K-x Comparometer

melander · 11-18-2009, 09:03 AM

For me High iso realy important, I live in the north of sweden, close to the polar circle. Soon The sun will just peak itself above the horizone. So realy realy usable iso 3200 is very welcome.

ISO 3200 no noise reduction, no PP, full size image
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2692/4098656832_d5f8e4f619_o.jpg

ISO 3200 Noise reduction (noise ninja standard values), some sharpening and curves, full image
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2519/4099403328_d6b22ed708_o.jpg

These would look great even as large prints. (Pentax K-X, Pentax DA 35, 1/15s, Iso 3200, f/3.5)

ogl · 11-18-2009, 09:14 AM

Originally posted by melander

For me High iso realy important, I live in the north of sweden, close to the polar circle. Soon The sun will just peak itself above the horizone. So realy realy usable iso 3200 is very welcome.

ISO3200 with a bit NR in LR is really cool. My K200D can't do the same even at ISO1000.

What about AF speed and accurancy?

audiobomber · 11-18-2009, 09:24 AM

Originally posted by ogl

I don't see that K20D is better than K-x at low ISO.
I mean IQ.

The K20D has higher resolution than the K-x. I haven't done enough investigation to see if there's anything else (e.g. colours). But why focus on only one aspect? IQ isn't all there is to a camera either, there's also size/balance, buttons vs menus (metering, ISO, focus), battery grip option, wireless flash, weatherproofing etc. We're back to the Porsche engine in a VW body argument.

The K-x's noise performance will soon be eclipsed by the next generation of cameras. If you choose carefully and it meets your needs, there won't be any reason to upgrade with each successive generation. The K20D is like that for me. I have no inclination to sell it in favour of a K-7 or K-X or some other brand. A lot of K10D owners would say the same thing.

melander · 11-18-2009, 09:25 AM

Originally posted by ogl

ISO3200 with a bit NR in LR is really cool. My K200D can't do the same even at ISO1000.

What about AF speed and accurancy?

AF speed is good, it can focus in worse condition than my K20D. Strange thing is that I got all my lenses micro adjusted on my K20D, ranging from -8 to plus 5. On my K-X its spot on all the way down to f/1.4, and the contrast detect LV focus is just as good. (And yes, I chimp and pixelpeep all the time with a new camera)

AWB is realy realy good, I have shot all my photos with AWB even at clubs.

melander · 11-18-2009, 09:27 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

The K20D has higher resolution than the K-x. I haven't done enough investigation to see if there's anything else (e.g. colours). But why focus on only one aspect? IQ isn't all there is to a camera either, there's also size/balance, buttons vs menus (metering, ISO, focus), battery grip option, wireless flash, weatherproofing etc. We're back to the Porsche engine in a VW body argument.

The K-x's noise performance will soon be eclipsed by the next generation of cameras. If you choose carefully and it meets your needs, there won't be any reason to upgrade with each successive generation. The K20D is like that for me. I have no inclination to sell it in favour of a K-7 or K-X or some other brand. A lot of K10D owners would say the same thing.

Only thing I miss when I go out with my K-X is the weather sealings. Tho, I have both so I can just pick the K20D when im planing a low iso outdoor shooting

**jbinpg** · 11-18-2009, 09:32 AM

I prefer the original over the PP-ed shot. Instead of NR, it appears that all that was done to the PP-ed shot was sharpen it a bit. Which also sharpened the grain. Anyway, your shot did engender massive DA35 envy in me, though.

Eruditass · 11-18-2009, 09:35 AM

Originally posted by ogl

ISO3200 with a bit NR in LR is really cool. My K200D can't do the same even at ISO1000.

What about AF speed and accurancy?

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/814875-post5.html

Originally posted by melander

AF speed is good, it can focus in worse condition than my K20D. Strange thing is that I got all my lenses micro adjusted on my K20D, ranging from -8 to plus 5. On my K-X its spot on all the way down to f/1.4, and the contrast detect LV focus is just as good. (And yes, I chimp and pixelpeep all the time with a new camera)

AWB is realy realy good, I have shot all my photos with AWB even at clubs.

interesting, my K-x unfortunately front focuses with my DA40, but I've heard many similar reports to yours

ogl · 11-18-2009, 09:36 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

The K20D has higher resolution than the K-x.

