[tomw]

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.

[CWyatt]

The K-7 does give the other brands a run for their money in the top APS-C category, at a lower price point than comparable cameras. And it's by far the most compact DSLR in its class, so it goes perfectly with the ultra compact limiteds.

[Lowell Goudge]

I think you are way off base here.

pentax, in almost all its models has always offered better value for the money than the competition. I way almost because I am not sure about the origonal *istD, at its introduction price. I have one and still use it because it does some things that no other dslr period can do, but it was expensive at the time.

All K series cameras have always been good value, and technically well rated, but editors always go for the bigger names regardless of capability. I can remember when the K10 came out, it was rated equal in every category to the canikons and ranked much better in user interface, but ranked below the canikons in teh final report, being equal or better across the board. it is simply brand bias.

If you want another camera better than the K7 then you want a fully pro $5000 camera that very few will purchase. look at the numbers pentax is posting on sales., they have what the market wants, and what smart consumers buy, they just don't carry the people who will only buy nikon because they think the name means the camera is better.

[tomw]

Perhaps, but I really think that the Nikon D300s and the Canon 7D are superior in IQ and certainly AF and low light capability. Quite a few reviewers even find the k x ISO capability and IQ on par if not superior to the K7. I passed on it and still have the K20D and I am glad I did. But, my point in this thread isn't that the K7 in a poor camera (quite the contrary); it is more than serviceable. However, does Pentax make a DSLR worthy of its superb primes. I think there is a wow factor with many primes, that simply doesn't exist with the cameras.

[rparmar]

Please look at the excellent photos shot by many people here and tell me how they would be better with another brand.

They wouldn't.

Bodies are much the same really, except with Pentax you get Shake Reduction for every lens, a smaller and lighter kit, a silent shutter, the best IQ possible, great lens compatibility, better ergonomics and weather-sealing... all for less money.

Oh and auto-focus? Sorry, I learned how to focus myself when I learned photography. Try it -- it's much more fun!

Yeah, bodies are much the same. Except Pentax is better.

Please ring again when any of this changes.

(P.S. I am still learning photography. And I'm sure glad my camera does not hold me back.)

[CWyatt]

Perhaps, but I really think that the Nikon D300s and the Canon 7D are superior in IQ and certainly AF and low light capability.

This has been covered hundreds of times, but anyway: in high ISO shooting RAW the K-7 is comparable with 7D and D300S. The sensor is not noisier. IQ really can't see a difference, a much greater difference in technical IQ will be the lens used. AF K-7 is close in AF-S, lagging in AF-C. Of course, it's cheaper and smaller too.

Quite a few reviewers even find the k x ISO capability and IQ on par if not superior to the K7.

K-X is probably the best high ISO sensor of any APS-C camera. So not really something to get at Pentax for, especially when the K-7 sensor matches its competition in high ISO, perhaps with even more detail retention.

[knoxploration]

Perhaps, but I really think that the Nikon D300s and the Canon 7D are superior in IQ and certainly AF and low light capability.

The very fact you're trying to compare the K-7 to cameras that are fully 50% more expensive shows just what a good job Pentax has done with it.

That's some wow factor, for me.

[tomw]

Whoa..I am not bagging Pentax. Much of what you write is a matter of opinion, just like what I have written. I have nothing against Pentax, I own Pentax. I bet I had my first Pentax K1000 before you were born and I also own lenses from the 60's and 70's. I think that the FA31 ltd is the best lens I own and I would never, ever think about getting rid of my 43mm or my 77mm. But, I am not so sure that their DSLRs are ...and this is the point I am trying to make'.. on the same level of excellence with their lenses. That's all I am saying. Read carefully.

[Lowell Goudge]

Whoa..I am not bagging Pentax. Much of what you write is a matter of opinion, just like what I have written. I have nothing against Pentax, I own Pentax. I bet I had my first Pentax K1000 before you were born and I also own lenses from the 60's and 70's. I think that the FA31 ltd is the best lens I own and I would never, ever think about getting rid of my 43mm or my 77mm. But, I am not so sure that their DSLRs are ...and this is the point I am trying to make'.. on the same level of excellence with their lenses. That's all I am saying. Read carefully.

OK lets take it from that perspective

Does any other maker produce a camera that will exceed the quality of pentax's lenses. I'm willing to bet the answer is also no, because perhaps sensor technology isn't there yet,


and when sensor technology reaches the limits of the lens, what will you and millions of others do, bitch that the lenses are no good.

Bye

[CWyatt]

Whoa..I am not bagging Pentax. Much of what you write is a matter of opinion, just like what I have written.

I think you can criticise Pentax all you like, if you have points you back up with detail. But the problem is vague points like not having the best IQ or low light capability are misleading.

