Why is the KR so much more popular than the K7?


dinneenp

Link Posted 06/01/2012 - 10:28
Hi,
I had a KX, upgraded to the K7, which I love, even if it's not great in high ISO settings. It just has so many extra external buttons and switches which makes me think about settings, focus areas etc more as they're 'right there'. Also the top panel mini screen is very handy for quick glancing at I find.
I'm not bothered with the weather sealed as so few lenses are weather proof/sealed and I don't have any.

Obviously with the KR you have the better image quality at high ISO. Someone mentioned better AF trackig but I haven't found the K7 wanting.

2nd hand the K7 is cheaper than the KR (I think). But why do so few people have K7/why do people choose the KR over it?

(I'll upgrade to a K5 at some stage but will get a 'lens or two' before so it'll be at least a year.


Cheers,
Pa
Cheers,
Pa
http://www.photoblog.ie where every post have a musical reference as it's title.

steven9761

Link Posted 06/01/2012 - 10:41
I personally chose the Kr based upon price. I honestly don't think (at my skill level at least) it is neccessary for me to pay for a top-end camera. I am a firm believer however, that you only get what you pay for.

Frogfish

Link Posted 06/01/2012 - 10:46
The Kr is a generation ahead of the K7, has a newer sensor and far better low light/high ISO handling. If you don't need the WR then it's a great camera.
http://frogfish.smugmug.com/ Pentax. Pentax DA*300/4, Cosina 55/1.2, Lens Baby Composer Pro & Edge 80, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0

Helpful

wvbarnes

Link Posted 06/01/2012 - 10:59
I upgraded to the KR from the KX having come back to Pentax after owning a Canon G9.

I never considered the top models, although the K5 at a then high RRP had already replaced the K7 anyway back last April when I was buying. All reviews around December 2010 had said the High ISO/low noise performance of the K5 was way over that of the K7. The much cheaper then KR's Sony sensor was again similar to the fine one on the KX so that was my upgrade, sideways.

The KR is an extraordinary camera for the money. With three lenses I still have over 1100 worth of kit. Quite enough to fork out for an amateur although a lot on here are either rich or think their wives won't divorce them, yet
Last Edited by wvbarnes on 06/01/2012 - 11:00

Helpful

fritzthedog

Link Posted 06/01/2012 - 11:02
I suspect that actually you may be mistaken in the belief that people are choosing the Kr instead of the K7

They are both great cameras but are different animals with a different pedigree. The K7s predecessors were the K20 and K10. The KRs were the K100, K200 and Kx

Logically - Pentax Kx users may choose to upgrade to a Kr but K7 users are more likely to upgrade to a K5 - and as top of the range users tend to be early adopters of new models - logically many K7 owners may have sold them to move to a K5.

In some ways moving from a K7 to a Kr would be like downsizing your house.

I don't think it is about choosing a Kr instead of a K7 - I think its more about the Kr being a great entry level camera attracting attention from those seeking this level of camera - whereas those looking for the top of the range model - which the K7 was - will now select the K5 instead of the 7

Then of course you also get the 'greedy' one like me - who have both
No matter how many lenses I have owned - I have always needed just one more

Helpful

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 06/01/2012 - 12:30
Frogfish wrote:
The Kr is a generation ahead of the K7, has a newer sensor and far better low light/high ISO handling. If you don't need the WR then it's a great camera.

This is all very true! It comes down to personal preference and how much you value those external knobs and buttons, and the more robust build of the K7/5. Something nice about a metal camera too. However the ISO performance isn't as good, although it's plenty good enough for me! I sometimes think there is perhaps slightly too much emphasis put on noise and dynamic range at high ISO, although I do appreciate their importance.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

apeksdiver

Link Posted 06/01/2012 - 12:40
dinneenp wrote:

2nd hand the K7 is cheaper than the KR (I think). But why do so few people have K7/why do people choose the KR over it?

It's more about having some thing new with a guarantee, when it was repleased the K-7 was hailed as the best Pentax yet. Technology advances mean the lower models outperform it in some respects but it is still a great piece of kit with excellent build quality.

AndrewA

Link Posted 06/01/2012 - 23:18
For me, I wanted to buy new so price dictated.
I could afford both the Kx and Kr but couldn't justify the stretch to K7 or K5.
The Kr was the best new Pentax I could afford and I am really pleased with it, a few more s and I would have gone for the K7 - well I think I would have....
Andrew

"I'm here because the whiskey is free" - Tyla

PPG link
Flickr link

stub

Link Posted 07/01/2012 - 10:05
I upgraded from the K-x to a sexondhand K7, and very pleased that i did. Image quality is supeior and build quality far in excess of the K-x. I undesrstand the Kr owners accepting the greater Iso capabilities but the K7 is a class perdormer.
K-1Gripped K-1 ungripped K-5ii K7 Various lenses

Stuart..

George Lazarette

Link Posted 07/01/2012 - 11:20
Price

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

vrapan

Link Posted 07/01/2012 - 19:45
Price and size I think. Still have my D40 and love it cause no matter how compact the K-5 is the D40 + 35mm is just tiny and extremely light!

felix

Link Posted 08/01/2012 - 01:40
Price and size and technology. The Kx and Kr is newer than the K7 and the High ISO is better too. But the Kr is newer than the Kx.
K1/K3, DA*16-50mm F2.8, FA 31mm F1.8, FA43mm F1.9 Limited, FA77mm F1.8 Limited, SMC Pentax K 85mm F1.8, DA18-135mm F3.5-5.6, FA*28-70mm F1.8, FA*200mm F1.8

kancilpintar

Link Posted 08/01/2012 - 18:45
Well, during my search for my DSLR, it was harder to find K7 (new or used) so I opted to Kr. But certainly in my opinion, Kr looks more entry level friendly than the K7
Kr - DA 35mm

mcpieman

Link Posted 09/01/2012 - 13:37
I had a K10D for years, I bought a K-R just before Christmas, its gone back as the front focus in low light was awful (on mine anyway). I also missed the top LCD, front dial, and instant access to metering modes. I've just ordered a used K7, hopefully I'll be happier with that. The High ISO of the K-r was unusable to me as it wouldn't focus in the condition I would use it.

elaine73

Link Posted 10/01/2012 - 00:06
i had the k100d, but following a serious accident my camera equipment was total damaged, i am getting the kr soon, i saw it on holiday and decided that would be my next camera and reading reviews only helped me make that decision, i hope to get more lenses too
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.