K20D vs. K7

<p>I am always trailing the pack and thinking about getting either a used K20D or K7. From what I have read on the forum the AF is faster on the K7. Anything else I should be considering? Thanks again.</p>

<p>Dave, obviously the K7 is a little smaller, with a metal outer shell as opposed to the K20D's polycarbonate. Performance and IQ wise they're pretty similar. I was going to say the K7's tougher, but then recalled my old K20D skipping down a Paris street, bouncing over and over (guess who always uses a strap these days?) without getting a single scratch.<br>

You'll probably find quite a few more used K7s on the market: the model sold heaps more than the K20D, and then got massively traded in for the K5.</p>

<p>I have the K7 and K10 which is built like the K20. The K7 is a better built camera, no doubt. I had damage to it from a relatively low fall that knocked it out and the K7 survived a catastrophic fall when my wimberly fell apart with a 150-500 attached to it when I was hiking with it. No comparison IMHO. The K7 is smaller and finally the K7 uses the same battery as the other new Pentax cameras (too date) in case you ever move to another camera or get one as a backup. I do like the ports better on the K10. Oh, also you can live view the screen directly on the K7 and you can't on the K10 (not sure about the K20) which is useful for macro sometimes for me.</p>

 

<p>The K20 feels better in your hands if you are a traditionalist The K-7 is more in the vein of the teensy weeny cameras now in vogue. In other words, kind of small for normal to big hands.</p>

<p>There are a couple more on-body comtrols for the K-20D. Switch for SR on/off is one, and bracket exposure is another. Some tradeoffs for the smaller body size. But the ISO button is convenient on the K-7 and K-5. The K-20D seems to have a good rep for reliabilty and sturdy build quality. Good for still photo taking. However, live view and video are K-7 upgrades. </p>

<p>I had the K-7 (replaced with the same bodied K-5 )<br /> I have normal to slightly larger digits and the K-7 never felt small :)<br /> I picked up a K20 and thought 'what a lump' Good if the OP could actually try to handle both.<br /> The K-7 and K-5 share the battery as noted above and also grip. <br /> My K-7 had the low shutter speed mirror slap shakes and more noise than I liked.<br /> Consider also the K-x, K-r or best the K-30 which all have better high iso though less body than K-20/K-7<br /> Pete</p>

<p>I agree with Peter. However, I'd save a bit more and get a K5. ;-)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I am always trailing the pack and thinking about getting either a used K20D or K7. From what I have read on the forum the AF is faster on the K7. Anything else I should be considering?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, there are always a couple more options to trailing the pack: get ahead of it or just stay where you are and don't bother. :)</p>

<p><br /> But if you really, really need to pick one of the two, pick the K-7. Both have lame Samsung sensors, but the K-7 has a lot more useful features and better control layout.</p>

<p>The LCD screen and live view are both better in the k 7 than the k 20, in my experience. I would also be a little concerned about batteries for the k20, since new ones probably aren't available at this point. If you have big hands, get the k 7/k 5 grip, which also allows you to use AA batteries or a second lithium ion battery. That said, they are both good cameras. </p>

<p>If AF is better, on the K-7 it's only by a little. K-7 offers 100% viewfinder and the 920K rear LCD is much better for judging focus, plus it offers an actually functional live view with (slow but accurate) contrast-detect autotocus, plus a movie mode. I also think the K-7's 77-segment metering is better than the old 16-segment meter in all prior Pentax DSLRs.</p>

<p>The battery & card doors were better on the K-10/20, and the locking mode dial is rather hard to operate on the K-7 (one of the few physical changes on the K-5 was to make this dial taller). I also find the metering mode and AF mode switches harder to operate on the K-7.</p>

<p>K-7 also adds a dedicated ISO button, and its info screen is a more modern approach to relatively quick access to a wider variety of settings one might change while shooting. K20D has quick access to a few of these but others will require a bit more menu diving.</p>

