K-7 now £799!!

The unfortunate thing about autofocus in the HD video mode was that Pentax US jumped on it as feature and clearly highlighted it in their K-7 promotion video. Oops

Who said anything about conspiracy?

It is a reality that the Pentax/Samsung dslr strategic partnership has broken down.

It is also a reality that in an informal partnership (ie not a joint venture et al) each of the parties owns and controls various component technologies.

That is all.

I don't mind a bit of conspiracy theory now and again. Not to do with cameras though.........???


Regards

The "conspiracy" (reading back over the last few pages) appears to be that the K7 has a potentially faster AF system than the users are being allowed to experience - for whatever reason.

I'm just saying that in probability it doesn't. I don't dispute Danny's report from the shop that day, I'm simply putting it down to that sample being faulty. Faulty electronic goods (especially pre-production ones) are hardly a new phenomenom.

Right, although of course here the situation is entirely reversed, in that the pre-production model offers superior performance in various respects related to autofocus.

Look, I have no real emotional capital invested in this discussion and merely offered a possible theory that I find objectively plausible.

My objection - and this is largely directed at John - is that to characterise my explanation as a conspiracy theory is a cheap debating trick, where he attributes a position to me that I did not take in order to subsequently ridicule it (the strawman fallacy).

I suspect that the AF was slowed down to make it more accurate more often. Or people are mistaken about it ever being faster. Stranger things do happen.

As for AF during video, Pentax probably decided that it was less embarrassing to have no AF than slow AF. It has to be contrast mode when the mirror is up.

I share K10D's reservations about the battery being over volts. To achieve this, the chemicals would have to be wrong, and virtually all combinations would have produced a lower voltage if any at all.

Autofocus on a video camera is a guaranteed 100% total waste of time. No professional video or motion picture film cameras have it for good reason. I thought the K7 was aimed at a pro market.

On the subject of high noise levels, in pictures, I see very few pictures posted here that are taken at the extreme end of the ISO range so what is the worry? Did any of you who are concerned about Pentax's alleged lack of performance in this respect ever shoot at 1600 or 3200 on film?

Good question Ken! I went through a phase of thinking Kodak Royal X Pan (1250 ASA) and Kodak Recording Film 2475 (1000 ASA plus) were a good idea, but the results soon persuaded me that they were not.

As regards Conspiracy Theories, many people subscribe to them and I know not who they are, nor do I suggest anyone in this forum is such a person. I have my own conspiracy theory though that prior to the release of the DVD the quality of VHS pre-recorded cassettes was being carefully compromised so that we wouldn't mind paying more for a good DVD.

Now Blu-Ray is here, I'm waiting for DVDs to start looking a bit worse than they used to. Come to think of it, how's the quality of non-HD TV channels doing?

I'm convinced that SD TV is looking far worse than it used to.

The only slow thing that causes problems with my photographs in the operator...



This is decidedly off topic but... When I was school I photographed a school play using XP1 at 1600 ASA. The 10x8 prints were remarkably free of grain, I was quite surprised. I still have them somewhere. It was the last time I photographed a play and the last time I used XP1...!

K.

I have to shoot a christening in a couple of weeks; I know I'll be pushing things to 800+ in the church, and then for the fixed portraits I'll be bouncing / softboxing / umbrella'ing 600W/s of elinchrom d-lite delight. I want those to be good. Will be interesting to see just how far I have to drop them down

I regularly shoot at ISO2000+ up to ISO3200 on the K20D.
Even printed at 18"x12" from ISO3200 - even if I say so myself it looked superb

Generally I don't have a problem
(But what I do notice is that shooting higher than ISO800 your RAW converter is going to have a big, big, big effect on the results. Silkypix wins hands down for me.)

But, I'm happy to try it on a K7 if someone wants to lend me one (and I'll compare with a D700 if someone can do the same )

Matt

I'd forgotten all about 2475!

I posed the question, partly because I regularly exposed Tri-X at 1600 and developed in Acuspeed and currently have to shoot in theatres at 1600 and 3200, I just don't see what the problem is, if you are shooting in low light levels that is just the way it is.

You'll have to turn them off completely!