Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-09-2011, 04:59 PM   #31
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
DxOMark rates the sensor in the K-x higher than the K-r overall, low light ISO (811 vs 755), Dynamic Range (12.5 vs 12.4).

My main hesitation while buying K-x was lack of visible AF point markings in the viewfinder. I have found that this is a non-issue, as the AF points are sometimes misleading. Lack of visible AF points actually forces me to check that the focus is right in the viewfinder.

I agree AF in Liveview is slow, but I use it very rarely and that too in situations where AF speed does not really matter.

I'm sure the K-r is a better camera overall, but for me the motivation to upgrade is not there. I wish K-r was released with K-5 sensor, that would have been a truly worthwhile upgrade!

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-came...brand2)/Pentax Side by side comparison of sensor


Last edited by selar; 08-09-2011 at 05:46 PM.
08-09-2011, 07:00 PM   #32
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,553
selar's point is why I will keep the k-x for another generation. Nothing bad will happen, and maybe the 'magic 16' sensor will come to the next model.

I swear though, the 'magic 12' sensor is mighty nice! I had a much better camera (technically) with the K-7, but never have I had such a sensor. Sony chose not to use this sensor in their Alpha line; their only 12Mpixel was the A700 then the A500 I think, neither with video and poor dxo scores compared to k-x. Big score for Pentax with the k-x / k-r sensor!
08-09-2011, 10:38 PM   #33
Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 10
Ill wait for the next gen then. The AF points are the main selling point for me and they don't sound like they are worth it. Thanks for the info
08-10-2011, 01:01 AM   #34
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Hanau am Main
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 29
QuoteOriginally posted by rblank Quote
Ill wait for the next gen then. The AF points are the main selling point for me and they don't sound like they are worth it. Thanks for the info
I switched from K-x to K-r; I was able to sell the K-x at nearly the price I got the new K-r as Pnetax offered a bargain reduction here in Germany.

I must say that especially the focus indicators have been a bit issue with the K-x. While someone here in the forum claimed that focus indicators may be misleading, I must say that no focus indicators do not lead at all! I had much more pictures with the K-x at apertures below 2.8 that were out of focus than I have with the K-r.

On the other hand, currently it should be quite clear that a successor to the K-r will be out Q4/2011 or Q1/2012. I assume it will have 15+ MP, better video and some other stuff that might be interesting.

Cheers,

Eriol

08-10-2011, 01:29 AM   #35
Veteran Member
Philoslothical's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,723
QuoteOriginally posted by Eriol Quote
While someone here in the forum claimed that focus indicators may be misleading, I must say that no focus indicators do not lead at all! I had much more pictures with the K-x at apertures below 2.8 that were out of focus than I have with the K-r.
I noticed that comment too, and found it baffling. I was tempted to get a K-x, but what's the point of having multiple AF points if you can't see which are locking on?

I think people tend to underrate the value of the screen too. Looking at the small screen on my P&S, which is about the resolution of the one on the K-x, and comparing it to the K-r, there's a world of difference. I wouldn't want to rely on the tiny K-x screen to determine if shots turned out sharp in review when the K-r does it so much better.
08-10-2011, 06:43 PM - 1 Like   #36
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
The reason the AF indicators are misleading, is that the AF indicator does not represent a point, it actually represents an area. The camera will lock focus on whatever offers the most degree of contrast in that area. So you could place the AF point exactly on an eye in a portrait, but the camera might lock onto the eyebrow instead. Additionally, the AF points are sometimes not aligned correctly, more so in consumer grade dslrs like the K-r and K-x.

With the K-x I set the AF point on the back LCD, I then have a rough idea where the camera will seek contrast in the image. However, I am less trusting of the AF because I no longer assume (incorrectly) that the camera has focused on the AF point and therefore force myself to verify the focus is where I intended it to be.

If I have the time to use Liveview I use it for focusing, as I can magnify the image to verify the focus, and use manual focus as well due to the greater degree of control (and magnification) I have over the focusing.

Till someone designs a camera that can read your mind, there is no other failsafe way that I know of to acheive critical focus.
08-11-2011, 01:52 AM   #37
Veteran Member
Philoslothical's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,723
Hmm, but they're only misleading if you incorrectly think that they're point sharp rather than small areas, and you know better. The visual AF "points" are fairly large squares, rather than tiny dots, and that itself is an indicator that it's a zone rather than a pixel point. The K-x functions the same way, you just don't get any indicator of where those "points" are. That still sounds a lot more difficult to deal with. With the K-r you can also manually select a point to use, you don't have to use auto 5 or auto 11, it just beeps and shows the mark when the area locks. What's the difference?

QuoteOriginally posted by selar Quote
Till someone designs a camera that can read your mind, there is no other failsafe way that I know of to acheive critical focus.
I don't think anyone with any camera should be too trusting of AF, period. I get far more reliable results manually focusing, even compared to center point only. AF is a convenience, but it doesn't take the place of careful observation, and I doubt it ever will.
08-14-2011, 04:33 PM   #38
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,553
QuoteOriginally posted by Philoslothical Quote
I think people tend to underrate the value of the screen too. Looking at the small screen on my P&S, which is about the resolution of the one on the K-x, and comparing it to the K-r, there's a world of difference. I wouldn't want to rely on the tiny K-x screen to determine if shots turned out sharp in review when the K-r does it so much better.
I was sure that would be a big thing when I want from the K-7 to the k-x.. and to my surprise it wasn't. That's just me though, and I expect that a more critical reviewer of shots would find that a great benefit. I just don't expect too much from on-camera review or AF preview, and I've found the k-x to be sufficient to what it is that I do.

