Coming from the K10D, which I thought was leaps and bounds above the DS2 in
performance, I have to say... the K7 is:
1. MUCH faster. Think about taking a shot and it's already focused, shot, and
on the card.
2. MUCH quieter. The shutter is more of a "fwoosh" than the ClicketyWHACK of
the K
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Robinson"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 9:22 AM
Subject: K7 first thoughts
Coming from the K10D, which I thought was leaps and bounds above the DS2
in performance, I have to say... the K7 is:
1. MUCH faster.
fic compaison I am
> interested in.
>
>
> Phil Northeast
> Hobart, Tasmania
>
> www.northeastmedia.biz
> northeastme...@bigpond.com
>
>
> - Original Message - From: "Charles Robinson"
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> Sent: Thursday, May 20,
On May 19, 2010, at 19:48, Northeast Media wrote:
> Hmmm...
>
> as a K10D owner I find this disturbing, doe sthis mean I need a ne wcamer ?
> sound like it.
>
> Keep the reports coming Charles this is the sort of specific compaison I am
> interested in.
>
Sorry, Phil.
Yes, the K7 addresses
Same sentiments I've expressed. After having the K-7, would I really
give my K20D to a friend?
Tom C.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Charles Robinson wrote:
> On May 19, 2010, at 19:48, Northeast Media wrote:
>
>> Hmmm...
>>
>> as a K10D owner I find this disturbing, doe sthis mean I need a n
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Charles Robinson wrote:
>
> Yes, the K7 addresses almost everything from the K10D that bugged me.
> Specifically:
> 1. Unpredictable exposure (with or without flash)
> 2. Loud. That shutter. Wow. Loud.
> 3. Unpredictable autofocus (will it lock or not?).
Pretty much my thoughts. Let's wait to see what September brings.
--M.
On 20/05/2010, Adam Maas wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Charles Robinson
> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, the K7 addresses almost everything from the K10D that bugged me.
>> Specifically:
>> 1. Unpredictable exposure (w
I don't think that way. My K7, which now has 15,000 frames on the clock will be
due to retire into backup mode by the time the next top of the line Pentax
camera is released. At that time, my K20 will be sold. The K7 has been so
vastly superior to the K20 that I couldn't imagine having been with
Paul,
Unlike you, a small majority of the digital work I shoot is in very
dim light. I've shot more frames on the K-x at ISO 1600 and up than
below since I tend to shoot film in better light. I'd like the other
advantages of the K-7 (accurate exposure, sealing, deep buffer) but I
need that high IS
Same thoughts in this camp re the K10 and exposure and AF. The shutter
noise is not a concern as I do most of my nature photos next to a
railway shunting yard.
Thus i am glad to hear the good review from you, and its making the
K-7/D300s decision painfully hard, again.
How do you find the exposur
On May 21, 2010, at 12:52, David J Brooks wrote:
> Same thoughts in this camp re the K10 and exposure and AF. The shutter
> noise is not a concern as I do most of my nature photos next to a
> railway shunting yard.
>
> Thus i am glad to hear the good review from you, and its making the
> K-7/D300
I'll confirm that, I do not use flash much, but K10D was excessively
sensible to reflective surfaces when using the flash. The K-7 is not
so. I tried a shot (integrated flash) straight into a mirror, the shot
could be more or less usable. Same with K10D would have been
overexposed by a couple tens
On May 21, 2010, at 14:01, Thibouille wrote:
> I'll confirm that, I do not use flash much, but K10D was excessively
> sensible to reflective surfaces when using the flash. The K-7 is not
> so. I tried a shot (integrated flash) straight into a mirror, the shot
> could be more or less usable. Same w
On 21/05/2010, Adam Maas wrote:
> The K-7 pretty much nailed everything I wanted fixed about earlier
> Pentax DSLR's except the high ISO performance, which wasn't good
> enough to get me to upgrade.
>
> I still want a K-7x, the K-x is a great little body but the K-7's VF,
> build and sealing and
Friday, May 21, 2010, 5:54:30 PM, you wrote:
RS> On 21/05/2010, Adam Maas wrote:
>> The K-7 pretty much nailed everything I wanted fixed about earlier
>> Pentax DSLR's except the high ISO performance, which wasn't good
>> enough to get me to upgrade.
