Switch to K-r from k200d?

jeninejessica · 08-10-2012, 09:59 PM

Pretty much as simple as that. My husband and I use a k200, happy enough with it, though he has dreams of moving up to a k5 or something eventually. Honestly though, we're not there yet. We take mostly photos of family, our daughter, random bits. I also will be using the camera for a bit of on the side type photography doing birth photography (so in not so great lighting conditions, etc).

A k-r just came up on a local sale page (new, they claim) for $425. Worth it? Or stick it out with the k200 a bit longer until we're ready to move up to something truly better.

Also, about what do you think we could get for our k200 with kit lens.

(Or is there a better place to post this in the forums?)

(ps, I never said thank you ages back, but we got terrific advice from the forums here regarding a new lens to purchase!)

audiobomber · 08-10-2012, 10:43 PM

Some K-r's (maybe all?) have inaccurate auto-focus in tungsten light. I recommend you pass on this deal. If you want a camera that is a clear upgrade over the K200D and K-r, check out the K-30.

Bramela · 08-11-2012, 12:00 AM

i agree, the K30 is definitely worth a look see.

Jonathan Mac · 08-11-2012, 02:59 AM

I wouldn't change my K200D for a K-r, but then I wouldn't change it for a K30 either, because I like the LCD, grip and build quality too much.

The only camera Pentax have made since the K200D that I have been tempted by is the K5. But, if you feel that you wouldn't make good use of all it's advantages, then it won't be worth it at this point.

I don't know what you have lens-wise, but $425 ought to be able to buy you something nice. I'm very much in the camp of using available money to buy new lenses, not the latest camera. I am a gearhead, but I think this attitude has served me well in learning to improve my photography.

jeninejessica · 08-11-2012, 07:36 AM

Thanks guys. That's kind of what we were leaning towards. It's just hard to pass up a 'deal'.

For lenses we've got the kit 18-55. Upon recommendation from these forums (thanks!) we bought a 50mm 1.4 last year, which we LOVE, and then recently bought a 50-200 as well.

We'll keep waiting until we -need-, or the k30 comes down/goes on an amazing sale. I'd seen that one pop up a few times in reviews and wondered about it.

dragra · 08-15-2012, 12:21 AM

I have a K20 and have added a K-r - they are a great combo! If you can get a K-r about 400 new just go and grab it: it is a good deal. K30 will cost you double as much.

p.s.
Concerning the ever repeating AF "problem" in tungsten light is not a K-r deal breaker. First you ought to ask yourself if you want to take pictures in tungsten light. I have no idea about birth environment light, but my guess would be it is neon or something similar. Tungsten bulbs are not sold anymore. And if you by any chance end up in a tungsten light environment there is a way to live there too: just do your WB manually and that's it!

Timd · 08-15-2012, 12:54 AM

With the K5 discontinued, it is a steal. If only for the high ISO capabilities. I bought the K200 just before it was discontinued and did the same with the K5 recently. Having said that, good glass is always an investment. In good light, there is little to match the K200. Not much advice here, but if it were me I would not move from the K200 unless it were for a K30, K5 or better.

audiobomber · 08-15-2012, 04:29 AM

Originally posted by dragra

First you ought to ask yourself if you want to take pictures in tungsten light. I have no idea about birth environment light, but my guess would be it is neon or something similar. Tungsten bulbs are not sold anymore. And if you by any chance end up in a tungsten light environment there is a way to live there too: just do your WB manually and that's it!

Tungsten light is still the standard in Canada, where the OP lives. Tungsten lighting is commonly used in hospital birthing rooms, where they are trying to mimic a home scene. Secondly, it's not white balance that is the issue, the problem is that the camera front focusses in yellow light.

dragra · 08-15-2012, 01:59 PM

Originally posted by audiobomber

Tungsten light is still the standard in Canada, where the OP lives. Tungsten lighting is commonly used in hospital birthing rooms, where they are trying to mimic a home scene. Secondly, it's not white balance that is the issue, the problem is that the camera front focusses in yellow light.

I didn't know Canada is still on tungsten light, I live in Europe where tungsten bulbs are not sold anymore for some years. Concerning the front focus issue: I've done a controlled test with a 40W tungsten bulb. I used the DA35 Ltd. and DA70 Ltd. lenses in AF.S and MF. Focus was spot on. When I dimmed the lamp down to a very low level (where you would not expect for the AF to work) I could get some front focus shots. Yet the frontfocus was gone as soon as I switched to Live-View. Focusing was also no error issue when I switched to MF.

