K-x or K-r?

trevorgrout · 11-04-2010, 07:19 PM

"In everyday use the D40 is just what it set out to be, a very capable, compact, lightweight and easy to use camera which makes a perfect first step for anyone wanting to get into digital SLR photography. It provides enough control and a large enough range of manual settings to enable you to experiment and learn but also helps you to take great pictures in the process. It's one of those cameras you can just pick up and start shooting without fuss, that you can hand to a friend who's never used an SLR and know they'll be able to do the same. "

>Sorry don't know how to use the quote feature

I don't understand how this separates the d40/d60 from any other entry level dslr. They *all* have auto mode. I am not sure how much simpler life can be?? If you have the money to buy a dslr just to put it in auto, then it was just a waste of your money in my opinion. It is frustrating when my friends buy a nice dslr and then don't have the motivation to learn how to use it.

Diemos, why exactly did you switch from nikon to pentax???

Last edited by trevorgrout; 11-04-2010 at 07:20 PM. Reason: revise

Black_ronin · 11-04-2010, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by Deimos

fron dpreview in the original d40 review:

"In everyday use the D40 is just what it set out to be, a very capable, compact, lightweight and easy to use camera which makes a perfect first step for anyone wanting to get into digital SLR photography. It provides enough control and a large enough range of manual settings to enable you to experiment and learn but also helps you to take great pictures in the process. It's one of those cameras you can just pick up and start shooting without fuss, that you can hand to a friend who's never used an SLR and know they'll be able to do the same. "

I dont buy into the whole one system for life, I switched to Pentax from Nikon and now own five lenses and a film k1000. Pentax now baby!

The free market is a wonderful thing, and lots of ppl looking for used gear.

Deimos,

This review is done in December 2006 - if they mentioned it over K-X than it would be more meaningful. Usability in DSLR is relatively subjective matter. Let me ask you a question - what was your first DSLR?

On the side note, i recently played with Nikon D3000 interface. I didn't find it more newbie friendly than K-X. But you know what - i am very subjective on this cause i am used to K-X interface already. So, it's mostly what you are used to. Cheers.

wannabefishing · 11-04-2010, 07:40 PM

well this is an interesting topic for me as i'm asking myself the same question, k- or k-r (time to move from the K100D)... my only question is this, through the viewfinder (not liveview lcd), does the k-x have the little red light that shows on the focus screen?

**Deimos** · 11-04-2010, 07:43 PM

my first was a d60, it helped me a LOT to learn in a very intuitive and easy way, ie while using the camera changing the settings.

I bought a K-r as a step-up not so much in IQ but in more advanced fuctionality and features and also for higher iso capability.

Originally posted by wannabefishing

does the k-x have the little red light that shows on the focus screen?

If you mean the AF points, no the k-r does though

DaveHolmes · 11-04-2010, 08:54 PM

Originally posted by Deimos

To be honest, and people here might kill me for this

You almost asked for it mate

But if they'd read your posts thoroughly however... There may have been less of an issue...

Although that said... I reckon any dslr... from any brand... in the same price range... would be as good to 'learn on' than any other... There hasn't been a 'bad' dslr made by any company in the last few years... It's just some... do 'some' things better.

I chose a K-x over a Nikon D5000 and a Canon 450D... The Canon felt odd in my hands... The Nikon felt great... The Pentax felt great too... The Pentax had a deal on 2 lenses, memory card, batteries and a bag... The Nikon didn't...

My photography is improving every day but this would be the case whatever system I had chosen and for whatever reason I chose it... The reason my photography is improving is that I take my camera everywhere and shoot pretty much everything I come in contact with... It has very little to do with my camera...

As proof in point... I took some shots on my old 6-mega-pixel point and shoot today (Fuji F10) and they were the best photos I've ever taken on it... The F10 has pretty much no manual controls... But my composition skills have vastly improved since I last used it...

Basically...

There are no perfect cameras... If there were... this thread would not exist... and new cameras such as K-r/K5 would not be released...

Any photographer moving to a dslr system is going to make their choice... After that... All they have to do is deal with it

foivosloxias · 11-04-2010, 11:12 PM

As a devoted K-x user I suggest the you should go for the K-r if money is no issue. I believe that the illuminated AF point, the AF assist lamp and the new faster SAFOX IX are definitely worth the extra money.
The LCD on is almost 4 times sharper on the K-r, 921.000 dots vs 230.000 dots on the K-x !

