax, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top