On Feb 7, 2011, at 5:51 PM, Glen Berry wrote: > I've read the specs for both cameras, and the K-x really should be better > than the K-100D, but I'd still like to ask the question. Do you think there > is a BIG and obvious improvement in image quality, after upgrading from a > K-100D to a K-x body?
I have both bodies. The K100Dsuper has better ergonomics in some ways, and will take stunning pictures in bright light. However, when it comes to raw sensor performance the only Pentax bodies that the K-x won't handily outperform are the K-r and the K-5. If you never go above ISO 400, the K100 should do you well. If you do, then get a K-x, or better yet a K-r. I absolutely love my K-x, and the only time I use my K20 these days is when I need weather sealing, TAV mode, or I'm working in the studio where sensor performance (or autofocus performance, or metering performance, or size...) aren't an issue, but ergonomics are. I spent a couple of weeks with a K-r and I can heartily recommend that it is worth the difference in price over the K-x. I posted a comparison of the two not long ago, and when someone posted about the big K-r sale at Abe's, I was sorely tempted, but I'm holding out for a K-5. If I'm going to buy a camera I can't afford, I'm going to get the one that does everything that I need. -- 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.
