K10 beats K7, at least on some points..

Whilst considering wether to upgrade to a K7 or KR I began by comparing the K10 to its newer stablemates and was both suprised and mystified to find the K10 has the upper hand over the K7 in Image Quality, Dynamic Range and Colour Depth.
Check link below

http://snapsort.com/compare/Pentax_K-7-vs-Pentax_K10D

As the old saying goes; there are lies, damned lies and statistics.

The image quality is almost certainly measured at base ISO, where you would generally expect a CCD sensor to be superior to CMOS. At higher ISO ratings the CMOS sensor will come into its own.

Ditto dynamic range.

The viewfinder figures ignore the fact that although the K-7 has a lower magnification it does have a 100% view - overall size is about the same therefore.

The K10D had a 14-bit processor which gave it the edge in colour depth. As this extra gamut wasn't actually viewable for the majority of intents and purposes it was scaled back for subsequent models.

The bottom line is that if you only shoot at base ISO (100) then you won't see any improvements in IQ by upgrading from a K10D - that does overlook all the other improvements made to general handling and speed of operation though. Only you know if it's worth the money to you - it wasn't to me, hence I've still got my K10D...

this is why I never upgraded to the k7 or k5..... the majority of my work on the k10's is with studio flash.... so I get the most the camera can give, quality wise..
I felt the image quality on the new models to not be a huge jump over what I was getting witht he k10's...
that was really lucky for me that the kr is so inexpensive, as it gave me some excellent low light shooting abilities and video abilities, but my k10's are still the studio workhorses....
At first I dismissed the kr.... good thing I went back and had a second look!

I was thinking of getting a KR for faster low light work and maybe an expensive lens or two, though the K10 would always be a backup / foul weather camera, its like that MX I've got, just couldnt bear to part with it....

What an utterly stupid thing to say!!!

Go to Imaging Resource and check their maximum recomended print sizes for each camera, and the iso samples. Forget silly comparisons like that one! God knows what they based '10 percent better image quality' on. For me the k-7 wins except at base iso where the differences are negligible at a 1:1 view - and that's a smaller portion of the frame for the higher resolution K7. It's hardly a quantum leap though! The Kr is a lot better at high iso than either and is the one to go for if you want to push exposures in PP or shoot high iso.

They based the 10% one the DXO sensor score comparisons. but it's still bollox as you can't quantify image quality. You can only quantify measurable things like S/N ratios, dynamic range etc, which is what the DXO test does and creates a score base4d upon these measurements.

Someone who can't grasp the true nature of IQ shouldn't be doing these kind of comparisons.


or the K-5 of course.

agree... my point was the kr adds to my options without breaking the bank...the image quality is close enough on the k10's that the decision to upgrade to the k5 boils down to cost and ergonomics... if I didn't have two k10's I might view the weather sealing and low light abilities of the k5 to be worth the extra money....

the k5 is a solid upgrade from the k10.... but the image quality is still close enough that the photographer matters more than the camera, more often than not.

These camera reviews are getting dafter and dafter
That's the first time I've ever seen anyone mark down a camera for
only having ONE Storage Slot

It's like saying don't buy that pair of trousers because they
only have three pockets

The one storage slot actually gets to me. When I was with Sony, I always had two cards in there. Sometimes I would forget one at home when I left in a hurry, and it didn't matter.

But just the other day, I left the house in a hurry with my K7, got 20 mins down the road and saw a swan in some of the most beautiful light I've seen this year. Snap a shot, and "there is no card in the camera". Drats. I know, it's my own fault, but I like the option to have two cards in there as a safeguard to my own stupidity.

To get back to the OP. Yeah, the k10 does have some definite pros, but so does the k7. I think the k5 should settle this whole CCD vs CMOS debate, since it's simply stellar at low ISOs. Although I feel the kx could have easily settled that debate just as well.