K7 vs. Kx vs. just wait...

frank · 05-02-2010, 03:58 PM - **1 Like**

Life is too short to wait. Go for the best (here it's K-7 in this case) you can afford and are willing to pay. That's always my suggestion

jedcaum · 05-02-2010, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by Ira

Finally, I disagree with the above statement that shooting in RAW as opposed to JPEG somehow narrows the kx's ISO benefit/advantage, because it doesn't. Noise is still noise, even if captured in RAW.

Then you disagree with empirical evidence that has shown that, purely in RAW capture, noise levels among K-X, K-7, 7D, and D90 are roughly equal, and you've let your fanboyism get the better of you. Advantage K-X no doubt, but not the definite superiority you suggest.

Falk Lumo: Lumolabs: Pentax K-x vs. K-7, sensor and video

http://dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/%28appareil1%29/345|0/%28appareil2%29/330|0/%28appareil3%29/329|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Pentax/%28brand2%29/Pentax/%28brand3%29/Canon

When shooting jpeg, this gap widens, as it seems that the jpeg engine in K-X does more with smoothing noise than the K-7. K-X is overall better in low light/high iso situations. No question. Perfectly acceptable images can be made with the K-7 as well, especially if shooting in RAW.

Personally, and this may be total rationalization, I like the noise that the K-7 produces when it produces it. Reminds me of film. Much more like film grain, and less digital artifacty to me than the other cameras I played with.

And if you've shot both, the K-X feels like a toy. The K-7 doesn't. This mattered to me. It may not matter with you, or the OP, so makes your choice, and takes your chances.

InfinitySL · 05-02-2010, 06:40 PM

Thanks for all the suggestions & info. I'm sure there are many others trying to make this same decision.

In the meantime, I think I have a stop-gap solution. I'm going to give the Kx to my dad as a fathers day gift (along with a few siblings) and I may just have to shoot with it for a few days before I give it to him (He'll never know it's been opened...right?

). That ought to give me a pretty good idea of how the camera operates & feels in the hand.

I think the cost is a real issue -- For nearly half what the K7 would cost, it'll probably suit most of my needs and as I can see form all the photo galleries & threads (Kit lens club, "post your best Kx photos", etc) that you can take some amazing pictures with the Kx...

My mind is not 100% made up, but you guys have given me lots to think about...

**rparmar** · 05-02-2010, 06:58 PM

I would be contrary here and say that if video is not so important, buy a used K100D Super. It is an excellent camera and if you can get it for a couple hundred, an incredible deal. Learn what you like and don't like while saving money on either of the current models. Then, when you know what you like and need, upgrade to the body that suits you.

In the meantime you'll have more money for glass, which is the real thing.

psdigital · 05-02-2010, 08:20 PM

I am more of a professional though so I am either going to buy the K-7 or wait until the new one comes out. Probably the latter because I still have my Sony for now. I would always recommend buying the most advanced camera you can afford. You can always learn how to use it but if you buy one that doesn't have the features you may want in the future, you will then have to upgrade. That comes sooner than you think. Get the best camera you can afford at the time. Like someone said earlier, you can always use it in GREEN mode while you are learning. The k-7 would be my choice unless you can wait until the fall to see if a new one comes out. If you have something to occupy your time until like trying out your Dad's camera

, wait for the new one.
Pentax has a lot of great glass and that is one reason I am looking at Pentax. The K-7 has a lot of great features. I agree with what one of the replies stated. How much does the average person shoot with high ISO's? 90 % of the time my camera stays on ISO 100. The k-7 is great for what I do. RAW shooting does make a difference with noise. You can make your own adjustments instead of letting the camera do it. It all comes down to the type of photography you do. If you use it in a studio like I do, you won't have to worry about the ISO noise. You just have to think about how use your camera and buy the best you can afford. Learning how to use an advanced camera is the fun part now that you don't have to worry about film. Isn't digital great!

If the new camera comes out in September, that will be within your six month timeframe.

robgo2 · 05-02-2010, 09:16 PM

Originally posted by Ira

Finally, I disagree with the above statement that shooting in RAW as opposed to JPEG somehow narrows the kx's ISO benefit/advantage, because it doesn't. Noise is still noise, even if captured in RAW.

