Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 13, 2010, 2:03 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: tr
Posts: 224
Default k-x or k-r?

Hello,

Price is anounced for itself and with 18-55mm wideangle lenses but it isn't delivered to stores yet.

There are owners of k-x who generally say they will stick with k-x and no need to upgrade also there are some of us tells k-r would be between k-7 and k-x and can be replaced with k-x without hesitation.

As DSLR starter i believe Pentax machines gives us good prices with a lot of features.

Would you suggest k-r over k-x?
imut is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 13, 2010, 2:39 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Zuken's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 175
Default

Sorry, can't tell. It will be better if you wait for reviews on K-r and then compare. I own a K-x and I am really happy with it.
__________________
Armando
PentaxK-x
Kit lens 18-55mm
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro Autofocus
http://razzi.me/zuken
Zuken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2010, 2:45 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: tr
Posts: 224
Default

If you look at spesifications (not reviews) of both cameras, is there anything missing important in k-x which will be completed with the release of k-r?
imut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2010, 3:21 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
John.Pattullo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 613
Default

the k-r is definately a superior camera and if you can afford the difference then get the k-r but since the k-r was announced the k-x has dropped even further and is still a very good camera

then again you'll be sacrificing a month or more of photographic fun - so its upto you
__________________
Flickr
PENTAX K-5 & PENTAX K-7
Pentax-DA 12-24mm f4 | Pentax-DA* 16-50mm f2.8 | Pentax-A 50mm f1.4 | Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro | Pentax-DA* 60-250mm f4 | Sigma 150-500mm
Pentax Photo Gallery
John.Pattullo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2010, 3:32 PM   #5
Member
 
mgvh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 30
Default

I just went through the same deliberation and ended up buying the Kx w/ the 18-55 and 50-300 for $628.

a) The Kr list price for the same 2 lens kit is $999. When the Kx was released, the list price for this kit was $849. So, the Kr is not really a replacement but also something of a step up. Prices will undoubtedly doubt drop on the Kr, but I'm guessing that this kit will probably be $800-$850 range after Christmas. SO, even if I waited until then, it would still be about a $200 difference between the Kx kit now (at $628) or the Kr then. Yes, the Kr is nicer and has addressed some of the concerns with the Kx, but I can live with the Kx issues, and I couldn't justify the $200 difference.
b) I have a trip planned for January, and I need some time to figure out how to use the camera properly, so I couldn't really wait till after Christmas...
mgvh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2010, 3:45 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

There's a couple of fairly major advantages with the K-r over the Kx. Whether those advantages are worth the extra money to someone who doesn't have either camera depends on that person and what they like/need.

KR advantages include specified 6 fps - faster than the K7 and significantly faster than the Kx's specified 4.7. That's a feature that will mean more to sports shooters and birders than it will to landscape and macro photographers.

Kr has focus point indicators in the viewfinder, something missing on the Kx. That's not important to someone who only uses center point focusing, but really huge for someone who frequently changes their focus point and doesn't necessarily remember which one is set.

Kr uses a different AF system. It remains to be seen whether it really IS better than the Kx focus system, but that's been a weakness of Pentax for a long time and I wouldn't be surprised if the difference is significant. This would be welcome by everyone, but most especially by people who shoot action. Those who shoot with mostly with manual focus lenses and macro shooters won't be particularly concerned about the AF system.

The Kr has a separate focus assist lamp, to help you focus in low light. Having just played around with my K-7 and seeing it's focus assist lamp in action, that's a very welcome addition to anyone who uses AF in very low light situations. Those who use their cameras mostly outdoors in good light won't be as interested in that.

The Kr has extended ISO levels. The Kx has excellent low-light capability and it remains to be seen whether the extended ISO settings will be useable except when it's absolutely necessary. Those who need faster shutter speeds in low light would be more interested in this than someone who can use a tripod in low light situations. I'm not yet convinced this is a real advantage for the Kr, but it may be.

The Kr's big LCD is a big advantage. I didn't think it made much difference until I got a K-7, then I do think it's significant.

The Kr comes with a proprietary rechargeable battery but can use AA batteries with an adaptor - to me that's great. While I prefer the proprietary rechargeable batteries, many prefer AA and this camera gives you the option to go either way.

There's probably other things I've missed that might be important to some (some of the new processing options for one). But I think what I've listed are the biggest advantages to the Kr over the Kx.

The biggest advantage the Kx has over the Kr is price.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2010, 3:58 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
John.Pattullo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 613
Default

think its probably fair to say the ONLY advantage the kx has over the kr is price assuming the low light performance is at least as good as the k-x and i would expect it to be that or more likley better - after all the iso 12800 is geniune setting not expanded so would think at equivalent settings it should be at least 1 stop better performance - but never know thigns dont always work like that
__________________
Flickr
PENTAX K-5 & PENTAX K-7
Pentax-DA 12-24mm f4 | Pentax-DA* 16-50mm f2.8 | Pentax-A 50mm f1.4 | Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro | Pentax-DA* 60-250mm f4 | Sigma 150-500mm
Pentax Photo Gallery
John.Pattullo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2010, 4:39 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
penolta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California USA
Posts: 5,206
Default

For a first time learner the K-x may be all that is needed, and then some people also may prefer the wider selection of body colors available now for the K-x. On the other hand, the K-r will allow for more growth, and more colors will eventually be available, but they are not here now.
__________________
.
.
If life brings you lemons, you can make lemonade.
penolta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2010, 9:51 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: East Central Vermont
Posts: 1,890
Default

Mtngal summarized the extra features of the Kr over the Kx very well. A bit more than a year ago I faced a similar dilemma: my K 100 was starting to act funny, and the K7 had just been announced to replace the K20. the K20 had a reputation as a sloid workhorse of a camera, with a few weakneses. The K7 had several new features that seriously improved on the K20. The K7 was clearly the better camera, but the K20 was being discounted so it was a great value. I thought for a while, and eventually decided on the better value. I'm very happy with my K20.

Only you can decide whether the Kx or the Kr is the right choice for you. But take heart knowing that the Kx is an excellent camera, and the Kr is probably better still. Either way, you'll end up with a great camera.
mtnman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2010, 10:00 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

If you are not in a rush, then waiting to see how the k-r performs would be a nice thing. You will see the reviews of how the new features performs. And if it is not stellar, you still can get the K-x then. But I think the k-r will be a excellent performer. So when you are ready, you will have a new problem, is the cost of the k-r with the 2 lens good enough to make the fantastic price of the k-x not tempting
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:47 AM.