There is a simple solution if you insist to shoot in low tungsten light without Live-View or MF, it is a very simple and logical solution: set your WB manually, best to a white sheet of paper. Focus accuracy will be spot on and the so called front focus problem in tungsten will be overcome.

cheers,
d

**Basset** · 08-15-2012, 04:34 PM

Lots of K-rs don't front focus. Probably most don't. I say buy it, test at home under tungsten light and return the same or next day if it does front focus. My bet is that it won't and you will have a real nice camera that way outperforms the K200d in low light.

geru2000 · 08-20-2012, 05:35 AM

Originally posted by jeninejessica

Pretty much as simple as that. My husband and I use a k200, happy enough with it, though he has dreams of moving up to a k5 or something eventually. Honestly though, we're not there yet. We take mostly photos of family, our daughter, random bits. I also will be using the camera for a bit of on the side type photography doing birth photography (so in not so great lighting conditions, etc).

A k-r just came up on a local sale page (new, they claim) for $425. Worth it? Or stick it out with the k200 a bit longer until we're ready to move up to something truly better.

Also, about what do you think we could get for our k200 with kit lens.

(Or is there a better place to post this in the forums?)

(ps, I never said thank you ages back, but we got terrific advice from the forums here regarding a new lens to purchase!)

I switched from the K200D to the Kr. I did so because a majority of my photography was happening in a gym or other dimly lit venue.
I couldn't get the shutter speed I needed to freeze the grandchildren's basketball games or their cheer leading competitions even with a 1.4 aperture.
The noise above 800 on the K200 was unbearable =.

With the Kr I can easily shoot these events and get very good results.

So IMO if you are shooting indoors in low light then the Kr is beneficial and the way to go.
If not then the K200D provides great images.

ChrisJowett · 08-31-2012, 04:03 PM

I faced the same question and bought a K-r. I regret that decision. The low light performance is better on paper than in reality; you simply cannot use photos taken at 25k. The video is also not particularly useful and I prefer using my child’s $150 Canon p&s. The real killer for me is the ff tungsten issue and manual focus generally (btw, all stage lighting is tungsten) There are few actual advantages and a few disadvantages. What I should have done is keep the K200D and bought a K-01. Two very different cameras with strengths and weaknesses
that add up to more than a K-30. It may not be an answer for you, but either way I cannot recommend a K-r.

theperception2008 · 09-25-2012, 06:18 AM

I love my K-r... I upgraded from a K100D Super, Sony CCD 6.1MP sensor that was the predecessor of the 10MP found in the K200D. The dynamic range and the noise handling is superb when using raw. Jpeg is not bad, but when you want a noise less image go with raw. I can shoot comfortably up to about iso 6000 for close subjects and about iso 3200 for more distant subjects.

At iso 1600, the files are really clean as a whistle when shooting in raw. Of course good glass is important for image quality. I wouldn't use iso 25K unless I was in a pinch though. But then again neither is iso 51K on the 5DmkII (tested on my friend's camera).

**JimJohnson** · 09-25-2012, 08:50 AM

Any chance of doing bounced flash? It increases your light levels without blinding your subject. I personally think a lot of the tungsten related front focus issue has more to do with light levels than color temp.

I was at a wedding/reception last weekend held in an old art-deco era ballroom. All the lighting was low-level incandescent. The hired photography team used yellow gels over their attached flashes and bounced everything. The cameras were obviously white-balanced for tungsten light. The yellow gels balanced the foreground and background color. Bouncing off the ceiling kept the light even and soft (occasionally a white card was used to add sparkle to eyes on close-ups).

The K-r handles noise at moderately high ISOs quite well, but you shouldn't need high ISOs with a bounce flash. That should get you a decent mid-range aperture adding sufficient depth of field for any possible mis-focus of the AF system.

