K7 poor image quality

Photoaddict - I started with the DL2 and now have the K-7. I do not have to do any more pp work than I did with the DL2 in fact the K-7 allows you much more choice in how your out-of-camera jpegs look. RAW is better, but the same was also very true for the DL2. The K-7 is just a more complex beast which is why perhaps some people have more trouble than they did with entry level cameras.

Higher-level cameras are aimed at more experienced photographers who know that to get the very best out of their cameras they will have to do a little work themselves.

It is quite unnecessary to spend hours or to use massively over-weight and over-priced programs like Photoshop. A few minutes in Silkypix is sufficient to turn a batch of RAW images into excellent photographs.

G

I have to disagree a bit with you there George, despite the market a specific model is aimed at the user should still be able to put the camera into green mode and get reasonably decent images, otherwise whats the point of putting green or program modes on it in the first place? Its true that a higher level model like the K7 has greater flexibility for those situations where a program mode just cant cope, and lets face it no camera can cope if the light isn't right.


Most duff results will be down to user error and not the equipment, I remember the first time I took the Bigma out, the results were quite dire, but I didn't blame the equipment I simply persevered and got the hang of using it, but I am an experienced photographer, a beginer would probably blame the lens

quote:3496ace15f="fatspider"]Most duff results will be down to user error and not the equipment, I remember the first time I took the Bigma out, the results were quite dire, but I didn't blame the equipment I simply persevered and got the hang of using it, but I am an experienced photographer, a beginer would probably blame the lens[/quote]In my case certainly true but I think both yourself and George are right, I think it's about expectation, some people expect to be the next Frans Lanting or Joe Cornish right out of the box! It's not like that as most of us I think know. I've been at this hobby/obsession for about 25 yr's and I've actually learn't more in hanging around here in the last four months or so than at any other time in those 25 yr's. Coming from those 25 yr's of Canon and Nikon use back into Pentax was quite daunting and my first impressions of my K7 were dissapointing to say the least but with this Forums help and a little perseverence i have learnt how to extract better results. i have always shot RAW and have no idea what Jpegs look like from my K7 to be honest, maybe my feelings would be different about the Camera if i was a Jpeg shooter... I don't know...

I see a wonderful mixed and informative response from the forum members. Thank you, and I have to agree with almost all of you. The K7 will produce absolutely brilliant results when correctly set for the situation. However I didn't expect to point and shoot and get master pieces, I did expect to get acceptable images. To start with despite playing with WB, aperture, shutter settings etc etc, I couldnt get an image that was worth processing let alone printing. Now even if I dont have time and forget to set the camera correctly the images are good no they are excellent. And when the camera is set accordingly they amaze me even pre processing. Why I dont know but after 48 hours use the camera went from awfull to excellent.

lets not all dwell on why the Camera went from bad to good,
Lets just be glad that it did!
I wasn't suggesting that you personally were having expectations set to high more myself actualy, when I bought my K7 with more than 25 Yr's experience I expected to get very good results straight out of the box! I didn't, the k7 is different to any Canon or Nikon I have ever used and it took me a little bit to tune myself in
I hope you are now happy with your k7 I'm most definately getting there with mine, in fact I'm using it more than my K5...
It's without a doubt a fiddlers Camera with more settings than most of us will ever use in fact I could happily while away the cold dark winter just twiddling with it...
Err the K7 that is...

The same has happened to me occasionally when using certain lenses that I might have just bought and tried, bad results for a good few days and then suddenly....Amazement at the great results. And then when looking back I realise that I had dived deep into researching and reading stuff around on how to make best use of the lens by tweaking the settings and PP details.
Having said that there are still a couple of lenses that I still can't get the IQ I would like to from them, and they are still sitting on the shelves hoping that I eventually will nail the best way to improve the images with them.

May be I should just persist and hopefully suddenly due to usage they might start giving excellent results . I might just give that a try, if you experienced that more than once with a camera then may be I should give it a try too.

Not every lens suits the way a photographer "sees" the world.

For example, a friend once bought a 19mm to use on her P30T, having seen lots of great ultra-wide images. It was an enormous disappointment to her because she still used it as though it was a 50mm lens. At that distance all she got was small subjects in the frame, none of the drama. And she couldn't make herself go closer, so it just didn't work.

John, your comment regarding wide angle lenses really made me think deeper as this is something I am planning to acquire fairly soon. I am used to 18mm at the widest at the moment obviously also because that's the widest angle lens I have, mind you its a zoom and not a prime. I am about to travel to Africa for a few weeks and will be travelling a good extension of the Indian coast and was thinking I should get a wider zoom something like 12-24mm Siggy. But as you said just because its a wider angle it doesn't mean it suits the way a photographer "sees" the world.
And the huge open horizons where I will be travelling around perhaps even a slightly less wider zoom might be appropriate. I was even thinking that the bigma might come of great use in those circumstances, as there will be no shortage of light around, so lots to think about, rather than just getting a wider lens thinking its what its needed for landscapes.

Some of my best landscapes have been taken with the standard 18-55, when travelling now I tend to keep my Tamron 18-250 on the body.

My DA40 tends to go for those market and street shots, but that's all. Hope that's given you something to think about Amin.

Definitely more than you can imagine even .
It might have gone a long way to save me a few quid actually.
Thanks for that

This is not a plug for BT, "its good to talk" Yes photography! Anyway have just read through all the posts and the one good thing is that we all have our opinions and from sharing them if we keep an open mind we can all learn from each other.

Amin, ultra-wides are certainly needed for architectural interiors and cramped environments, but for ladscapes they can be disappointing unless there is a strong foreground interest.

Moderate telephoto lenses select details and bring distant subjects into view much better. Pictures of mountains with wide angles look distant and small. Telephoto shots give the mountains a better sense of size and imnportance.

I use a 12-24mm, but I don't use it much. It is mainly used inside buildings to capture whole rooms.

Amin - I sold my wide angle. I didn't like the landscapes it produced. Even with foreground interest they didn't look right.
Now I use my 17-70 and make a panorama if I want a sweeping landscape. Works much better for me. It may only be a two or three photo pano, but it just looks and feels better to me. The wide angle always made the landscape look cramped rather than sweeping somehow. I know others love theirs and swear by them, but it didn't work for me.

I have used the Bigma for landscapes too.

Have fun in Africa. Another forum member I am deeply envious of.

I've always found that too Gwyn! I just don't like wide wides or maybe I just don't get wide wides? In my quest for purity I've ended up going "Prime" it just works better for me, My widest Lens is the 15mm Ltd which topping out around 22.8mm these days ain't wide at all...
When I see a wide vista I like to stitch a couple together using the 21 or the 40 but rarely the 15, I guess we all just see things differently...
Which is what keeps it interesting after all