K-x, K-r, D3100 or T2i.

kinsale · 08-31-2010, 12:16 PM

I've been researching other cameras whilst waiting for the K-r announcement. 2 that interest me are the D3100 and the T2i. The T2i i am almost ruling out due to price but the D3100 should be about the same price as the K-r.
I have some Pentax lenses but do not have a lot of money invested.

I plan on shooting some video as well which puts me off the K-x even though I love everything else about it.

What say you experts? I know it's hard without the K-r specs but why would you not get a D3100 for example?

thanks
Ian

yeatzee · 08-31-2010, 12:24 PM

Originally posted by kinsale

I've been researching other cameras whilst waiting for the K-r announcement. 2 that interest me are the D3100 and the T2i. The T2i i am almost ruling out due to price but the D3100 should be about the same price as the K-r.
I have some Pentax lenses but do not have a lot of money invested.

I plan on shooting some video as well which puts me off the K-x even though I love everything else about it.

What say you experts? I know it's hard without the K-r specs but why would you not get a D3100 for example?

thanks
Ian

Because anything less than the D90 currently does not have an in body motor essentially "crippling" it (probably a strong word but what ever).

paperbag846 · 08-31-2010, 12:35 PM

The only lenses that will AF with the D3100 will be ones with the motor in the lens (more expensive lenses).

The feature set of the K-x is more complete... but more importantly, what kind of photography do you want to be doing? Pentax and Nikon each have their own strengths, and if you are going to be investing in lenses, THAT should dictate which body you buy. Your future self will thank you.

kinsale · 08-31-2010, 12:35 PM

Besides the lenses being more expensive, how else would that hurt me?

**boriscleto** · 08-31-2010, 12:37 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

Because anything less than the D90 currently does not have an in body motor essentially "crippling" it (probably a strong word but what ever).

And anything less than the D300 can't meter without a chipped lens.

kinsale · 08-31-2010, 12:38 PM

Originally posted by paperbag846

The only lenses that will AF with the D3100 will be ones with the motor in the lens (more expensive lenses).

The feature set of the K-x is more complete... but more importantly, what kind of photography do you want to be doing? Pentax and Nikon each have their own strengths, and if you are going to be investing in lenses, THAT should dictate which body you buy. Your future self will thank you.

I am new to all this so please forgive me. I thought you could get the same lens pretty much from any of the major players? I want to do all round photography at the start as i haven't found one particular genre that I really like yet. I am looking for an all round camera with video as well.

tbirdas · 08-31-2010, 12:46 PM

I am certainly not an expert - I have had a K-x for 3 months. There have been numerous discussions on k-x vs D5000 vs T1i way back which I painstakingly reviewed when I was making my decision. You can make all arguments for and against, I decided based on price (a bit lower for a 2-lens kit) and the ability to use older lenses etc. K-x shoots video but doesnt AF in that mode. I suspect even if the K-r does, it will probably be audible as the AF in general is not silent... Perhaps the D3100 is more appropriate in that respect. I would think that if you are not heavily invested in the Pentax system, the D3100 would be an option. If you just stay with the kit lenses (not a bad option with the k-x) or just add a fast prime, either system would be fine - my brother has a D3000 with a 35/1.8 Nikkor and he is happy.

yeatzee · 08-31-2010, 12:46 PM

Originally posted by kinsale

Besides the lenses being more expensive, how else would that hurt me?

lens options. Basically if your going Nikon, my advice would be to pony up for a used D300 or in some cases D90.

sharathk · 08-31-2010, 12:47 PM

any entry level dslr in the market today should perform well enough for snapshot use. just that on k-x you can use any pentax lenses. but on D3100 you can use only lenses with auto focus motors. since D3100 doesn't have focus motor nor in camera stabilization. you pay for that thru every lens you buy.

Jasvox · 08-31-2010, 02:00 PM

how can anyone here or anywhere else be an expert when half he camera bodies you have mentioned have not even been released yet? Silly.

Jason

paperbag846 · 08-31-2010, 02:24 PM

My experience (as I have contemplated switching to Nikon, and abandoned that plan):

A) Pentax lenses cover the most used ranges.
B) Nikon has a few extra options in the budget lens category, but for the most part, their lenses cost more for the same features (e.g., image stabilization, specialty lens prices).
C) Nikon has more to offer the professional photographer who is willing to spend 1000's on a lens.

Considering that you are looking at the entry level cameras, I doubt you would be buying the products that Nikon has, but Pentax does not. You can buy the K-X or K-R with a it lens and cover all your general-use focal lengths, and you can buy the double-kit lens package which will give you a nice telephoto lens as well for animals or candids. That package is 700-800, and will likely give you everything you need for general-purpose photography. The standard kit lens (18-55 mm) is what you would be using for most purposes (the images will look similar to a persons point-of-view).

