Foo - Pentaxians

Already on the wait list for when this hits the street. I will wait to see if they have solved their High ISO noise issues and focus issues, but both have been addressed in the design. Plus in camera true HDR with tone mapping,,nice.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K7/K7A.HTM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNCHdsZI88g

http://www.dpreview.com/

http://www.pentaximaging.com/

Maybe not a D700/5dmkII but should compete very well with the D300 D90 and whatever the prosumer Cannon is.

http://surfdoc.blogspot.com/

It certainly looks like a nice camera, judging by the pictures at dpreview. Very old-school rugged look to it. Large hand-grip, and lots of interesting buttons. Less menuing needed is a good thing. Great resolution on the LCD, too.

yeah, almost makes me regret selling my K20 - then I caress my D700 and all is forgotten. ;)

Seriously, Pentax makes some great stuff. The high ISO noise issue wasn't bad - just not as good as Nikon or Canon. If they could address that they'd have the hands down winner - its close as it is. Of course, still no tilt/shift lenses which is ultimately why I switched.

oh Pentax needs to come out with something full frame too.

I was just a few minutes ago, checking prices on the K20d as I have been using my K100d. I think I will wait till July and get this one instead.

I'm saving up for a Canon 50D...

I like my closeout K110D, and I'm comfortable with the Pantax system, (moved over from film bodies). But the K110 has enough QC issues, (It was a sealed, new body) That I'll probably also be jumping to Cannon for my next camera.

I'm saving up for a Canon 50D...

If you already have Canon stuff then that's a smart move. However if you have no legacy equipment I'd give the Pentax K20D (and now the K7) a LOOOOONNGG hard look.

If you already have Canon stuff then that's a smart move. However if you have no legacy equipment I'd give the Pentax K20D (and now the K7) a LOOOOONNGG hard look.

True true,, the K20d is a better camera than the Canon 50D and it can be had for less than $700. The K7 is in completely different league.

I was hoping they'd at least try for APS-H since it's rumored that their digital specific lenses can handle that. And even then, it'd be a hard choice to stick with Pentax. But it is nice that they're taking AF and metering more seriously. 5fps is nice. 100% FOV is nice and Pentax pentaprisms are bright and have always left me happy. Noise test results will be interesting. But I still can't think of anything that this camera has to offer that makes up for the lack of a FF sensor.

Are they or aren't they marketing this toward "serious" photographers?

who says "serious" photographers need FF? I struggle with this "i need FF" arguement myself but the reality of the situation is that there are thousands of professional photographers using crop sensors as we speak. I shot medium format for 10 years after I switched from 35mm and before digital... I am drawn to the biggest capture format I can lug into the mountains on my back.. but I have seen nothing yet that says FF is providing any better results than crop in the areas that are important to me. Crop sensors are more than capable of producing prints of up to 17x22, the size of my printer, so what do I need FF for? The "serious phototgraphers" use FF argument holds no water.

but I have seen nothing yet that says FF is providing any better results than crop in the areas that are important to me.
You don't need FF, that's fine. But I want the wider DOF range that FF affords, as well as reduced noise assuming the pixel density is reduced even if total pixel count increases. More important than any of that, though, is my preference for wide-angle. Tele shooters and even normal shooters may actually benefit from a cropped sensor, but that isn't my style. And the "serious" shooters I know prefer to not have equipment that sets limitations on the images they produce.


The "serious phototgraphers" use FF argument holds no water.
Then it's a good thing I never said that. I'm more interested who Pentax thinks they're marketing to with a camera that is roughly equivalent to a 3rd tier Canon or Nikon body.

Then it's a good thing I never said that. I'm more interested who Pentax thinks they're marketing to with a camera that is roughly equivalent to a 3rd tier Canon or Nikon body.

now you are just being a troll.. so good luck with that

now you are just being a troll.. so good luck with that
Troll?

You glaze over my reasons why no-FF is a deal-breaker for me (and many pros/semipros/serious amateurs), and only respond to my second point with the BS quoted above. Who the hell are you calling troll?

I was hoping they'd at least try for APS-H since it's rumored that their digital specific lenses can handle that. And even then, it'd be a hard choice to stick with Pentax. But it is nice that they're taking AF and metering more seriously. 5fps is nice. 100% FOV is nice and Pentax pentaprisms are bright and have always left me happy. Noise test results will be interesting. But I still can't think of anything that this camera has to offer that makes up for the lack of a FF sensor.

Are they or aren't they marketing this toward "serious" photographers?

