|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-24-2010, 10:07 AM
|
| |
Vincent--beautiful stuff!!!
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-22-2010, 05:40 AM
|
| |
There's a shooting mode called AF-C, which is continuous autofocus. So if you're aiming at a skier and hold the shutter button all the way down and keep it down, it will trip the shutter as soon as it locks in the first focus, and will take as many shots for as long as you hold the shutter down.
According to everything I've read, the K-r's autofocus speed is far superior to the K-x, allowing you to get a lot more pulls of the trigger than with the K-x for action shooting. So you'll get 3 shots with the K-x and 6 with the K-r. (The math is for an example only.)
In addition, there's something called HDR--high dynamic range. Your camera has a built-in HDR function, which isn't fantastic on the K-x, but the camera takes 3 shots of the same image at different exposures and processes them into one image, the resulting image with an exposure range that's hard to explain. (It's damn cool.)
The RIGHT way to do HDR is on a tripod, and simply take several images of a non-moving subject and "assemble" it later on your computer. (Since you're taking several shots, the subject can't be moving.) However, many of us just like to screw around and try to do HDR now and then handheld. It is my understanding, and I might be wrong, that the K-r's faster AF gives you HDR advantages as well.
As already mentioned, image quality and clean high ISO is going to be fairly comparable, with the K-r supposedly having an edge in at least ISO. However, this edge isn't big enough for you to really notice.
Mind you, I'm writing all of this as a K-x owner. I DO way prefer the convenience of AAs over proprietary batteries, and didn't even know that the K-r took proprietary until I read this thread. But if you buy yourself an extra pack or two, with good planning you're good to go.
Look--you'll be happy with both cameras. But I don't think I would downgrade to the K-x just to get the 55-300 NOW. For me personally, I would put my lens money/budget towards a good prime anyway, like the new 35, which you'll find is a much more useful walkaround lens than the 55-300.
And if you do concerts and birding, I would probably go for a quality, fast prime anyway over the 55-300. I never shot with the 55-300, but I'm pretty sure you can find a faster 300 prime.
Good luck!
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
12-21-2010, 08:26 AM
|
| |
Depending on what you shoot, I think the K-r's faster focus and how that allows for much faster AF-C shooting makes it worth the extra money.
|