If you are trying to save money and have fun, I would say the pentax K-X or K-R should fit the bill. Nikon is great buy if you forsee yourself being hired for jobs and renting specialty lenses, or spending a LOT of money to build yourself a very impressive kit.

I would recommend buying an 18-55 kit lens at first (not the double lens package) to see what you like to shoot. You will likely be very happy with the 18-55 kit and not see any need to upgrade for quite some time.

Price-performance ratio is Pentax, upgrade-ability options is Nikon. If this is just a hobby and you want the best value for your dollar, the K-X or K-R has lots more to offer over the D3100 or D3000. To get the most out of Nikon you need to spend the big bucks.

But don't take my word for it... compare lenses on whatever camera store's website you will be using. Some will be more expensive some will be less, but in the range you will be shooting in, at the budget level, I believe Pentax offers more value.

kinsale · 08-31-2010, 04:55 PM

I do recognize that the K-x fits the bill. I own a K100D which my wife is getting as a present. The problem is the K-x is not the all round camera I want it to be due to the video feature not being as good as say the D3100 or the A55.
I know this is not always popular here but video is important to me as I only travel with one camera. I would not bring a camcorder and a camera with me anywhere.
I just thought I would get peoples opinions of the merits of each system and I thank you for your inputs.

Nikon does seem to have what I need in terms of lenses. If the K-r has what I need though I would prefer that.

**Ex Finn.** · 08-31-2010, 05:36 PM

Try the other brand. If you like it, then stick with it. As far as "I would not bring a camcorder and a camera with me anywhere", I would , just to get good footage.

Cheers, Mike.

paperbag846 · 08-31-2010, 05:45 PM

Once again , if you are going with Nikon you really should be buying their more expensive bodies... I would go with the D90... the entry level cameras they sell are very crippled.

Unless you only plan on using the kit lens.

Rory · 08-31-2010, 05:47 PM

Isn't the D3100 video capped at like 5 minutes or something? I thought I read that somewhere regarding the D5000. It was then that I ran into the K-x and bought that instead. I'm glad I did.

08-31-2010, 12:16 PM	#1
kinsale Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: New Hampshire Posts: 50	K-x, K-r, D3100 or T2i. I've been researching other cameras whilst waiting for the K-r announcement. 2 that interest me are the D3100 and the T2i. The T2i i am almost ruling out due to price but the D3100 should be about the same price as the K-r. I have some Pentax lenses but do not have a lot of money invested. I plan on shooting some video as well which puts me off the K-x even though I love everything else about it. What say you experts? I know it's hard without the K-r specs but why would you not get a D3100 for example? thanks Ian

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nikon D3100 1080p video with AF !	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	9	08-24-2010 05:44 AM
What tells the Nikon D3100 us about the Pentax K-r?	Lampo	Pentax News and Rumors	64	08-22-2010 08:04 AM
Pentax K-7 vs canon T2i	mikemike	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	37	05-27-2010 11:23 AM
Pentax K7 vs Canon T2i(550D)	rohit anupoju	Pentax DSLR Discussion	3	05-03-2010 05:29 PM
Canon T2i + Kmount lenes?	tryp-the-lyt	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	8	03-16-2010 07:33 PM

08-31-2010, 12:24 PM	#2
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Originally posted by kinsale I've been researching other cameras whilst waiting for the K-r announcement. 2 that interest me are the D3100 and the T2i. The T2i i am almost ruling out due to price but the D3100 should be about the same price as the K-r. I have some Pentax lenses but do not have a lot of money invested. I plan on shooting some video as well which puts me off the K-x even though I love everything else about it. What say you experts? I know it's hard without the K-r specs but why would you not get a D3100 for example? thanks Ian Because anything less than the D90 currently does not have an in body motor essentially "crippling" it (probably a strong word but what ever).

08-31-2010, 12:35 PM	#3
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	The only lenses that will AF with the D3100 will be ones with the motor in the lens (more expensive lenses). The feature set of the K-x is more complete... but more importantly, what kind of photography do you want to be doing? Pentax and Nikon each have their own strengths, and if you are going to be investing in lenses, THAT should dictate which body you buy. Your future self will thank you.

08-31-2010, 12:37 PM	#5
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by yeatzee Because anything less than the D90 currently does not have an in body motor essentially "crippling" it (probably a strong word but what ever). And anything less than the D300 can't meter without a chipped lens.

08-31-2010, 12:38 PM	#6
kinsale Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: New Hampshire Posts: 50 Original Poster	Originally posted by paperbag846 The only lenses that will AF with the D3100 will be ones with the motor in the lens (more expensive lenses). The feature set of the K-x is more complete... but more importantly, what kind of photography do you want to be doing? Pentax and Nikon each have their own strengths, and if you are going to be investing in lenses, THAT should dictate which body you buy. Your future self will thank you. I am new to all this so please forgive me. I thought you could get the same lens pretty much from any of the major players? I want to do all round photography at the start as i haven't found one particular genre that I really like yet. I am looking for an all round camera with video as well.

