Fascinating. But I'll bet it can't pee up a wall as high as a Nikon. Bob
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of John Francis > Sent: 22 May 2009 19:19 > To: Pentax List > Subject: K-7 size compared to a few other camera bodies > > > W H D > K-7: 131 x 97 x 73 mm > *ist-D: 129 x 95 x 60 mm > K10D: 142 x 101 x 70 mm > K200D: 135 x 97 x 77 mm > MX: 136 x 83 x 50 mm > ME: 131 x 83 x 50 mm > LX: 145 x 91 x 50 mm > MZ-5n: 135 x 90 x 62 mm > MZ-S: 137 x 95 x 64 mm > PZ-1p: 152 x 96 x 74 mm > > And a few comparisons from other manufacturers: > > EOS 50D: 154 x 111 x 81 mm > EOS-1 Ds: 150 x 160 x 80 mm (includes battery grip) > > D90: 132 x 103 x 77 mm > D300: 147 x 114 x 74 mm > D3x: 160 x 157 x 88 mm (includes battery grip) > > E620: 130 x 96 x 59 mm > > > > My observations, in no particular order: > > o Digital cameras are much thicker than film bodies. > > o The PZ-1p was *enormous* for a Pentax film body. > > o The K-7 is very close in size to the *ist-D, except > for the depth. So if you liked the size of the *ist-D, > you will probably be happy with the feel of the K-7 > > o The Nikon D90 is a pretty compact camera, too. Not > quite as small as the K-7, but definitely no behemoth. > > o The K-7 is pretty close to the size of the Olympus E620, > except for the extra depth (most of which is probably > due to the register distance). > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly > above and follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