As a newbie, IMHO, is better to stick with the 18-55mm excellent kit lens and slowly progress to a second lens once you decide which kind of photography suits you, e.g. landscapes, flower/insect macros, street photography etc.

I can promise that you will certainly have a lot of fun with any of these cameras.

My Flickr K-x set

kari · 11-05-2010, 05:42 AM

Originally posted by foivosloxias

As a devoted K-x user I suggest the you should go for the K-r if money is no issue. I believe that the illuminated AF point, the AF assist lamp and the new faster SAFOX IX are definitely worth the extra money.
The LCD on is almost 4 times sharper on the K-r, 921.000 dots vs 230.000 dots on the K-x !

As a newbie, IMHO, is better to stick with the 18-55mm excellent kit lens and slowly progress to a second lens once you decide which kind of photography suits you, e.g. landscapes, flower/insect macros, street photography etc.

I can promise that you will certainly have a lot of fun with any of these cameras.

I disagree completely, none of the K-r's features will make a difference when it comes down to what matters, which is image quality. That you can only improve by buying better lenses. I found the 18-55 kit lens very limiting very quickly and would suggest upgrading that to a Sigma 17-70 or Tamron 17-50 for about the same price as the difference between a K-x and a K-r. I got the DA* 16-50, but that's a lot more expensive.

The K-x AF has never been a problem for me, I found AF-C very nice in Sports Mode shooting birds in flight and the tracking works very well. I've never been in a situation where I needed to see AF points in the viewfinder either. The better LCD would be nice to have, but it's not going to make a difference to your photos.

I'd definitely go for the K-x and a better lens like the Tammy, Sigma or the DA 35 2.4. As has been mentioned, the AA batteries are another plus for me.

foivosloxias · 11-05-2010, 10:18 AM

Dear Kari,
The OP writes "I am new to DSLRs and this will be my first one."
My suggestion,therefore, is to him not to an advanced, like you, photographer. IMHO it will be frustrating to a first time DSLR user to choose between various focal lengths and brands. You must learn to drive before you can race.

As for the 18-55mm kit lens I am totally satisfied from a lens that costs less than $ 80 in its kit version.
You write : "... what counts is image quality and that is improved by buying better lenses". Well then all it takes to become a good photographer is buying expensive cameras and really expensive lenses, no need for composition, framing, perspective and all that boring stuff. Really ?

Please feel free to check this and judge for yourself if what counts in photography is behind and not in front of the camera.
Flickr: foivosloxias' stuff tagged with dal1855mmed

Ira · 11-05-2010, 10:54 AM

Originally posted by foivosloxias

As a devoted K-x user I suggest the you should go for the K-r if money is no issue. I believe that the illuminated AF point, the AF assist lamp and the new faster SAFOX IX are definitely worth the extra money.
The LCD on is almost 4 times sharper on the K-r, 921.000 dots vs 230.000 dots on the K-x !

My Flickr K-x set

I didn't know that, but wow:

Is there anything more valuable to a beginner--or anyone-- than being able to best review your saved images, to decide whether to even save it, or take some more cracks at the subject?

I love my K-x, but for reviewing, the screen is pretty worthless. I would love to see what the K-r's looks like.

Ira · 11-05-2010, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by kari

I disagree completely, none of the K-r's features will make a difference when it comes down to what matters, which is image quality.

The K-x AF has never been a problem for me, I found AF-C very nice in Sports Mode shooting birds in flight and the tracking works very well. I've never been in a situation where I needed to see AF points in the viewfinder either. The better LCD would be nice to have, but it's not going to make a difference to your photos.

Think this through a little:

All of the K-r's improvements do help you create better images by providing better tools to do that. Yeah, in lab tests, final IQ may be close between the two, but the K-r makes it easier to get there.

Docrwm · 11-05-2010, 12:43 PM

Originally posted by Ira

Think this through a little:

All of the K-r's improvements do help you create better images by providing better tools to do that. Yeah, in lab tests, final IQ may be close between the two, but the K-r makes it easier to get there.

