[Wheatfield]

This video proofs what the maker of video wants it to proof. Give me a Canon 7D and I make a similar video against Canon.

I also don't see need for very fast AF in weddings.

I think your K20D with fast lens will do weddings fine. It is more about your photography skills than limitations of your camera.

I've used an *istD, K10, K20 and k7 as wedding cameras. Each camera suffered multiple AF failures at critical points. The AF wouldn't track the bridesmaids, wouldn't track the bride, missed focus during the hand off, etc.
Quite frankly, Pentax's AF is not to be trusted at weddings.
Now I'm sure that this will bring out the fanboys and multiple pictures posted of how their cameras work just fine, but you put a Pentax into a dim church and ask it to track a moving subject and you are asking for a fail.
I now use manual focus for weddings, and were I doing them as regularly now as I was 10 years ago I'd have a 135 format camera, not an APS-C format camera.

[Al_in_the_Shire]

If you are considering the Canon 7D, you might be interested in this review of the camera from Darwin Wiggett.

The Canon EOS 7D Review Darwin Wiggett

[ManOf7]

Canon 7D has tethering. The Pentax k7 does not. If you do studio work or outside setups with a laptop, tethering is critical. The HDMI port on the k7 is not an adequate solution. If I had to do it again, I would spend the extra dollars and purchase the 7D.

[StarDust]

The K-7 has no tethering?? Has Pentax downgraded?

[Marc Sabatella]

I am a longtime Pentax enthusiast, but I must admit, the only advantages that the K-7 has over the 7D in my opinion, is size, weight, and cost.

I'd add SR, unless you're factoring it in as part of cost (eg, a 7D system with stabilized lenses is that much *more* expensive). But that limits you quite a bit with respect to lens selection. If SR isn't relevant to *your* photography, fine, but it's still a huge win in many situations.

[Marc Sabatella]

I've noticed the exposure is much better with Canon.

You've shot both the K-7 and 7D yourself - same scene, same settings? Or do you just mean that the photographs you've seen from the 7D are well exposed in ways yours are not, an you're assuming the camera is the only relevant variable here?

[Wheatfield]

Canon 7D has tethering. The Pentax k7 does not. If you do studio work or outside setups with a laptop, tethering is critical. The HDMI port on the k7 is not an adequate solution. If I had to do it again, I would spend the extra dollars and purchase the 7D.

I don't quite agree with this. If you are shooting product photography, tethering is a very nice feature, but if you are photographing people, it is as much, or more, of a hindrance than a help.
I've only tethered a camera once for shooting people and gave up on it very quickly. It was too much of a distraction for everyone involved.

As an aside, we did very well shooting pictures before tethering became possible, so how it is suddenly critical is beyond me.
I use it as a replacement for when I would have used Polaroids in conjunction with large format product.

[cwood]

The K-7 has no tethering?? Has Pentax downgraded?

I highly suggest that anyone who is concerned with the lack of tethering in K-7 to actually find a camera that it works on and try it. The Canon WiFi system is pretty good but cable tethering is a SERIOUS pain in the A$$. I set it up on my K20D for one shoot and that experiment ended in about 10 minutes. I also set it up with a cable tether on my Canon 1DmkIII and that experiment also ended quickly. For product photography it is fine because you may only be taking one picture every 5 minutes. But if you plan on taking 4 or 5 pictures in succession (like say inside a 30 second interval) then you are in for a serious delay waiting for the pictures to get pushed across. Then of course there is the stupid cable following you around waiting for you to trip on it and ruin your camera and computer.

The only solution is the turn the file size down to the smallest setting for jpg to "test the lighting etc..." and then when you have it nailed change the setting back to RAW or Large JPG or whatever you want. But I hope you've got some serious time on your hands if you think you are going to take a bunch of tethered photos in RAW.

[Jasvox]

"If I had to do it again, I would spend the extra dollars and purchase the 7D."

We can switch systems at any time, cant we? Get what makes you happiest and have no regrets.

Jason

[Jyrkira]

I've used an *istD, K10, K20 and k7 as wedding cameras. Each camera suffered multiple AF failures at critical points. The AF wouldn't track the bridesmaids, wouldn't track the bride, missed focus during the hand off, etc.
Quite frankly, Pentax's AF is not to be trusted at weddings.
Now I'm sure that this will bring out the fanboys and multiple pictures posted of how their cameras work just fine, but you put a Pentax into a dim church and ask it to track a moving subject and you are asking for a fail.
I now use manual focus for weddings, and were I doing them as regularly now as I was 10 years ago I'd have a 135 format camera, not an APS-C format camera.