[Tuner571]

Please look at the excellent photos shot by many people here and tell me how they would be better with another brand.

They wouldn't.

Bodies are much the same really, except with Pentax you get Shake Reduction for every lens, a smaller and lighter kit, a silent shutter, the best IQ possible, great lens compatibility, better ergonomics and weather-sealing... all for less money.

Oh and auto-focus? Sorry, I learned how to focus myself when I learned photography. Try it -- it's much more fun!

Yeah, bodies are much the same. Except Pentax is better.

Please ring again when any of this changes.

(P.S. I am still learning photography. And I'm sure glad my camera does not hold me back.)

I agree, look at all the amazing post on the PPG and tell me that Pentax does not make great camera's to go with there amazing lens lineup. With Pentax, you have the in-body shake reduction that works with any lens you put on the body. You get weathering sealing that actually works and does a great job protecting the camera from rain and snow.

Yet, somehow Pentax camera bodies cost much less then any other camera on the market.I think that Pentax is doing just fine and if you are finding that this just isn't enough maybe it's time to start looking at other camera companies.

[jct us101]

When Pentax made the K100D I would say that they made a camera that was more than worthy of all those limited primes that you can use on it. That was an amazing little camera, the first with built in shake reduction, using AA batteries so you can buy some more when you run out, and having a huge LCD for it's time. There was just so much about that camera that was awesomely good.

The K-x seems to be the current high ISO noise winner too, and except for the focus points not being visible in the little LED viewfinder thing like in other brands, it is almost a functionally perfect camera as well, being one of the smallest DSLRs out there.

[nulla]

The K-7 does give the other brands a run for their money in the top APS-C category, at a lower price point than comparable cameras. And it's by far the most compact DSLR in its class, so it goes perfectly with the ultra compact limiteds.

Agree 100%

[Itai]

Pentax has always given more for the money than any other brand by far. Just compare the K-7 with the Nikon D300S, its closest competitor, and you'll see. It is not to say that they cannot have more features, there is always room for growth but they are definitely leading the pack.

Check this out:
- Cheapest weather-sealed DSLR ever made: Pentax K200D
- Cheapest weather-sealed DSLR other than K200D: Pentax K20D
- Cheapest DSLR with 100% coverage viewfinder: Pentax K-7
- Cheapest DSLR shooting faster than 4 FPS: Pentax K-x
- Cheapest DSLR shooting faster than 5 FPS: Pentax K-7

Value features:
- Built-in stabilization (Sony & Olympus also have this) makes all lens stabilized
- Best high-ISO quality among APS-C camera: Pentax K-x
- Only maker that has DSLRs using AA batteries: Pentax

Unique:
- Only DSLR with automatic horizon correction: K-7
- TAv exposure mode
- Sv exposure mode
- Program lines
- Digital white-balance preview
- Green button to reset EC, WB fine-tuning, ISO, metering line
- Configurable settings to reset on power-off

Almost unique:
- There are only two cameras with built-in stabilization and 100% coverage viewfinders,
one is the K-7, the other costs $3000.

Plus, Pentax controls on the K10D, K20D and K-7 are the most efficient of any makers.

Now you know why I'm with Pentax most of the time! I do have another system (Canon)
for when fast continuous AF is needed and I do know Nikon has the leaders in low noise
when it comes to full-frame (D3 & D3S). Pentax can't win them all but, hey, they give a hell
of a challenge to everyone else. I firmly believe Canon introduced the 7D to challenge the
K-7 (and it doesn't, see: Canon EOS 7D Detailed Review | NeoCamera.com)

- Itai
Digital Camera Buying Guide, Photography Articles and Reviews | NeoCamera.com

[tomw]

You have listed many attributes that make Pentax a good choice; one reason I have stayed with K20D. Some how or other, some have got the impression that I am anti-Pentax camera bodies and that I prefer Canon or Nikon. Let's start with my original post. I am asking a simple question and I stand by it. I don't care if any other brand has bodies that do justice to their lens line up, I only care about Pentax since I own Pentax primes. I know for a fact that the Canon 7D has faster AF and shhots more fps, but I wouldn't get it for those reason over my K20D. I know that Nikon's D300s is better at high ISO; again I wouldn't choose it. I also know that sensor technology is critical. And, I know that Pentax has, recently, focused on value. Though, this has not been the case with their lenses, which are no longer value priced. 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. What's the use of having a f1.8 lens if it has to wait on the sensor? I am prepared to upgrade from my K20D when Pentax addresses these and a few other issues that many besides myself would like to see. I will gladly pay the extra money. Now, how is that anti-Pentax?