Help me choose

ronyzmbow · 07-07-2011, 10:44 PM

My son of 28 is interested more and more in Photography and find it difficult to choose between Pentax cameras - the Pentax K-R and the Pentax K10D. The K-R is brand new and for half the price he can get a K-10D that took about 1000 images. He is only interested in quality images and not in any video features. The K-5 is out of question because of high price. What would you recommend?

hcc · 07-07-2011, 10:57 PM

There are pros and cons to each option. Both cameras are well-regarded overall and you cannot get much wrong.

The K-r has a newer more performant sensor and AF. If you are definite that your son loves photography, the K-r is a good option as long as he does not need WR.

On the other hand, the K10D is a good starting point, with a nice WR camera body and more in-camera controls. The savings (with the K10d) may allow you to buy him some good lenses that he will be able to re-use once he upgrade to a newer camera.

It is too often understated that the lenses are more important than the body. Good glass is worth every penny. Better glass than body... So many says which reflect the plain fact that a good lens is more important than a good body.

For example, I just come back from holidays in family. My nephews used a K100d and I showed them how to use a couple of good lenses (FA50mm f2.8, FA*300 f4.5). They were amazed by the outputs compared to their basic lens (Sigma 18-125mm). Until you use some good-quality lenses, you would not know what you miss.

I hope that the comment will assist for now...

Mr. B · 07-07-2011, 11:25 PM

K10 is better in terms of control - more buttons/switches are on the body. On the K-r, they're in the menus. On the other hand, the K-r is better in performance, it has a few stops better high ISO, faster AF...

I was very happy with my K10 and I kinda miss it. But you can't go wring with either of them. And the part about the lenses is also correct.

JohnBee · 07-07-2011, 11:35 PM

What about the K200 or K20D?

Ben E · 07-08-2011, 02:23 AM

As much as I like the K-r, I would say that he should get the K10D and use the money he saved on lenses, like others have said.

RioRico · 07-08-2011, 08:53 AM

Some oversimplifications: The K10D is for work, the Kr is for fun. The K10D is excellent in stable situations: studio, landscape, portrait, macro, set scenes. The Kr is great for dynamic situations: action, wildlife, low light, impromptus. The heavier K10D has better controls, and tethering. The lighter Kr has more in-camera features, and video (which you say is unimportant now -- but desires change). For serious tripod work, the K10D. For spontaneous handheld shooting, the Kr.

Yes, vast oversimplifications. See the reviews and comparisons for actual information.

My personal preference: I love my K20D, a perfected K10D, with a different sensor. I love its ruggedness and controls and what it delivers. I wouldn't mind having a K10D also, but I would rather supplement what I have with the smaller Kr, for its immensely better high-ISO quality.

cbaytan · 07-08-2011, 01:15 PM

Originally posted by JohnBee

What about the K200 or K20D?

Second.

newarts · 07-08-2011, 04:42 PM

For me an almost over-riding consideration is low light performance because I find I'm often limited by light for ad-hoc indoor sports, home, theater, Bistros, birds in the forest, etc... But that's me. He might be different and want mostly pre-set situations where lighting can be planned.

A few stops extra ISO is valuable to me as I can get by with less expensive lenses.

Nomad · 07-08-2011, 04:55 PM

Save some $$ and get a k-x for the price of a k10d and it will actually focus indoors too!!

newarts · 07-08-2011, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by Nomad

Save some $$ and get a k-x for the price of a k10d and it will actually focus indoors too!!

Yes. A superb cost-effective starting kit would be a K-x, DA(L)18-55mm, DA(L)50-300mm, and Raynox DCR 150 close-up attachment. You might do this for $600usd used.

This will give excellent results over an extremely wide range of hand-held photo situations - from dim to bright and from mosquito sized to a bluebird far away or a goal at the other end of the pitch.

epqwerty · 07-08-2011, 05:28 PM

Doesn't the answer to his question really depend on how and what he shoots? If low light or night time photography is the main type then I'd go with the Kr over the k10d. However if it is for portraits and studio type I would think the k10d is better suited over the Kr. Ideally I would go with the cheapest option on body within reason and spend the extra cash on the lens as bodies become less impressive with passing years whereas a lens will stay relatively useful for many many years such as the fa 31 ltd. That's the route I'm taking as a hobbyist. Km which I bought over 1.5 years ago for 400 plus kit lens. Compared to getting the kx at the time for 700.