True, but at +$300 over the K-x I decided to pass. No regrets at all. The Value for Money equation on the K-x vs. K-r just does not side with the K-r IMHO. And if money is no object then why not just get the K5?

GeneV · 11-05-2010, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by Docrwm

True, but at +$300 over the K-x I decided to pass. No regrets at all. The Value for Money equation on the K-x vs. K-r just does not side with the K-r IMHO. And if money is no object then why not just get the K5?

The price is a bit of an issue. Great prices on the older model kept me away from the K7.

typical8o8 · 11-05-2010, 02:21 PM

this appears to be a sound article on the K-r:

Pentax K-r Review | PhotographyBLOG

the K-r addressed the complaints that people had about the K-x and then some. it is everything that the K-x wasn't. both cameras are capable of producing outstanding images. some people just aren't willing to pay extra for the extra features. those extra features may mean the difference between getting a good shot and not getting one at all. many people complained about the price point of the K-5. now, with all the positive feedback and ridiculously good DxO results people can't wait to get their hands on the darned thing. if you compare the K-r to other DSLR's in its class, you'll begin to really see its value. i am a happy K-x user, btw.

Ira · 11-05-2010, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by Docrwm

True, but at +$300 over the K-x I decided to pass. No regrets at all. The Value for Money equation on the K-x vs. K-r just does not side with the K-r IMHO. And if money is no object then why not just get the K5?

The $300 more for the K-r over the K-x makes sense for a lot of people. Whereas the much higher price for the K-5 may very well not.

Money is always an object--it's just a matter of where you want to spend it.

And I repeat:

The faster AF, improved LCD, continuous shooting mode and more make it, to me, worth the extra 300 bucks.

**Deimos** · 11-05-2010, 03:08 PM

I got my k-r for $690 body only, that price isnt that bad, it is at $850 though but the prices have already dropped. It is a lot of camera, well worth the extra bucks for me. I looked at an open box k-x kit $500 but the extra k-r features sold it. It also just feels better quality and better in the hand. AF points help!

The screen is also fantastic

11-05-2010, 10:18 AM	#23
foivosloxias Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25	Dear Kari, The OP writes "I am new to DSLRs and this will be my first one." My suggestion,therefore, is to him not to an advanced, like you, photographer. IMHO it will be frustrating to a first time DSLR user to choose between various focal lengths and brands. You must learn to drive before you can race. As for the 18-55mm kit lens I am totally satisfied from a lens that costs less than $ 80 in its kit version. You write : "... what counts is image quality and that is improved by buying better lenses". Well then all it takes to become a good photographer is buying expensive cameras and really expensive lenses, no need for composition, framing, perspective and all that boring stuff. Really ? Please feel free to check this and judge for yourself if what counts in photography is behind and not in front of the camera. Flickr: foivosloxias' stuff tagged with dal1855mmed Last edited by foivosloxias; 11-05-2010 at 10:50 AM.

11-04-2010, 07:19 PM	#16
trevorgrout Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Oklahoma City Photos: Albums Posts: 105	"In everyday use the D40 is just what it set out to be, a very capable, compact, lightweight and easy to use camera which makes a perfect first step for anyone wanting to get into digital SLR photography. It provides enough control and a large enough range of manual settings to enable you to experiment and learn but also helps you to take great pictures in the process. It's one of those cameras you can just pick up and start shooting without fuss, that you can hand to a friend who's never used an SLR and know they'll be able to do the same. " >Sorry don't know how to use the quote feature I don't understand how this separates the d40/d60 from any other entry level dslr. They all have auto mode. I am not sure how much simpler life can be?? If you have the money to buy a dslr just to put it in auto, then it was just a waste of your money in my opinion. It is frustrating when my friends buy a nice dslr and then don't have the motivation to learn how to use it. Diemos, why exactly did you switch from nikon to pentax??? Last edited by trevorgrout; 11-04-2010 at 07:20 PM. Reason: revise