They're marketing this towards the 50d and D300 crowd, and honestly they might have a winner. Noise performance at high ISOs will be important though.

I use a k10d right now..the whole video thing with dslrs is killing me. I hate it. buy a freakin video camera. I was holding out to see what the k30d\k7 was gonna be. I agree with high ISO statements, and this camera seems to adress those issues ( a full review is still pending) but i wish pentax\hoya would just come out with a pro loevel dslr with no video, higher ISO range and higher burst rate...but thats just me...

on a side note..any of you pentaxians in the photo gallery????

If you already have Canon stuff then that's a smart move. However if you have no legacy equipment I'd give the Pentax K20D (and now the K7) a LOOOOONNGG hard look.

I'm a Canon lover for many reasons, and already have Canon lenses.

My good friend shoots Pentax and always seems to get odd problems with his photos...

I'm a Canon lover for many reasons, and already have Canon lenses.

My good friend shoots Pentax and always seems to get odd problems with his photos...

What kind of problems? I always had great results with mine unless I screwed something up.

My favorite saying is photography is in the photographer not the camera.

I went Nikon only because I needed to shoot at extreme ISO's a LOT (they have the best high ISO performance right now) and because I need at some point to get a tilt/shift lens.

oh and because I had a D1H body (courtesy of Carbonlife) and speedlite laying around.

OK, time for a random RANT!

This notion that only the top model from Nikon or Cannon is suitable for professional use is just so much rubbish. A professional will use what they need to get the job done while not blowing all their profit on equipment. Back in film day's many, many professionals used Nikon FM 2's or FE 2's and NOT F4's or F5's. Its a little bit different these days because when you buy a digital camera you are effectively buying the "film" you are going to use for the life of the camera as well but its not that different. Professionals use what they need without blowing all their money on equipment.

The whole small sensor vs full frame thing annoys me as well. When digital camera's started I wanted full frame in order to best utilize my existing lenses. The manufacturers promised advantages from going to a smaller sensor and in theory they should be right but my gripe is that they NEVER got around to producing the top quality lenses for the new sensor size that they should have made in the first place. Instead they foisted sub quality variable aperture zooms on us. Now that the lenses that they should have made in the first place are just now coming out they are going back to 24x36mm sensor size:notamused:

Love their work:rolleyes:

Anthony

They're marketing this towards the 50d and D300 crowd, and honestly they might have a winner. Noise performance at high ISOs will be important though.
I am really surprised to see that Pentax didn't even budge on pixel count. That should help them a lot on noise management. But competition is going to be tough.

I'll probably wait to see how the DA* 16-50mm f2.8 works on this body. Chromatic aberration on this thing is frustrating, to say the least.

I am really surprised to see that Pentax didn't even budge on pixel count. That should help them a lot on noise management. But competition is going to be tough.

I'll probably wait to see how the DA* 16-50mm f2.8 works on this body. Chromatic aberration on this thing is frustrating, to say the least.

More pixels actually makes noise worse. That's why the D700 is so amazing at high ISO's. It's only 12 MP in a full frame camera. More real estate per pixel translates to less noise especially at high ISO's. Panasonic took the same approach to their amazing LX3 as well. Megapixels is all about hype and marketing. Even at large print sizes you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between a 12 megapixel camera and a 20 megapixel camera.

There's lots of brilliant 3rd party glass out there. The Sigma 10-20mm and the Sigma 24-70 2.8 both come to mind as well as the Tamron 28-75 2.8.

More pixels actually makes noise worse. That's why the D700 is so amazing at high ISO's. It's only 12 MP in a full frame camera. More real estate per pixel translates to less noise especially at high ISO's. Panasonic took the same approach to their amazing LX3 as well. Megapixels is all about hype and marketing. Even at large print sizes you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between a 12 megapixel camera and a 20 megapixel camera.

There's lots of brilliant 3rd party glass out there. The Sigma 10-20mm and the Sigma 24-70 2.8 both come to mind as well as the Tamron 28-75 2.8.

Sensor technology counts for something too. The 5D MKII has 21mp and keeps up nicely with the D700. Downsizing the file to 12mp helps reduce visible noise in comparison as well. I feel comfortable shooting at 6400 ISO if I need to.

Anyways, FF isn't needed, but it usually is counted as pro type gear based on the IQ and probably the price. APS-C sensors are usually considered "budget". Not that there aren't pros using APS-C sensor cameras, but that's just the general perception of a lot of people.

I should say crop sensor though, there are Olympus people out there.

Despite worse noise than their full frame counter parts, there are people that are using crop sensor cameras to their advantage, like sports photographers and such.