08-31-2010, 12:46 PM	#7
tbirdas Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Indianapolis Posts: 83	I am certainly not an expert - I have had a K-x for 3 months. There have been numerous discussions on k-x vs D5000 vs T1i way back which I painstakingly reviewed when I was making my decision. You can make all arguments for and against, I decided based on price (a bit lower for a 2-lens kit) and the ability to use older lenses etc. K-x shoots video but doesnt AF in that mode. I suspect even if the K-r does, it will probably be audible as the AF in general is not silent... Perhaps the D3100 is more appropriate in that respect. I would think that if you are not heavily invested in the Pentax system, the D3100 would be an option. If you just stay with the kit lenses (not a bad option with the k-x) or just add a fast prime, either system would be fine - my brother has a D3000 with a 35/1.8 Nikkor and he is happy.

08-31-2010, 12:46 PM	#8
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Originally posted by kinsale Besides the lenses being more expensive, how else would that hurt me? lens options. Basically if your going Nikon, my advice would be to pony up for a used D300 or in some cases D90.

08-31-2010, 12:47 PM	#9
sharathk Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 146	any entry level dslr in the market today should perform well enough for snapshot use. just that on k-x you can use any pentax lenses. but on D3100 you can use only lenses with auto focus motors. since D3100 doesn't have focus motor nor in camera stabilization. you pay for that thru every lens you buy.

08-31-2010, 02:00 PM	#10
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	how can anyone here or anywhere else be an expert when half he camera bodies you have mentioned have not even been released yet? Silly. Jason

08-31-2010, 02:24 PM	#11
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	My experience (as I have contemplated switching to Nikon, and abandoned that plan): A) Pentax lenses cover the most used ranges. B) Nikon has a few extra options in the budget lens category, but for the most part, their lenses cost more for the same features (e.g., image stabilization, specialty lens prices). C) Nikon has more to offer the professional photographer who is willing to spend 1000's on a lens. Considering that you are looking at the entry level cameras, I doubt you would be buying the products that Nikon has, but Pentax does not. You can buy the K-X or K-R with a it lens and cover all your general-use focal lengths, and you can buy the double-kit lens package which will give you a nice telephoto lens as well for animals or candids. That package is 700-800, and will likely give you everything you need for general-purpose photography. The standard kit lens (18-55 mm) is what you would be using for most purposes (the images will look similar to a persons point-of-view). If you are trying to save money and have fun, I would say the pentax K-X or K-R should fit the bill. Nikon is great buy if you forsee yourself being hired for jobs and renting specialty lenses, or spending a LOT of money to build yourself a very impressive kit. I would recommend buying an 18-55 kit lens at first (not the double lens package) to see what you like to shoot. You will likely be very happy with the 18-55 kit and not see any need to upgrade for quite some time. Price-performance ratio is Pentax, upgrade-ability options is Nikon. If this is just a hobby and you want the best value for your dollar, the K-X or K-R has lots more to offer over the D3100 or D3000. To get the most out of Nikon you need to spend the big bucks. But don't take my word for it... compare lenses on whatever camera store's website you will be using. Some will be more expensive some will be less, but in the range you will be shooting in, at the budget level, I believe Pentax offers more value.

08-31-2010, 04:55 PM	#12
kinsale Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: New Hampshire Posts: 50 Original Poster	I do recognize that the K-x fits the bill. I own a K100D which my wife is getting as a present. The problem is the K-x is not the all round camera I want it to be due to the video feature not being as good as say the D3100 or the A55. I know this is not always popular here but video is important to me as I only travel with one camera. I would not bring a camcorder and a camera with me anywhere. I just thought I would get peoples opinions of the merits of each system and I thank you for your inputs. Nikon does seem to have what I need in terms of lenses. If the K-r has what I need though I would prefer that.

08-31-2010, 05:36 PM	#13
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	Try the other brand. If you like it, then stick with it. As far as "I would not bring a camcorder and a camera with me anywhere", I would , just to get good footage. Cheers, Mike.

08-31-2010, 05:45 PM	#14
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Once again , if you are going with Nikon you really should be buying their more expensive bodies... I would go with the D90... the entry level cameras they sell are very crippled. Unless you only plan on using the kit lens.

08-31-2010, 05:47 PM	#15
Rory Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Chicago Photos: Gallery Posts: 672	Isn't the D3100 video capped at like 5 minutes or something? I thought I read that somewhere regarding the D5000. It was then that I ran into the K-x and bought that instead. I'm glad I did.