Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 1, 2010, 7:55 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 589
Default k7 versus k20d noise

Is the k7 any better at all than the k20d in the noise department? Just curious. If not, then what was Pentax thinking?
tony3dd is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 1, 2010, 8:07 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
John.Pattullo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 613
Default

generally most people think they are virtually identical but if one is slightly better then it is the k20

as for what pentax was thinking well overall the k7 is a better camera with more upto date features etc and is magnesium alloy body

cameras these days are mostly incremental updates - the k20 to k7 upgrade simply didn't upgrade the sensor that time round - this time with the k7-> k5 it is mostly the sensor thats been upgraded

remember you dont HAVE to upgrade every yeah you simply choose the the camera you want when you feel enough has changed for you to warrant the cost of upgrading

sure there are some k-7 users that wont bother with the k-5 and will keep shooting happily with what they have for years more to come - me i am kinda yoyoing this one - i want the k-5 but its expensive propsition and i am concerned about the buffer size

then againt he dynamic range higher resoultion for versatility in cropping etc and of course massive low light improvements all make it say buy me

will see guess depends on how much spare cash i have in december after buying presents
__________________
Flickr
PENTAX K-5 & PENTAX K-7
Pentax-DA 12-24mm f4 | Pentax-DA* 16-50mm f2.8 | Pentax-A 50mm f1.4 | Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro | Pentax-DA* 60-250mm f4 | Sigma 150-500mm
Pentax Photo Gallery
John.Pattullo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2010, 8:26 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
NMRecording's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eastern Appalachains
Posts: 866
Default

exactly how I feel about it John. I am actually thinking of selling my K20 pre Xmas and buying the K5 post xmas. Ive been shooting with my IST lately anyways so I figure why not.

I got the K ist for the low light as it blows the K20d out of the water, only problem is I dont believe its SR ( i cant find it anywhere in camera) and its 6 MP. I am still able to shoot nice shots handheld but they dont compare to the K20d. I think the low light + resolution + speed = K5

the K5 is the best in all categories. its like mashing together a Kx, and a K2o or K7 and giving it steroids.

Im definitely in, its just a matter of when. I still like the idea of carrying around two cameras, but I want one of them to be a K5


edit: If you dont wanna spend money and want a lowlight cam, go on ebay and buy a K*ist, it truly is great. Iso 200 on K*ist outperforms K20d on 1600 even if you take noise out of equation.
there really is no comparison in low light situation.
NMRecording is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2010, 8:36 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
John.Pattullo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 613
Default

have been tempted to buy an older camera for infrared photography but they seemt o still be selling for quite alot considering teh age of some of them- but its really my only option the k7 infrared filter is jsut to heavy - cant get any reasonable shots from it
__________________
Flickr
PENTAX K-5 & PENTAX K-7
Pentax-DA 12-24mm f4 | Pentax-DA* 16-50mm f2.8 | Pentax-A 50mm f1.4 | Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro | Pentax-DA* 60-250mm f4 | Sigma 150-500mm
Pentax Photo Gallery
John.Pattullo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2010, 6:01 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John.Pattullo View Post
..... and i am concerned about the buffer size
I think that issue has been put to bed John.

I forget who was hands on but 22 jpg at 7 fps and I think it was 15 RAW - and the camera was still going. That's 3 secs non-stop and personally I don't shoot anything for longer than that ... ever.
__________________
http://frogfish.smugmug.com
Pentax : 15 Ltd, 77 Ltd, 43/1.9 Ltd, Cosina 55/1.2, DA*300/4, Contax Zeiss Distagon 28/2.8, Raynox 150/250, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.

Nikon : D800, D600, Sigma 500/4.5, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 - 35/2.0, Nikkor 85/1.8G, Sigma 50/1.4. Nikon x1.4 TC, Sigma x2.0 TC
Frogfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2010, 12:50 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
John.Pattullo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 613
Default

reports from hands on i've heard said 8 raw as per the spec sheet - i never shoot jpeg so number of jpegs is somewhat irrelevant - hope your right but i suspect that i am - apparently pentax japan have said that buffer size isn't a concern for them since they think action shots are mostly shot in jpeg

anyway am gonna wait until see reviews of it - probably makes more financial sence to wait for the next one - my k-7 still does pretty much eveyrthing i require
__________________
Flickr
PENTAX K-5 & PENTAX K-7
Pentax-DA 12-24mm f4 | Pentax-DA* 16-50mm f2.8 | Pentax-A 50mm f1.4 | Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro | Pentax-DA* 60-250mm f4 | Sigma 150-500mm
Pentax Photo Gallery
John.Pattullo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2010, 2:07 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 589
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John.Pattullo View Post
reports from hands on i've heard said 8 raw as per the spec sheet - i never shoot jpeg so number of jpegs is somewhat irrelevant - hope your right but i suspect that i am - apparently pentax japan have said that buffer size isn't a concern for them since they think action shots are mostly shot in jpeg

anyway am gonna wait until see reviews of it - probably makes more financial sence to wait for the next one - my k-7 still does pretty much eveyrthing i require
Are you the person who shot that picture of the jet? If so, I never saw the rest of them. Do you have a link? That was an absolutely great shot! My K7 is on it's way back from repair along with 2 lenses. Should be here early next week. Can't wait to try it out. They adjusted the auto focus, and fixed a de-centering issue on my 55-300.
tony3dd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2010, 2:50 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tony3dd View Post
Is the k7 any better at all than the k20d in the noise department? Just curious. If not, then what was Pentax thinking?
Hi Tony,

This probably would have been a more relevant post a year ago. . .but here are my thoughts FWIW.