<p>Another ergonomic change is that on K20D you need to hold down buttons while spinning dials to change ISO and exposure compensation, etc -- on K-7, you can use it this way, or you can click and release button, then spin dial.</p>

<p>To me the SR switch is no great loss as on the existing K10D and K20D this lever was prone to breaking, and I personally almost never used it -- pretty much whenever I wanted SR off, I'd be using the 2-second timer anyway (which implicitly disables SR).</p>

<p>Overall I think the primary controls and grip shape on the K-7 are better but the secondary controls on the K-20D are a little less fiddly for adult hands.</p>

<p>Other K-7 improvements/features</p>

<ul>

<li>In-camera CA and distortion correction</li>

<li>LED AF illuminator/spotbeam (K20D could strobe pop-up flash)</li>

<li>Faster continuous shooting -- 5+ fps vs. 3fps.</li>

<li>Better shutter - very quiet and 1/8000 max speed (vs relatively noisy 1/4000 on K20D)</li>

<li>JPEG-only HDR (no in-camera aligning so this is pretty much a tripod-only feature)</li>

<li>noise-reduction and highlight/shadow might be more configurable</li>

<li>K-7 can use SR (moveable sensor) +orientation sensor to implement auto-leveling, digital level (can show level on LCD or viewfinder), plus minor composition adjustment (for example, while on tripod)</li>

</ul>

<p>I personally wouldn't worry about battery availability for either model.</p>

<p>*deleted double-post*</p>

<p>Thanks for the input. Much appreciated. Trailing the pack and chasing the pack are two different things. I am comfortable following along. Perhaps the most interesting comment was about the "same lame Samsung sensores." Any additional information here? Thanks again.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Perhaps the most interesting comment was about the "same lame Samsung sensores." Any additional information here?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There is not that much to say. Pentax had a partnership with Samsung and used their sensor technology in a few cameras, some of which were also marketed by Samsung under their brand. The high end cameras were K10D, K20D, and K-7 (and other lower end models). When the relationship dissolved, Pentax started using Sony sensors and the performance of their cameras in low light got a significant boost first in the K-x and then in the K-5. For how big that boost was, compare the cameras on dxomark, but the short version is that the K-5 sensor still remains a standard for APS-C performance. The K20D and K-7 use two iterations of the same Samsung sensor - low light performance is slightly worse in the K-7 - not in a meaningful way, but people made a lot about it at the time.</p>

<p>It's not that the K20D/K-7 cannot take great pictures, but if you find yourself needing to use ISO above 800 often, you'll hit the limitations of these older sensors.</p>

<p>Sony just makes the best sensors available in consumer cameras today. Canon has been left behind. I don't know where Samsung is today, but they were not even close at the time of K-7. Panasonic is struggling too - Olympus has benefited from a Sony sensor in the OM-D exactly like Pentax benefited from one in the K-5.</p>

<p>K10D, K200D, K2000/K-m (along with Samsung GX-10) had Sony-sourced 10mp CCD, similar to that in the Nikon D80 and D200.<br>

All the 6mp bodies -- *ist D-series, K100D*, including the Samsung GX-1s / GX-1l clones of *ist DS2 / *ist DL) also had Sony-sourced CCD.<br>

The 14mp Samsung sensor was above average when it first appeared on the K20D but was eclipsed a few months later by the next generation of Sony CMOS, starting with the 12mp unit incorporated into the K-x (and Nikon D90/D300/D5000). There was a lot of disappointment when the otherwise excellent K-7 was released with the same decent but by that time rather stale sensor.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>K10D, K200D, K2000/K-m (along with Samsung GX-10) had Sony-sourced 10mp CCD, similar to that in the Nikon D80 and D200.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Do you have any link to a reliable source indicating the origin of the K10D sensor? I heard speculations about both Sony and Samsung and since Samsung had their own version of K10D and sensor producing capability, it seemed strange for them to have picked a Sony sensor.<br>

