K-x Vs. K-r Vs. K5


sircam

New Member
May 21, 2007
731
0
0
#1
Just finished doing a side-by-side IQ comparison test with all three cameras - K-x Vs. K-r Vs. K5.

Funny thing is I cannot understand why the older K-x still beats the newer K-r in terms of pure IQ alone... by a small margin though. The K-r is quite close though.

So for those selling their K-x thinking they will somehow get better IQ from the newer K-r... be warned.

I think Pentax has wisely positioned these three cameras in their current lineup. They all have great IQ... and the K5 is only noticeably better when I shoot RAW and stretch the Dynamic Range to an extreme in PP. For all practical purposes, all these three cameras have fantastic sensors capable of some really great High ISO images. I rarely feel the need to do such extreme stretching in PP anyway.

I'd only advise investing in the K-r if you are a heavy K-x user and would like the extra feature set that it offers. I think the price difference is definitely worth it. But if you are thinking you will obtain better IQ from the sensor output alone... the K-x is actually slightly better in this regard between the two!

I'm offering my K-r to a friend because of this. I think I will keep my K-x as a backup/second Pentax DSLR and now purchase the K5 instead... because it offers all that the K-r does... plus a whole lot more!

The highly capable and well positioned K-x + K-r + K5 trio from Pentax will most probably take Pentax a notch higher in terms of global market share.
 

Last edited:

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#2
sircam, you base these on your own personal tests? i hope you are not using..... dxomark
 

rocaway

New Member
Mar 6, 2010
197
0
0
#3
I don't have a K-r but I think that whatever differences between it and the K-x will be marginal and thus slight differences could probably be explained as sample deviation. Pretty much the same sensor right?
 

wilflare

New Member
Nov 17, 2010
6
0
0
#6
haha! inclining me towards the k-x as my first dslr eh.
 

sircam

New Member
May 21, 2007
731
0
0
#8
Yup... a personal test was done because I do not trust the results from tests done by others! Need to see with my own eyes. Very basic test i.e. same scene, same composition, same illumination, same lens and similar camera settings. I discount the minor variations which are but natural in such testing. As far as I can tell... these three cameras are nearly the same for everyday generic shooting... which is a great thing for Pentaxians on a budget. Almost similar IQ for everyday shooting with generic settings. Cameras primarily differentiated by feature-set... not by quality of IQ for newbies considering which camera to buy!

The K5 does show a definite edge in my PP work-flow however. Which is why I am attracted to it. Along with its other useful features such as 100% viewfinder, considerably quieter shutter, weather resistant body, etc.

The K-x and K-r are almost the same in output. Very difficult to tell them apart unless I pixel peep and resort to extreme testing in PP. The fact that the K-x fared slightly better is just a technical point. For practical reasons and everyday generic photography they are the same.

The point I wished to make is that Pentax has not allowed the K-x to become obsolete when it comes to IQ. I now think of the K-r as an upgraded K-x... sort of like a new Deluxe version because it has the same output with a few more features for those who may feel the need for it. But put them together in a 'race' based on pure IQ and it would be nearly a 'draw'!
 

oceanpriest

Senior Member
Apr 24, 2010
3,455
24
38
Ghim Moh
#9
Yup... a personal test was done because I do not trust the results from tests done by others! Need to see with my own eyes. Very basic test i.e. same scene, same composition, same illumination, same lens and similar camera settings. I discount the minor variations which are but natural in such testing. As far as I can tell... these three cameras are nearly the same for everyday generic shooting... which is a great thing for Pentaxians on a budget. Almost similar IQ for everyday shooting with generic settings. Cameras primarily differentiated by feature-set... not by quality of IQ for newbies considering which camera to buy!

The K5 does show a definite edge in my PP work-flow however. Which is why I am attracted to it. Along with its other useful features such as 100% viewfinder, considerably quieter shutter, weather resistant body, etc.

The K-x and K-r are almost the same in output. Very difficult to tell them apart unless I pixel peep and resort to extreme testing in PP. The fact that the K-x fared slightly better is just a technical point. For practical reasons and everyday generic photography they are the same.

The point I wished to make is that Pentax has not allowed the K-x to become obsolete when it comes to IQ. I now think of the K-r as an upgraded K-x... sort of like a new Deluxe version because it has the same output with a few more features for those who may feel the need for it. But put them together in a 'race' based on pure IQ and it would be nearly a 'draw'!
k-x super :bsmilie:
 

sircam

New Member
May 21, 2007
731
0
0
#10
Hi Frank,

I originally bought the K-r. The K5 belongs to a friend... but seems it would be wise if I got one for myself too instead of the K-r... especially if I decide to keep my K-x since I have one already and do not wish to sell it at the weird prices it currently is going for in B&S!