Hell, even Canon's prime sport photographer's camera is 1.3x crop. After all, it is cheaper to buy a crop sensor camera and a 300mm lens with a 1.4x extender than a full frame camera and 600mm lens.

But I like the full frame for the IQ. I do mainly portraiture/glamour/people so the 70-200 is more than enough reach for me. Plus, I still have a 30D.

Anyways, the K7 looks like a capable camera, just as was mentioned in some blog I read, is it enough of a camera to pull people away from the big two?

oh Pentax needs to come out with something full frame too.

Hoya/Pentax, I think, have made it fairly clear that a FF Camera is not forthcoming. Their Lens roadmap indicates that all of their future Lens are optimized for APS-C.

Coming from film, I had a bit of adjustment getting used to the "crop factor".

If you already have Canon stuff then that's a smart move. However if you have no legacy equipment I'd give the Pentax K20D (and now the K7) a LOOOOONNGG hard look.

I have a K20D and am quite happy with it. The K-7 has some features that I would like to have (Live view and video not being included in those). I'm happy to see that Pentax has finally included a focus assist light with the K-7. The most major, and common, complaint that most Pentax users have is the low light auto-focus performance. The K-7 should eliminate that problem.

I'm seriously considering upgrading to the K-7 but will wait for the early rush to subside and maybe the price will drop just a bit.

Hoya/Pentax, I think, have made it fairly clear that a FF Camera is not forthcoming. Their Lens roadmap indicates that all of their future Lens are optimized for APS-C.
This makes Pentax's continued attempts to produce a digital "medium format" (http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/24/pentaxs-30-megapixel-645-digital-on-track-for-2010-release/) even wackier. If they can't do what they need to do to give Canon/Nikon serious competition, they're going to have an even tougher time getting someone to abandon their Hasselblad or Mamiya D-MF.


Coming from film, I had a bit of adjustment getting used to the "crop factor".
One of the things that irritates me most about APS-C specific lenses is that they still label the focal lengths in their 35mm equivalents.

One of the things that irritates me most about APS-C specific lenses is that they still label the focal lengths in their 35mm equivalents.

The focal length of lens does not change. A 50mm lens is a 50mm lens period. All lens manufacturers have adjusted the f/l's of their offerings to compensate for the "crop factor"

One of the things that irritates me most about APS-C specific lenses is that they still label the focal lengths in their 35mm equivalents.

Plus with most manufactures, most of their lenses are still 35mm lenses.

The focal length of lens does not change. A 50mm lens is a 50mm lens period. All lens manufacturers have adjusted the f/l's of their offerings to compensate for the "crop factor"
Errrr, yeah. Brain fart. I still get twisted up when trying to convert 50mm (35mm equiv) to MF and APS-C, for example.

I'm interested in the K7. I'm not going to be the first one to run out and buy one but the one factor that I think is the K10D and K20D's Achilles heel, the fact that they don't write good in camera jpeg's, I'm not 100% sure they have fixed because for probably obvious reasons they haven't come out and said it in the first literature. They have hinted at it by saying they have a new processing engine but I will wait to see what some trusted reviewers have to say on the topic.

Anthony

The K-7 is a good example of evolution in action, of what a serious photographer wants/needs. If I had the cash, I'd consider it because it appears to be a high quality camera with no surprises or corners cut.

What kind of problems? I always had great results with mine unless I screwed something up.

My favorite saying is photography is in the photographer not the camera.

I went Nikon only because I needed to shoot at extreme ISO's a LOT (they have the best high ISO performance right now) and because I need at some point to get a tilt/shift lens.

He has some weird focusing problems...and sometimes it makes textures look odd. We (him and a few friends including myself) are still trying to figure out if it's the camera or the lighting...but it's looking like the camera so far.

He's likely going to switch to Canon soon.

He has some weird focusing problems...and sometimes it makes textures look odd. We (him and a few friends including myself) are still trying to figure out if it's the camera or the lighting...but it's looking like the camera so far.

He's likely going to switch to Canon soon.

Is he using the jpeg's from the camera or is he converting raw format on his computer?

The jpeg's are useless. Full stop. Don't bother.

The images I get from converting raw files are top notch. I have no complaints.

Anthony

Is he using the jpeg's from the camera or is he converting raw format on his computer?

The jpeg's are useless. Full stop. Don't bother.

The images I get from converting raw files are top notch. I have no complaints.

Anthony

RAW. We're not novices. :D

I'm just saying he's had weird issues with his Pentax, that's all.

