Monday, July 13, 2009

The K-7 Failed My Test, So I've Bought This One!

I shot with the K-7 hands on and tested it for more than an hour, it failed in many ways as far as image quality aspects are concerned and thus I just "fell back" to get something "better" in the Pentax land, which I think is surely the sensible choice for me.

I shall report back later on with a mini review on the K-7 as well as a simple shootout test against my K5D and you will soon know why I did not choose the K-7 (Sad but I shall honestly share my findings). Update: Here is my that K-7 hands-on test and the findings.

Surprisingly, I have also found that my Olive DAL 18-55 Kit Lens is obviously sharper than the DA 18-55 WR which I tested. So, my choice has been just so easy. One K-7 + DA 18-55 WR > 2 x (One K-m Olive + DAL 18-55) in cost but IQ/PQ wise the K-m is just better! I'm not kidding and you will soon know why!

Well, the Olive K-m has just 1,000 units on Earth and I have got one of them, too! :-D


daedbird said...

You have no credibility until you update the split screen post, since it is clearly a fake......

Take some pride in your blog, and at least report that the photo appears to be a match of the image taken by Pentax America President Ned Bunnell and poster to his blog, photoshopped to create that image.....

Leaving the post up after credible evidence has been shown seriously calls into question your objectivity....

RiceHigh said...

Have you boys read the quoted user reports at the PentaxForums?

Boys, have you ever read? Is it so difficult to read and understand?? Actually to learn and face that someones have just submitted a bug report! JUST! Nothing More, Nothing Less.

The picture is not fake, it is an *illustration*!

Konstantinas said...

Congratulations on your purchase. That olive k-m is surely sweet! :)

43rumors said...

Hi Rice!
I am Alejandro from I appreciate your work and I fully understand your K-7 critiqs. Some people are like hooligans and they won't accept your opinions regarding the K-7. They do not understand that if everybody make pressure on Pentax-Hoya may they will make it better next time!

Thanks for your blog,

Justin said...


I agree with you that IQ of k-7 is way below one can expect. In fact, it is not even on par with entry level D5000. For peoples who don't believe it, just compare samples at imaging ressource. Furthermore, the price asked for lens is insane, I give up. I'm looking at nikon offers now, and will certainly wait a bit for the D300 replacement.

Anonymous said...

Fully agree with you, Rice. I do not like the K-7 noise performance which is simply worse than other Pentax cameras! Imaging ressource shows it all. It is simply worse. Well, I will stick with my K10D, which is good enough. Changing systems would be a big loss for me (many Pentax lenses most - full frame FA*s), but probably, when I have the money I'll go for Nikon D700, when it gets cheap. Hope, it will. And I hope Pentax will some day produce an FF camera for my excelent lenses. I am fed up with APS cameras.

Anonymous said...

Hello, everyone. I also downloaded the ISO 1600 samples of K-7 and D300 from Imaging recource. I have to admit that AT FIRST sight, when looking at the images at 100%, I REALLY did not like at all how K-7 compared to the Nikon. But then it appeared quite plainly that the D300 image is quite a bit softer. I opend the K-7 in photoshop CS4 and simply applied strong noise reduction without any sharpening. OH, MY! The images then looked IDENTICAL! It became obvious to me that Nikon has smoothed the noise at the expense of detail. Anyone with an OBJECTIVE look will come to this conclusion. It seems to me that all APS cameras are at the limit of their possibilities and the K-7 is CERTAINLY no worse! I will try to do the same with other ISO samples, also with the 50D even though I do not expect a different result. If it is so with other cameras also, there will be no reservations for me to save for the K-7. What I also came to understand once again: DO NOT BE HASTY WITH MAKING CONCLUSIONS.

Anonymous said...

Yes, I just tried same with 50D. Canon's camera gives the same result if not worse. Probably, not. IMO, SAME RESULT! Please, anyone looking at the K-7 try it and see for yourself. There is no reason to discredit the K-7.

Anonymous said...

This may well be in part a perception problem - but the general public will not dig that deeply. They will look at samples, and make judgments. Pentax had that problem with earlier models and lousy JPEG as compared to then-competitor models.

Shooting RAW would have helped a lot, but the average new buyer does not want the penalties involved with RAW.

Like that first date - you want to make your best impression; because you may not get that second date in which you get to tell the other person how great you really, really are. Think of marketing cameras today as speed-dating.

You also need to get noticed by someone other than a person who already knows you. Sony has brand-name, marketing, channels, and two legacy bases working for then (K/M)

The problem that Pentax has dates back to 2000 or earlier, and they've been playing catchup ever since. The expanding DSLR market gave them a cushion to grow volume without increasing share, but their recent dealer cutbacks reduce their visibility and ability to sell out of stock, without Web outlets. I've been watching this for years, hoping they'd pull out of that swan dive before hitting the pool surface.