So its...

'Goodbye K-r... nice knowing you, but I'll stick with your cousin K-x for now!'

'Hello K5! Welcome to my dry cabinet!!'

'And as for you, my dear ol' K-x... you stay put exactly where you are for now, okay?!!'

Now got to clear up some of my old manual lenses which I hardly use to make permanent space for the K5! Thanks to Denis and you for poisoning me with your initial hands-on feedback. The K5 has now simply become too irresistible after having hands-on myself with all three cameras side by side!
 

Last edited:

rocaway

New Member
Mar 6, 2010
197
0
0
#11
I guess this shows how ahead of the curve Pentax was with the K-x, a year later and it still manages great.
 

kengoh

Senior Member
Jan 23, 2004
6,844
36
48
Singapore
#12
kx is still a capable camera. It's so sad to receive offers of $350 (body alone) when I help my fren selling. :what:
 

wongcho

New Member
Jun 8, 2009
236
0
0
#13
Sircam - Thanks for your qualitative results.
Useful for me - support my intention to keep the Kx for a longer period.
 

sircam

New Member
May 21, 2007
731
0
0
#14
I guess this shows how ahead of the curve Pentax was with the K-x, a year later and it still manages great.
You nailed it with your comment! Its like the other cameras in the Pentax stable finally managed to catch up with it after so long!

Yup... the K-x had indeed set a new benchmark in the industry for given its price-point at launch.

Am now wondering how good the new FF cameras to be announced by the bigger players will be if the current ASP-C sensors are already this good! Should be an exciting 2011 for new photography gear for enthusiasts and professionals.

Also looking forward to Pentax going mirrorless!
 

multan

New Member
Feb 4, 2010
69
0
0
Marine Parade
#15
Thanks sircam.

I definitely do not regret buying an older model (K-x) last weekend.
 

CorneliusK

Senior Member
Jan 23, 2010
790
0
16
#16
Lack of illuminated AF points + ridiculously slow liveview AF are, to me, the 2 biggest drawbacks of the K-x vis-a-vis the K-r.

If you are using something like the FA50 for portrait work in low light conditions, the K-x will be an exercise on frustration as, 1) you can't see the etchings on the focusing screen and 2) there are no illuminated AF points to guide you.

Focus recompose is not accurate at all when you are shooting at close range at f2.0.

Liveview becomes the only option but the K-x liveview is tedious to work with.

In addition, K-r has the focus assist beam.

But for general shooting in regular conditions, there isn't really anything extra which the K-r can bring to the table.
 

ricsal

New Member
Jun 23, 2007
1,549
0
0
#17
Though Kx lacking AF point which at first I was not Ok with but gradually it became quite alright. Even looking at the K5 viewfinder, I didnt even actually need to see them already. I would be buying back the K-x again as 2nd body in the future but this time must take black. hehehe
 

detritus

Senior Member
Sep 12, 2009
2,922
3
0
shootingbugs.blogspot.com
#18
Though Kx lacking AF point which at first I was not Ok with but gradually it became quite alright. Even looking at the K5 viewfinder, I didnt even actually need to see them already. I would be buying back the K-x again as 2nd body in the future but this time must take black. hehehe
depends how u use it... if u're still using the center AF point only, then yes, you don't need the red light...

but if u're using auto 11 pt AF, u need it otherwise u won't know what on earth the camera is focusing on.
 

kengoh

Senior Member
Jan 23, 2004
6,844
36
48
Singapore
#19
depends how u use it... if u're still using the center AF point only, then yes, you don't need the red light...

but if u're using auto 11 pt AF, u need it otherwise u won't know what on earth the camera is focusing on.
All the while I've been using single center AF pt on my kx but still miss some birdie shots.
The focusing accuracy of kx is no match to k5.
 

ricsal

New Member
Jun 23, 2007
1,549
0
0
#20
depends how u use it... if u're still using the center AF point only, then yes, you don't need the red light...

but if u're using auto 11 pt AF, u need it otherwise u won't know what on earth the camera is focusing on.
Really meh? I use 11pt also but somehow know where its focusing.

Anyways, K-x is good when u couple it with a split focusing screen.
 

Top Bottom