Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-08-2010, 09:13 PM   #106
Veteran Member
future_retro's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 572
QuoteOriginally posted by JoepLX3 Quote
FYI: I just paid 30 Euro (excl 6.75 transport costs) for a Pentax M 200 mm F4 (MF Prime).
  • Still targeting for 28 mm F2.8, 50 mm F1.7 and 135 mm F3.5 (with Pangor Auto Macro Converter as well as SLR with big flash...) all for 65 Euro (excl transport costs)
  • and maybe combined with some other m42 glass including a 500 mm F8 (100 Euro incl transport costs will be my first offer)
But next to that I still have to go buy a Pentax DSLR... The K-x or its successor? Isn't today the big day for such announcement?
  • I am willing to pay more for better and/or bigger LCD, 100% and larger OVF, Low light AF support light (without pop-up flash), WR, better video support incl connector for external stereo microphone, 18-125 mm kit zoom lens, Front/Back focus correction for at least up to 5 lenses.
Also so a nice 40 mm F2.8 MF pancake, LBA?
You just described the K7 feature for feature, the K7 body is about 860, go buy it right now

09-08-2010, 09:22 PM   #107
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 523
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by future_retro Quote
You just described the K7 feature for feature, the K7 body is about 860, go buy it right now
Nope, the K-7 is too big for me, but it looks like K-r has bigger LCD!!!


https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/113796-k-r-hands.html#post1171820
09-08-2010, 09:29 PM   #108
Veteran Member
future_retro's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 572
QuoteOriginally posted by JoepLX3 Quote
Nope, the K-7 is too big for me, but it looks like K-r has bigger LCD!!!


https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/113796-k-r-hands.html#post1171820
Have you actually held a K7 or seen one in person?
09-08-2010, 09:56 PM   #109
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 523
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by future_retro Quote
Have you actually held a K7 or seen one in person?
Yes, as heavy and Canon 7D

I will go for K-x or K-r, just balance the value of the additional features versus the price.
  • K-r got larger and higher resolution LCD as well as dedicated assist light for automatic focus in low light - NICE
  • OVF is unchanged and was probably like just like WR and more controls unrealistic to ask (sorry)
  • K-r also didn't get stereo (nor connection for external stereo microphone) - Unhandy...
  • Front/Back focus correction - not clear, maybe they will even come with firmware update for K-x, because the K-r seems to NOT REPLACE the K-x - TBC
Maybe K-r is already on display here in Nagoya, the LCD difference will probably guide my decision.

09-08-2010, 10:42 PM   #110
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NYC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,071
QuoteOriginally posted by JoepLX3 Quote
Nope, the K-7 is too big for me, but it looks like K-r has bigger LCD!!!
Do you have little girl hands?

You don't want to buy a K-7 because "it has too many useless features that would confuse a complete beginner" like yourself, yet you keep yapping about wanting a camera that has... those exact same features. Amazing.
09-08-2010, 10:53 PM   #111
Veteran Member
future_retro's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 572
QuoteOriginally posted by hangu Quote
Do you have little girl hands?

You don't want to buy a K-7 because "it has too many useless features that would confuse a complete beginner" like yourself, yet you keep yapping about wanting a camera that has... those exact same features. Amazing.
Exactly, it seems quite silly to choose the Kr, you just listed all the features you want, and then you listed all the features that the Kr doens't have, and they were the same list, so why exactly do you want it?

.......yet the K7 looms only %23 heavier than the Kr and has ALL the features you want

QuoteQuote:
I will go for K-x or K-r, just balance the value of the additional features versus the price.
??? compared to the K7 the Kr has NO features, especially the ones you are looking for specifically and prices are only $60USD difference

it's your money, your choice, but the logic makes no sense to me
09-08-2010, 11:03 PM   #112
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NYC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,071
QuoteOriginally posted by future_retro Quote
Exactly, it seems quite silly to choose the Kr, you just listed all the features you want, and then you listed all the features that the Kr doens't have, and they were the same list, so why exactly do you want it?

.......yet the K7 looms only %23 heavier than the Kr and has ALL the features you want

??? compared to the K7 the Kr has NO features, especially the ones you are looking for specifically and prices are only $60USD difference

it's your money, your choice, but the logic makes no sense to me
At this point, it's clear that he just wants to yap about himself for the attention.

On another note, how disappointing is the K-r? The press release gave me a yawn. Unless it has radically improved noise control over the K-x and a better SR system, there's no way I'm upgrading to the $800 body. The main differences I see are AF assist lighting, AF illumination points, possibly better metering and a choice of batteries, all pretty useless for a MF user like me.
09-08-2010, 11:06 PM   #113
Veteran Member
future_retro's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 572
Yes I am extremely disappointed, they have a great camera with the Kx but the competition is stacked really high against the Kr, especially with it's crazy high price

09-08-2010, 11:08 PM   #114
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 523
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by hangu Quote
At this point, it's clear that he just wants to yap about himself for the attention.