The K-x's noise performance will soon be eclipsed by the next generation of cameras. If you choose carefully and it meets your needs, there won't be any reason to upgrade with each successive generation. The K20D is like that for me. I have no inclination to sell it in favour of a K-7 or K-X or some other brand. A lot of K10D owners would say the same thing.

IQ = IMAGE QUALITY. It's the end JPEG picture from RAW convertor.

The difference between 14.6 and 12.2 MP is very low in RAW.

Horizontal LPH 2450
Vertical LPH 2400

vs
Horizontal LPH 2300
Vertical LPH 2250

K20D has rather strong AA filter and worse DR than K-x.

thibs · 11-18-2009, 11:16 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

A lot of K10D owners would say the same thing.

About K10->K20, yes. About K10->K7? No way.

There's just no reason to compare those two cameras. I sold my K10 and never regretted it. K7 is better is all aspects, yes including high ISO.

The K10 was a very cool package at a stupid price when it came out.
K-7 is fantastic tool for me. Wholy different from a simple upgrade.

K-x sensor would have been cool, for sure. But I don't spend my life shooting at Iso6400 so I don't care at all.

audiobomber · 11-18-2009, 02:31 PM

Originally posted by thibs

About K10->K20, yes. About K10->K7? No way.

What I said is, there's not necessarily any need for someone with a K10 to upgrade. People who've taken magnificent photos with a K10 can still do so now that the K-7 has been released. Just because some new camera outperforms it in some ways doesn't mean it's outperformed in all ways or is less valid as a photographic tool. The K10D is perfectly fine for many peoples' needs, and may be a far better choice than a K-x, or even a K-7, depending on one's requirements.

ogl · 11-19-2009, 03:49 AM

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/816169-post1.html

thibs · 11-19-2009, 07:37 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

What I said is, there's not necessarily any need for someone with a K10 to upgrade. People who've taken magnificent photos with a K10 can still do so now that the K-7 has been released. Just because some new camera outperforms it in some ways doesn't mean it's outperformed in all ways or is less valid as a photographic tool. The K10D is perfectly fine for many peoples' needs, and may be a far better choice than a K-x, or even a K-7, depending on one's requirements.

Yep, completely agree. Sorry of I misunderstood your point.
You're of course perfectly right. I still use from time to time my wife's K100D: it still works perfectly and produces nice enough pictures.

spidrman · 11-19-2009, 01:39 PM

After reading this thread, I'm glad that I bought a K-x today! It's my first digital SLR (have had many film SLRs).

audiobomber · 11-19-2009, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by thibs

Yep, completely agree. Sorry of I misunderstood your point.
You're of course perfectly right. I still use from time to time my wife's K100D: it still works perfectly and produces nice enough pictures.

I'm not replacing my K20D with a K-x, but I have been obsessing about replacing my backup camera, a K100D Super. What's holding me back mostly is that I don't want to get into a cycle of upgrading both cameras every year or two. If only I knew what Pentax will be bringing out next.

reyreina · 11-25-2009, 07:34 AM

Originally posted by melander

For me High iso realy important, I live in the north of sweden, close to the polar circle. Soon The sun will just peak itself above the horizone. So realy realy usable iso 3200 is very welcome.

