Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-03-2010, 11:58 AM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lithuania
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 490
anyone did Kx to Kr?

I wonder, if you did, and if you'd want to be picky, would you notice the worse performance of the sensor?

I mean less dynamic range, and more noise.

do you in some way visually notice, that it has less DR or more noise?

for example, when I had k20d and then K7 I clearly noticed that k7 sensor is performing worse..

11-03-2010, 12:17 PM   #2
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Bari, Italy
Posts: 34
Worse performance? It's almost the same sensor...
11-03-2010, 12:33 PM   #3
Site Supporter
Deimos's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kingdom of Wonder
Posts: 1,709
If you put images side by side you likely wouldnt be able to tell the difference. And in the one comparison posted on this site search "iso flower" it seemed that the k-r produced a bit more detail.

you cant go basing "performance" on what dxo says.

I have a k-r its great, maybe not worth the upgrade from a k-x if all that matters is IQ...but all the other features over the k-x make it a much better choice for me
11-03-2010, 03:31 PM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lithuania
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 490
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Deimos Quote
If you put images side by side you likely wouldnt be able to tell the difference. And in the one comparison posted on this site search "iso flower" it seemed that the k-r produced a bit more detail.

you cant go basing "performance" on what dxo says.

I have a k-r its great, maybe not worth the upgrade from a k-x if all that matters is IQ...but all the other features over the k-x make it a much better choice for me
I understand that..
i'll look for that thread, but as I remember, no kx-kr comparison showed, that kr has an advantage in IQ.. at least to my eyes.

and I also understant that when I had K20d image quality was superb in every way I could imagine at least up to ISO 1000.

so as both kx and kr are better than k20d in IQ so theres isn't much point in complaining.

here is the comparisons.. to my eye kx performs better, not by much.. and maybe only at pixel level but still, better
All sizes | high-key_ISO_elevator | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

in this test it's about equal:
All sizes | low-key_ISO_elevator | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

in this test I see that kr has less dr and results are less sharp. maybe it could be because of the actual sample, but kx pictures look better..
All sizes | grey_ISO_elevator | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

11-03-2010, 03:44 PM   #5
Site Supporter
Deimos's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kingdom of Wonder
Posts: 1,709
QuoteOriginally posted by Mystic Quote
I understand that..
i'll look for that thread, but as I remember, no kx-kr comparison showed, that kr has an advantage in IQ.. at least to my eyes.

and I also understant that when I had K20d image quality was superb in every way I could imagine at least up to ISO 1000.

so as both kx and kr are better than k20d in IQ so theres isn't much point in complaining.

here is the comparisons.. to my eye kx performs better, not by much.. and maybe only at pixel level but still, better
All sizes | high-key_ISO_elevator | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

in this test it's about equal:
All sizes | low-key_ISO_elevator | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

in this test I see that kr has less dr and results are less sharp. maybe it could be because of the actual sample, but kx pictures look better..
All sizes | grey_ISO_elevator | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
In the first two I think the k-r shows a bit more detail myself, in the last one though the k-x def looks better. Then again this is just one test done in a certain way perhaps with some faults. The differences are so small to be honest they are almost negligible

It seems though that even if one is very very marginally better than the other detail or noise wise, your only ever going to notice it by pixel peeping. and the other k-r benefits imo make it worthwhile
11-04-2010, 02:53 AM   #6
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Bari, Italy
Posts: 34
They're quite the same camera... at least speaking about sensors. There can be small differences but nothing great, imho. Real upgrades in K-r are about what is "around" its sensor
11-04-2010, 05:04 AM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lithuania
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 490
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Deimos Quote
In the first two I think the k-r shows a bit more detail myself, in the last one though the k-x def looks better. Then again this is just one test done in a certain way perhaps with some faults. The differences are so small to be honest they are almost negligible

It seems though that even if one is very very marginally better than the other detail or noise wise, your only ever going to notice it by pixel peeping. and the other k-r benefits imo make it worthwhile
I agree with you.

QuoteOriginally posted by _lyan_ Quote
They're quite the same camera... at least speaking about sensors. There can be small differences but nothing great, imho. Real upgrades in K-r are about what is "around" its sensor
K20d and k7 were soposed to be the same sensors too..
11-04-2010, 06:18 AM   #8
Site Supporter
Deimos's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kingdom of Wonder
Posts: 1,709
I was looking at some of my images on pc last night, taken with tammy 17-50 and 90mm. Wow the k-r (and those lenses) are great.

Most shots were taken at iso 800 and 1600 and they look amazing....800 with no NR honestly looks like 200 or 400 did on my d60

11-04-2010, 06:26 AM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 923
QuoteOriginally posted by Mystic Quote
I agree with you.



K20d and k7 were soposed to be the same sensors too..
The K20D and K7 both used 14 MP sensors from Samsung....that's the end of the commonality. There has never been any real indication they used the same sensor.
11-04-2010, 09:01 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lithuania
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 490
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by kittykat46 Quote
The K20D and K7 both used 14 MP sensors from Samsung....that's the end of the commonality. There has never been any real indication they used the same sensor.
well from what i remember it was said, that:

they made 4 channells for read out data, that made possible 5,2fps, in k20d was 2.

and so called improved nr algorithms..

from what i remember, it was stated that k7 sensor is basically improved k20d sensor, and we shouldn't expect better image quality.
11-04-2010, 09:19 AM   #11
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,511
the performance difference between k-r and k-x is very minimal according to dxo numbers... honestly you probably wouldn't notice even if looking for it.
11-04-2010, 08:08 PM   #12
Junior Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 37
been thinking about it for a while then just decided to invest on a nice glass instead of upgrading to the k-r =)
11-05-2010, 09:29 AM   #13
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,206
QuoteOriginally posted by WerTicus Quote
the performance difference between k-r and k-x is very minimal according to dxo numbers... honestly you probably wouldn't notice even if looking for it.
Between these two, I'd pick between price and features, not the minuscule difference in a couple of pixels.
11-12-2010, 06:27 AM   #14
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Central Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 218
I have a Kx and love it. It is my 1st DSLR, when I heard about the Kr, I thought about getting it. There are some nice changes, but I think I will go for a K5 about mid 2011. It will take that long to save for it.
11-12-2010, 08:10 AM   #15
Pentaxian
kp0c's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 721
I think that the K-x is a perfect first DSLR camera that one can use for a long time before really needing to upgrade. Those upgrading quickly from K-x to K-r do so probably because they have a lot of spare money (but no enough for a K-5 I guess) and/or always want the new toy. IMHO, when I upgrade my K-x, I want to upgrade to a body that has more features than just being more recent. For example, dual dials, top LCD, weather sealing, micro af adjust... these are the features I want in my next camera, not just a red dot in the view finder... (although I would like to have an AF assist lamp on my K-x).
Bottom line is there is few reason to upgrade from K-x to K-r. Yes, the upgrade could be justified, but I think one would be better served by holding on to their K-x a little longer and save up for a more advance camera feature wise like the K-5.
Just my two cents, as usual.
Karl
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!
camera, k-r, k7, kr, noise, notice, pentax k-r, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:36 AM. | 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