On another note, how disappointing is the K-r? The press release gave me a yawn. Unless it has radically improved noise control over the K-x and a better SR system, there's no way I'm upgrading to the $800 body. The main differences I see are AF assist lighting, AF illumination points, possibly better metering and a choice of batteries, all pretty useless for a MF user like me.
I agree, mainly the LCD is interesting (size + resolutio), so I am leaning towards cheaper K-x and more / better glass.
09-08-2010, 11:08 PM   #115
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,681
Hang on... nothing to justify the difference between the K-7 and the K-r?
Does high ISO mean nothing all of a sudden?
Also bear in mind it is BRAND SPANKING NEW technology that will sure to have its price dropped considerably once out a couple of months, and you can be sure the K-7's value will hold up better than the K-r's...
09-08-2010, 11:21 PM   #116
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NYC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,071
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
Hang on... nothing to justify the difference between the K-7 and the K-r?
Does high ISO mean nothing all of a sudden?
Also bear in mind it is BRAND SPANKING NEW technology that will sure to have its price dropped considerably once out a couple of months, and you can be sure the K-7's value will hold up better than the K-r's...
Just because it has a higher max ISO does not mean anything. You're assuming that because it is newer, it will have a better sensor. That logic certainly did not work out for the K-7.

There's no reason to believe that the K-7's price won't drop as well, especially when the K-5 hits the market soon. Also does the OP want to wait several months for the price to drop substantially?

The OP clearly states that:
QuoteQuote:
I am willing to pay more for better and/or bigger LCD, 100% and larger OVF, Low light AF support light (without pop-up flash), WR, better video support incl connector for external stereo microphone, 18-125 mm kit zoom lens, Front/Back focus correction for at least up to 5 lenses.
Honestly, I don't think he has a clue as to what he really wants or needs but if we were to go by what he's saying... well he's been contradicting himself left and right, but if we were to go by what he said in that paragraph alone, the K-7 certainly makes more sense than the K-r.
09-08-2010, 11:29 PM   #117
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 523
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by hangu Quote
The OP clearly states that:

Honestly, I don't think he has a clue as to what he really wants or needs but if we were to go by what he's saying... well he's been contradicting himself left and right, but if we were to go by what he said in that paragraph alone, the K-7 certainly makes more sense than the K-r.
Now I want to defend myself, my I?
- Maybe I forgot to mention the precondition of maintaining compactness, but I my mind is was generally known the K-r would be the next in the K-x line, noth the K-7 line. Either way, sorry (hope that doesn't count as contradicting)
- When I state I am willing to pay more for multiple items, then that doesn't state much more for only one or two of them.

So it is a balance for me, just like for everybody looking for a camera
09-08-2010, 11:36 PM   #118
Veteran Member
future_retro's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 572
QuoteOriginally posted by JoepLX3 Quote
- Maybe I forgot to mention the precondition of maintaining compactness, but I my mind is was generally known the K-r would be the next in the K-x line, noth the K-7 line. Either way, sorry (hope that doesn't count as contradicting)
This is why I question if you've actually had any hands on time with a K7, the want to maintain compactness is not a sin, but your preconceived notions of the size of the K7 are steering you wrong

the K7 is the most compact amateur dslr there is, look at DP reviews side by side photos, it's dwarfed by all the other cameras, for about a month I had the Kx and the K7 and used them side by side, they both fit in the exact same places in my bag, and the differences in size are so miniscule that it wont' damage portability at all, in fact not even a 7d would damage portability, in what situation would a little more mass affect portability?

the difference between an LX3 and a dslr, I can see that, but dslr's don't vary much in size and no matter how hard I try I can't call to mind a place that you can take a Kx with the kit lens and not take a 7d with it's kit lens
09-08-2010, 11:57 PM   #119
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,681
QuoteOriginally posted by hangu Quote
Just because it has a higher max ISO does not mean anything. You're assuming that because it is newer, it will have a better sensor. That logic certainly did not work out for the K-7.
The sensor has been updated from that of the K-x - of course I have no clue how and what that means for real-life results, but I expected the K-7 sensor to be the same as the K20D from the literature at the time - slightly different here with the K-r.
09-08-2010, 11:57 PM   #120
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NYC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,071
QuoteOriginally posted by JoepLX3 Quote
Now I want to defend myself, my I?
- Maybe I forgot to mention the precondition of maintaining compactness, but I my mind is was generally known the K-r would be the next in the K-x line, noth the K-7 line. Either way, sorry (hope that doesn't count as contradicting)
Let's hope you don't straggle following this:
A) You state that you want the K-x instead of the K-7 because it is cheaper and you could buy better lenses for better IQ at the cost of important features that are missing on the K-x.

B) Then you decide that you'd rather have the K-r instead of the K-x, which costs the same as the K-7 because you like the additional features on the K-r. Thereby negating the possibility of spending more money on better lenses.

You followed that up with this little gem:
QuoteQuote:
I am willing to pay more for better and/or bigger LCD, 100% and larger OVF, Low light AF support light (without pop-up flash), WR, better video support incl connector for external stereo microphone, Front/Back focus correction for at least up to 5 lenses.
Out of those 7 features, the K-r has 2. The K-7 has all 7. Yet, you want the K-r, because it's slightly smaller but lacks many of the important features that you're willing to pay more money for.

Yes, you know EXACTLY what you want and you haven't contradicted yourself one bit. We're the idiots here. If we looked in the dictionary for the word "illogical", why, we'd see a picture of Future_Retro and Hangu!
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
auto, auto focus, focus, focus primes, k-mount, lenses, pentax lens, primes, reasons, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What does "auto" mean on older manual focus lenses? jonhock Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 12-03-2009 11:32 AM
Auto-Focus Lenses on Manual Bodies pdx138 Pentax Film SLR Discussion 7 08-22-2009 06:47 PM
9 Reasons To Manual Focus duron Photographic Technique 12 12-08-2008 02:05 PM
Manual or Auto Focus paolo g Pentax DSLR Discussion 35 06-27-2008 10:55 AM
Manual and Auto Focus JCSullivan Photographic Technique 51 12-15-2007 06:54 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:23 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top