View Full Version : Upgrade from Pentax Kr

25-02-13, 02:05 PM
Hi all, this is my first post, but couldn't find anything anywhere else, so thought I'd ask everyone's thoughts.

I currently use a Pentax K-r, For which I have 3 lenses, however, I've had this sometime and am now considering the next step.

I'm thinking of upgrading to a full frame camera, this will have to be something 2nd hand due to my budget, but think I would rather spend the money on something 18-24 months old than something new that'll be replaced in a few months anyway.

I guess, what I'm after is any suggestions for what to look at/for, So far I've only looked an Canon, thinking a 5d mk2 or an older 1d, which would be in my price range, I'll then get extra lens(es) once I sell my Pentax. But any other suggestions/thoughts would be most welcome.

Thanks in advance


25-02-13, 03:11 PM
Hi and welcome first question is why upgrade you should be getting really good pictures with the kit you have

26-02-13, 09:28 AM
The main reason is the lack of available lenses on the market, also I recently used a 5d mk2 and the images were so good, I guess it's turned my head. (hence the emphasis on the canon models at present).

Also, where I live is abundant with wildlife and the lack of weatherproofing on mine is a worry every time I take it out.

Nigel Atherton
26-02-13, 01:58 PM
Full frame DSLRs have impressively big, bright viewfinders and offer several advantages over APS C ones, the main ones being better low light performance (on the whole) and the ability to get shallower depth of field with a given field of view. But on the downside you'll need larger and more expensive full frame lenses and you don't get that automatic 1.5x focal length boost (where a 200mm lens becomes equivalent to 300mm) by having the smaller sensor. This means you'll need to buy longer focal length lenses to get the same crop as with your K-r.

If you're sold on full frame the Canon EOS 5D Mk.II is a stunning camera for landscapes, wildlife etc. Less so, for sports. You don't state a budget but even the 5D Mk.1 is a great buy at under 500 for the body, and about 1200 will get you a used EOS 5D Mk.II or a Nikon D700. Bear in mind you’d still need to budget for full frame lenses.

Alternatively you could stick with Pentax and get the K-5 II, which is weatherproof (like your K-r) and delivers great image quality. The K-5 IIs, which has no low anti aliasing filter, delivers even better image quality for about 130 more.

The Pentax lens range is not as extensive as Canon and Nikon but with the independents, such as Sigma, all the bases are still covered. If its wildlife you're into then something like the K-5 II or K-5 IIs with the 18-135mm weather resistant lens and a Sigma 120-400mm or 150-500mm would cost little more than just the Canon EOS 5D Mk.II body on its own.

26-02-13, 03:57 PM

Thanks for the input. I hadn't looked at the K-5, but will do so. Sports photography isn't an issue, it is mainly wildlife/landscape. I'm also due to be photographing a friends weeding later in the year, so the low light capabilities will prove important in the church.

I was thinking of looking at teleconverters with regard to losing the focal length and my budget is going to be approx. 1300 (to include new lenses).