On Tue, Jun 25, 2013, Darren Addy wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Aahz Maruch <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013, Darren Addy wrote: >>> >>> The K-x has superb high ISO and runs on AA batteries. >> >> By the standards of the K-5 II, it only has "good" high ISO, not superb >> (based on my experience with Larry's K-x). But you've got a good point. > > True, but the discussion was comparing it not to Pentax models that > came after, but to Point & Shoots (and, I would suggest, it > outperforms any Pentax model that came before it with its Sony > sensor).
Even by point-and-shoot standards, I would only call the K-x "good" rather than "superb"; DxOMark rates the K-x for 811 and the Canon G1X for 644, which is not much of a margin for something bigger and heavier than the G1X. You suggested the K-x with the kit lens, which would be F3.5 at 18mm (27mm 35mm equiv) where the G1X is F2.8 at 28mm equiv -- wiping out the K-x advantage. In addition, I had some autofocus problems with Larry's K-x that I haven't experienced with the G1X (nor the K-5 with the similar 18-135). Note that I still agree that you have a good point: the K-x would be cheaper than even a used G1X, it takes regular AA batteries, and the feel will be more familiar to someone who mostly uses other Pentax bodies. I'm just quibbling over one word of yours. -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- 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.
