Sensor shootout, K7 vs K-X

Comparison between the K7 and the K-X sensor link
Still need to read it myself but though I would already share it with you.

ps. updated it with a cleaner link.

The conclusion isn't really what I wanted to see. I know the K-7 has a lot more going for it but to see a model costing half the amount getting a sensor with far superior noise control doesn't make me want to run out and buy the more expensive model. At the same time the K-x lacks a lot of the things I want from the K-7 (Second wheel, top lcd, weather sealing, viewfinder .. to name but a few).

I feel like a dog that's cornered two mailmen.... I just don't know which one to go for....

Interesting.... but it's not obvious to me on what output he is making the basis of his comparisons, perhaps I am missing something :

Are we talking Jpegs straight from the camera at default noise reduction settings or Jpeg from RAW through a converter......?

He's using RAW for the comparison.

yes that is basicly the summary but the sensor of the K7 is better at lower ISO, has less artefacts and is able to produce better video's.

But we know that the K7 can preform also pretty well at high iso and the extra MP should be able to level things out when comparing prints.

We await the K7 Super in time honoured Pentax tradition

But I'm not holding my breath!

Well we never got a K10D Super ... or was that the K20D?

I have`nt read the review yet, But when i first opened RAW images from my K7 i thought that they were very noisy. I soon spotted that the Pentax software displays RAW images with the in Camera adjustments applied.
And that as the default colour setting is BRIGHT which applies sharpening and therefore increases noise straight from the Camera. At first i applied just 2 clicks of NR post capture which did not make any obvious difference to the amount of detail but removed all of the noise. But later following a review in Amateur Photographer i put the Camera in Natural colour setting and found the images straight from the Camera much less noisy. So i would`nt let Noise put you off a great Camera. I have over 7,500 shots on mine and i am happy with the results that i am obtaining, Even straight from the Camera.

Best Regards Pete

When shooting RAW, the image the camera displays is the embedded compressed JPEG that is stored inside the RAW file. The RAW image data itself is unaffected by the Bright and Natural settings.

Absolutely right, But unlike earlier Pentax Digital Camera Utility Software, The Latest v4 software the image is displayed with all of the Camera settings and corrections added, (Lens Distortion,Colour Balance, Chromatic aberration Highlight Compensation,etc) So if you were to leave the Camera set to "Bright" then you would see quite a noisy image when you first view the RAW File. It is only when you begin to make any additional adjustments to the Photo that all of these corrections disappear from the viewed image. The unaltered image in "Natural" is much more acceptable regarding noise, I have read many complaints about the amount of noise in K7 Raw images and this default "Bright" setting is often the culprit as one would naturally expect to see a RAW image displayed in its unadulterated state.

Regards - Pete

You don't view the embedded JEPG when using a proper RAW converter program (as opposed to Pentax's) - a preview is created directly from the RAW data - then the Bright/Natural setting is irrelevant.

I don't know who is complaining about noise, but no serious revewier judges a camera's RAW capability before properly examining or converting a RAW file.

Actually i switched my Camera to "Natural"after reading the Amateur Photographer review. Angela Nicholson had changed the settings on her test Camera for this very reason and i have done so ever since. I don`t use independent software as i have always used the supplied Camera Raw Utility, V3 became pretty good after the upgrade but i am still waiting for Pentax to do something with V4 as it is really awful to use!!!Especially if you don`t want JPEG in sRGB ! I regard RAW images as a digital negative and so i would prefer to view them in their natural state each time i open an image. I tried opening my RAW files in CS-3 Raw converter for a while, but i could not achieve the same degree of control that i could with Pentax V3 software so i went back to using it, I also tried Silkypix but could not see much difference other than a fancier interface . There have been reviewers and K7 users complaining about the level of noise straight from the Camera. Of course with the level of control available, Any of us can easily create the type of image that we want. But straight from the Camera Pentax seem to buck the general trend and go for more detail rather than less noise.
I had not read this Particular review when i first posted a reply,FALK was one of the original K7 testers and has a long and respected reputation for his work. However i was directing my comment more towards Mike P`s Post re- Kx/K7.Personally i am pleased to see the Kx sensor performing so well in this review,But the K7 is still worth every penny of the price difference between the two.

Best Regards - Pete

Regards - Pete

Silkypix Developer Studio generates a preview directly from the RAW data - so it looks different and more true than what you see with Pentax Lab. Anyway its user interface is so good that I don't want to use anything else.

If you want to view the RAW in its natural state, you do not want to use Pentax RAW which only shows you the embedded compressed JPEG until final conversion. The Natural setting will help, but still its crap compared to what you get with a better program, with which the Bright/Natural settings are completely irrelevant.

Pentax software: not recommended.
Silkypix: highly recommended.

I am seriously looking at getting a KX for a second body to put my DA* 50-135mm on.

The high ISO quality will suit my concert / festival photography no end.

The images I have seen so far a thigh ISO have really impressed me along with the mentioned a lot faster AF & a lighter body too...