<br>

I've been looking for a reliable source, but could only find debates with no concrete source of information: <a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/105918-list-pentax-dlsrs-equipped-sony-sensor.html">here</a> and <a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50319577">here</a>, for example. <a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/20023055">Here</a> someone even suspects Kodak and points out that the K10D sensor has a different number of contacts than the one in D200.</p>

<p>This is very strange reading all this. It's like sitting in on a forum of archaeologists.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>This is very strange reading all this. It's like sitting in on a forum of archaeologists.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>LOL Blame it on the fact that using Pentax leads one to finding out about all kinds of old lenses accompanied by stories of the glorious Spotmatic times when Takumars were the yardstick of quality manufacturing. I am not sure if I would have had this historical interest if I would have started with another brand.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Anything else I should be considering?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The K-5II. In fact, that's the only Pentax you should be considering right now.</p>

<p>Build quality, quality of materials and ergonomics favor the K-7.</p>

<p>On the flip side, the K-7 has a nasty shutter vibration issue at middle of the road speeds 1/60th to 1/180th or so. It's fixable by bolting it down to a big tripod.</p>

<p>The menu system on the K-7 is much better, and basically everything Andrew said is spot on. </p>

<p>As far as IQ, aside from the shutter vibration, I think the K-7 is a little better but overall they are similar enough that it's splitting hairs. </p>

<p>I actually still believe the K10D has better IQ than either the K20D or K-7, and the K-5 is vastly superior to either. I haven't used the K-5II or really looked much into it, but again, I believe there was another bump (which is impressive because it took 2 generations between the K10D and K-5 to see a noticable bump). </p>

<p>This all has been interesting. So, from an image quality perspective, would I be better off with the KX than the K20D? High ISO is nice but not a primary consideration for me. Thanks.</p>

<p>I think the K-x has a nicer sensor but the K20 has better controls. K-x is smaller and lighter which could be a pro or a con depending on your preference. I went with the K-x and still use it from time to time. I love the images and don't mind the handling. </p>

<p>My impression - K-x performance (especially if evaluated via straight-out-of-camera files) seems to drop off more slowly as ISO increases, incorporating more aggressive noise reduction. I consider K20D and K7 to produce pretty decent ISO 3200 images. The K-x output is smoother at 3200 but I think there is detail smearing and you can probably achieve similar results by post-processing the grainier K20D/K7 files. The K-x seems to hold its quality fairly well (still kind of smeared up close) at 6400, and even 12800 is still pretty smooth though I think its detail is worse than the ISO 6400 K20D/K7 file. At low ISO I think the K20D/K-7's 14-bit RAW files are probably a little better. Just about every other aspect of the K10D/K20D/K-7, etc. is superior though (viewfinder, build, controls, etc.).</p>

<p>Justin brings up a pretty good point -- I also feel that the venerable K10D produced some very nice files, especially up to ISO 800. ISO 1600 works OK if you're careful not to underexpose, and 3200 is best avoided. Well-built with ergonomics and features very close to the K20D. Only a few come to mind -- the K10D lacks the K20D's (nearly worthless) live view and low-res 20fps burst mode, the review LCD is slightly smaller, and lacks the PC socket and multi-lens AF fine-tuning.</p>

<p><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=3668464">Laurentiu Cristofor</a>, you're right, I don't have a good source for the origin of the 10mp sensors Pentax used. It might even possibly be something else, maybe not even Samsung or Sony, but Kodak or other. I will submit however that Pentax sold quite a few 6mp bodies (*ist D and *ist DS) for a couple of years before Samsung-badged versions of *ist DL or DS2 (GX-1L, GX-1S) appeared, it was not evident that a Samsung partnership was present with earlier 6MP bodies. At any rate, I don't think the Samsung sensor appeared to be much of a liability at the time of its introduction, unfortunately it only appeared to be state of the art for about half a year or so before the next generation of Sony sensors made their debut.</p>