|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
07-31-2009, 04:00 AM
|
| |
Good points.
From what we've heard, the K-7 started out as K30D, in an effort to upgrade the K10D body. But along the road, in particular after seeing that K20D did not really gain momentum and based on feedback they gathered during Photokina last year, they (Hoya?) decided they need change. So, it was decided that the spirit which made successful the limited lenses, or the old LX body, must be grasped for the K-7 body development.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
07-30-2009, 03:08 PM
|
| |
It may be better as well. But I consider the advantage in the areas of in-camera NR (better actually than Canon) and AF (almost on par) to be more noticeably. Which is why I called these "strongholds".
I actually like what I heard about the D300s. You say "Nikon just does not feel the heat to make a bigger step". Not with regard to Pentax, I agree. But I am still wondering why Nikon didn't attempt more seriously to capture part of the 5DmkII video market.
I really hope you don't consider me fanboy just because I think the K-7 can compete against D300s (price/performance-wise, by its video capabilities, and its smaller size (for those who prefer smaller)). I didn't say K-7 is the better camera.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
07-30-2009, 01:33 PM
|
| |
Add to the list the electronic horizon ;)
No, this is just the logical thing to do. D300s was long planned ahead. As is D700s, btw. D300s is a much smaller upgrade to the D300 than K-7 is to the K20D. And it comes later. And is more expensive. Despite the fact that Nikon has more resources. Well played, Pentax!
And it is less than K-7, actually. 24p only, and no 3:2 1024p mode. Not to forget the HDR feature and sensor shift magic. NR and AF are two strongholds for the D300, of course.
|