GibbyTheMole · 07-08-2011, 05:48 PM

Originally posted by Nomad

Save some $$ and get a k-x for the price of a k10d and it will actually focus indoors too!!

Good idea, there. I'm positively nuts about my K-x. From what I gather, the K-r & K-x are extremely similar cameras.

Originally posted by newarts

A superb cost-effective starting kit would be a K-x, DA(L)18-55mm, DA(L)50-300mm, and Raynox DCR 150 close-up attachment. You might do this for $600usd used.

That would be exactly what I'd recommend, too. (BTW - I notice you're in Ames, Iowa. I'm in Oskaloosa... So howdy, fellow Iowan!)

newarts · 07-08-2011, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by GibbyTheMole

.... I'm in Oskaloosa... So howdy, fellow Iowan!)

Yay Oski!

Go Indians! Cream the Dutch!

We have to play Dowling

ronyzmbow · 07-10-2011, 10:15 AM

I just won a Pentax K-10D in Ebay UK for 270 GBP! The camera is like new - only 700 images! I am so excited to use it! Any advices and tips are more than welcomed!

07-07-2011, 10:44 PM	#1
ronyzmbow Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Denmark Posts: 50	Help me choose My son of 28 is interested more and more in Photography and find it difficult to choose between Pentax cameras - the Pentax K-R and the Pentax K10D. The K-R is brand new and for half the price he can get a K-10D that took about 1000 images. He is only interested in quality images and not in any video features. The K-5 is out of question because of high price. What would you recommend?

07-07-2011, 10:57 PM	#2
hcc Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,002	There are pros and cons to each option. Both cameras are well-regarded overall and you cannot get much wrong. The K-r has a newer more performant sensor and AF. If you are definite that your son loves photography, the K-r is a good option as long as he does not need WR. On the other hand, the K10D is a good starting point, with a nice WR camera body and more in-camera controls. The savings (with the K10d) may allow you to buy him some good lenses that he will be able to re-use once he upgrade to a newer camera. It is too often understated that the lenses are more important than the body. Good glass is worth every penny. Better glass than body... So many says which reflect the plain fact that a good lens is more important than a good body. For example, I just come back from holidays in family. My nephews used a K100d and I showed them how to use a couple of good lenses (FA50mm f2.8, FA300 f4.5). They were amazed by the outputs compared to their basic lens (Sigma 18-125mm). Until you use some good-quality lenses, you would not know what you miss. I hope that the comment will assist for now... Last edited by hcc; 07-07-2011 at 11:32 PM.*

07-08-2011, 08:53 AM	#6
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Some oversimplifications: The K10D is for work, the Kr is for fun. The K10D is excellent in stable situations: studio, landscape, portrait, macro, set scenes. The Kr is great for dynamic situations: action, wildlife, low light, impromptus. The heavier K10D has better controls, and tethering. The lighter Kr has more in-camera features, and video (which you say is unimportant now -- but desires change). For serious tripod work, the K10D. For spontaneous handheld shooting, the Kr. Yes, vast oversimplifications. See the reviews and comparisons for actual information. My personal preference: I love my K20D, a perfected K10D, with a different sensor. I love its ruggedness and controls and what it delivers. I wouldn't mind having a K10D also, but I would rather supplement what I have with the smaller Kr, for its immensely better high-ISO quality. Last edited by RioRico; 07-08-2011 at 08:27 PM.

