Hello Larry, Thanks for the report. I'm intending to use mine as you describe - backup/addition to my K20D. I plan to use it in situations where it is advantageous over the K20D.
-- Best regards, Bruce Saturday, February 6, 2010, 4:27:18 AM, you wrote: LC> I stopped by fry's tonight to check out the k-x in more detail. The LC> sales woman saw me checking it out, and said that they had an open box LC> unit that I could actually try out. I grabbed batteries and an SD LC> card and played with the k-x a bit at ISO 6400. LC> I shot a few, realized that it was on JPEG, so I reset it to JPEG+. LC> These are some of the in camera jpegs, uploaded straight to flickr: LC> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157623363532670/ LC> These are some of the raw files, processed in lightroom. Some of them LC> are cropped, none of them are resized, so original size is 100%: LC> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157623363649782/ LC> These are some of the raw files, many of them cropped, some cropped LC> and uncropped, processed in lightroom to a max side of 1000 pixels: LC> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157623363684346/ LC> If I were to get a K-x I'd sell my K100D super and use it as a small, LC> light camera. I'd also use it for ultra low light situations, if it's LC> sufficiently better than the K20. If it isn't enough better than the LC> K20 at low light, I'd probably hold off on the upgrade. LC> My quick impressions of it: LC> I'm surprised it seems to have the original 18-55 AL not the AL-II. I LC> guess it's cheaper to make. LC> The auto focus seems snappy, at least in a well lit environment. I LC> didn't do any serious test, but it may be faster than the K20, but I LC> rarely use autofocus. LC> It's actually just a little bit smaller than my K100. This is a good LC> thing, I'd get it as a "small camera" easy to carry in a fanny pack. LC> Overall the user interface seems pretty good. It's much better than LC> the K100, with separate buttons for autofocus, and live view. The LC> screen is nice and large. In retrospect, I didn't notice the lack of LC> the top LCD. LC> The back LCD is much improved over the K100. LC> The option of the color histogram is a welcome addition. LC> They changed the ordering of the AA batteries. Not a real problem, we LC> just had to try a few times before the camera worked. LC> I neglected to test buffer size and speed. I can't imagine it not LC> being better than the three shots of the K100. LC> The live view button on the back is pretty nice, live view seems to LC> work better than on the K20, but it still has an annoying amount of LC> lag when you press the shutter. LC> There are a lot of modes on the mode wheel. I didn't really LC> investigate them. LC> If there were lights in the frame, the auto exposure would increase LC> shutter speed by a stop or so, even if that's the only difference LC> between the shots. LC> Doing a thorough test would mean either finding someone who has one LC> locally I could play with for a day or two, or buying the open box LC> unit at Fry's, and returning it at the end of the weekend. LC> I wouldn't want to trade my K20 in on a K-x, but I think that the two LC> of them (or a K7 and a K-x) would make a great pair, each has some LC> advantages over the other. My hunch is that in over 95% of shots, the LC> difference in image quality between the two would not be noticed, LC> except when the UI of one allowed it to get a shot that the other one LC> missed. LC> And for those that are wondering, it's the Campbell Fry's on Hamilton, LC> that I went to. LC> -- LC> Larry Colen [email protected] sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