I have seen comparisons, and they are much closer in RAW than in JPEG mode. Sorry, but I am unable to find the source right now. And the K-7 at ISO 1600 is really quite good. Even at ISO 3200, with some good NR software, it is more than passable. If I really needed ISO 3200 frequently, I would be shooting with a D700.

Rob

jedcaum · 05-02-2010, 10:58 PM

Here's one comparison, that specifically states the gap narrowing between K-X and K-7 in raw. There are many others.

Pentax K-x Digital Camera - Full Review - The Imaging Resource!

If it was an absolutely clear-cut win for the K-x in all IQ regards, that would have been an easier choice. Many note that the K-7 sensor is better at low ISO than the K-x, and delivers more details. IMO, then, the choice isn't so simple, and there are a great many ways that the K-7 delivered more of what I wanted from a body (weather resistance, customization, more minute control, room to grow into the equipment).

Another thing that helped make my decision was finding a slightly used body, which knocked the K-7 price down to maybe $150 over the K-x. For that difference, grabbing the more robust and better feeling body was a no brainer. At regular prices for both, I'd probably have gone K-X.

For the OP, good for you! Deciding is the hard part. Enjoy taking your pictures, whichever way you go.

johnmflores · 05-02-2010, 11:06 PM

I'd recommend a K-x with the two lens kit (18-55 and 55-300) versus the K-7 with one lens (the same 18-55 as the K-x). Those two lenses will cover anything from landcapes and cityscapes to outdoor sports well-enough for a beginner like the OP. Add a small flash for indoor social snapshots and a small bag and your all set to start your photographic journey! Good luck!

Eagle_Friends · 05-03-2010, 12:15 AM

easy choice, the K-x!!!!

JHD · 05-03-2010, 05:06 AM

I bought a K-x just before Christmas and it still sells for 1/2 of what the K-7 does in Canada. If the price of the K-7 comes down to what it sells for in the USA, I might consider it as a second body; but I sure don't plan on selling my K-x to get a K-7.

Right now to my way of thinking, the same amount of money required for a K-7 would be better spent on glass instead.

yoshizuki · 05-03-2010, 12:03 PM

I got the 2 lens kit with the kx. The 55-300mm is awesome.

k54 · 05-10-2010, 03:30 AM

Originally posted by Ira

1) Cost: kx over K7 by a mile.

2) Dials: It's a wash. Anyone can learn to get comfortable with any controls.

3) ISO: Do not underestimate the superiority of the kx's high ISO performance. It is revolutionary, and it has K7 owners drooling here. When the next incarnation of the K7 has the same capability, which they're also drooling over, it's going to cost what the K7 goes for now--a little more at first, but then the same. So why go for K7 now?

4) Video: For most people, the video functions are a side issue. If you really think you're going to use a DSLR to shoot serious video, okay. But that's a whole other issue, when you look at the low cost of digital camcorders specifically designed to do this.

5) WR: A major, major issue depending on your shooting conditions. I live in monsoon country, but still do not shoot in heavy rain.

I agree. This is the reason why I chose K-x with 2 kit lens....

cabstar · 05-10-2010, 09:48 AM

I have gone from using a k100 to Samsung GX20 (same as k20d) & now the k-x.

Although the k-x does not have twin dials the need to press the exposure button on top & dial in I don't find much of an issue, info is still in the viewfinder.

I don't really miss the top dial, again all info is within the viewfinder, I am taking pictures so constantly looking through the viewfinder.

The red focussing dot I don't miss, I usually know which point I am going to focus on so can remember a second from choosing where the camera has focussed. I do shoot centre spot the majority of the time.

I regularly shoot at ISO 1600 with my GX20 and have shots regularly published in magazines. There are a lot of discussions about noise, however most noise can be turned down using software, don't fall into the trap of thinking your images will be great out of the body, all images need tweaking in post processing software, so noise is not really an issue for me.

Only thing I miss about the k-x is the lack of a facility for a grip, I do love the compact size as it is though & find myself taking the k-x out more than the GX20.

Handle both & see what you like, myself I would go for k-x & buy a tamron 17-50mm 2.8, the price of the k-x at the moment is an absolute gift & as the k-x is the newer camera the k-7 will be replaced first, hopefully with an even better k-x sensor drool drool drool.... By which time you will have the Pentax bug & looking to upgrade...

Urkeldaedalus · 05-10-2010, 10:16 AM

It sounds like you may be conflicted about wanting to upgrade to whatever comes out next this year, so I'll give my advice based on two different scenarios.

