[pakuchn]

LeDave,

Just wondering where do you find the reading/information on the iso between the two cameras.

[pakuchn]

Ohh I forgot to ask, why would Pentax put a better sensor in a K-x and not put it in a K-7? I would think that K-7 would be the best of the best.
No?

[LeDave]

Pakuchn, I read the information here on this forum and research on Google. But yes the K-x has a better sensor for high ISO. The K-7 is Pentax's flagship camera, and without a proper ISO 100 it wouldn't be so professional in which Pentax is trying to market the K-7 to be. Especially for fashion shoots and commercial shots of products, IQ is most important with all available equipment; for that factor ISO 100 brings out the most clarity.

Now here's a few things to help you decide on your decision more. Do you want to shoot street photography? Do you want to shoot more of the evening without a tripod or flash? If so, then the K-x is more suitable for you. But do you want to do fashion photography? Product photography? and shoot landscape with a tripod? Then the K-7 is more suitable for you.

[shnikus]

When K-7 came out it's sensor was "best of the best" (available to Pentax). Sensors are getting better and better very fast. KX sensor is the low ISO king now, but only until the next generation of sensors becomes available. I wouldn't worry about silly stuff like that

---

Last edited by shnikus; 12-13-2009 at 08:53 PM.

[dosdan]

Ohh I forgot to ask, why would Pentax put a better sensor in a K-x and not put it in a K-7? I would think that K-7 would be the best of the best.
No?

Three possibilities:

1. The K-x was designed later than the K7. So the K7 missed out on the new Sony sensor.

2. Foolish megapixal pride? The new sensor is "only" 12.4 Mpix, whereas the Samsung sensor in the K20D and K-7 is 14.6Mpix. Marketing would not let the flagship camera step down in Mpixels.

3. Wanted a faster fps shooting rate so went to a 4 channel version of the Samsung sensor. I presume the Sony sensor isn't as fast.

Dan.

[er1kksen]

2. Foolish megapixal pride? The new sensor is "only" 12.4 Mpix, whereas the Samsung sensor in the K20D and K-7 is 14.6Mpix. Marketing would not let the flagship camera step down in Mpixels.


Dan.

Sounds like you've never experienced the fantastic, vivid detail from those 14.6mp samsung sensors. Nothing foolish about it at all, my friend.

[pakuchn]

LeDave,

The primary use of the camera is for:
Taking pictures of people/kids indoors with low lights.
Taking camera on motorcycle trips around U.S and Canada.
Hiking trips.
Trips to Europe.
This is all for fun and enjoyment. So basically, everything you all do, but not for business. I have a budget of $1500.00 and I would like to get a camera, lenses and flash and hold on to it for years to come. I don’t want to get a new body each year.

[LeDave]

LeDave,

The primary use of the camera is for:
Taking pictures of people/kids indoors with low lights.
Taking camera on motorcycle trips around U.S and Canada.
Hiking trips.
Trips to Europe.
This is all for fun and enjoyment. So basically, everything you all do, but not for business. I have a budget of $1500.00 and I would like to get a camera, lenses and flash and hold on to it for years to come. I don’t want to get a new body each year.

Like some have stated before already, I would recommend the K-x for you. But if you need WR then go with the K-7, otherwise the K-x makes a good companion. If you don't want to upgrade a new body each year, the K-x will hold up it's ISO extremely well for the years to come. With a budget of 1500, you could get yourself a K-x and a good set of lenses, I would definitely recommend the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or 28-75 f/2.8 depending on which focal lengths are more practical for you.

[UnknownVT]

Using the standardized sample test images at Imaging-Resource for the K7, Kx and Nikon D90

all at ISO 3200 -

Shadow noise -


Details -


Face -


Texture details -

[pakuchn]

As you all said K-x looks much better.

[Marc Sabatella]

Ohh I forgot to ask, why would Pentax put a better sensor in a K-x and not put it in a K-7? I would think that K-7 would be the best of the best.
No?

You didn't forget to ask - you *did* ask. You simply forgot to read the replies you already got. The K-7 *is* the better sensor better in many ways. The K-x gets somewhat better high ISO performance by starting at ISO 200 rather than ISO 100, but ISO 100 is more important for most professional purposes, so the K-7 is limited there. Also, good chunk of the K-x's better performance at higher ISO is due simply to performing more NR in its firmware. The assumption is that pros are more likely to want to perform NR themselves.

[pakuchn]

Marc,

I like your concert pictures, very clean. What lens do you mostly use?

[dosdan]

Sounds like you've never experienced the fantastic, vivid detail from those 14.6mp samsung sensors. Nothing foolish about it at all, my friend.

Yes, I have. I'm a K20D owner. I'm taking about Pentax Marketing not wanting the new flagship camera (K-7) to have less megapixels than previous model (K20D).

Dan.

[er1kksen]

Yes, I have. I'm a K20D owner. I'm taking about Pentax Marketing not wanting the new flagship camera (K-7) to have less megapixels than previous model (K20D).

Dan.

Well, what I'm saying is there's nothing foolish about that (like you seemed to be saying earlier). The sensor in the K-7 is great. It's just a little noisier at high ISOs than, say, the sensor in the K-x (and the number of megapixels really has very little to do with that. The Samsung sensors run hot).

I don't necessarily think that was marketing's decision, either.

[Marc Sabatella]

I like your concert pictures, very clean. What lens do you mostly use?

Thanks you! My main lens is the M135/3.5 - an old (1970's) cheap ($50) manual focus lens. The ability to use lenses like this - and have them be stabilized! - is one of the things that makes Pentax great, especially for things like concert photography. I also use an M100/2.8 (another old cheap MF lens), and the DA70/2.4 (the one modern / expensive / AF lens I use much for concert photography).

BTW, looking at the posted samples from the "comparometer", I see something different from what most people seem to: I see very high (pretty much objectionally so) levels of noise reduction applied to both the K-x and the D90 images. The K-7 images look like the sorts of things I could easily work with in PP. That's what I do with my K200D - no NR in camera beyond whatever it does beyond my control, but I apply as much as I feel need in my RAW processing. Typically, I use a very light hand - far less heavy-handed than the posted K-x and D90 samples.

You have to remember those are 100% crops. That's the equivalent of making a print about the size of my refrigerator and then examining it from a foot away. That's just not how photographs are viewed, and that's why I keep emphasizing that people tend to greatly overstate the differences *in practice* between cameras. The idea that there is *any* modern DLSR that could not produce acceptable images in the type of applications being discussed here is lunacy. It's like poring over Car & Driver magazine looking over stats on acceleration and turning ration and whatever it is they rate cars on, and then wondering if one that got a marginally worse socre than the others will still be able to drive you to work.