I don't how weddings are in your country, but in Finland when the bride comes in to the church she walks very slowly. It is part of the seremony here. Also all the other movements are quite slow. So maybe I need to say that I don't think there is a need for fast AF for weddings in Finland. At least in my experience both K200D and K-7 do it fine.

[Wheatfield]

I don't how weddings are in your country, but in Finland when the bride comes in to the church she walks very slowly. It is part of the seremony here. Also all the other movements are quite slow. So maybe I need to say that I don't think there is a need for fast AF for weddings in Finland. At least in my experience both K200D and K-7 do it fine.

They move slowly here too, but the camera moves even slower.
The K7 will lock on eventually, but often by the time it gets around to making the shot, the shot I wanted is gone.
Unfortunately, if I try to predict how long it will take to make the shot, it often makes it faster than I was expecting.
Either way, it buggers up what I'm trying to do.
A few weddings ago I had managed to get the thing (K7) to AF well enough during the processional, only to have it stuff up during the hand-off.
The AF light was on, indicating it had achieved focus, then it froze, then the AF light started blinking.
By the time I got the AF switched off, the shot was gone.

I suspect that in a well sunlit venue, the AF may be good enough, but in artificially lit churches that have rather dim light levels, I haven't found the K7 to be significantly more reliable than the K20, which I found to be not reliable at all.

[Jasvox]

Weather sealing is one of the major advantages that K-7 has over 7D.
(not significant for everybodyl)

The 7D has a magnesium alloy body and weather sealed just as is the K-7.

Jason

[jpzk]

I am a longtime Pentax enthusiast, but I must admit, the only advantages that the K-7 has over the 7D in my opinion, is size, weight, and cost. I owned a K-7 and I have a 7D now. The advantages of the 7D over the K-7 include:

1) Significantly faster AF in low light (Elwood's link above shows that pretty clearly, and it is my experience as well.) This is useful in many more applications than simply sports. You don't see the difference as much in bright light, but in dim light, the outdated SAFOX shows its limitations.
2) Significantly better tracking AF
3) Much better high-ISO noise control without loss of detail
4) Much faster FPS
5) Better control of exposure for video, and full HD.
6) Access to a much wider range of in-production lenses.
7) No SDM! All EOS cameras use lens motors, so there is no moving mechanical connection whatsoever between the lens and the camera. In all but the cheapest lenses, the EOS lens drive motors are true ring-type ultrasonic, and have been since 1987.
8) Better flash exposure.
9) Ability to rent pretty much whatever you want from a variety of sources to try it out.

What about the lenses for the 7d ... how much extra $$$ do you have to pay to get SR?
I did consider, a while back, to switch to another brand. The reasons were many, including:
1. I find the AF tracking with the K7 a little on the weak side. Although better than that of the K20D, I still miss a few good shots quite regularly because of it.
2. I often end up having to shoot under dim lighting conditions and have to crank up the ISO on the K7 ... enough said on that.
The reason I did not switch to one of the other brands was simply a matter of budget and the fact that I already own a rather large collection of expensive glass for the Pentax cameras I have.
As you might know, I do wildlife shots pretty much 90% of the time, and that includes lots of BIF shots.
I don't care about video and there is no way to rent anything here in our neck of the woods. (K7 has video ... never used it.)

So, because you owned a K7 before the 7D, I wanted to ask whether you did some wildlife shots and, if so, how much "better" is your keeper rate when comparing both brands?
Cheers.

JP

[Deerhunter1]

I also do wildlife and has just upgraded my Pentax gear with the K7 from K10 while at the same time also bought the 7D and a 400 mm L lens. The latter for wildlife exklusively. Pentax will do everything else. The Canon gear is absolute firstclass I dare say and a godsent to this particular shooting at dawn and dusk, but imho the K7 and Da*300 produce excellent results in normal daytimelight conditions with the possible exeption of BIF´s, I suppose.

[Deerhunter1]

The 7D has a magnesium alloy body and weather sealed just as is the K-7.

Jason

Well, somebody told me the 7D is less weatherproof than the 5D mk11 which has less than stelllar reputation in this regard. Soon as the rains starts down in the rucksack goes my Canongear, up comes the K7 with Da*300 attached. But that is just my 2 cent.