My advice if you eventually want to sell the camera to upgrade to the next body Pentax is going to come out with.

Buy the K-x, use the cost difference between the K-7 and the K-x to buy good lenses. Unless things change drastically, whatever lens you buy now will only be better on the next camera you use it on.

When the new camera comes out, sell the K-x after the new camera has dropped in price a bit. Alternately, people will probably be selling their k-7s at this point and you can get one of these for cheaper at this later date. Either way you'll have a camera for awhile and probably save a little bit of money in the process (depends on how crazy you go on the lenses

)

My advice if you want to keep the camera and use it for awhile

Get the K-7. Although the K-x is a good enough camera to be a main camera for a user like you, the k-7 is a better camera in pretty much every respect -- besides high ISO image quality others have mentioned. The k-7 is more durable, has better build quality, better video, is weather sealed, has a sexy silent shutter sound and will likely last longer than the k-x.

Something to think about: Unless you take a lot of photos at ISOs greater than 2000 the K-x's high ISO advantage is not (in my opinion) substantial enough to pick it over the K-7. The K-7 also autofocuses better in low light conditions, which is why a combination of the two cameras would be so nice.

The good news is I don't think you can go wrong with either camera.

telfish · 05-10-2010, 02:50 PM

I am lucky enough to own both a K-X and a K-7. I like them both, and for different reasons. They complement each other. The K-X I use in low light and where I really need to boost shutter speeds. I use it with my Bigma hand held and get decent results.

The K-7 I tend to use as a walk round camera with the limiteds or with a macro as I need the extra detail the K-7 can produce in these situations. The faster AF and the slightly better metering also help.

Whichever you get will work for you. After all you are buying into a system. Get the best glass you can afford to go with the body you choose and have fun!

05-02-2010, 06:40 PM	#18
InfinitySL Junior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Chatham, NJ Posts: 31 Original Poster	Thanks everyone For the suggestions... Thanks for all the suggestions & info. I'm sure there are many others trying to make this same decision. In the meantime, I think I have a stop-gap solution. I'm going to give the Kx to my dad as a fathers day gift (along with a few siblings) and I may just have to shoot with it for a few days before I give it to him (He'll never know it's been opened...right? ). That ought to give me a pretty good idea of how the camera operates & feels in the hand. I think the cost is a real issue -- For nearly half what the K7 would cost, it'll probably suit most of my needs and as I can see form all the photo galleries & threads (Kit lens club, "post your best Kx photos", etc) that you can take some amazing pictures with the Kx... My mind is not 100% made up, but you guys have given me lots to think about...

05-02-2010, 08:20 PM	#20
psdigital New Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 24	I'm looking to purchase a new Pentax too... I am more of a professional though so I am either going to buy the K-7 or wait until the new one comes out. Probably the latter because I still have my Sony for now. I would always recommend buying the most advanced camera you can afford. You can always learn how to use it but if you buy one that doesn't have the features you may want in the future, you will then have to upgrade. That comes sooner than you think. Get the best camera you can afford at the time. Like someone said earlier, you can always use it in GREEN mode while you are learning. The k-7 would be my choice unless you can wait until the fall to see if a new one comes out. If you have something to occupy your time until like trying out your Dad's camera , wait for the new one. Pentax has a lot of great glass and that is one reason I am looking at Pentax. The K-7 has a lot of great features. I agree with what one of the replies stated. How much does the average person shoot with high ISO's? 90 % of the time my camera stays on ISO 100. The k-7 is great for what I do. RAW shooting does make a difference with noise. You can make your own adjustments instead of letting the camera do it. It all comes down to the type of photography you do. If you use it in a studio like I do, you won't have to worry about the ISO noise. You just have to think about how use your camera and buy the best you can afford. Learning how to use an advanced camera is the fun part now that you don't have to worry about film. Isn't digital great! If the new camera comes out in September, that will be within your six month timeframe. Last edited by psdigital; 05-02-2010 at 10:35 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Misc In wait	Mindaugas	Post Your Photos!	1	12-20-2009 03:12 PM
Can't wait....	shefiredevil	Photographic Technique	2	08-29-2009 08:50 AM
I can't wait until I go to NY!!	Buddha Jones	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	30	04-26-2009 08:17 AM
should i wait	dafiryde	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	05-08-2008 06:24 AM
Wait for DA* or...	Pentoxic	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	04-10-2008 06:55 PM