Noise isn't everything, tho it's easy to get the impression that it is. . .

The K-7 is more desirable if you like a compact body, which many don't. . . but I do. . .

The K-7 is a major step up if you shoot moving subjects and want the much easier tracking afforded by the quicker VF blackout times over the K20, also AF-C is significantly improved. A couple of milliseconds more time to see the subject might not seem like a lot, but it makes a lot of difference for me. I don't shoot a lot of BIF and such, but when I have the opportunity, the difference in capabilities between the two cameras is very noticeable.

Increased FPS don't play much of a part in my shooting, but the increased speed of the shutter/mirror combo also resulted in the above mentioned faster blackout times. The faster frame rate actually is a bit of an annoyance since it causes quite a few double tap exposures when I only wanted one, as I'm apparently a little slow getting off the shutter button, which I've set to continuous high for convenience. If I can get a bit more than a 1 second burst at full FPS, I'm happy, so I've never needed more buffer than Pentax has supplied in any of the bodies that I've owned. BTW, I love the soft shutter/mirror sound of the K-7. After shooting the K-7 exclusively for even a short time, the K20's shutter sound is quite jarring.

The 77 segment meter is a significant improvement, IMO, especially with an external flash. Overall, it's more accurate and forgiving for me.

Low light AF sensitivity is a major improvement, and accuracy is significantly improved in artificial light due to the additional AF color sensor in SAFOX VIII+. Add the best Auto WB in any DSLR, and this makes the K-7 a much easier camera to use for available light shooting despite the slight disadvantage in high ISO noise, IMO.

I can handle the K-7 much faster than the K20, specs aside. Once I got used to the new button placement, everything I do is more efficient, and the INFO screen is a major factor in this. Also the higher res of the LCD is a feature that I snickered at, but it's such an improvement that I now look at LCD res as a priority feature despite having little use for LV.

I don't use the tilt correction as there are few critical horizons in what I shoot, but I feel the ability to correct for rotational motion in the SR has helped. I also don't use the lens correcting capability, but I can see the benefit for those who can afford the in-camera processing time.

I have both a K20 and a K-7, and I'll grab the K-7 at least 90% of the time. There is virtually no situation that I consider the K20 a better choice. For a while, when I first got the Sigma 180 Macro, exposure difficulties caused by the Sigma's incompatibility with the K-7, F 1.7x AFA and the Metz 15 MS1 forced me to use the K20, since it worked well with the lens/AFA/flash combo the way I originally modified it. Once I was able to sort this out with the K-7, the K20 went back to 1st backup status for this purpose.

The noise issue has been over-exaggerated IMO. If you shoot RAW, the noise difference is negligible. I shoot jpeg, and the difference is greater, but I use Topaz Denoise as the equalizer, and it's never really been an issue. I find the K-7's noise a bit stronger in luminosity, and a bit less in color, so it's kind of a wash. . . but I'd usually rather deal with luminosity noise than color. To me, digital processing is digital processing, so if the camera doesn't handle a particular aspect as well as the computer and appropriate software does, it makes little difference to me as long as I can handle it satisfactorily before printing.

All of the improvements in any model from its predecessor can be worked around, but convenience of use as a factor increases in importance the more you use the camera. For occasional use, upgrading every model release doesn't necessarily make sense. If you shoot over 10-20K exposures per year, then the seemingly small differences can really add up.

I'm a pretty experienced birder and novice small critter macro shooter. I'm also retired/disabled, and photography is my main activity so I spend a lot of time with a camera in my hands compared to many other amateurs. For my use, the advantages of the K-7 over the K20 were definitely worth the upgrade cost. Add to that, I like the way the body looks and feels, even though it took some time to appreciate the thinner but deeper grip on the body. . .but different people have different priorities, so YMMV. . .

Scott
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2010, 3:39 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
rhermans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Antwerp - Belgium
Posts: 3,454
Default

The biggest difference I found measurbating between the result of the k20 and K7 with all images ever post on review sites was that their was a lot less chroma noise in the K7 than the K20. The K7 however looks better, is a lot more userfriendly so I had a hard time not getting the K7. The appearance of the K-x with it's high iso's made me not upgrade to the K7. This is now also the main reason to upgrade to the K5 if all that is said proves true.

Ronny
__________________

Last edited by rhermans; Oct 2, 2010 at 4:30 PM.
rhermans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2010, 3:48 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
John.Pattullo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 613
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tony3dd View Post
Are you the person who shot that picture of the jet? If so, I never saw the rest of them. Do you have a link? That was an absolutely great shot! My K7 is on it's way back from repair along with 2 lenses. Should be here early next week. Can't wait to try it out. They adjusted the auto focus, and fixed a de-centering issue on my 55-300.
if you mean the jet in my avatar then yes i shot that with my k7 - should be a thread afew pages back with all the images but if you go to my flickr page link is in my signature then they are all there
__________________
Flickr
PENTAX K-5 & PENTAX K-7
Pentax-DA 12-24mm f4 | Pentax-DA* 16-50mm f2.8 | Pentax-A 50mm f1.4 | Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro | Pentax-DA* 60-250mm f4 | Sigma 150-500mm
Pentax Photo Gallery
John.Pattullo is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:50 AM.