Has anyone used the an Editor call Kirita, and are there many differences in comparison to Photoshop? Is there a recommendation on either, or even a different program?
I've used both fairly extensively. The thing is that the programs are in large part incomparable.
Krita is more easily compared to Corel Painter. What Photoshop could be compared to is GIMP.
Krita focuses on being a painting program but doubles as an image editor as well, Corel Painter focuses on being a painting program, Photoshop focuses on being an image editor but doubles as a painting program; and GIMP fills that same category as Photoshop as well.
There are differences between the programs, you can not say 1 program is better than the other for any of the 4 programs. But you can say that GIMP and Krita are the only ones that work on linux, they are also the only ones that are free, and despite being free they are able to compete with the other (quite expensive) choices.
For logo design you might want to look at something completely different, like vector drawing programs (such as Inkscape, Illustrator, Flash, Corel Draw...) Krita is out of all the 3 main programs I'm discussing by far the worst at handling vectors, so if you intend to use vectors then Krita would be your worst choice. GIMP would be more than sufficient if you can handle it's terrible, hideous, horrendous UI design. And corel painter simply ain't aimed at vector use even if it is capable of it.
I disagree with the other poster that Krita is complicated to understand sometimes, I actually have a significantly harder time understanding Photoshop than Krita; and with good reason, Photoshop is bloated to the brim with features I do not use, and never will. Since my personal focus is painting Krita suited my needs better.
The thing is, you'll never know which program suits you better until you've tried them all. But I personally would say Photoshop is the best image editor (GIMP in second place) Corel Painter has the best brush engine selection for painting (but otherwise Krita would be the best painting program) so if Photoshop, Painter and Krita were put on a horizontal spectrum (where the left side is catered to image manipulation and the right to digital painting) photoshop would be on the left, krita in the middle (jack of all trades), corel painter on the right.
For it's price I think corel painter has some very primitive and distracting bugs (there was something about it's layer system...) so I can't really recommend it (but all the most colorful digital paintings I've seen come from Painter, which is a plus for that one)
I mean all three programs have features the others don't have (krita has it's multibrush tool and more layer modes than painter and photoshop combined, it also has these perspective grids that are cool, photoshop works better than the others at high resolutions (krita performs worst there; but this is being improved with current development), painter has the widest variety of brush engines, and all of them extremely well made and optimized, photoshop has the widest array of tools and filters. And so on and so forth.
The question isn't which program is better, but which is better for you, because in all of these programs you will not use their entire array of features, you will only use a selective portion of their features, of their tools... So what you should be asking yourself is "Which of these programs does exactly what I need most painlessly?"
For me it was Krita, it didn't cost me a dime, has all the features I need (corel painter has some that I want (sexy brush engines), but bugs that I don't want; photoshop has nothing I want that the other two don't offer besides it's high res performance, but god help me I will upgrade Krita with my own hands if I have to to outperform these other two at high resolutions if I must! And this can only be done for Krita and GIMP because they are open source, anyone can edit the source code of the programs to fix or change them,in fact this is how Krita came to be, it was initially based heavily off GIMP's source code, although it has largely outgrown that by now.), and most importantly, krita works on my work environment of choice. Linux.
TL;DR: yes, there are too many differences between photoshop and krita to count. My bet is that for your purposes, GIMP would do nicely, but otherwise Inkscape or Photoshop.
I use Photoshop 7, and Krita, and Gimp, and Inkscape, and Blender, to do whatever I need done. I have used Photoshop the most and am most used to it. I have used Corel Paint in the past and am glad to be rid of it. All of my photo editing and image creation software has come to me completely FREE, this includes Photoshop. Recently I have migrated completely over to Linux, so using Krita and Gimp is a MUST. Although I can still use Photoshop inside "Wine", a virtual windows port, but would prefer to get up to speed using Gimp & Krita.
As an example, a client gave me a drawing made on a wet bar napkin and said he wanted his Logo made from it. I re-drew it inside Photoshop, which turned out looking really awesome, BUT it was still a Bitmap image, and needed to be changed to a VECTORED image. So I turned to using Inkscape to change it into a vectored image - which saved the day. (see below).
So what I'm telling you is to use as much or as little as you want to do whatever you need.
My own company logo was created entirely with Photoshop because it has a plugin that lets you create "Fire".
But a friends company logo was done as a short animated 8-second movie using Blender.
They all have their strengths and weaknesses, use them all. I do with great success. If there's something you don't know about using any of these programs, Youtube is a great resource of knowledge.
As an extra help, here's a link that shows you how to make "Flaming Text" inside Gimp.