Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-18-2010, 08:13 AM   #1
Junior Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: GTA
Posts: 48
BAD review of K-x @ camcorderinfo

K-x' got very nice reviews everywhere with emphasis on being a top performer in handling noise.

Except for this one:

Pentax K-x DSLR Camera Review - Camcorder Reviews

Reviewed as a "camcorder" though, not a still camera.

01-18-2010, 08:41 AM   #2
Veteran Member
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,663
Well, I wouldn't exactly expect the K-x to stack up well against fully featured camcorders as far as the overall user experience is concerned. ;-) It certainly has the potential to deliver some high-quality results when used to its strengths, but video on DSLRs (the K-x included) is still in its infancy.
01-18-2010, 10:03 AM   #3
Forum Member
opiszon's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Poznań, miasto doznań
Posts: 80
QuoteOriginally posted by buliwyf Quote
K-x' got very nice reviews everywhere with emphasis on being a top performer in handling noise.

Except for this one:

Pentax K-x DSLR Camera Review - Camcorder Reviews

Reviewed as a "camcorder" though, not a still camera.
NOT everywhere

on polish site Optyczne.pl - testy aparatów, testy obiektywów, testy lornetek, inne testy ,aparaty cyfrowe, obiektywy, lornetki, artyku?y, nowo?ci, opinie komentarze - Optyczne.pl (mother site of english LensTip.com - lens review, lenses reviews, lens specification - Lenstip.com ) k-x was tested and compaired to Nikon d300s

conclusion of this test is
"Pentax k-x is no good even for amateur photographer"

this sentence and obvious incompetence of tester have began great feedback from this site readers
Outcry was so strong, that commenting on k-x test was closed, and so mouths of portal readers are shut.

That's all about optyczne.pl / lenstip.com impartiality. They cannot give answer for even one of complaint, that was given from polish Pentax community.

that sad :-(

Test Pentax K-x - Podsumowanie - Optyczne.pl

translated by google:
Google T?umacz
01-18-2010, 11:18 AM   #4
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,206
Wow, they do some really in depth testing!

Interesting how landscape > bright / natural for color accuracy according to them. (edit this was for video)

edit: the camcorder site is part of the review. The whole review including DSLR functions is here:

Pentax K-x Digital Camera Review - Pentax DSLR - DigitalCameraInfo.com


doesn't do too well. VERY in depth and standardized - but with some puzzling results.

QuoteQuote:
This is not a camera for image-quality sticklers. In our lab testing for both stills and video, it came in behind the competition in most areas

Color accuracy isn't great, image noise levels are relatively high, and white balance performance is substandard, though none of these problems is likely bad enough to bother the snapshot shooter.
Pentax K-x Digital Camera Review - Pentax DSLR - DigitalCameraInfo.com
Noisier than the K2000 with NR off and NR to the max??


Last edited by Eruditass; 01-18-2010 at 11:38 AM.
01-18-2010, 11:34 AM   #5
Pentaxian
Clicker's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,241
It's the nature of us "humans"; some like to tango, others like to "cha-cha".

BUT, i'd expect that review from any camcorder site even the canon 7d and 5DMII get the "negatives" from "real" videographers even though some broadcast shooters have accepted it as an alternative tool to be used with impressive results, it's a matter of how "open" one is vs the "traditional" user within the industry. Heck just nary months ago this debate about the video feature in DSLRs was hotly debated by all; "The Purist" vs "Others" but look now it's slowly but surely been accepted *note* Video Forum, that debate is more or less moot now as the issue has progressed into "how to do better videos", "how to improve the feature" ...yada...yada...yada
01-18-2010, 12:06 PM   #6
Veteran Member
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,663
QuoteOriginally posted by Eruditass Quote
Wow, they do some really in depth testing!

Interesting how landscape > bright / natural for color accuracy according to them. (edit this was for video)

edit: the camcorder site is part of the review. The whole review including DSLR functions is here:

Pentax K-x Digital Camera Review - Pentax DSLR - DigitalCameraInfo.com


doesn't do too well. VERY in depth and standardized - but with some puzzling results.



Pentax K-x Digital Camera Review - Pentax DSLR - DigitalCameraInfo.com
Noisier than the K2000 with NR off and NR to the max??
They appear to be using some different model of camera than the K-x I've been using for the last month and a half. Odd.
01-18-2010, 02:13 PM   #7
Site Supporter
kiwi_jono's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,038
QuoteOriginally posted by Eruditass Quote
Wow, they do some really in depth testing!

Interesting how landscape > bright / natural for color accuracy according to them. (edit this was for video)

edit: the camcorder site is part of the review. The whole review including DSLR functions is here:

Pentax K-x Digital Camera Review - Pentax DSLR - DigitalCameraInfo.com


doesn't do too well. VERY in depth and standardized - but with some puzzling results.