EDIT - wow, 3 weeks later and I own a k-r?!?
Part of the k-x' appeal was that I got it used for under $400 -- well, I found a used k-r for not much more and someone here took over my beloved k-x. The small discomforts of the k-x were not a real bother, but for a similar price I can live without them with a very small weight penalty.

First impressions are that AF is a smidge faster but shutter sound might be louder on my k-r. AF lights are nice, no surprise. Some day I hope to get the GPS/astro attachment & it has to be a k-r for that (budget says NO to any higher models). I like the squared-shape of the k-r, looks like a more serious cam (but equally fun!). Had it not been for the great price I'd still be using the k-x, but even now I will not slander it: the k-x and k-r are both excellent cameras.



Last edited by jimr-pdx; 09-05-2011 at 07:39 PM. Reason: oops I bought a k-r
09-13-2011, 01:43 AM   #39
Senior Member
dragra's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ljubljana
Photos: Albums
Posts: 238
May I use a exaggeration: K-x is something similar for Pentax than the iPod was for Apple. Many people noticed it, many were impressed by the image quality for the price. I would usualy ignore entry level cameras, but the K-x was impossible to ignore. It has beaten the hell out of my K-20 in terms of AF speed, accuracy and last but not least the fantastic high ISO performance.

As I started to do more advanced low light work I noticed that there is no way around the viewfinder display of active AF points. That was the main reason to get a K-r. But there was more than meets the eye: under the hood K-r was a pleasant refinement with even more accurate AF, more fine tuning at different levels nicely rounded up with sheer speed of a pro camera body.
10-17-2011, 06:21 AM   #40
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 6
The k-x is just amazing and so is the K-R they are both really underrated to me and the price is a steal for a camera like the K-x that I have right now. I'm only a student and have been using my little white K-x where ever I go and it just does what you want it to do and its simple. I think if you already own a K-x you don't really need to upgrade to a K-r but if you are new to DSLR's and you want to get the most bang for the buck the K-x or the K-r will be everything a entry level student like me will need.

I'm glad pentax upgraded the K-x to K-r, I'm pretty sure the K-r still beats the Canon rebel Xs anyday of the week.
11-11-2011, 01:02 PM   #41
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2
i have owned both the kx for about a year 1/2 and the k-r is my current camera and have owned it for a month they are pretty much the same but the kr has better auto focus,fps,speed,built quiallty, battery options,and it has auto focus pionts in the view finder they are pretty close to the same in this versiion i dont find the contrast isues like the kx but the kr still has it a little the kx on a lot of images where under contrasted.
11-25-2011, 06:22 PM   #42
New Member




Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2
Hey I've been thinking of buying another Pentax after K100D which was my first camera and is now being used by my old man back in Finland. I'm looking for something not too expensive, after all it's not going to be any serious photographing!

So I wondered whether I should try to get a K-x or K-r, obviously K-r would be a little better when looking at the posts in the forum. I wondered would K-x still be an okay camera for a beginner? Any suggestions?
11-26-2011, 03:49 PM   #43
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 205
I had both the k-x and k-r, and I think the main performance advantage of the K-r is the AF speed + the AF light.

Other than the faster AF, the rest of the upgraded features are really just nice-to-have things like AF points in the viewfinder, higher res and bigger lcd etc...

so if speed is not that much of a concern, then i'd get a K-x, because it doesnt have the tungsten FF issues the k-r has.
11-26-2011, 07:45 PM   #44
Veteran Member
magkelly's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,905
The main reason I'd probably add a K-r as my second (main) body is the visible AF points. I love my K-x to pieces, in fact I'd have to say I actually like the chassis and ergonomics on the K-x better than the K-r that I got to see in SF, but I really like the idea of more visible and faster AF. (My eyes are getting so bad I need all the help I can get on that score. MF is getting increasingly difficult for me.) Honestly if I had my druthers and a whole lot of dough I'd go straight to a K-5 because I do like to muck about in the wet shooting a lot and that would be practical, but a K-5 would be severely stretching the budget right out of orbit. It's just not something I could do and realistically a K-r would do me. That's the goal anyhow a K-r eventually with my K-x serving as backup and second string camera while working. They really are close according to the specs though. So far as I can tell the focus and the iso are just a tad better but otherwise they're pretty much interchangeable. K-x to me is still the prettier camera but no way I'd sneer at the K-r. It's a terrific little machine.
11-26-2011, 09:31 PM   #45
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Montreal
Posts: 197
I had both cameras for a while and got rid of the K-r,
tried and tested both side by side for a few months
gave up on the K-r and gave it away to a family member.

The K-r has a little faster AF, fancy illuminated points and an AF assist light
(which is way too weak!, my 2006 Fuji S9100 has a better beam..)

My older K-x may be a tad slower to AF but more importantly to me was always *more accurate*
and not affected by tungsten or any other artificial light front-focus issues compared to the K-r.

For me, the K-x simply gives more consistent results in low-light conditions.

And since the debug menu trick wasn't discovered for the K-r,
I could not adjust the focus properly with the limited in-camera range.
With my K-x I can easily enter the debug menu and correct issues for a certain problem lens.

Plus, the K-x sensor is slightly better in the ISO 400-800 range,
what the K-x does at ISO 400, the K-r needed 800 and so on.
Daytime pics @ ISO 100-200 were better on the K-r.

Even after sending the K-r in to Pentax for calibration and updating the firmware,
I still had much better results using the K-x in my very specific photo shoots
(nightime / low-light urban firefighting scenes).

Note that my usage is very specific, most people here have had good luck with their K-r's

Last edited by mlatour; 11-27-2011 at 07:22 AM.
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, comparison, k-r, k-x, kr, pentax, pentax k-r
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:19 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