07-08-2011, 07:03 PM	#13
newarts Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Ames, Iowa, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 2,965	Originally posted by GibbyTheMole .... I'm in Oskaloosa... So howdy, fellow Iowan!) Yay Oski! Go Indians! Cream the Dutch! We have to play Dowling Last edited by newarts; 07-08-2011 at 07:11 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The Politics of Fashion Part 21 Choose Your Camp and Choose it Well	benjikan	Photographic Industry and Professionals	2	05-24-2011 11:20 AM
Help me choose the next one !	deadprez	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	05-18-2011 05:34 PM
Which one to choose... need help	okita	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	9	03-18-2010 12:58 AM
you choose	deadprez	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	09-01-2009 12:39 PM
Which would you choose?	PaddlesUp	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	07-19-2009 01:46 PM

07-07-2011, 11:25 PM	#3
Mr. B Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Varaždin, Croatia, Europe Photos: Gallery Posts: 295	K10 is better in terms of control - more buttons/switches are on the body. On the K-r, they're in the menus. On the other hand, the K-r is better in performance, it has a few stops better high ISO, faster AF... I was very happy with my K10 and I kinda miss it. But you can't go wring with either of them. And the part about the lenses is also correct.

07-07-2011, 11:35 PM	#4
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	What about the K200 or K20D?

07-08-2011, 02:23 AM	#5
Ben E Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Israel Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 177	As much as I like the K-r, I would say that he should get the K10D and use the money he saved on lenses, like others have said.

07-08-2011, 01:15 PM	#7
cbaytan Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Trabzon/Turkey Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,010	Originally posted by JohnBee What about the K200 or K20D? Second.

07-08-2011, 04:42 PM	#8
newarts Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Ames, Iowa, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 2,965	For me an almost over-riding consideration is low light performance because I find I'm often limited by light for ad-hoc indoor sports, home, theater, Bistros, birds in the forest, etc... But that's me. He might be different and want mostly pre-set situations where lighting can be planned. A few stops extra ISO is valuable to me as I can get by with less expensive lenses.

07-08-2011, 04:55 PM	#9
Nomad Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Maine Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 408	Save some $$ and get a k-x for the price of a k10d and it will actually focus indoors too!!

07-08-2011, 05:15 PM	#10
newarts Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Ames, Iowa, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 2,965	Originally posted by Nomad Save some $$ and get a k-x for the price of a k10d and it will actually focus indoors too!! Yes. A superb cost-effective starting kit would be a K-x, DA(L)18-55mm, DA(L)50-300mm, and Raynox DCR 150 close-up attachment. You might do this for $600usd used. This will give excellent results over an extremely wide range of hand-held photo situations - from dim to bright and from mosquito sized to a bluebird far away or a goal at the other end of the pitch.

07-08-2011, 05:28 PM	#11
epqwerty Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Ontario Posts: 550	Doesn't the answer to his question really depend on how and what he shoots? If low light or night time photography is the main type then I'd go with the Kr over the k10d. However if it is for portraits and studio type I would think the k10d is better suited over the Kr. Ideally I would go with the cheapest option on body within reason and spend the extra cash on the lens as bodies become less impressive with passing years whereas a lens will stay relatively useful for many many years such as the fa 31 ltd. That's the route I'm taking as a hobbyist. Km which I bought over 1.5 years ago for 400 plus kit lens. Compared to getting the kx at the time for 700.

07-08-2011, 05:48 PM	#12
GibbyTheMole Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Iowa Photos: Albums Posts: 2,275	Originally posted by Nomad Save some $$ and get a k-x for the price of a k10d and it will actually focus indoors too!! Good idea, there. I'm positively nuts about my K-x. From what I gather, the K-r & K-x are extremely similar cameras. Originally posted by newarts A superb cost-effective starting kit would be a K-x, DA(L)18-55mm, DA(L)50-300mm, and Raynox DCR 150 close-up attachment. You might do this for $600usd used. That would be exactly what I'd recommend, too. (BTW - I notice you're in Ames, Iowa. I'm in Oskaloosa... So howdy, fellow Iowan!)

07-10-2011, 10:15 AM	#14
ronyzmbow Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Denmark Posts: 50 Original Poster	I just won a Pentax K-10D in Ebay UK for 270 GBP! The camera is like new - only 700 images! I am so excited to use it! Any advices and tips are more than welcomed!