K20D to K7

**eccs19** · 04-19-2010, 04:22 AM

Just curious about anyone that's had the K20D and upgraded to the K7. I've got an old *istD and looking at upgrading. I'm debating between the 2 camera's, as they both seem like nice cameras. Just looking for peoples reasons as to why they went from K20D to K7. With me, I'm not sure if spending the extra ~$500 for new is worth it or not. I know I get the factory warranty, but not sure about the other features at to if it's worth it, so looking for opinions.

Thanks

telfish · 04-19-2010, 05:23 AM

I had a K20 and upgraded to the k7. The reasons.

Better AF particularly in low light, lamp assist in really dark conditions
Better metering, more accurate.
Better viewfinder 100% view
Better build and form factor, combine the K7 with the limited lenses and you have a very special setup.
Better menu system, far easier to navigate.

Picture quality is about the same.

Wheatfield · 04-19-2010, 06:13 AM

Originally posted by telfish

I had a K20 and upgraded to the k7. The reasons.

Better AF particularly in low light, lamp assist in really dark conditions
Better metering, more accurate.
Better viewfinder 100% view
Better build and form factor, combine the K7 with the limited lenses and you have a very special setup.
Better menu system, far easier to navigate.

Picture quality is about the same.

+1, although the AF isn't as improved as it could be. The metering is finally accurate, which is a first for Pentax.

bdery · 04-19-2010, 06:19 AM

Video mode should get a mention too. Smaller size, too. But for taking pictures, both will be great.

WiseOx · 04-19-2010, 06:38 AM

I've got to throw in another thumbs up for video. It totally was not the reason I upgraded from the K20d, as I already had a nice Canon HF100 for video. But after playing around with the video a bit, I love it. Video thru Pentax glass is stunning. Love being able to play in the DOF offered up by a wide open FA50.

**eccs19** · 04-19-2010, 06:57 AM

Thanks for the input. Video isn't one of my thoughts. Never even crossed my mind. I personally just care about doing photos. Still pondering spending $500 on used K20D and spend the extra $500 on a ~500mm lens (if I can get something decent in that range), or just spend the $1000 on the K7 body. Decisions, decisions.

**EsBee** · 04-19-2010, 07:33 AM

I've been pondering the same move as well, although in my case I may just keep the K20D because it is such a nice and capable body.

A couple of things about the K-7 which haven't been mentioned in this thread are, better weather-proofing and of course, the ~920K pixels on the 3" LCD!

Last edited by EsBee; 04-19-2010 at 09:11 AM.

Unruely · 04-19-2010, 07:52 AM

I have both now. I got the K7 first and then the K20D as a second/backup camera. Everything others have said is true! One big thing I have noticed between the 2, the shutter is much quieter on the K7 in comparision to the K20D!

jjdgti · 04-19-2010, 08:00 AM

Is it worth to spend the $500 more on a K7? Or beter, a K20D and a nice glass? I have the K10D and a K20D. I am thinking of getting a K7 and sell either the K10D or the K20D, but I still have the same question, spend $500 more for a camera that will be replace soon in the Pentax line up. More advice? Thanks.

helios · 04-19-2010, 08:33 AM

I too agonized over the decision to upgrade from the K20 to the K-7 but now I am glad I did. The benefits have been mentioned in the other posts above and I agree withem. I would add the much improved white balance. Really the most attractive aspect is that the K-7 is smaller, lighter and quieter as well as faster in handling. Because it is less bulky I am more likely to take the camera wth me. It feels right and as has been mentioned matches the limited lenses beautifully.

If you get the chance to handle a K-7 you will have no difficulty in making up your mind.

houstonmacgregor · 04-19-2010, 08:49 AM

I did the nornmal one step at a time up grade k10> k20 > k7. Even though I think I am having some focusing issues with the K7 ( may be need new glasses) I am glad I did. The k20 just has a feel of more of a inexpensive, old mindset camera, more noices, looser this or that, etc.. The k7 just feels and acts 21st century. If that makes any sense.

The Accord will always seem to be an upgraded Civic no matter what accessories you put on it, while the Acura will always seem luxery no matter how basic of one you get.

Spotmatic · 04-19-2010, 09:22 AM

I just ordered a K 7 to replace a K20 for thr reasons already mentioned. I use DA limiteds most of the time and the smaller body will work for me. I know there is a new model in the works but don't really care because I won't be able to afford it.

creampuff · 04-19-2010, 09:23 AM

The K-7 has such a quiet shutter that I have shot people barely 3 feet away and they didn't know I had tripped the shutter. The closest any DSLR has come to being Leica-like in quietness. That alone is worth the upgrade. Also the interface is quicker and much improved.