ISO 3200 no noise reduction, no PP, full size image
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2692/4098656832_d5f8e4f619_o.jpg

ISO 3200 Noise reduction (noise ninja standard values), some sharpening and curves, full image
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2519/4099403328_d6b22ed708_o.jpg

These would look great even as large prints. (Pentax K-X, Pentax DA 35, 1/15s, Iso 3200, f/3.5)

*thumbs up* i have similar results with my k-x and pp with noiseware

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
New K-7 Comparometer images	PentaxPoke	Pentax DSLR Discussion	18	07-30-2009 06:41 PM

11-18-2009, 09:03 AM	#46
melander Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Sweden, Umea Posts: 876	For me High iso realy important, I live in the north of sweden, close to the polar circle. Soon The sun will just peak itself above the horizone. So realy realy usable iso 3200 is very welcome. ISO 3200 no noise reduction, no PP, full size image http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2692/4098656832_d5f8e4f619_o.jpg ISO 3200 Noise reduction (noise ninja standard values), some sharpening and curves, full image http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2519/4099403328_d6b22ed708_o.jpg These would look great even as large prints. (Pentax K-X, Pentax DA 35, 1/15s, Iso 3200, f/3.5)

11-18-2009, 09:14 AM	#47
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by melander For me High iso realy important, I live in the north of sweden, close to the polar circle. Soon The sun will just peak itself above the horizone. So realy realy usable iso 3200 is very welcome. ISO3200 with a bit NR in LR is really cool. My K200D can't do the same even at ISO1000. What about AF speed and accurancy?

11-18-2009, 09:24 AM	#48
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by ogl I don't see that K20D is better than K-x at low ISO. I mean IQ. The K20D has higher resolution than the K-x. I haven't done enough investigation to see if there's anything else (e.g. colours). But why focus on only one aspect? IQ isn't all there is to a camera either, there's also size/balance, buttons vs menus (metering, ISO, focus), battery grip option, wireless flash, weatherproofing etc. We're back to the Porsche engine in a VW body argument. The K-x's noise performance will soon be eclipsed by the next generation of cameras. If you choose carefully and it meets your needs, there won't be any reason to upgrade with each successive generation. The K20D is like that for me. I have no inclination to sell it in favour of a K-7 or K-X or some other brand. A lot of K10D owners would say the same thing.

11-18-2009, 09:25 AM	#49
melander Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Sweden, Umea Posts: 876	Originally posted by ogl ISO3200 with a bit NR in LR is really cool. My K200D can't do the same even at ISO1000. What about AF speed and accurancy? AF speed is good, it can focus in worse condition than my K20D. Strange thing is that I got all my lenses micro adjusted on my K20D, ranging from -8 to plus 5. On my K-X its spot on all the way down to f/1.4, and the contrast detect LV focus is just as good. (And yes, I chimp and pixelpeep all the time with a new camera) AWB is realy realy good, I have shot all my photos with AWB even at clubs.

11-18-2009, 09:27 AM	#50
melander Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Sweden, Umea Posts: 876	Originally posted by audiobomber The K20D has higher resolution than the K-x. I haven't done enough investigation to see if there's anything else (e.g. colours). But why focus on only one aspect? IQ isn't all there is to a camera either, there's also size/balance, buttons vs menus (metering, ISO, focus), battery grip option, wireless flash, weatherproofing etc. We're back to the Porsche engine in a VW body argument. The K-x's noise performance will soon be eclipsed by the next generation of cameras. If you choose carefully and it meets your needs, there won't be any reason to upgrade with each successive generation. The K20D is like that for me. I have no inclination to sell it in favour of a K-7 or K-X or some other brand. A lot of K10D owners would say the same thing. Only thing I miss when I go out with my K-X is the weather sealings. Tho, I have both so I can just pick the K20D when im planing a low iso outdoor shooting

11-18-2009, 09:32 AM	#51
jbinpg Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Prince George, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,546	I prefer the original over the PP-ed shot. Instead of NR, it appears that all that was done to the PP-ed shot was sharpen it a bit. Which also sharpened the grain. Anyway, your shot did engender massive DA35 envy in me, though.

