Your thoughts on the Pentax K-r

[mojopixel]

Hi,

I'm a newbie when it comes to DSLRs and after a bit of research I was thinking about getting a Pentax K-r. I'm primarily interested in taking photos of landscapes and shots of the city at night and that's why I'm thinking of this particular camera.

Does anybody here have one and if so what do you think it's a good camera, especially for landscapes and low-light shots?

Thanks for your input,

P

 

[Hisdem]

If you want to take low light shots, I would recommend you take a look at the Nikon D3100, as it shows less noise than the K-r at high ISO. The D3100 is also around $100 cheaper, but has a slower max shutter speed, and half the boost ISO. Also, AFAIK Nikon has a much wider range of lenses available. If you would like to see a rough comparison, check these links.

D3100 x K-r

Rebel T2i x K-r

All of them are very good cameras though, so I'm sure you will be satisfied with whichever you choose!

 

[Phrasikleia]

I would recommend you take a look at the Nikon D3100...Also, AFAIK Nikon has a much wider range of lenses available.

Not quite true, especially when you consider all of the great and inexpensive manual focus lenses available for either camera. Vintage lenses for both Nikon and Pentax abound. I would be surprised if Pentax didn't have an equal range available.

 

[Hisdem]

Not quite true, especially when you consider all of the great and inexpensive manual focus lenses available for either camera. Vintage lenses for both Nikon and Pentax abound. I would be surprised if Pentax didn't have an equal range available.

Good point, I was just taking into account new AF lenses, my mistake. I'm also a newbie at this

 

[Abstract]

Sure, I'd recommend it. All DSLRs these days offer exceptional image quality. Pentax is smaller than Nikon, Canon, and Sony, so their cameras are all of very high quality and have lots of desirable features, even the basic models. And nobody makes pancake lenses quite like Pentax.

 

[Jason Beck]

And nobody makes pancake lenses quite like Pentax.

ajhahahajajahahah

 

[TheReef]

I've had experience with a few Pentax dSLRs and can only recommend them - they have great build quality, ergonomics and features and take great pics.
They're a much smaller company than Canon/Nikon and have more competitive offerings I think.

A nice feature is in-body shake reduction which means whatever lens you attach is stabilised, even old manual focus lenses (you can pick up some really high quality manual focus glass quite cheaply used).
For example you could pick up a fast 50mm manual (or AF) f/1.7 for f/1.4 lens and get the added bonus of shake reduction, a perfect combination for low light situations.
I once picked up a Pentax M 50mm f/1.4 from an op shop for $10! (I was very lucky at that price but just goes to show...).
Having shake reduction in the body keeps lens design simple and prices lower on new lenses.
I use a Pentax 12-24mm ultra wide lens, normally these lenses don't have inbuilt IS/VR as it isn't needed as much at ultra wide focal lengths, but nevertheless I find situations where it's a useful bonus to have for free that I wouldn't have got elsewhere.

Canon and Nikon do have big lens lineups but I feel there is more than enough choice from Pentax, they have an excellent range of superb small/pancake DA and FA limited lenses, high quality ultra wide, midrange and telephoto zooms and primes.
The 40mm f/2.8 pancake is little more than the thickness of a lens cap
In the much longer fast telephoto segment Pentax don't offer as much, these lenses are >$2k, 5k, 10k, very expensive and I think I'd be safe to say the majority of photographers in the segment wouldn't ever go near anything like these lenses in their photographic journeys.

For the purposes you describe, any dSLR offered today is more than capable of those things, the K-r has a great sensor well suited to low light. I would definitely factor in a tripod to whatever you purchase.
The Pentax kit lens is also a great performer, very sharp when stopped down for landscapes.

I think you'd be happy with the K-r

 

[bsamcash]

I have the Pentax K-r, and I have been a Pentaxian for a long time. It's an exceptional body, especially for beginners. And by the fact that you're questioning it, it's already apparent that you know a bit about the body and shopping around, so there's not much I can add. If you love primes get a Pentax. If you're a beginner on a budget, and you love indoor/lowlight shooting, get the K-r or K-x.

 

[compuwar]

Not quite true, especially when you consider all of the great and inexpensive manual focus lenses available for either camera. Vintage lenses for both Nikon and Pentax abound. I would be surprised if Pentax didn't have an equal range available.

Not in the super-tele range- which doesn't affect the OP, but does affect some of us. Old Pentax super-teles are very rare and expensive, and there's nothing new on the Pentax Web site over 300mm, and the best one there is only f/4.

You simply can't find 300/2.8, 400mm, 500mm or 600mm primes for Pentax other than the Sigma 300/2.8.

Paul