K-7 or Kr

[chongmic]

I'm migrating from film to digital, but couldn't make up my mind since the K7 price had drop to a reasonable level, although I'm still amateur, I'm looking for something semi pro, but the Kr features offering is tempting as well. What is your opinion? K5 is way beyond my budget at the moment, unfortunately. Any market indication that K7 price will drop further until it is completely phase out from the market?

[blackcloudbrew]

I haven't been following the K7 prices but apparently (or so I've read) they are not being made any more so new stock may be gradually going away. That should result in lower prices but the market hasn't been logical in the last few years. You can pick up a used K7 if you want to save some money.

My opinion as to which to get is purely based on user remarks and reviews. I think both are fine cameras with the k7 now being the older technology of the two and not having as good low light performance as the Kr. On the other hand the k7 is weather sealed and the Kr isn't and I prefer the layout of the K7 controls over the Kr. So it boils down to what do you want. If those were my only choices, I think I'd consider my use of the camera and let that be the guide. For me it would be the k7. By the way most of us are amateurs here, honestly one doesn't have to be a pro to buy a pro camera, as one just has to have the money.

Keep in mind that digital camera bodies are apt to have a much shorter useful life than film cameras. Part of that is because after about 18 months to 2 years there will be new stuff out there which makes your camera totally obsolete (or so you may feel at that point). The same is not true for lenses which endure. Pick on body, learn to use a DSLR and enjoy digital photography. I started in 2008 with a k10 and now have a k20 and k100, my eye is on the k5 though as those other ones are just so out of date now...

[calsan]

If money is a priority, research which lens you want, then use the remaining money on whatever camera you can afford.
So if you have $1000, and the lens you want is $800, then buy a second hand K10d or K100d for $200.
Assuming you buy a good lens, it will retain most of it's value and 4 years from now you will be able to pick up a K5 for $200.

There is not much difference in a print or even on screen between different models of camera, however once you know, you can usually guess which lens was used.  Also, ignore opinion (so called review) sites like DPReview, which are fixated on photographing graph paper (unless this is your desired subject)- instead look on somewhere like pbase or pentax photo gallery and browse the photos by lens. 
Decide which sort of lens will suit your desired subject - either a normal focal length, wide angle or tele -- or perhaps a macro?  If you want to travel with your camera, then a small lightweight lens is a good trade off to a heavy fast lens, as no point having a lens that you won't bring with you as it's too cumbersome.  if you can't decide, then the 18-55II is a pretty sharp, cheap lens that is worth having as a starting point - you will soon find out if you need wider or longer or faster.  They can be picked up cheap second hand also.
pbase Pentax
Pentax Photo Gallery
Also, if someone tells you that you can't take good photos with a kit lens, or (shock) a Pentax, then what they mean is that THEY can't take good photos.  Check out the kit lens photos on Pentax Photo Gallery 18-55II and you will see that the limitation is actually the photographer.

[chongmic]

I definitely agree with both of you, especially after viewing what a kit lens can perform. It worth the Pentax name printed on it. I think I have made up my mind, just get started first. Camera body will keep improving, it is my indecisiveness that kept me from migrating earlier. I always waiting for something better and cheaper in the market. Both are great camera, it just being tailored to the specific need to certain group of user. I'm leaving in the tropical region, foul weather is a concern but I figured I won't be taking pictures in severe weather anyway, at least the chances are pretty remote. I think I'll go with the Kr as I have not made up my mind on the lens, get starting with cheaper camera and save the cash for future lens upgrade. At least I still get to play with my old Tamron lens from my film body.

[chongmic]

By the way, does the old Pentax 220T flash will work on these new digital body?

[calsan]

It should work, but you might have to control it manually (not 100% sure).
http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/flashes/index.html
http://pttl.mattdm.org/

If you have an old flash that you wish to keep, then a K20d/K7 could be a better choice as these models have a PC sync socket, allowing off camera flash with a cord and hot-shoe adapter.

[chongmic]

Thanks for the advice. I would probably use the flash on the camera in the just in case scenario, with the high ISO rating, flash would probably deem as redundant.

Further up some reading, is there any difference between the 18-55 AL II and the kit lens bundled in the box with Kr? My guess was probably the lens coating, plus the lens hood may not come with the camera.

[calsan]

They would be the same optically.
Sadly, the DA-L version has no quick-shift manual focus, no hood and a plastic mount.
The first two items are essential, in my opinion.   I wouldn't buy a lens without quick-shift any more.

The nicest version is the WR that comes with the K-7 and K-5, although you can also buy it separately; should be a lot of them available second hand too.



PS
Flash is also still useful, and can be used creatively.

[calsan]

I had a look in my local camera shop today, both k7 and Kr had a WR lens on them.  Not sure if this was standard for the Kr, however.
I might just repeat my earlier point not to spend too much of your budget on the camera body - after a few months you will wish you had bought a better lens instead.  The 'character' of your camera changes with each lens, which is why we all suffer from "LBA".
I'm currently leaning towards the DA21mm limited.

[blackcloudbrew]

Good thought Cal. I have the DA21 limited and sadly it doesn't get enough use. Mostly because I have a number of other lenses (zooms) in this range. However, when I use it, it works very well and is a nice complement to the DA40 limited.

[calsan]

There was a group guys in the shop looking at the new Fuji X100, they seemed to waver just a little in admiring it's (quite pleasing) aesthetics when they saw my K-7 with the shop's DA21 fitted.
I must say, I get this lens.  It's a Goldilocks lens in terms of focal length, aperture and size. 

The small size is great in not scaring people out of your photos, I find people dive out of the way when they see my Sigma 17-70 and other large lenses.  This is one big reason why I switched to using the 18-55 - it doesn't yell "Photographer".

The rendering and OOF areas are very similar to the FA50, which surprised me.  Very colour neutral.  I had thought it would produce harsh OOF given it's focal length, but it's very smooth.  Another big bonus was that at F22, it does perfect starbursts and doesn't seem to loose too much to diffraction.  Basically, it may not be very fast or very wide, but what it does it does well.
Plus the 'hijab' style lens hood is cute.
These shots at either F3.2 or F22, you can tell which is which.

[calsan]

645d price included for interest to others overseas.
That's Aussie dollars.

[blackcloudbrew]

Looks like LBA has claimed another victim. 

[calsan]

I'd been going so well - I hadn't touched any new lenses for over two years.
Sigh.
Back on the wagon.

[chongmic]

Very good info for my shopping guide. Had started looking up in ebay for cheap used lens, including the manual A 50 1.7. With the 18-55 kit comes with the Kr, and both my old Tamron 28-80 and 70-300, should give me a very good startup before moving up to the more expensive lenses. The new DA 35 2.4 also in my shopping list. I'll be doing mostly landscaping and once in a while family events and outing.