Upgrading Kr
Posted 08/05/2013 - 16:26 - Helpful Comment
Link
I think you might find the K-7 and K20D to be a bit slow and/or noisy compared to your K-r, so at least the K-5 and maybe II or IIs would be a good upgrade path.
Best regards, John
Posted 08/05/2013 - 16:27
Link
I thought the same. Would that only apply at higher ISOs?
johnriley wrote:
I think you might find the K-7 and K20D to be a bit slow and/or noisy compared to your K-r, so at least the K-5 and maybe II or IIs would be a good upgrade path.
I think you might find the K-7 and K20D to be a bit slow and/or noisy compared to your K-r, so at least the K-5 and maybe II or IIs would be a good upgrade path.
Posted 08/05/2013 - 16:30 - Helpful Comment
Link
More so to higher ISOs. I'm happy with the K20D at ISO400, but prefer it at ISO200. The K-5 I can use up to ISO1600 without any worry about it.
Best regards, John
Posted 08/05/2013 - 16:32
Link
THanks John. THat is significant! Mac
johnriley wrote:
More so to higher ISOs. I'm happy with the K20D at ISO400, but prefer it at ISO200. The K-5 I can use up to ISO1600 without any worry about it.
More so to higher ISOs. I'm happy with the K20D at ISO400, but prefer it at ISO200. The K-5 I can use up to ISO1600 without any worry about it.
Posted 08/05/2013 - 16:36
Link
Given the helpful posts from John, does the K7 suffer as much in comparison?
Mac
Mac
Posted 08/05/2013 - 17:05
Link
Gosh
John replied helpfully!
If I want to shoot at low ISO does it matter????
Mac
John replied helpfully!
If I want to shoot at low ISO does it matter????
Mac
Posted 08/05/2013 - 20:28
Link
Simonmac wrote:
If I want to shoot at low ISO does it matter???? Mac
If I want to shoot at low ISO does it matter???? Mac
No, not so much, but why would you always want to shoot at low ISO? It kind of defeats the object of having a capable camera and you have already said 'that is significant' to John's reply about not having to worry with the IQ on a K-5 up to 1600 ISO.
Regards
David
Posted 08/05/2013 - 20:37
Link
As you have ruled out the lower priced but admirable K-30 it seems a simple choice between the K5 or the K5 II if you can afford the considerable extra cost.
Posted 08/05/2013 - 20:46
Link
Sorry, I got a bit tetchy there!
davidstorm wrote:
No, not so much, but why would you always want to shoot at low ISO? It kind of defeats the object of having a capable camera and you have already said 'that is significant' to John's reply about not having to worry with the IQ on a K-5 up to 1600 ISO.
Regards
David
Simonmac wrote:
If I want to shoot at low ISO does it matter???? Mac
If I want to shoot at low ISO does it matter???? Mac
No, not so much, but why would you always want to shoot at low ISO? It kind of defeats the object of having a capable camera and you have already said 'that is significant' to John's reply about not having to worry with the IQ on a K-5 up to 1600 ISO.
Regards
David
Posted 08/05/2013 - 22:04 - Helpful Comment
Link
K30 nowt wrong with them and for the price they were a few months ago the deal of the decade.K-r still use mine loads along with the K30 the weather ain't that bad used the k-r waist deep in the North sea before and no probs as long as you are care full.Plus the batteries and adaptors are the same so no mucking about. I can use the same power source(AA) for both camera's,flash,radio and torch plus only need one charger.
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
716 posts
14 years
Birmingham
I've been here before with the K100d.
Happy with the image quality of the K-r. More so now that I am using RAW.
Weather sealing has now become important to me because of the UK's crappy weather!
I am looking at K5, K20 and K7. Not the K30 as I am not a fan of its shape. Petty, but feel is important to me!
Any thoughts?
Thanks, as always.
Mac
www.500px.com/simac