>>
>> I still want a K-7x, the K-x is a grea
On May 21, 2010, at 8:54 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 21/05/2010, Adam Maas wrote:
>
>> The K-7 pretty much nailed everything I wanted fixed about earlier
>> Pentax DSLR's except the high ISO performance, which wasn't good
>> enough to get me to upgrade.
>>
>> I still want a K-7x, the K-x is a
On 22/05/2010, paul stenquist wrote:
> After 15,000 K7 frames, I'd be really bummed if I had to shoot with my K20
> again. And a Kx doesn't have the battery or frame rate horsepower I need. Not
> to mention a viewfinder that's acceptable for manual focus.
I do a fair few 15+ shot sequences wit
On May 21, 2010, at 9:19 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 22/05/2010, paul stenquist wrote:
>
>> After 15,000 K7 frames, I'd be really bummed if I had to shoot with my K20
>> again. And a Kx doesn't have the battery or frame rate horsepower I need.
>> Not to mention a viewfinder that's acceptable
...@bigpond.com
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Robinson"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2010 4:32 AM
Subject: Re: K7 first thoughts
On May 21, 2010, at 12:52, David J Brooks wrote:
Same thoughts in this camp re the K10 and exposure
- Original Message -
From: "Northeast Media"
Subject: Re: K7 first thoughts
Thats the bity I hate the most about myK10D.
I can work around the ISO and AF performance - at least they are
predictable.
The first night function I shot with the K10d and my Metz 45 CL-4 fla
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 9:05 PM, paul stenquist wrote:
>
> On May 21, 2010, at 8:54 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
>
>> On 21/05/2010, Adam Maas wrote:
>>
>>> The K-7 pretty much nailed everything I wanted fixed about earlier
>>> Pentax DSLR's except the high ISO performance, which wasn't good
>>> enoug
On May 22, 2010, at 8:16 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 9:05 PM, paul stenquist
> wrote:
>>
>> On May 21, 2010, at 8:54 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/05/2010, Adam Maas wrote:
>>>
The K-7 pretty much nailed everything I wanted fixed about earlier
Pentax DSLR
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 8:29 AM, paul stenquist wrote:
>>
>> Paul,
>>
>> K-x is 4.7fps, K-7 is 5.2fps. Only real difference is buffer depth.
>>
> Yep. 4.7 fps doesn't help much when the camera stops dead in the water. But
> Kx is very nice. I'd like one for the occasional low-light work. Although
Well, yes, K10D is whacky in shutter sound and technologically older
than K-7. But Galia produces excellent pictures with it and some simple
lenses such as DA 21, FA 50/1.4 or FA 100/3.5 macro.
I am likely to pass on K7x or whatever else that comes out of the door
this year. It is because I do
Boris Liberman wrote:
> ...some simple lenses such as DA 21, FA 50/1.4 or FA 100/3.5 macro.
;-)
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Web : http://www.fotoralf.de
--
Ralf, but you won't argue that DA* 16-50/2.8 or Sigma EX 10-20/4-5.6 are
more complex than DA 21 and FA 50/1.4 ;-), or will you?
Boris
On 5/23/2010 1:25 PM, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:
Boris Liberman wrote:
...some simple lenses such as DA 21, FA 50/1.4 or FA 100/3.5 macro.
;-)
Ralf
-
Boris Liberman wrote:
> Ralf, but you won't argue that DA* 16-50/2.8 or Sigma EX 10-20/4-5.6 are
> more complex than DA 21 and FA 50/1.4 ;-), or will you?
On the mere base of their parts count, you're quite right. Just as a
5-500 mm hypermegasuperzoom is more complex than a Zeiss Hologon. ;-)
R
, William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message - From: "Northeast Media"
> Subject: Re: K7 first thoughts
>
>
>> Thats the bity I hate the most about myK10D.
>>
>> I can work around the ISO and AF performance - at least they are
>> predictable.
