Upgrading from *IST DS to Kr?

Thanks - I never considered the K20D. I'll look into it....

I am a long time user of the DS and I come from years of experience using an old Spotmatic. I have to admit that I was skeptical about some of the advances I'd read about especially live view and video.

Well my brother, who also owns a DS, recently bought a K5 so I was able to play with it. As a caveat I would agree that getting a better lens is usually the best strategy.

The first telephoto I got for my DS was a cheap Sigma 70-300 and I hated it. AF was slow and noisy. I felt like I was shooting with a coffee grinder. Worse none of the pictures were acceptable. Later I learned that the major problem was camera motion. Putting it on the K5 was a revelation. Not only was focus faster and more accurate but the SR improved the picture quality immensely even with 1.4 X tel-extender on BIFs. I'd still like to get a better telephoto, but in the mean time I think the old Sigma would be a good alternative. I have also been able to get good shots hand holding a Sigma 600.

Don't get me started with low light capability. I have street shots , hand held, showing things I couldn't see with the naked eye. I got an acceptable shot of the constellation Orion, hand held, with the kit lens. That is totally unreal.

While it is certainly the best video camera I have ever shot, the LCD screen is nearly useless with telephoto lenses especially outdoors. It does work fine on a tripod, but for moving targets you need one of those clip on magnifier eye cups.

The water proofing is a great improvement I think. While not often an issue out here in the Mojave, I do enough birding to justify it.

I didn't notice the difference in the viewfinder.

I like the 7 fps a lot.

My brother has the 35 mm prime and it is awesome bout he also got the new kit lens for the K5 as a weather proof walk around. I don't use those focal lengths enough to recommend anything here.

Chuck

stevemot wrote:

I'm guessing this would give me a better sensor, SR and faster AF, but at a cost of lower viewfinder magnification.

Has anyone else upgraded from the *ist DS to a Kr - how did you find the cameras compared? Was the upgrade worth it?

Steve

Upgraded from a *istDL (the DS little brother) to a K-r. It isn't just the sensor, shake reduction, and auto focus......it's also:

• 50% Bigger and almost 5 times higher res LCD (you'd be surprised how much you will appreciate this!)

• 6fps vs 2.8fps (big difference with soccer pics of my kids)

• Sensor cleaning (nice!)

• Dual battery options (which has already payed dividends)

• More than twice the megapixels (for cropping versatility)

• HD video (not a big deal, but I'm surprised how much I have used it)

• 2 f-stops higher max ISO (with boost of a stop higher)

• MUCH less noise at high ISO (huge upgrade!)

I know some of those have to do with better sensor....something you already mentioned. But I wanted to point out the specifics of how the sensor is better.

Also, the K20D is a good option and has things like weather sealing the K-r does not have. But the K-r still beats it on frames per second, better LCD and live view, and high ISO performance.

Bottom line is it's a big upgrade. I am a nature photographer so I could care less about tungsten lighting issues (which mine doesn't have anyway). Amongst all the other things I highlighted, the thing you will notice first is how much snappier it is to operate all the way around. About the only thing the DL has that I miss on the K-r (though not as much once I got used to it) is the top LCD. And yes, the DL still takes some very nice low ISO shots.....and I still use it here and there.

Escaping wrote:

I loved my ist-DS and had such a fond memory of how well it handles, especially when I had to use some fast MF lenses, its viewfinder is just the best of its days ... I agonized for a while about letting it go. I finally sold it.

I had use the K2000 or K-m and liked it, being small and has SR as well a better 10Mp sensor. The K-m viewfinder is not as good but I have finally stopped using my MF lenses as I have slowly added a few fast AF primes.

I have added a K-10D and the K-5 but dont have the K-r. I am finding the K5 and K10D are more robust but also larger camera's compared to the K-m size and what I first bought the DS for. If small size is critical, my sense is the right camera to replace the DS is the Kr (which replaces the K-x which in turn replaced the K-m).

The K2000/km works better with MF lenses than the DS. Set AF to center and use that confirmation when focusing. It is a lot faster and far more accurate than with the DS. AF with AF lenses is also vastly improved.

-- hide signature --

Escaping (CT, USA) http://www.pbase.com/cvanlang
D700 / D300 / D7000 / D90 / K10D / K-m / G2 / GF1 / V1 / LX5

You should not consider K20D, unless you need WR. K-r has a -by far- superior IQ, especially in low light, it is far more responsive, and it is very much lighter and smaller. K20D was a great camera in its time.. not anymore.

stevemot wrote:

Thanks - I never considered the K20D. I'll look into it....