Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-09-2010, 07:34 PM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 214
Would you upgrade from a K-x to a K-7 or keep the K-x and buy a DA* 50-135mm

I have a K-x and was thinking of buying a K-7 but also want a DA* 50-135mm Lens which would be awesome for portraits which is what I shoot and will shoot weddings also so good ISO performance would be important. Would you rather upgrade from the K-x to a K-7 or keep the K-x and buy the DA* 50-135mm? My current lens with my K-x is a Tamron 28-75mm F2.8.

09-09-2010, 07:57 PM   #2
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,206
QuoteOriginally posted by crossover37 Quote
I have a K-x and was thinking of buying a K-7 but also want a DA* 50-135mm Lens which would be awesome for portraits which is what I shoot and will shoot weddings also so good ISO performance would be important. Would you rather upgrade from the K-x to a K-7 or keep the K-x and buy the DA* 50-135mm? My current lens with my K-x is a Tamron 28-75mm F2.8.
All your reasons lead to buying the DA* 50-135mm. What reasons do you have to upgrade to the K-7?

Personally, I'd do what you are suggesting. Better bodies will come out in the future, while lenses will stick around.
09-09-2010, 08:02 PM   #3
Veteran Member
future_retro's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 572
I'd totally keep the Kx and get the lens, I people can't say enough good things about that lens, and can't say enough bad things about the K7's high ISO performance (lack thereof)

I've had a Kx and K7, and everything you hear about the ISO's are true, the Kx is incredible, and the K7 kind stinks

The best thing for me about the K7 is the WR and the stereo connector for video if you're into that thing

It doesn't seem like you have any reason to upgrade to the K7 and every reason to keep the Kx and get that awesome lens
09-09-2010, 08:15 PM   #4
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 214
Original Poster
Cool thanks for the input guys. I wish the build quality of the k-x would be like the k-7 and it was bigger. My k-x just seems so small and doesn't look professional and I wonder if people would question the camera if I shot a wedding....I'd like focus indicators too and an auto focus assist lamp.

09-09-2010, 08:15 PM   #5
Veteran Member
KxBlaze's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,594
Definitely keep the Kx and get the lens. What versatility you gain from the lens greatly outweighs what you gain with a new body an no new lens.
09-09-2010, 08:29 PM   #6
Veteran Member
future_retro's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 572
The DA 50-135 is a huge lens with a gold ring, a window for the distance scale and a petal shaped lens hood, also the Kx shutter is as loud as an atom bomb, I don't think anyone will question your appearance

if you're really worried about appearances though you could just use a flash bracket and a TTL cord and gain some instant "oooooh ahhhh" cred
09-09-2010, 09:25 PM   #7
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 214
Original Poster
Lol the kx looks really tiny with my tamron, i cant imagine how it'd look with the 50-135mm, that loud shutter on the kx is too loud and could do without the loud slapping. It's not very discreet if you shooting the ceremony at a wedding.
09-09-2010, 10:41 PM   #8
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
That lens will work with any ASP-C body, while the K7 will only last you so long.

Buy the lens and kick some butt, the KX is an awesome cam.

09-09-2010, 11:00 PM   #9
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,687
You'll need a decent telephoto for weddings as 75mm won't cut it - it'd be either the 50-135 or get a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 IMO. Enjoy deciding.
09-09-2010, 11:25 PM   #10
Veteran Member
lurchlarson's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oregon, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 683
Go with the 50-135. It'll last you longer.
09-10-2010, 01:50 AM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Var, South of France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,071
Well, maybe you can get some 2nd hand K7 and Tamron 70-200 for not so much above the 50-135 price tag?
This way you'll have two bodies with really good lenses and a continuous, non-overlapping 28-200 range... This is a must for weddings, where you don't really have time to swap lenses...
I'd pair them this way : K7+28-75 and Kx+70-200... I know, the Kx will look like the lens rear cap at this point, but his way you'll get an even use of the iso capabilities of both cameras.

I'd say that you're looking at around 1100€ used for the K7-tamron set against 950€ new for the 50-135... Well worth it in my view.
09-10-2010, 04:24 AM   #12
Forum Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 62
I wasn't contemplating a switch to the K7, but I did just get that lens, and it is totally worth it over a body upgrade. If the K-x is not limiting you in some functional way, think about upgrading later. When you do decide to, you will have that lens in your kit already.
09-10-2010, 05:12 AM   #13
Pentaxian
wizofoz's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Melbourne, Outer east.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,655
The K-7 is so much a better camera than the k-x, its just not funny. I have both. The K-x is a toy in comparison, and I don't mean just because of the candy colours. Yep it has a better high ISO response. Thats it. The K-7 FEELS like a real camera, it ACTS like a real camera, it PERFORMS like a real camera, it has all manual controls like a real camera. It doesn't bother itself with PnS type gimmicks on the dial. There is no comparison between them. The K-x is tiny, any lens greater in weight than the stock 18-55 is out of balance. I have a large selection of lenses, would I mount a long lens on the k-x? no way, it is just a silly proposition.

The K-x is a wonderful entry level camera, possibly at its time, the best ever at the level, but it is not a patch on the use and durability of a k-7. I'll take the noise/grain of higher ISO every time over the tiny/toy feel of the k-x.
09-10-2010, 05:52 AM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 203
QuoteOriginally posted by wizofoz Quote
The K-7 is so much a better camera than the k-x, its just not funny. I have both. The K-x is a toy in comparison, and I don't mean just because of the candy colours. Yep it has a better high ISO response. Thats it. The K-7 FEELS like a real camera, it ACTS like a real camera, it PERFORMS like a real camera, it has all manual controls like a real camera. It doesn't bother itself with PnS type gimmicks on the dial. There is no comparison between them. The K-x is tiny, any lens greater in weight than the stock 18-55 is out of balance. I have a large selection of lenses, would I mount a long lens on the k-x? no way, it is just a silly proposition.

The K-x is a wonderful entry level camera, possibly at its time, the best ever at the level, but it is not a patch on the use and durability of a k-7. I'll take the noise/grain of higher ISO every time over the tiny/toy feel of the k-x.
+1
09-10-2010, 06:45 AM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Albums
Posts: 612
QuoteOriginally posted by crossover37 Quote
Cool thanks for the input guys. I wish the build quality of the k-x would be like the k-7 and it was bigger. My k-x just seems so small and doesn't look professional and I wonder if people would question the camera if I shot a wedding....I'd like focus indicators too and an auto focus assist lamp.
The only people to whom it will matter are people that are "into" photography and try to justify their investment. Uncle Dan will say "A Pentax K-x! And you're supposed to be a photographer?! I spent ten grand on a Nikon D3 kit!")

Just ignore them. To the bride, groom, and everyone else that cares about the photos, the camera makes absolutely no difference. I know of at least one photographer who makes her living shooting weddings using nothing but DISPOSABLE cameras, it's part of her style. Her name escapes me at the moment, but she's a fairly famous photographer.
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!
50-135mm, camera, da*, dslr, k-7, k-x, lens, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Impulse Buy - Takunar 135mm f/3.5 Nick Siebers Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 09-10-2010 10:00 AM
Upgrade from 16-45mm to 12-24mm or 50-135mm? AirSupply Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 01-22-2010 08:06 PM
SIGMA 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM Lens for PENTAX:To buy or not to buy? thelittlecar Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 12-31-2009 06:01 AM
where to buy a 50-135mm online? kauaiguy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 09-22-2009 04:42 PM
Do not buy DxO Optics Pro if you have a K20D and shoot in DNG Derridale Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 2 05-05-2008 07:02 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:33 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