08-10-2012, 09:59 PM	#1
jeninejessica New Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Canadian Prairies Posts: 9	Switch to K-r from k200d? Pretty much as simple as that. My husband and I use a k200, happy enough with it, though he has dreams of moving up to a k5 or something eventually. Honestly though, we're not there yet. We take mostly photos of family, our daughter, random bits. I also will be using the camera for a bit of on the side type photography doing birth photography (so in not so great lighting conditions, etc). A k-r just came up on a local sale page (new, they claim) for $425. Worth it? Or stick it out with the k200 a bit longer until we're ready to move up to something truly better. Also, about what do you think we could get for our k200 with kit lens. (Or is there a better place to post this in the forums?) (ps, I never said thank you ages back, but we got terrific advice from the forums here regarding a new lens to purchase!)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K200D to Panasonic GF1 switch advices?	ytterbium	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	26	10-02-2011 02:57 AM
Switch is off, but everything still on.	LightMeter	Pentax Medium Format	2	09-16-2011 10:01 PM
AF/MF switch	biloxisean	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	11	05-11-2011 06:44 PM
Switch to Ubuntu?	Deiberson	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	91	01-24-2011 08:34 AM
When/How to use Macro Switch?	hockmasm	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	09-23-2010 03:59 AM

08-10-2012, 10:43 PM	#2
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Some K-r's (maybe all?) have inaccurate auto-focus in tungsten light. I recommend you pass on this deal. If you want a camera that is a clear upgrade over the K200D and K-r, check out the K-30.

08-11-2012, 12:00 AM	#3
Bramela Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Newcastle Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,284	i agree, the K30 is definitely worth a look see.

08-11-2012, 02:59 AM	#4
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,879	I wouldn't change my K200D for a K-r, but then I wouldn't change it for a K30 either, because I like the LCD, grip and build quality too much. The only camera Pentax have made since the K200D that I have been tempted by is the K5. But, if you feel that you wouldn't make good use of all it's advantages, then it won't be worth it at this point. I don't know what you have lens-wise, but $425 ought to be able to buy you something nice. I'm very much in the camp of using available money to buy new lenses, not the latest camera. I am a gearhead, but I think this attitude has served me well in learning to improve my photography.

08-11-2012, 07:36 AM	#5
jeninejessica New Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Canadian Prairies Posts: 9 Original Poster	Thanks guys. That's kind of what we were leaning towards. It's just hard to pass up a 'deal'. For lenses we've got the kit 18-55. Upon recommendation from these forums (thanks!) we bought a 50mm 1.4 last year, which we LOVE, and then recently bought a 50-200 as well. We'll keep waiting until we -need-, or the k30 comes down/goes on an amazing sale. I'd seen that one pop up a few times in reviews and wondered about it.

08-15-2012, 12:21 AM	#6
dragra Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Ljubljana Photos: Albums Posts: 238	I have a K20 and have added a K-r - they are a great combo! If you can get a K-r about 400 new just go and grab it: it is a good deal. K30 will cost you double as much. p.s. Concerning the ever repeating AF "problem" in tungsten light is not a K-r deal breaker. First you ought to ask yourself if you want to take pictures in tungsten light. I have no idea about birth environment light, but my guess would be it is neon or something similar. Tungsten bulbs are not sold anymore. And if you by any chance end up in a tungsten light environment there is a way to live there too: just do your WB manually and that's it!

08-15-2012, 12:54 AM	#7
Timd Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Cape Town, SA Posts: 262	With the K5 discontinued, it is a steal. If only for the high ISO capabilities. I bought the K200 just before it was discontinued and did the same with the K5 recently. Having said that, good glass is always an investment. In good light, there is little to match the K200. Not much advice here, but if it were me I would not move from the K200 unless it were for a K30, K5 or better.

08-15-2012, 04:29 AM	#8
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by dragra First you ought to ask yourself if you want to take pictures in tungsten light. I have no idea about birth environment light, but my guess would be it is neon or something similar. Tungsten bulbs are not sold anymore. And if you by any chance end up in a tungsten light environment there is a way to live there too: just do your WB manually and that's it! Tungsten light is still the standard in Canada, where the OP lives. Tungsten lighting is commonly used in hospital birthing rooms, where they are trying to mimic a home scene. Secondly, it's not white balance that is the issue, the problem is that the camera front focusses in yellow light.