11-18-2009, 09:35 AM	#52
Eruditass Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,207 Original Poster	Originally posted by ogl ISO3200 with a bit NR in LR is really cool. My K200D can't do the same even at ISO1000. What about AF speed and accurancy? https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/814875-post5.html Originally posted by melander AF speed is good, it can focus in worse condition than my K20D. Strange thing is that I got all my lenses micro adjusted on my K20D, ranging from -8 to plus 5. On my K-X its spot on all the way down to f/1.4, and the contrast detect LV focus is just as good. (And yes, I chimp and pixelpeep all the time with a new camera) AWB is realy realy good, I have shot all my photos with AWB even at clubs. interesting, my K-x unfortunately front focuses with my DA40, but I've heard many similar reports to yours

11-18-2009, 09:36 AM	#53
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by audiobomber The K20D has higher resolution than the K-x. The K-x's noise performance will soon be eclipsed by the next generation of cameras. If you choose carefully and it meets your needs, there won't be any reason to upgrade with each successive generation. The K20D is like that for me. I have no inclination to sell it in favour of a K-7 or K-X or some other brand. A lot of K10D owners would say the same thing. IQ = IMAGE QUALITY. It's the end JPEG picture from RAW convertor. The difference between 14.6 and 12.2 MP is very low in RAW. Horizontal LPH 2450 Vertical LPH 2400 vs Horizontal LPH 2300 Vertical LPH 2250 K20D has rather strong AA filter and worse DR than K-x.

11-18-2009, 11:16 AM	#54
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by audiobomber A lot of K10D owners would say the same thing. About K10->K20, yes. About K10->K7? No way. There's just no reason to compare those two cameras. I sold my K10 and never regretted it. K7 is better is all aspects, yes including high ISO. The K10 was a very cool package at a stupid price when it came out. K-7 is fantastic tool for me. Wholy different from a simple upgrade. K-x sensor would have been cool, for sure. But I don't spend my life shooting at Iso6400 so I don't care at all.

11-18-2009, 02:31 PM	#55
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by thibs About K10->K20, yes. About K10->K7? No way. What I said is, there's not necessarily any need for someone with a K10 to upgrade. People who've taken magnificent photos with a K10 can still do so now that the K-7 has been released. Just because some new camera outperforms it in some ways doesn't mean it's outperformed in all ways or is less valid as a photographic tool. The K10D is perfectly fine for many peoples' needs, and may be a far better choice than a K-x, or even a K-7, depending on one's requirements.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-19-2009, 03:49 AM	#56
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/816169-post1.html

11-19-2009, 07:37 AM	#57
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by audiobomber What I said is, there's not necessarily any need for someone with a K10 to upgrade. People who've taken magnificent photos with a K10 can still do so now that the K-7 has been released. Just because some new camera outperforms it in some ways doesn't mean it's outperformed in all ways or is less valid as a photographic tool. The K10D is perfectly fine for many peoples' needs, and may be a far better choice than a K-x, or even a K-7, depending on one's requirements. Yep, completely agree. Sorry of I misunderstood your point. You're of course perfectly right. I still use from time to time my wife's K100D: it still works perfectly and produces nice enough pictures.

11-19-2009, 01:39 PM	#58
spidrman New Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 5	After reading this thread, I'm glad that I bought a K-x today! It's my first digital SLR (have had many film SLRs).

11-19-2009, 02:03 PM	#59
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by thibs Yep, completely agree. Sorry of I misunderstood your point. You're of course perfectly right. I still use from time to time my wife's K100D: it still works perfectly and produces nice enough pictures. I'm not replacing my K20D with a K-x, but I have been obsessing about replacing my backup camera, a K100D Super. What's holding me back mostly is that I don't want to get into a cycle of upgrading both cameras every year or two. If only I knew what Pentax will be bringing out next.

11-25-2009, 07:34 AM	#60
reyreina Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: NY Posts: 15	Originally posted by melander For me High iso realy important, I live in the north of sweden, close to the polar circle. Soon The sun will just peak itself above the horizone. So realy realy usable iso 3200 is very welcome. ISO 3200 no noise reduction, no PP, full size image http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2692/4098656832_d5f8e4f619_o.jpg ISO 3200 Noise reduction (noise ninja standard values), some sharpening and curves, full image http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2519/4099403328_d6b22ed708_o.jpg These would look great even as large prints. (Pentax K-X, Pentax DA 35, 1/15s, Iso 3200, f/3.5) thumbs up i have similar results with my k-x and pp with noiseware