Tuner571 · 04-19-2010, 09:26 AM

Well, I have the K20D now and I have used the K7 in a store, but I really don’t see the need to upgrade. I mean, I have large hands so the K20D is better in that aspect. When comparing the AF speeds I really didn’t see a large difference between the two. However, I would agree that the K7 does have better AF in low light. The K7 does meter better, but I can fix that real quick on my K20D with exposure compensation.

To me the new menu is more appealing than the one on the K20D but I did not find it any easier or harder either. So as you can tell by my comments I never did upgrade to the K7 because I just didn’t think that it was worth it. Oh, and another thing I think the ISO performance is better on my K20D then on the K7 as well so if that is important to you I would go with the K20D. Also, the K20D as you said is much cheaper and you will save a bunch that you could use on a new better lens in the future

**bkpix** · 04-19-2010, 09:26 AM

Got the K7 because the K20D's autofocus problems were starting to drive me nuts. I am not a sports or bird photographer, but the K20D would fail to lock on so often in regular use (street shots, event shots, casual shots at home) that I was missing a whole lot of photographs.

The K7 is much improved in this regard! I don't think AF will be an issue for me now. I also like the smaller, tighter construction. And video is good.

One problem: The new SD card slot is insanely hard to pull the card from. You have to pop it loose and then carefully, with your fingernails, pull the card out of a tight slot. The upshot is that much of the time the card then goes flying across the room when it finally lets go.

Noise is, as expected, somewhat worse at higher ISO than the K20. PP will take care of it. On the other hand, shooting side by side at 1000 the other night, the K7 produced shots that were much sharper than the K20.

04-19-2010, 04:22 AM	#1
eccs19 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Lisle, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,510	K20D to K7 Just curious about anyone that's had the K20D and upgraded to the K7. I've got an old *istD and looking at upgrading. I'm debating between the 2 camera's, as they both seem like nice cameras. Just looking for peoples reasons as to why they went from K20D to K7. With me, I'm not sure if spending the extra ~$500 for new is worth it or not. I know I get the factory warranty, but not sure about the other features at to if it's worth it, so looking for opinions. Thanks

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
In Canada: Summer Rebates for K20d or K20d plus lens	Pentaxtic	Pentax DSLR Discussion	1	07-17-2009 11:34 AM
Magic Lantern Guides: Pentax K20D and MasterWorks: Jumpstart Guide for the K20D.	Reportage	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	10	02-12-2009 10:24 PM

04-19-2010, 05:23 AM	#2
telfish Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: NY Posts: 407	I had a K20 and upgraded to the k7. The reasons. Better AF particularly in low light, lamp assist in really dark conditions Better metering, more accurate. Better viewfinder 100% view Better build and form factor, combine the K7 with the limited lenses and you have a very special setup. Better menu system, far easier to navigate. Picture quality is about the same.

04-19-2010, 06:13 AM	#3
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,975	Originally posted by telfish I had a K20 and upgraded to the k7. The reasons. Better AF particularly in low light, lamp assist in really dark conditions Better metering, more accurate. Better viewfinder 100% view Better build and form factor, combine the K7 with the limited lenses and you have a very special setup. Better menu system, far easier to navigate. Picture quality is about the same. +1, although the AF isn't as improved as it could be. The metering is finally accurate, which is a first for Pentax.

04-19-2010, 06:19 AM	#4
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,356	Video mode should get a mention too. Smaller size, too. But for taking pictures, both will be great.

04-19-2010, 06:38 AM	#5
WiseOx Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Whitby (near Toronto), Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 433	I've got to throw in another thumbs up for video. It totally was not the reason I upgraded from the K20d, as I already had a nice Canon HF100 for video. But after playing around with the video a bit, I love it. Video thru Pentax glass is stunning. Love being able to play in the DOF offered up by a wide open FA50.

04-19-2010, 06:57 AM	#6
eccs19 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Lisle, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,510 Original Poster	Thanks for the input. Video isn't one of my thoughts. Never even crossed my mind. I personally just care about doing photos. Still pondering spending $500 on used K20D and spend the extra $500 on a ~500mm lens (if I can get something decent in that range), or just spend the $1000 on the K7 body. Decisions, decisions.

