[elbronconegro]

I'm kidding, of course.

I am a P&S person ready to get serious and learn about photography. My wife gave me a Kelly Green K-x for Christmas (the only color available for <$500 at the time, and she didn't want to leave me empty-handed), and though it was very cool looking, I didn't want to draw any unwanted attention to myself as I started on my new hobby, so I opted to return it, for a classic black one.

After ordering a black K-x with 18-55 lens from GrandCentralPhoto.com for $400 out the door, and then cancelling that order (they are a notorious bait-and-switch outfit in NJ- maybe you've heard of them? Bastards!), I am now ready to get either the K-x -or now- the K-r with the 18-55/55-300 kit.

I've gone back and forth so many times about this and have read nearly every article, post, youtube video, and blog on the pros and cons of each rig.

I'm pretty sure the K-r is what I want, because I would like the option of using the AF points in the viewfinder, the higher max light sensitivity, the somewhat faster AF, and the 6fps burst capability. I do not care about the bigger screen (should I?).

I like the idea of the K-x as it seems to be a David to all the other model's Goliath. Its low-light performance bests the K-r. It packs almost all of the same features as the K-r for $100-$150 less (for the 2-lens kits). I'd feel smart owning the K-x.

The feature comparison of these two cameras has been beaten to death. It's been resurrected and beaten to death, again. I know the K-r appears to be better on paper.

So now for my real question(s):

Which one these cameras will help me be a better photographer, and better prepare me for an upgrade down the road (Pentax, of course) should I become a crazy shutterbug? Hypothetically speaking, if it were possible for a photographer to snap identical subjects with each of these cameras, with the same glass, conditions, settings, etc., would you be able to tell the difference between the two photos? If my son steals home at his tee-ball game and I try to capture the play at the plate, will that extra 1.3 fps the K-r has be the difference between getting the shot or not? What advantage is a higher ISO boost if the images you capture are noisy? If I went with the K-r, what would I wish I had with the K-x besides the $150 in my pocket?

Sorry so long-winded. I have no DSLR experience- can you tell?

Thanks for letting me in your club without a background check.

Regards,
elbronconegro

No Camera Yet
No Lens Yet

---

Last edited by elbronconegro; 02-24-2011 at 01:25 PM.

[Abstract]

if it were possible for a photographer to snap identical subjects with each of these cameras, with the same glass, conditions, settings, etc., would you be able to tell the difference between the two photos?

I highly doubt anyone would be able to tell the difference...

But as you stated the K-r has other features you seem interested in, are those features worth the extra 150? Thats up to you I would say, both seem like capable cameras.

[hawk1500]

I think the k-r and the k-x are pretty much the same in terms of high iso/low light performance. IMO, the extra 25600 ISO setting really doesn't do much. But you can get the K-r body for like $569 (or less now), which isn't bad at all. I got the 18-55mm and 55-300mm kit on Amazon for $749 during Christmas. Of course, the k-x with the 18-55mm is like $450 or less now.

[elbronconegro]

I highly doubt anyone would be able to tell the difference...

That's what I thought- thanks for the quick reply, Abstract.

[elbronconegro]

I think the k-r and the k-x are pretty much the same in terms of high iso/low light performance. IMO, the extra 25600 ISO setting really doesn't do much.

I appreciate your $0.02, hawk- thanks. More info to confuse me...

[Abstract]

You're welcome, No need to be confused about that, ISO 25600 is more of a gimmick/last resort if anything, its totally not needed, I would not give an extra point to the K-r for it at all.

[ptwist61]

I have had my K-x since Nov. 2009 Let me say its an awesome camera.

One of my favorite sites is the DxOmark in comparing sensors

I will bash on Canon and say that you have to pay lots of money to get a decent sensor, cuz the 20D,30D, 40D and 50D sensors suck...

All companies do is copy the same sensor into a different bodies at different price points

The K-x and K-r is the same sensor by Sony (same as the Nikon D90) Your getting a 1000 dollar sensor for less than half the price.

ISO performance is amazing. In low light settings, it excellent. You will push the limits of you kit lens eventually.

I love my DA*50-135 2.8(my first born)

Any 2.8 for lower 1.7 or 1.8 glass will get you a great image, in High ISO situations.

Look a the the Pentax Forums Marketplace for deals on used gear. you will save lots of money on excellent almost brand new items.

Get the two lens package, You will teach yourself about focal lengths and the way different lenses behave and min. focusing distance

If you want to save money, get the K-x, but if you want more features, get the K-r.

[Rondec]

The kr improvements are mostly non-iso improvements. Video is better, auto focus points exist, auto focus is faster, live view is faster, frames per second is faster, but as far as image quality of an individual shot taken with the Kx versus the Kr, you would be hard pressed to see the difference.

I personally use auto focus indicator lights a lot and while I am sure I could learn to live without them, that by itself would push me toward the kr over the kx.

[piesforyou]

I'm a k-x owner and I would say that there are a few things I would love to have in my k-x that the k-r has.

- Viewfinder AF points. If you want to use the 11 point autofocus, this is extremely handy. I always use centre point focus, re-compose because of this.
- The hi-res screen believe it or not is actually very useful for reviewing images, checking they are sharp, checking the right bit is in focus etc.
- I think i'm right in saying the K-r has a built in intervalometer function, something the k-x was supposed to have but they left out. I would love this.
- DFS can be turned off for longer exposures in bulb mode.
- AF - assist beam could be useful in some situations.

If I were in your boots I think I would probably stump up the extra dosh for the k-r.

[SPB]

I'm kidding, of course.
Which one these cameras will help me be a better photographer, and better prepare me for an upgrade down the road (Pentax, of course) Regards,elbronconegro

Either of them will do the trick and neither will make you a better photographer! Only what is behind the camera will do that, once you have gained experience of using which ever of the two cameras you decide for.

[ewig]

Which is better, the K-x or 645D?

i think you should choose K-x ... because 645D is too big .. just let me know if you want to sell your 645d

[einstrigger]

Hey, I was a K-x user who moved to the K-r. Having owned the K-x for a year, I figured I knew the type of images I could get with the K-r would be similar. The AF illuminated points, AF assist light, and interval shooting (time lapse) are really great features to have. The first two probably being more important than the last, because both cameras use pentamirrors to save cost. This equates to a small and dark viewfinder when taking pictures at night, making it more difficult to get things in focus. This frustrated me quite often with the K-x and now less so with the K-r.

[elbronconegro]

Which is better, the K-x or 645D?

i think you should choose K-x ... because 645D is too big .. just let me know if you want to sell your 645d

It's funny to think you could get 20 K-x's for the price of a 645D... you could build a frame that holds four rows of five K-x's, rig them so they all snap at the same time, fuse all the photos together, and then you'd have a 240MP image...6X the resolution of the 645D.

[mycarsoots]

I recently purchased a K-r to complement my K10d, since the K10d is a poor low light performer. The main reason that I chose the K-r over the K-x was the high resolution lcd screen. It really does help you determine if sharpness is up to par. It is much better than the screen on the K10d.

[Pablom]

I recommend you just buy a camera already because you WILL NOT be disapointed with either choice and all these days without photography are far more costly than the subtle differences between these cameras