08-15-2012, 01:59 PM	#9
dragra Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Ljubljana Photos: Albums Posts: 238	Originally posted by audiobomber Tungsten light is still the standard in Canada, where the OP lives. Tungsten lighting is commonly used in hospital birthing rooms, where they are trying to mimic a home scene. Secondly, it's not white balance that is the issue, the problem is that the camera front focusses in yellow light. I didn't know Canada is still on tungsten light, I live in Europe where tungsten bulbs are not sold anymore for some years. Concerning the front focus issue: I've done a controlled test with a 40W tungsten bulb. I used the DA35 Ltd. and DA70 Ltd. lenses in AF.S and MF. Focus was spot on. When I dimmed the lamp down to a very low level (where you would not expect for the AF to work) I could get some front focus shots. Yet the frontfocus was gone as soon as I switched to Live-View. Focusing was also no error issue when I switched to MF. There is a simple solution if you insist to shoot in low tungsten light without Live-View or MF, it is a very simple and logical solution: set your WB manually, best to a white sheet of paper. Focus accuracy will be spot on and the so called front focus problem in tungsten will be overcome. cheers, d

08-15-2012, 04:34 PM	#10
Basset Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Photos: Albums Posts: 340	Lots of K-rs don't front focus. Probably most don't. I say buy it, test at home under tungsten light and return the same or next day if it does front focus. My bet is that it won't and you will have a real nice camera that way outperforms the K200d in low light.

08-20-2012, 05:35 AM	#11
geru2000 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Watertown, NY Posts: 267	Originally posted by jeninejessica Pretty much as simple as that. My husband and I use a k200, happy enough with it, though he has dreams of moving up to a k5 or something eventually. Honestly though, we're not there yet. We take mostly photos of family, our daughter, random bits. I also will be using the camera for a bit of on the side type photography doing birth photography (so in not so great lighting conditions, etc). A k-r just came up on a local sale page (new, they claim) for $425. Worth it? Or stick it out with the k200 a bit longer until we're ready to move up to something truly better. Also, about what do you think we could get for our k200 with kit lens. (Or is there a better place to post this in the forums?) (ps, I never said thank you ages back, but we got terrific advice from the forums here regarding a new lens to purchase!) I switched from the K200D to the Kr. I did so because a majority of my photography was happening in a gym or other dimly lit venue. I couldn't get the shutter speed I needed to freeze the grandchildren's basketball games or their cheer leading competitions even with a 1.4 aperture. The noise above 800 on the K200 was unbearable =. With the Kr I can easily shoot these events and get very good results. So IMO if you are shooting indoors in low light then the Kr is beneficial and the way to go. If not then the K200D provides great images.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-31-2012, 04:03 PM	#12
ChrisJowett Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 79	I faced the same question and bought a K-r. I regret that decision. The low light performance is better on paper than in reality; you simply cannot use photos taken at 25k. The video is also not particularly useful and I prefer using my child’s $150 Canon p&s. The real killer for me is the ff tungsten issue and manual focus generally (btw, all stage lighting is tungsten) There are few actual advantages and a few disadvantages. What I should have done is keep the K200D and bought a K-01. Two very different cameras with strengths and weaknesses that add up to more than a K-30. It may not be an answer for you, but either way I cannot recommend a K-r.

09-25-2012, 06:18 AM	#13
theperception2008 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Łódź, Poland and Riverside, California, U.S.A Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 488	I love my K-r... I upgraded from a K100D Super, Sony CCD 6.1MP sensor that was the predecessor of the 10MP found in the K200D. The dynamic range and the noise handling is superb when using raw. Jpeg is not bad, but when you want a noise less image go with raw. I can shoot comfortably up to about iso 6000 for close subjects and about iso 3200 for more distant subjects. At iso 1600, the files are really clean as a whistle when shooting in raw. Of course good glass is important for image quality. I wouldn't use iso 25K unless I was in a pinch though. But then again neither is iso 51K on the 5DmkII (tested on my friend's camera).

09-25-2012, 08:50 AM	#14
JimJohnson Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Summer:Lake Superior - Michigan Winter:Texas Hill Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,772	Any chance of doing bounced flash? It increases your light levels without blinding your subject. I personally think a lot of the tungsten related front focus issue has more to do with light levels than color temp. I was at a wedding/reception last weekend held in an old art-deco era ballroom. All the lighting was low-level incandescent. The hired photography team used yellow gels over their attached flashes and bounced everything. The cameras were obviously white-balanced for tungsten light. The yellow gels balanced the foreground and background color. Bouncing off the ceiling kept the light even and soft (occasionally a white card was used to add sparkle to eyes on close-ups). The K-r handles noise at moderately high ISOs quite well, but you shouldn't need high ISOs with a bounce flash. That should get you a decent mid-range aperture adding sufficient depth of field for any possible mis-focus of the AF system.