04-19-2010, 07:33 AM	#7
EsBee Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: National Capital Region Posts: 739	I've been pondering the same move as well, although in my case I may just keep the K20D because it is such a nice and capable body. A couple of things about the K-7 which haven't been mentioned in this thread are, better weather-proofing and of course, the ~920K pixels on the 3" LCD! Last edited by EsBee; 04-19-2010 at 09:11 AM.

04-19-2010, 07:52 AM	#8
Unruely Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: West Virginia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 105	I have both now. I got the K7 first and then the K20D as a second/backup camera. Everything others have said is true! One big thing I have noticed between the 2, the shutter is much quieter on the K7 in comparision to the K20D!

04-19-2010, 08:00 AM	#9
jjdgti Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: NJ Posts: 1,824	Is it worth to spend the $500 more on a K7? Or beter, a K20D and a nice glass? I have the K10D and a K20D. I am thinking of getting a K7 and sell either the K10D or the K20D, but I still have the same question, spend $500 more for a camera that will be replace soon in the Pentax line up. More advice? Thanks.

04-19-2010, 08:33 AM	#10
helios Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Peterborough UK Posts: 37	I too agonized over the decision to upgrade from the K20 to the K-7 but now I am glad I did. The benefits have been mentioned in the other posts above and I agree withem. I would add the much improved white balance. Really the most attractive aspect is that the K-7 is smaller, lighter and quieter as well as faster in handling. Because it is less bulky I am more likely to take the camera wth me. It feels right and as has been mentioned matches the limited lenses beautifully. If you get the chance to handle a K-7 you will have no difficulty in making up your mind.

04-19-2010, 08:49 AM	#11
houstonmacgregor Forum Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 97	I did the nornmal one step at a time up grade k10> k20 > k7. Even though I think I am having some focusing issues with the K7 ( may be need new glasses) I am glad I did. The k20 just has a feel of more of a inexpensive, old mindset camera, more noices, looser this or that, etc.. The k7 just feels and acts 21st century. If that makes any sense. The Accord will always seem to be an upgraded Civic no matter what accessories you put on it, while the Acura will always seem luxery no matter how basic of one you get.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-19-2010, 09:22 AM	#12
Spotmatic Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Ft. Myers Florida Posts: 169	I just ordered a K 7 to replace a K20 for thr reasons already mentioned. I use DA limiteds most of the time and the smaller body will work for me. I know there is a new model in the works but don't really care because I won't be able to afford it.

04-19-2010, 09:23 AM	#13
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	The K-7 has such a quiet shutter that I have shot people barely 3 feet away and they didn't know I had tripped the shutter. The closest any DSLR has come to being Leica-like in quietness. That alone is worth the upgrade. Also the interface is quicker and much improved.

04-19-2010, 09:26 AM	#14
Tuner571 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,549	Well, I have the K20D now and I have used the K7 in a store, but I really don’t see the need to upgrade. I mean, I have large hands so the K20D is better in that aspect. When comparing the AF speeds I really didn’t see a large difference between the two. However, I would agree that the K7 does have better AF in low light. The K7 does meter better, but I can fix that real quick on my K20D with exposure compensation. To me the new menu is more appealing than the one on the K20D but I did not find it any easier or harder either. So as you can tell by my comments I never did upgrade to the K7 because I just didn’t think that it was worth it. Oh, and another thing I think the ISO performance is better on my K20D then on the K7 as well so if that is important to you I would go with the K20D. Also, the K20D as you said is much cheaper and you will save a bunch that you could use on a new better lens in the future

04-19-2010, 09:26 AM	#15
bkpix Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Creswell, Oregon Photos: Albums Posts: 568	Got the K7 because the K20D's autofocus problems were starting to drive me nuts. I am not a sports or bird photographer, but the K20D would fail to lock on so often in regular use (street shots, event shots, casual shots at home) that I was missing a whole lot of photographs. The K7 is much improved in this regard! I don't think AF will be an issue for me now. I also like the smaller, tighter construction. And video is good. One problem: The new SD card slot is insanely hard to pull the card from. You have to pop it loose and then carefully, with your fingernails, pull the card out of a tight slot. The upshot is that much of the time the card then goes flying across the room when it finally lets go. Noise is, as expected, somewhat worse at higher ISO than the K20. PP will take care of it. On the other hand, shooting side by side at 1000 the other night, the K7 produced shots that were much sharper than the K20.