I'm glad yours works great for you.

I'm interested in the K7. I'm not going to be the first one to run out and buy one but the one factor that I think is the K10D and K20D's Achilles heel, the fact that they don't write good in camera jpeg's, I'm not 100% sure they have fixed because for probably obvious reasons they haven't come out and said it in the first literature. They have hinted at it by saying they have a new processing engine but I will wait to see what some trusted reviewers have to say on the topic.

Anthony

The .jpeg's are fine from the K10D, & K20D. (I've owned both) Those "trusted' reviewers on DPR didn't like the .jpegs produced by Pentax's default settings.

The digital world has been spoiled by jpegs that are over sharpened and over-saturated and Pentax chose default settings that did neither. Simple adjustment of the jpeg settings correct everything that the "trusted" reviewers didn't like.

Now, why would anyone have a DSLR, such as the K20D, and shoot in jpeg only anyway? Especially since both the K10D and K20D haw RAW+jpg shooting mode.

That's like having your film processed then throwing away the negatives. But, you shoot in RAW so you already knew that. :)

The .jpeg's are fine from the K10D, & K20D. (I've owned both) Those "trusted' reviewers on DPR didn't like the .jpegs produced by Pentax's default settings.

The digital world has been spoiled by jpegs that are over sharpened and over-saturated and Pentax chose default settings that did neither. Simple adjustment of the jpeg settings correct everything that the "trusted" reviewers didn't like.

Now, why would anyone have a DSLR, such as the K20D, and shoot in jpeg only anyway? Especially since both the K10D and K20D haw RAW+jpg shooting mode.

That's like having your film processed then throwing away the negatives. But, you shoot in RAW so you already knew that. :)

I'm an experienced photographer who has worked professionally and I also used to be involved in camera club competitions where my work was continually being judged and I was often successful against my peers.

The jpeg's from the K10D and K20D are just not up to scratch. I had better results from a 7 mp Sony point and shoot. The difference between the K10D's raw files converted by Adobe Camera Raw and the jpegs is chalk and cheese. I'd be ashamed to submit an image from an in camera jpeg from my k10D. It just wouldn't cut it in amateur competition let alone professional competition.

Anthony

He has some weird focusing problems...and sometimes it makes textures look odd. We (him and a few friends including myself) are still trying to figure out if it's the camera or the lighting...but it's looking like the camera so far.

He's likely going to switch to Canon soon.

I never saw anything like that - if its the camera I'd say its just that particular one. I'd send it in for warranty repair.

as far as taking away business from the 'big 2'.

a.) the 'big 2' should never get complacent and you should never think it won't happen just because you can't imagine it.
b.) Pentax already took some business away from the big 2. Mine for example. I purchased a K20 over a 50D and a D90. The Pentax had a some really cool features the others didn't, was less expensive, and IMHO built more robustly (I still think its build quality rivals my D700).
c.)Features I liked - robust weather protection, dust removal on sensor, in body image stabilization. The last feature really rocked. Nikon and Canon could take a lesson there. It was effective and all lenses were stabilized.

So yes, I think Pentax could take business away from Canon or Nikon at that level of camera.

Btw, the reason I wanted full frame vs. APC is that I do a lot of architectural photography, and cropped sensor was killing me on the wide angle end of things.

Btw, the reason I wanted full frame vs. APC is that I do a lot of architectural photography, and cropped sensor was killing me on the wide angle end of things.

I wonder if you have, or have tried the DA14, DA15 or DA 12-24 for you Landscape photography?

I had a DA 12-24 for a while and found it to be a worthwhile and very good lens. However, I also found that most of my photography required anything wider than the DA 16-45.

I wonder if you have, or have tried the DA14, DA15 or DA 12-24 for you Landscape photography?

I had a DA 12-24 for a while and found it to be a worthwhile and very good lens. However, I also found that most of my photography required anything wider than the DA 16-45.

I ended up getting a D700 for my architectural stuff. Only have a 20mm 2.8 right now - am saving my pennies for a 14-24 2.8. Nikon sold their soul to the devil for that lens. One of the best lenses ever made.

For Pentax I shot all 3rd party glass. I found the Sigma 10-20mm to be pretty incredible especially for the price.