11-04-2010, 07:20 PM	#17
Black_ronin Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 52	Originally posted by Deimos fron dpreview in the original d40 review: "In everyday use the D40 is just what it set out to be, a very capable, compact, lightweight and easy to use camera which makes a perfect first step for anyone wanting to get into digital SLR photography. It provides enough control and a large enough range of manual settings to enable you to experiment and learn but also helps you to take great pictures in the process. It's one of those cameras you can just pick up and start shooting without fuss, that you can hand to a friend who's never used an SLR and know they'll be able to do the same. " I dont buy into the whole one system for life, I switched to Pentax from Nikon and now own five lenses and a film k1000. Pentax now baby! The free market is a wonderful thing, and lots of ppl looking for used gear. Deimos, This review is done in December 2006 - if they mentioned it over K-X than it would be more meaningful. Usability in DSLR is relatively subjective matter. Let me ask you a question - what was your first DSLR? On the side note, i recently played with Nikon D3000 interface. I didn't find it more newbie friendly than K-X. But you know what - i am very subjective on this cause i am used to K-X interface already. So, it's mostly what you are used to. Cheers.

11-04-2010, 07:40 PM	#18
wannabefishing Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Niagara Posts: 30	well this is an interesting topic for me as i'm asking myself the same question, k- or k-r (time to move from the K100D)... my only question is this, through the viewfinder (not liveview lcd), does the k-x have the little red light that shows on the focus screen?

11-04-2010, 07:43 PM	#19
Deimos Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Kingdom of Wonder Posts: 1,777	my first was a d60, it helped me a LOT to learn in a very intuitive and easy way, ie while using the camera changing the settings. I bought a K-r as a step-up not so much in IQ but in more advanced fuctionality and features and also for higher iso capability. Originally posted by wannabefishing does the k-x have the little red light that shows on the focus screen? If you mean the AF points, no the k-r does though

11-04-2010, 08:54 PM	#20
DaveHolmes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 1,501	Originally posted by Deimos To be honest, and people here might kill me for this You almost asked for it mate But if they'd read your posts thoroughly however... There may have been less of an issue... Although that said... I reckon any dslr... from any brand... in the same price range... would be as good to 'learn on' than any other... There hasn't been a 'bad' dslr made by any company in the last few years... It's just some... do 'some' things better. I chose a K-x over a Nikon D5000 and a Canon 450D... The Canon felt odd in my hands... The Nikon felt great... The Pentax felt great too... The Pentax had a deal on 2 lenses, memory card, batteries and a bag... The Nikon didn't... My photography is improving every day but this would be the case whatever system I had chosen and for whatever reason I chose it... The reason my photography is improving is that I take my camera everywhere and shoot pretty much everything I come in contact with... It has very little to do with my camera... As proof in point... I took some shots on my old 6-mega-pixel point and shoot today (Fuji F10) and they were the best photos I've ever taken on it... The F10 has pretty much no manual controls... But my composition skills have vastly improved since I last used it... Basically... There are no perfect cameras... If there were... this thread would not exist... and new cameras such as K-r/K5 would not be released... Any photographer moving to a dslr system is going to make their choice... After that... All they have to do is deal with it

11-04-2010, 11:12 PM	#21
foivosloxias Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25	As a devoted K-x user I suggest the you should go for the K-r if money is no issue. I believe that the illuminated AF point, the AF assist lamp and the new faster SAFOX IX are definitely worth the extra money. The LCD on is almost 4 times sharper on the K-r, 921.000 dots vs 230.000 dots on the K-x ! As a newbie, IMHO, is better to stick with the 18-55mm excellent kit lens and slowly progress to a second lens once you decide which kind of photography suits you, e.g. landscapes, flower/insect macros, street photography etc. I can promise that you will certainly have a lot of fun with any of these cameras. My Flickr K-x set

11-05-2010, 05:42 AM	#22
kari Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 142	Originally posted by foivosloxias As a devoted K-x user I suggest the you should go for the K-r if money is no issue. I believe that the illuminated AF point, the AF assist lamp and the new faster SAFOX IX are definitely worth the extra money. The LCD on is almost 4 times sharper on the K-r, 921.000 dots vs 230.000 dots on the K-x ! As a newbie, IMHO, is better to stick with the 18-55mm excellent kit lens and slowly progress to a second lens once you decide which kind of photography suits you, e.g. landscapes, flower/insect macros, street photography etc. I can promise that you will certainly have a lot of fun with any of these cameras. I disagree completely, none of the K-r's features will make a difference when it comes down to what matters, which is image quality. That you can only improve by buying better lenses. I found the 18-55 kit lens very limiting very quickly and would suggest upgrading that to a Sigma 17-70 or Tamron 17-50 for about the same price as the difference between a K-x and a K-r. I got the DA* 16-50, but that's a lot more expensive. The K-x AF has never been a problem for me, I found AF-C very nice in Sports Mode shooting birds in flight and the tracking works very well. I've never been in a situation where I needed to see AF points in the viewfinder either. The better LCD would be nice to have, but it's not going to make a difference to your photos. I'd definitely go for the K-x and a better lens like the Tammy, Sigma or the DA 35 2.4. As has been mentioned, the AA batteries are another plus for me.