Ricehigh has enough lenses to make the K-M a valid purchase, at likely half the price of the K-7 body. It's a limited edition, enhancing its value to him. It's a stripped design with 5 AF points and 10 MP, and the slow-AF problems are known - but if it suits his purpose since he has other cameras, it works out at the price.

This is where Pentax was strong - low end cameras with excellent optics, at a fair price. But that won't attract move-ups from lower form factors.

Since 1,000 were built, and the release was in Japan only in March, it looks like it did not sell out even that 1,000. It does consume some older components, which makes sense for Pentax - this is true niche marketing.

But not a way to survive as a brand, unfortunately. That was why the K-7 came out.

Anonymous said...

You still haven't answered the K7 copied photo issue yet, Rice. Did you copy it?
Or did your source have the same toy figure, same lighting, exposure etc?

I wonder about the other 'facts' of this 'blob' more and more.

Also, Ken Rockwell has said the Nikon D300 has smearing issues at has isos.
And Dpreview says the Nikon D5000 has no better image quality than the D60.

So what's the comparitive point between the K7 and Km, even if the points were suspect?

Anonymous said...


You still haven't answered the K7 copied photo issue yet, Rice. Did you copy it?
Or did your source have the same toy figure, same lighting, exposure etc?


Your complaint is with the source - Pentax Forums. Take it over there. Either you can't read, or just enjoy propagandizing like the worst of the fanboys.

The K-7 has multiple mechanical problems as well, including overheat potential and physical sensor issues, causing Pentax' own fixes right before release.

Anonymous said...

Various threads to check out:

I was so disappointed that I was packing it up and returning it to AMAZON. My co-worker was very curious about the sensor size of APS-C so I lifted up the mirror and showed her. She then asked me HOW COME THE SENSOR is CROOKED? I was like???

I couldn't believe what I saw. I have 3 K20D and 2 K10D and cleaned the sensor many many times and I have never seen a crooked sensor. I thought it could be the SR therefore the sensor moves freely inside the body. BUT if that was true then it should position differently every time. I then turned of the power and light turned the camera side by side. I heard the sensor is moving inside the body but when I lifted the mirror it was still in the same positon.

K-7 & Spider Thin Vertical Line (2 img)

(Lens price discussion)

terrencechin said...

You should probably also point out the K7's benefits over the K-m.
While it seems the sensor has its problems, it is possible that many of these could be fixed with firmware updates (how likely that'll happen is another matter), but the K7 has a much better viewfinder and durable body. Also the 3" LCD, top LCD and other physical improvements.
Simply stating the K-m is better for half the price isn't totally true.

Anonymous said...


You are really disgusting. First of all you seem to enjoy bashing and slamming Pentax for no other reason than your own orgasms. How can you judge in hour hands-on testing?

I have never seen a single photograph taken by you, that says enough. Or will you post one?

Walk to hell, miserable spoilt child you are.

Anonymous said...

RE: Simply stating the K-m is better for half the price isn't totally true.


"Better" is in the eye of the beholder. He has a higher-end camera of another make, so his more extreme needs are covered. The Olive K-M is more collectible that anything else, since you could just buy the K2000 - which, incidentally, has vanished from a temporary perch on the Amazon Top 100 DSLR's.

If you understand some math, you realize that when it gets down to places 75-100, the quantitative sales difference between models is minor, and no one doing a general shopping tour on Amazon gets past the top 25. There are 13 Canons and 7 Nikons in that top 25, and of course the hybrids.

Pentax K-7 is at #16, which is helpful to marketing. 5 good reviews are nice to see; these are the early-adopter faithful, and several reviewers complained about the K10D and K20D AF. 5 merchants, all with the same price.

The K-M will take care of probably 90 percent of what someone wants to shoot. If you read DPREVIEW, you'll read about K10D and K100D and 1st-D - as though it's a time warp. The K20D could not get these people to move up. The K-7 would; at a lower price. Those same people are not looking for movie mode.

The problem is that I don't see anyone new to the mount investing in PK lenses the way that the legacy people did; and Pentax counted on low-priced lens sales for profits.

The poster after you, by the way, apparently has a lithium prescription lost in shipment. Sad.

Anonymous said...

Luckily I have not lost a lithium prescription in shipment :-).

I don't need that, but if accidentally I might receive ot find some lithium I will more than happily send it to Ricehigh because he might need it for his sick mind slash behaviour.

Anonymous said...

sounds like he bought the k-m simply because its 'limited edition'. Collectors value and nothing more. Remember, this is the same guy who bashed the K-m earlier. Of course, I'm sure he will change his mind if he can get a hold of a limited edition K-20 "retro" style as well.

wake up rice high. you are being childish now. Some things you wrote about (SOME) I agreed, but now to say a K-m is better than a K-7 simply because of 1/2 the price ignores everything the K-7 brings to the table.

