advertisement


Calling all Pentax cognescenti

James

James

Lord of the Erg\o/s
I have a K-10D that I don't like much. It meters poorly and feels like a bag of poo compared to the more compact and accurate *istDS that I owned before. I'd be inclined to find another *istDS, but chances of a low mileage example are slim. So, my thoughts turn to the K-7, which I understand has been superceded by the K-5. Has anyone moved from the K-10D/K-20D onto the K-7/K-5 and found the change an improvement?

Secondly, I'd like to rationalise my collection of lenses. The K and M lenses I have, including a very nice 135/2.5 (no, not the Takumar version), don't get on particularly well with the K-10D. For some strange reason, I can't do stopped down metering that I used to be able to do with the *istDS. They are effectively redundant unless the K-7 treats them with the respect they deserve. Setting the manual primes aside, do you think it's a good idea to:

(1) Sell my FA50/1.4 and DFA100/2.8 macro for a DFA50/2.8 macro? I don't really need the 100mm length if I can use my K135/2.5.

(2) Ditch the DA12-24/4 for a DA10-17 fisheye? The rectilinear perspective is much more distorting and unnatural to my eye that the fisheye effect. Is there a DA10-19 user here?

(3) Consider a DA17-70/4 as a general purpose travelling lens. Has anyone experienced this lens? Is it good enough to replace my FA35/2AS?

Any and all comments welcome.

James
 
James,

I've recently moved from a *ist DS to the K5. It is step well worth taking as it handles as well as the DS and has much better technology/image capture. The K7 ought to handle eaqually well as it is the same body as the K5; however, from what I've seen the step from K7 to K5 is big enough to justify the spend on K5. I haven't tried a manual lens on it yet however IIRC it is supposed to meter happily with them just as the DS does.

Can't really comment on the lens options as I'm perfecty happy with the FA20, FA35 and FA50 as my main lens options (plus a few others as need/mood dictates) and have not tried any of the zooms you mention.

Buy a K5 and worry about the lens rationalisation later.

Regards,

Stuart.
 
The manual metering thing with the K10D/K20D is supposed to be due to the viewfinder screen. If you change the standard one to one of the other types, it is supposed to solve the problem.
 
Thanks for your comments Stuart and Patrick. I agree the body should take priority, especially since I get on fine with the lenses. On that note, a used (16,000 shutter trips) K-7 in apparently good condition has turned up for auction with a 18-55WR Pentax lens starting at the equivalent of 400 squids. Is that reasonable or a bit OTT?

James
 
Hello James,

As a long term user of Pentax film cameras and having traded up from the digital K100d to the K-7 last year, I can only say, I’ve got bigger files and more noise. The noise cleans up nicely in Lightroom though! The K-7 is aimed at the serious amateur and as such you need to know how to get the best from the images it produces in post processing.

As for lenses, I’ve no experience with those you have listed. The K-7 copes very well with my legacy M42 lenses which are the ones I use mostly. Mainly because I like apertures rings rather than have it consigned to a wheel.

The ergonomics’ of the K-7 is very nice; its heft feels right in the hand too!

I paid £700 for just the body and they still command high prices like this.

HTH Paul
 
I seem to recall reading comments about the K7 being a bit noisy - I've been debating the move from *istDS to something a bit newer. I think I'll wait until the K5 comes down a bit - either that or accept that the K-r might be all I need.
 
"What have I done" was the first thing that went through my head when I uploaded my first photos from the K-7, the luminance noise was that bad. However, viewing on screen is one thing (I'm not a pixel peeper) so I had some A3 prints done, which in my opinion is the only way of seeing what's what. They came back excellent in every way!
 
Paulicus said:
As a long term user of Pentax film cameras and having traded up from the digital K100d to the K-7 last year, I can only say, I’ve got bigger files and more noise. The noise cleans up nicely in Lightroom though! The K-7 is aimed at the serious amateur and as such you need to know how to get the best from the images it produces in post processing.
Click to expand...
Hello Paul. That's interesting to note. I found I needed far less post-processing with images captured by my (long-gone) *istDS than I do with the K-10D.

Paulicus said:
The ergonomics’ of the K-7 is very nice; its heft feels right in the hand too!
Click to expand...
Not quite as solid as my LX though.

RichardH said:
... either that or accept that the K-r might be all I need.
Click to expand...
Noooooooooooo .... it's not a proper Pentax without a pentaprism!
 
Paulicus said:
"What have I done" was the first thing that went through my head when I uploaded my first photos from the K-7, the luminance noise was that bad. However, viewing on screen is one thing (I'm not a pixel peeper) so I had some A3 prints done, which in my opinion is the only way of seeing what's what. They came back excellent in every way!
Click to expand...
Paul, is the luminance noise the result of on-board JPEG conversion or what you see in the pre-processing RAW files?
 
I've just swapped to a K-5 and have been impressed thus far with the noise reduction on it. Took a couple the other night looking towards Blencathra at ISO6400 just as a test and they looked surprisingly good (on a 27" iMac).

The K-7 body is on sale for £579 at Jacobs.
 