On May 24, 2010, at 10:26, Gonz wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> Is that Metz a handle mount or a shoe mount? I've been looking at
> getting a better flash than the unpredictable and crappy Pentax ones.
Gonz -
Just for the record - which camera model are you using for which the Pentax
flashes are "unpre
I've had real bad luck with my AF360 on everything starting from the
*istD, the K100D, and now the K20D. It just seems to be all over the
place.
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Charles Robinson wrote:
> On May 24, 2010, at 10:26, Gonz wrote:
>
>> Hi Bill,
>>
>> Is that Metz a handle mount or a
On May 24, 2010, at 11:31 AM, Charles Robinson wrote:
On May 24, 2010, at 10:26, Gonz wrote:
Hi Bill,
Is that Metz a handle mount or a shoe mount? I've been looking at
getting a better flash than the unpredictable and crappy Pentax ones.
Gonz -
Just for the record - which camera model ar
I played with a friend's Nikon D90 and the little pop-up flash on that
thing took WAY better shots than my K20 with 360. Shame.
gonz
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Charles Robinson wrote:
> On May 24, 2010, at 10:26, Gonz wrote:
>
>> Hi Bill,
>>
>> Is that Metz a handle mount or a shoe moun
On May 24, 2010, at 10:37, Gonz wrote:
> I played with a friend's Nikon D90 and the little pop-up flash on that
> thing took WAY better shots than my K20 with 360. Shame.
>
I played with my K7 and its pop-up flash on Saturday. Even the K7 pop-up flash
nails exposures better than the 540 on my
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Charles Robinson wrote:
> On May 24, 2010, at 10:37, Gonz wrote:
>
>> I played with a friend's Nikon D90 and the little pop-up flash on that
>> thing took WAY better shots than my K20 with 360. Shame.
>>
>
> I played with my K7 and its pop-up flash on Saturday.
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Gonz wrote:
> I played with a friend's Nikon D90 and the little pop-up flash on that
> thing took WAY better shots than my K20 with 360. Shame.
>
> gonz
The D200 pop up flash is very accurate.
I have the same problem with my K10 and af360. All over the place. I
Gonz,
I haven't done much flash with the K-7 and 540. I'll have to try more.
The K-7's on camera flash has been OK with the 31mm limited lens,
but I don't care much for the pre-flash and lag associated with it.
I kept my DS2 because I understand how to get reliable flash exposures
out of it.
I thi
Charles Robinson wrote:
On May 24, 2010, at 10:26, Gonz wrote:
Hi Bill,
Is that Metz a handle mount or a shoe mount? I've been looking at
getting a better flash than the unpredictable and crappy Pentax ones.
Gonz -
Just for the record - which camera model are you using for which the Pen
mike wilson wrote:
Charles Robinson wrote:
On May 24, 2010, at 10:26, Gonz wrote:
Hi Bill,
Is that Metz a handle mount or a shoe mount? I've been looking at
getting a better flash than the unpredictable and crappy Pentax ones.
Gonz -
Just for the record - which camera model are you u
Unless you need all the K-7 has to offer, consider the K-X, as well.
It's a great little camera and does well with the AF540.
-p
On 5/24/2010 10:55 AM, Gonz wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Charles Robinson wrote:
On May 24, 2010, at 10:37, Gonz wrote:
I played with a fr
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Paul Sorenson wrote:
> Unless you need all the K-7 has to offer, consider the K-X, as well. It's a
> great little camera and does well with the AF540.
>
> -p
And the af360
Dave
BTW if the come out with a K-7x that could be my camera
--
Documenting Life in Rura
- Original Message -
From: "Gonz"
Subject: Re: K7 first thoughts
Hi Bill,
Is that Metz a handle mount or a shoe mount? I've been looking at
getting a better flash than the unpredictable and crappy Pentax ones.
I looked in B&H for the one you mentioned, but it a
distudio.p...@gmail.com]
Sent: 22 May 2010 01:54
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K7 first thoughts [Scanned][Spam score:8%]
On 21/05/2010, Adam Maas wrote:
> The K-7 pretty much nailed everything I wanted fixed about earlier
> Pentax DSLR's except the high ISO performance, which
42 matches
Mail list logo
