On Jun 7, 2010, at 3:37 PM, Barry Rice wrote: > > Hey Folks, > > I‚m upgrading from a K10. I do serious botanical photography for stock > illustrations. Other than the obvious difference in pixels, are there any > thoughts on the difference between the K7 vs the Kx? Really, I shoot > almost exclusively in Av, and other than using the DOF preview, the 2- > second delay (to minimize shutter shake) are the only features I consider > crucial. > > I‚m planning on shelling out the extra cash for the K7, but if the word on > the street is that the model is a dud, I‚d like to know about it!
The word on the street is the the K7 rocks. It's possible that the K20 is slightly better than the K7 at high ISO, but in every other way, the K7 is a big step up. The areas that the K-x excel in are high ISO, small size and low price. You would be hard pressed to find a more competent camera at anywhere near it's price. Quite a few people have bought the K-x to "tide them over" until the K7 replacement comes out, and found themselves using it more than nominally better cameras. If I were in your shoes, I'd probably spend the extra for the K7 for better low ISO quality, autofocus, metering and water resistance. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