05-02-2010, 03:58 PM - 1 Like	#16
frank Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,202	Life is too short to wait. Go for the best (here it's K-7 in this case) you can afford and are willing to pay. That's always my suggestion

05-02-2010, 05:55 PM	#17
jedcaum New Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Belleville, IL Posts: 22	Originally posted by Ira Finally, I disagree with the above statement that shooting in RAW as opposed to JPEG somehow narrows the kx's ISO benefit/advantage, because it doesn't. Noise is still noise, even if captured in RAW. Then you disagree with empirical evidence that has shown that, purely in RAW capture, noise levels among K-X, K-7, 7D, and D90 are roughly equal, and you've let your fanboyism get the better of you. Advantage K-X no doubt, but not the definite superiority you suggest. Falk Lumo: Lumolabs: Pentax K-x vs. K-7, sensor and video http://dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/%28appareil1%29/345\|0/%28appareil2%29/330\|0/%28appareil3%29/329\|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Pentax/%28brand2%29/Pentax/%28brand3%29/Canon When shooting jpeg, this gap widens, as it seems that the jpeg engine in K-X does more with smoothing noise than the K-7. K-X is overall better in low light/high iso situations. No question. Perfectly acceptable images can be made with the K-7 as well, especially if shooting in RAW. Personally, and this may be total rationalization, I like the noise that the K-7 produces when it produces it. Reminds me of film. Much more like film grain, and less digital artifacty to me than the other cameras I played with. And if you've shot both, the K-X feels like a toy. The K-7 doesn't. This mattered to me. It may not matter with you, or the OP, so makes your choice, and takes your chances.

05-02-2010, 06:58 PM	#19
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	I would be contrary here and say that if video is not so important, buy a used K100D Super. It is an excellent camera and if you can get it for a couple hundred, an incredible deal. Learn what you like and don't like while saving money on either of the current models. Then, when you know what you like and need, upgrade to the body that suits you. In the meantime you'll have more money for glass, which is the real thing.

05-02-2010, 09:16 PM	#21
robgo2 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: New Mexico Photos: Albums Posts: 1,125	Originally posted by Ira Finally, I disagree with the above statement that shooting in RAW as opposed to JPEG somehow narrows the kx's ISO benefit/advantage, because it doesn't. Noise is still noise, even if captured in RAW. I have seen comparisons, and they are much closer in RAW than in JPEG mode. Sorry, but I am unable to find the source right now. And the K-7 at ISO 1600 is really quite good. Even at ISO 3200, with some good NR software, it is more than passable. If I really needed ISO 3200 frequently, I would be shooting with a D700. Rob

05-02-2010, 10:58 PM	#22
jedcaum New Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Belleville, IL Posts: 22	Here's one comparison, that specifically states the gap narrowing between K-X and K-7 in raw. There are many others. Pentax K-x Digital Camera - Full Review - The Imaging Resource! If it was an absolutely clear-cut win for the K-x in all IQ regards, that would have been an easier choice. Many note that the K-7 sensor is better at low ISO than the K-x, and delivers more details. IMO, then, the choice isn't so simple, and there are a great many ways that the K-7 delivered more of what I wanted from a body (weather resistance, customization, more minute control, room to grow into the equipment). Another thing that helped make my decision was finding a slightly used body, which knocked the K-7 price down to maybe $150 over the K-x. For that difference, grabbing the more robust and better feeling body was a no brainer. At regular prices for both, I'd probably have gone K-X. For the OP, good for you! Deciding is the hard part. Enjoy taking your pictures, whichever way you go.

05-02-2010, 11:06 PM	#23
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	I'd recommend a K-x with the two lens kit (18-55 and 55-300) versus the K-7 with one lens (the same 18-55 as the K-x). Those two lenses will cover anything from landcapes and cityscapes to outdoor sports well-enough for a beginner like the OP. Add a small flash for indoor social snapshots and a small bag and your all set to start your photographic journey! Good luck!

05-03-2010, 12:15 AM	#24
Eagle_Friends Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 971	easy choice, the K-x!!!!

05-03-2010, 05:06 AM	#25
JHD Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,406	I bought a K-x just before Christmas and it still sells for 1/2 of what the K-7 does in Canada. If the price of the K-7 comes down to what it sells for in the USA, I might consider it as a second body; but I sure don't plan on selling my K-x to get a K-7. Right now to my way of thinking, the same amount of money required for a K-7 would be better spent on glass instead.

