K-x or K-r dilemma

Hi guys,

I'm new to the forum and was wondering if you could help me out. I've never had a DSLR before and have decided on one of these two. My dilemma is I have a %15 discount for eBay and was going to buy from there and was looking at the following:

Pentax K-r 12.4 MP Digital SLR Camera - Black (Kit w/ PENTAX-DA L 18-55mm AL lens) - £330.65 with discount

PENTAX Kr (K-r) DSLR CAMERA TWIN LENS KIT 18-55 50-200 - £416.50 with discount

Pentax K-X 12.9 MP Digital SLR Camera - Black (Kit w/ Pentax 18-55mm and 50-200mm Lens) - £271.14 with discount (used with 3 month warranty)

My question is what would you recommend from the above bearing in mind that the K-x is used but comes with 2 lenses and is significantly cheaper but the K-r is the better of the 2 cameras? Are the differences worth the extra cost? What would you do in my position?

Cheers

ran1gers

I would take the first one. The 50-200mm from the twin lens kit isn't worth the extra £70 .. personally I would make do with the 18-55mm and buy a 55-300mm once funds allow.

K-r is quite a bit better than the K-x .. has faster af, focus points, lens adjustment and a few extra bits .. plus 12 months warranty.

If you buy it through SRSmicrosystems it will cost you a few pounds more but you get 2 years warranty and if you send him a message through ebay saying you are a forum member maybe even free postage as well.

Hi ran1gers,

Welcome to the Forum.

I'm going to agree with Mike - although I suppose I'm biased as I have a k-r.

I bought the k-r with the kit 18-55mm but I saved up and got a Sigma 70-300mm lens because of the macro ability.

I have no personal experience of the k-x but I looked at all the reviews I could find before deciding to spend the extra money on the k-r and I'm delighted with it.

Good luck, it's a difficult decision and a lot of money to spend, but I think in your situation I'd pay the extra money and buy a new camera with full warranty rather than a second hand one.

Kind regards
Charlotte

Deffo the first deal. You could put the difference toward a slightly better telephoto zoom.

Definitely the second one. The 50-200 gets a bad rap. It's an excellent lens for the money (in this case esp. for £70)....I would say only marginally inferior in IQ to the 55-300 (I have photos if you would like me to post them). And one of the really nice things.....it's extremely compact and light for a relatively long zoom.

ran1gers, I have the K-X and have been absolutely delighted with it, also purchased the 55-300mm separately and what a fantastic lens this is! One of the points above by mike-p is related to a post raised by me today in the forum and is slightly inaccurrate. YOU CAN calibrate the autofocus on a K-X, it's just that it is not mentioned in the manual and you need to unlock a secret menu to access it. Please see following link:

http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2010/01/k-x-debug-mode-tutorial-af-adjustment.html

I can't comment on the K-R but looking at the deals you have available I would agree with the other comments that the first K-R deal is the best.

Hi,

I was faced with a choice between the K-x and K-r 6 months ago. The K-x was still available new in January, and the K-r was a lot more money - at the time £130 more than the K-x.

I decided that although I had some PK lenses from film days I could use (having my old Tamron 80-210 ruled out the twin lens option for me), to save more of my budget for lenses and bought the K-x. I have not regretted this decision as I have since bought a few more lenses - including the Pentax DA 50-300 wich has more range and is a lot lighter than my old Tamron and a wide angle zoom. I hope this is not LBA (Lens Buying Affliction) as my original budget is almost spent

You are able to get the K-r for £20 less than I paid 6 months ago for the K-x and £150 less than the K-r was then - so I would say you should go for the first deal you mention.

Cheers,

Cheers guys, you've been a great help, looks like the first one is the winner.