James, I only shoot Raw (DNG) and the luminance starts at 200 ISO on my camera. I'm viewing on a big profiled screen too, which may make it look worse than it actually is.

The Raw images from my K100d didn't have much post processing, so my expectations were maybe too high when I stumped up for the K-7.

Rest assured, it cleans up easily in software and I'm happy with it for my style of photography - just make sure if you decide to buy a K-7, that there's a big dog with a cask of brandy round its neck sitting next to you - for when you upload your first photos!

I wish I'd never sold my LX, MX, K1000 - The K1000 was kept on my desk purely for the mechanical satisfaction of winding on and firing the shutter, sad, but true!

£579 at Jacobs is a good price
 
Hi James,

This doesn't answer your question directly (very few answers will), but I'll pass on my experience. I hope it helps.

I moved from a K110d to a K7, and have found the improvement significant. I can't comment on the difference between the K10 and the K7, apart from the size , which I've experienced, and is quite important for me (one reason why I didn't go for the 10/20s in the first place).

There is a fair bit of noise on the K7 at the higher ISOs, but I tend not to use them. At lower ISOs, the differences between the 2 are quite substantial (an improvement on behalf of the K7. Much more subtlety, very difficult to explain).

As far as lenses go. I use manual primes - a F1.4 50, a 28mm and a 135mm, all of which I picked up 2nd hand. TTL metering works well most of the time, but I use an incident meter a lot.

I was worried about the upgrade beforehand, but have not regretted it at all.

AFAICT, the K5 is a better choice.

regards,

Will.
 
Paulicus said:
I wish I'd never sold my LX, MX, K1000 - The K1000 was kept on my desk purely for the mechanical satisfaction of winding on and firing the shutter, sad, but true!
Click to expand...
Paul, I keep my LX for exactly that reason. Oh, and for the exceptionally bright and clear viewfinder too. Unfortunately, mine is starting to develop the dreaded sticky mirror. I rather regret selling a couple of superb SMC lenses; a K18/3.5 ultrawide and the slightly overhyped A*85/1.4 for loose change before I discovered eBay.

WillDias said:
I moved from a K110d to a K7, and have found the improvement significant. I can't comment on the difference between the K10 and the K7, apart from the size , which I've experienced, and is quite important for me (one reason why I didn't go for the 10/20s in the first place).

There is a fair bit of noise on the K7 at the higher ISOs, but I tend not to use them. At lower ISOs, the differences between the 2 are quite substantial (an improvement on behalf of the K7. Much more subtlety, very difficult to explain).

As far as lenses go. I use manual primes - a F1.4 50, a 28mm and a 135mm, all of which I picked up 2nd hand. TTL metering works well most of the time, but I use an incident meter a lot.

I was worried about the upgrade beforehand, but have not regretted it at all.

AFAICT, the K5 is a better choice.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Will. Part of my problem with the K-10D is its bulk. I much preferred the more compact *istDS, but I thought I could get used to it.

If the K-5 is much better, I might wait a few months for the supply to plateau and price to drop. It might be better peace of mind to buy new too.

James
 
James,

I haven't touched a K5, so can't comment directly. But I believe it sorts may of the high ISO problems of the K7 which I think provides what many people were wishing for, i.e. a K7 with the better low light performance of the K-x.

I thought the K10 was bulky and ugly, and just felt wrong in my hands, which is ironic considering that the size and feel were so good with the lower models, and was one of the reasons why they were liked so much.

The K-7 fixes that problem wonderfully. It is like a more solid k-110, exactly what I was after.

I noticed that the K-7 was the first top-end Pentax to win praise from a wider audience. Something I think the company desperately needed.

I think your plan of going for the K5 when the price drops sounds sensible.

Regards,

Will.
 
K20D is the worse thing I ever bought. Have basically stopped taking pictures since I "upgraded" from my *istDS (penta-prism model). Although in theory I can get it back off my Dad.
 
WillDias said:
I noticed that the K-7 was the first top-end Pentax to win praise from a wider audience. Something I think the company desperately needed.
Click to expand...
Yes, the last widely lauded Pentax was the LX, back in the early 80s.

matthewr said:
K20D is the worse thing I ever bought. Have basically stopped taking pictures since I "upgraded" from my *istDS (penta-prism model). Although in theory I can get it back off my Dad.
Click to expand...
Your experience parallels mine. The *istDS kept me snapping regularly, whereas the K10D just gathers dust. This must change.
 
I bought a K20D from my local cameraworld.

My istDS stopped working :( and I thought the K20D would be a good replacement... the photos however aren't the same it seems... to repair the DS was more than the S/H K20D cost!

Is the DS a bit of a good camera then.. If I could get a good S/H one I would.

John
 
I wish I never sold my *istDS. Like my LX, the *istDS is exceptionally accurate with its metering and I rarely have to correct the overall exposure. I find the K10D much too random.

Even with averagely lit subjects, the TTL metering varies markedly with aperture. With my manual lenses, TTL metering is reasonably accurate wide-open. But when stopping down (and previewing with the green button), there is a tendency to underexpose.

I never had that problem with the *istDS.

Then there is the other problem of a slight tilt to my compositions that I've never been able to figure out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top