11-05-2010, 10:54 AM	#24
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Originally posted by foivosloxias As a devoted K-x user I suggest the you should go for the K-r if money is no issue. I believe that the illuminated AF point, the AF assist lamp and the new faster SAFOX IX are definitely worth the extra money. The LCD on is almost 4 times sharper on the K-r, 921.000 dots vs 230.000 dots on the K-x ! My Flickr K-x set I didn't know that, but wow: Is there anything more valuable to a beginner--or anyone-- than being able to best review your saved images, to decide whether to even save it, or take some more cracks at the subject? I love my K-x, but for reviewing, the screen is pretty worthless. I would love to see what the K-r's looks like.

11-05-2010, 10:59 AM	#25
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Originally posted by kari I disagree completely, none of the K-r's features will make a difference when it comes down to what matters, which is image quality. The K-x AF has never been a problem for me, I found AF-C very nice in Sports Mode shooting birds in flight and the tracking works very well. I've never been in a situation where I needed to see AF points in the viewfinder either. The better LCD would be nice to have, but it's not going to make a difference to your photos. Think this through a little: All of the K-r's improvements do help you create better images by providing better tools to do that. Yeah, in lab tests, final IQ may be close between the two, but the K-r makes it easier to get there.

11-05-2010, 12:43 PM	#26
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by Ira Think this through a little: All of the K-r's improvements do help you create better images by providing better tools to do that. Yeah, in lab tests, final IQ may be close between the two, but the K-r makes it easier to get there. True, but at +$300 over the K-x I decided to pass. No regrets at all. The Value for Money equation on the K-x vs. K-r just does not side with the K-r IMHO. And if money is no object then why not just get the K5?

11-05-2010, 01:17 PM	#27
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Docrwm True, but at +$300 over the K-x I decided to pass. No regrets at all. The Value for Money equation on the K-x vs. K-r just does not side with the K-r IMHO. And if money is no object then why not just get the K5? The price is a bit of an issue. Great prices on the older model kept me away from the K7.

11-05-2010, 02:21 PM	#28
typical8o8 Junior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: NE Posts: 28	this appears to be a sound article on the K-r: Pentax K-r Review \| PhotographyBLOG the K-r addressed the complaints that people had about the K-x and then some. it is everything that the K-x wasn't. both cameras are capable of producing outstanding images. some people just aren't willing to pay extra for the extra features. those extra features may mean the difference between getting a good shot and not getting one at all. many people complained about the price point of the K-5. now, with all the positive feedback and ridiculously good DxO results people can't wait to get their hands on the darned thing. if you compare the K-r to other DSLR's in its class, you'll begin to really see its value. i am a happy K-x user, btw.

11-05-2010, 02:30 PM	#29
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Originally posted by Docrwm True, but at +$300 over the K-x I decided to pass. No regrets at all. The Value for Money equation on the K-x vs. K-r just does not side with the K-r IMHO. And if money is no object then why not just get the K5? The $300 more for the K-r over the K-x makes sense for a lot of people. Whereas the much higher price for the K-5 may very well not. Money is always an object--it's just a matter of where you want to spend it. And I repeat: The faster AF, improved LCD, continuous shooting mode and more make it, to me, worth the extra 300 bucks.

11-05-2010, 03:08 PM	#30
Deimos Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Kingdom of Wonder Posts: 1,777	I got my k-r for $690 body only, that price isnt that bad, it is at $850 though but the prices have already dropped. It is a lot of camera, well worth the extra bucks for me. I looked at an open box k-x kit $500 but the extra k-r features sold it. It also just feels better quality and better in the hand. AF points help! The screen is also fantastic