Went into my camera bag last night to pull out the k20d and to my surprise the body was sitting by itself, no body cap, no lens attached. Very odd, I always throw a body cap on the camera when done with shooting. Apparently I left Bigma on the body when I left CO last week on my way home to HI. Somewhere along the line the backpack must have take a significant jolt and the weight of the lens, literally tore the metal lens mount off the camera. What knuckle head. What I cant figure out is when it occurred. I didnt check the bag, and the camera was cradled very tightly in the Lowepro bag... I will send it in for repair, but I doubt there is anything that can be done. bummer...

still have the k10d to get me through the interim. Maybe it was my subconscious :)

Guess I can be glad the K7 is a stainless steel frame and magnesium body :)

http://inlinethumb62.webshots.com/44029/2801333620102801834S600x600Q85.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2801333620102801834NYfzQy)

Guess I can be glad the K7 is a stainless steel frame and magnesium body :)

http://inlinethumb62.webshots.com/44029/2801333620102801834S600x600Q85.jpg (http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2801333620102801834NYfzQy)

OWW!:cry:

Sorry to hear about your camera. Hopefully its fixable.

Anthony

as far as taking away business from the 'big 2'.

a.) the 'big 2' should never get complacent and you should never think it won't happen just because you can't imagine it.
b.) Pentax already took some business away from the big 2. Mine for example. I purchased a K20 over a 50D and a D90. The Pentax had a some really cool features the others didn't, was less expensive, and IMHO built more robustly (I still think its build quality rivals my D700).
c.)Features I liked - robust weather protection, dust removal on sensor, in body image stabilization. The last feature really rocked. Nikon and Canon could take a lesson there. It was effective and all lenses were stabilized.

So yes, I think Pentax could take business away from Canon or Nikon at that level of camera.

Btw, the reason I wanted full frame vs. APC is that I do a lot of architectural photography, and cropped sensor was killing me on the wide angle end of things.

Of course there will be people buying entry level and some mid level gear that will go for other manufactures, but when it comes to upgrading past that, companies like Pentax and Olympus don't really leave anywhere to go. I mean, isn't the K7 their first camera that shoots over around 3fps? At least sony built a full frame camera, which is the type of camera that a pro is likely to buy. Give them a generation or two and they might have a camera that can directly compete with the full frame Nikon and Canon cameras.

And the in body image stabilization is a whole new argument. Canon claims up to 4 stops with certain lenses where cameras with in body claim about two. Each lens with IS has the IS integrated for that lens.

Of course there will be people buying entry level and some mid level gear that will go for other manufactures, but when it comes to upgrading past that, companies like Pentax and Olympus don't really leave anywhere to go. I mean, isn't the K7 their first camera that shoots over around 3fps? At least sony built a full frame camera, which is the type of camera that a pro is likely to buy. Give them a generation or two and they might have a camera that can directly compete with the full frame Nikon and Canon cameras.

And the in body image stabilization is a whole new argument. Canon claims up to 4 stops with certain lenses where cameras with in body claim about two. Each lens with IS has the IS integrated for that lens.

I would argue that in body IS is less effective than at the lens. The lens is what moves most and stabilizing it will have the most effect IMO. I know my 70-200L IS is amazing and I can hand hold it at shutter speeds much lower than I would ever guess I could. I would never buy a telephoto lens without it. At the wide end, while it would probably help, it would add weight and cost. Some of those wide fast lenses are already expensive enough. I guess that argues for in body IS but I don't feel like it's something that I have to have at those focal lengths.

I would argue that in body IS is less effective than at the lens. The lens is what moves most and stabilizing it will have the most effect IMO. I know my 70-200L IS is amazing and I can hand hold it at shutter speeds much lower than I would ever guess I could. I would never buy a telephoto lens without it. At the wide end, while it would probably help, it would add weight and cost. Some of those wide fast lenses are already expensive enough. I guess that argues for in body IS but I don't feel like it's something that I have to have at those focal lengths.

AFAIK that's the very reason Canon and Nikon don't offer in-camera IS.

AFAIK that's the very reason Canon and Nikon don't offer in-camera IS.

Well following the "rule" for image shake, shooting with a 16mm lens you'd be shooting at 1/16. There's only so slow that you can go before you're getting image shake and IS is less effective at those focal lengths. There's a few lenses that are as wide as 17mm that have IS, but they're made for crop sensor cameras and have to take the crop into consideration.

In body IS may not be as effective as in lens, but it is effective. I know from first hand experience. You can still do IS in the lens as well. To be able to put ANY lens on and have IS available is powerful stuff. Period. And IMO the in lens stuff isn't as good as they claim it to be.

As far as Pentax as a company is concerned - this is the company that made pro 645 and 6x7 bodies where as Nikon and Canon did not. This is also the company that introduced a lot of serious photogs to their first camera (I myself on a K1000).