05-03-2010, 12:03 PM	#26
yoshizuki Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 74	I got the 2 lens kit with the kx. The 55-300mm is awesome.

05-10-2010, 03:30 AM	#27
k54 Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Manila Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 77	Originally posted by Ira 1) Cost: kx over K7 by a mile. 2) Dials: It's a wash. Anyone can learn to get comfortable with any controls. 3) ISO: Do not underestimate the superiority of the kx's high ISO performance. It is revolutionary, and it has K7 owners drooling here. When the next incarnation of the K7 has the same capability, which they're also drooling over, it's going to cost what the K7 goes for now--a little more at first, but then the same. So why go for K7 now? 4) Video: For most people, the video functions are a side issue. If you really think you're going to use a DSLR to shoot serious video, okay. But that's a whole other issue, when you look at the low cost of digital camcorders specifically designed to do this. 5) WR: A major, major issue depending on your shooting conditions. I live in monsoon country, but still do not shoot in heavy rain. I agree. This is the reason why I chose K-x with 2 kit lens....

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-10-2010, 09:48 AM	#28
cabstar Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Grimsby UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 224	I have gone from using a k100 to Samsung GX20 (same as k20d) & now the k-x. Although the k-x does not have twin dials the need to press the exposure button on top & dial in I don't find much of an issue, info is still in the viewfinder. I don't really miss the top dial, again all info is within the viewfinder, I am taking pictures so constantly looking through the viewfinder. The red focussing dot I don't miss, I usually know which point I am going to focus on so can remember a second from choosing where the camera has focussed. I do shoot centre spot the majority of the time. I regularly shoot at ISO 1600 with my GX20 and have shots regularly published in magazines. There are a lot of discussions about noise, however most noise can be turned down using software, don't fall into the trap of thinking your images will be great out of the body, all images need tweaking in post processing software, so noise is not really an issue for me. Only thing I miss about the k-x is the lack of a facility for a grip, I do love the compact size as it is though & find myself taking the k-x out more than the GX20. Handle both & see what you like, myself I would go for k-x & buy a tamron 17-50mm 2.8, the price of the k-x at the moment is an absolute gift & as the k-x is the newer camera the k-7 will be replaced first, hopefully with an even better k-x sensor drool drool drool.... By which time you will have the Pentax bug & looking to upgrade...

05-10-2010, 10:16 AM	#29
Urkeldaedalus Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Iowa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,369	It sounds like you may be conflicted about wanting to upgrade to whatever comes out next this year, so I'll give my advice based on two different scenarios. My advice if you eventually want to sell the camera to upgrade to the next body Pentax is going to come out with. Buy the K-x, use the cost difference between the K-7 and the K-x to buy good lenses. Unless things change drastically, whatever lens you buy now will only be better on the next camera you use it on. When the new camera comes out, sell the K-x after the new camera has dropped in price a bit. Alternately, people will probably be selling their k-7s at this point and you can get one of these for cheaper at this later date. Either way you'll have a camera for awhile and probably save a little bit of money in the process (depends on how crazy you go on the lenses ) My advice if you want to keep the camera and use it for awhile Get the K-7. Although the K-x is a good enough camera to be a main camera for a user like you, the k-7 is a better camera in pretty much every respect -- besides high ISO image quality others have mentioned. The k-7 is more durable, has better build quality, better video, is weather sealed, has a sexy silent shutter sound and will likely last longer than the k-x. Something to think about: Unless you take a lot of photos at ISOs greater than 2000 the K-x's high ISO advantage is not (in my opinion) substantial enough to pick it over the K-7. The K-7 also autofocuses better in low light conditions, which is why a combination of the two cameras would be so nice. The good news is I don't think you can go wrong with either camera.

05-10-2010, 02:50 PM	#30
telfish Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: NY Posts: 407	I am lucky enough to own both a K-X and a K-7. I like them both, and for different reasons. They complement each other. The K-X I use in low light and where I really need to boost shutter speeds. I use it with my Bigma hand held and get decent results. The K-7 I tend to use as a walk round camera with the limiteds or with a macro as I need the extra detail the K-7 can produce in these situations. The faster AF and the slightly better metering also help. Whichever you get will work for you. After all you are buying into a system. Get the best glass you can afford to go with the body you choose and have fun!