Anonymous said...

Hi Rice,

I agree with your comments on Pentax. I had used Pentax MX since I was in school and since then I had LX, and other Pentax bodies,and now DS has with me since 2004. I have given up Pentax and bought D5000 in July 09, though I have more than 20+ Pentax lenses. It was a painful and costly decision. Good luck to Pentax. And also very angry with the Pentax's vert high increase of lens' price.

Anonymous said...

RE: to say a K-m is better than a K-7 simply because of 1/2 the price ignores everything the K-7 brings to the table.


You are missing the point, just as Pentax itself is.

Ricehigh was looking for his standard of IQ, and the K-7 was not providing it, based on samples that he's seen. He decided that (for whatever reason) he wanted the K-M, and based on cost, he thought it a better value (NOT a better camera) than the K-7.

Those not bound by a legacy lens collection make that kind of objective decision - they find something fitting their criteria, and decide based on best price and features.

There was likely a collector aspect to it, but he can afford the indulgence, based on what he said earlier. I've seen this on DPREVIEW forums - someone looks at K-7; and then realizes that the
K20D is good enough, at half the price.

Panasonic ran into this, since some prospects decided that video was not worth twice the price TO THEM, and got the G1 instead. The GH1 is improved over the G1 for stills, but without a need for video, some decided on the G1.

That's the risk of what Panasonic did in having such a large price differential - if you compare the capabilities of the 14-140mm to a DSLR with 28-280mm, the GH1 is fairly priced, and offers more capability. The pricing is really about the lens.

Anonymous said...

We and Pentax are missing the point? "Ricehigh was looking for his standard of IQ"?
What's his "standard of IQ"? Does it even matter, the IQ I mean? And why would us, and Pentax as well, even consider what this fanatic Pentax-basher has to say?
The K-m being so much better than the K-7, well, how can some people accept something as ridiculous? And now it looks like we'll see a made-up "test", in which, of course, RH will "show" us how bad the K-7 is...
Get real, people... he's simply annoyed at the thought the K-7 can really succeed on the market. Yes, he hates Pentax that much.
This is the only explanation for all the negativity, for all the misinformation, for all the lies that can be found between pieces of real information taken out of context.

Anonymous said...

RH don't have money for K-7 :D

RiceHigh said...

> Anonymous said...
> RH don't have money for K-7 :D

Yes, I have no money to buy that expensive WR kit lens! :-o

Anonymous said...

you sinmply can vuy without kit LENS LOL :D Showed this all your BLOG to my friends who uses Canon and they said: "he even can show his pictures, even can't compare correctly" LOL

Anonymous said...

What about the Bunnell photo Rice?
You are very silent on this unless you get another poster to answer for you.
Pentax Forums indeed!

You have a credibility problem because you don't answer yourself but get another Canon fanboy to answer for you.
You own a Km?
You have never said that before.
Show some pictures taken of your Canon 5D with
it and prove it!

Anonymous said...

Funny man, You say that K-m is close to 5D, K-7 is far behind.:)
It's GOOD joke.
What medicine do you take?
Olive K-m...Rather unusual.

Anonymous said...

can't seemed to find the white K-m no more...

Garfield said...

Can I please get some enlightenment here - from Mr. Rice or one of you

I don't really get why people say K7 is worst in terms of noise then K20D.

After I compare ISO 1600 samples from K7 and K20D in Image Resource's Comparison page ... I came to the conclusion that in terms of noise, K7 is far superior then K20D. There are chroma noises all over K20D's sample. Whereas there are very little chroma noises on K7's sample, mostly just luminous noise.

If you just look at that bottle of Olive Oil and the black mug- you will know what I mean.

Anonymous said...

Hi RiceHigh,

How much did you pay for your olive? Also, where did you buy it?

I am in Hong Kong.



RiceHigh said...

I've paid 5390 HK Dollars, bought at Broadway, with a bundle of gifts which I think worth more than HK$500, including a 8GB Transcend Class 6 SDHC card, an multi-mini card reader, LCD protecting sheet, an HMC UV filter, a rocket blower and an Adidas gift. And there is also a standard gift of the National Geographic NG2343 camera bag in green colour, too. A real bargain, I have to say.

Anonymous said...

Cool. Thanks for the info, RH.

I like the comparison shots of Shau Kei Wan with Junk Bay in the background. You should make them your default scene when comparing cameras and lenses, just as dpreview uses Tower Bridge in London.

Not much use taking pictures today though, the haze here is terrible!


Anonymous said...

I just bought a k20d for US300. thanks for the info. Pentax vs Nikon = sharper images w/ room for noise reduction.

Post a Comment

Related Posts

Creative Commons License
RiceHigh's Pentax Blog by RiceHigh is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.