Pentax K-x Digital Camera Review - Pentax DSLR - DigitalCameraInfo.com
Noisier than the K2000 with NR off and NR to the max??
Have a look at the actual High ISO images themselves from these tests. I'm no expert but the following things stand out:
* One the exposure for the comparative area is more underexposed than other cameras. This will lead to higher noise. I can confirm this from many high ISO shots I have shot with my K-x, the exposure level is fairly critical to good performance.
* Even without taking this into account, visually the K-x images look pretty good compared to the competition (much better than results would suggest).
* There is probably quite a bit of variabilty between camera to camera. I believe my K-x is somewhat noisier than most of the reviews / samples I have seen. Ive tried pretty hard to reproduce low noise images I have seen in samples and still between 1/2 to 1 stop worse. However I suspect well within Pentax "specs" so not much I can do and anyway its still pretty good.
01-18-2010, 03:42 PM   #8
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
Problem with reviews

QuoteOriginally posted by buliwyf Quote
K-x' got very nice reviews everywhere with emphasis on being a top performer in handling noise.

Except for this one:

Pentax K-x DSLR Camera Review - Camcorder Reviews

Reviewed as a "camcorder" though, not a still camera.
You need a good "sample" of them for any decent conclusion. And then the conclusion should also be just a reference point.....
If you dig into it more you find these tidbits:
Pentax K-x Digital Camera Review - Pentax DSLR - DigitalCameraInfo.com
The Nikon D5000 outperformed the Pentax K-x in most of our lab tests, including substantial wins in color accuracy, long exposure, image noise and white balance. The Pentax came out ahead in burst rate shooting and dynamic range, though not by much. The one major sticking point for the Nikon, though, is still image resolution. While sharpness wasn't as bad as the Canon T1i, it is still troubling, while the Pentax K-x scored well in this area

So Pentax (to them) has a bit of trouble w/ WB and color (both of which can be EASILY tweaked in RAW) but think the images are sharper than both the Nikon and Canon, which can't be tweaked well I'd take the Pentax. The noise... I'd leave open to more of a look....

01-18-2010, 04:08 PM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,255
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com's staff consists of *2* people.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com's staff consists of *4*...if we are to believe their list.

Hey guys, let's start a website.
01-18-2010, 05:45 PM   #10
Veteran Member
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,663
QuoteOriginally posted by asdf Quote
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com's staff consists of *2* people.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com's staff consists of *4*...if we are to believe their list.

Hey guys, let's start a website.
Actually, I'm doing that. This week. Camera tests will be limited to cameras I've actually owned and use, a list which has been limited by my needs and financial resources, but hey, maybe I can get people to send me more cameras to "review" as well... ;-)
01-19-2010, 06:32 AM   #11
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 181
Erik.... go with it!!!! Just don't be rude like that of digitalcamerainfo......
01-19-2010, 06:37 AM   #12
Veteran Member
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,663
QuoteOriginally posted by dycz Quote
Erik.... go with it!!!! Just don't be rude like that of digitalcamerainfo......
I'm certainly going with it. It won't be just a photography site, but there will be photography/photogear articles (a lot of them, actually) and if I get a large enough readership, a) that might generate enough advertising income for me to buy more gear to write about, and b) it might give me a large enough audience to have people willing to let me borrow gear for a while to review it up.

I certainly do hope to be seen as a more objective and reliable information source than these highly questionable tests furnished by digitalcamerainfo, however...
01-19-2010, 11:36 AM   #13
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 127
digitalcamerainfo doesn't state what the tests are that they use to compare. They just say something like it's highly technical and accurate. They also state that the comparison shots were NOT used in the evaluation. So basically we have no idea what they used to test the cameras.

It seems that even "digitalcamerainfo" is geared more towards the video side of things... almost every other paragraph complained about the lack of HDMI interface on the K-x. Honestly, I do not know ANYONE that uses the TV out on their camera on a regular basis, if at all. I can count on one hand how many times I've used the composite output on all of the cameras I've owned, usually when visiting family and everyone wanted to see the shots we had taken that day.

The comparison test shots of the K-x were severely underexposed a while back. I saw reflections of florescent bulbs on the bottles. Those have since been replaced with a little bit better shots with what looks like the same LED lighting the other shots were taken with. I won't put much weight in that site's reviews in the future.
01-19-2010, 06:41 PM   #14
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AUS
Posts: 3,262
QuoteOriginally posted by er1kksen Quote
I'm certainly going with it. It won't be just a photography site, but there will be photography/photogear articles (a lot of them, actually) and if I get a large enough readership, a) that might generate enough advertising income for me to buy more gear to write about, and b) it might give me a large enough audience to have people willing to let me borrow gear for a while to review it up.

I certainly do hope to be seen as a more objective and reliable information source than these highly questionable tests furnished by digitalcamerainfo, however...
Good luck, mate. Keep it journalistic, not technofetishist or "bloggist." - disclose sponsors, remain objective in reviews, don't pass off copy-pasted press releases as "previews" or "reviews" (THAT'S a pet hate of mine!) or pull stunts just to draw in page views (page heading: "CANON TO STOP MAKING DIGITAL CAMERAS!!!111!ONE!UNO!!" followed by in the main body of the text "...is something that won't be happening anytime soon.")

Of course, if you do need opinionated, flame-war inducing demagoguery, you know where to PM me.
01-23-2010, 05:05 PM   #15
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: West Sussex UK
Posts: 235
QuoteQuote:
The Pentax K-x isn't the kind of camera you want to use for your professional video shoot.
This apple is not a very good banana.

No duff Sherlock.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, k-x, pentax news, pentax rumors, review, review of k-x, reviews
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA 31mm Limited assembled in Vietnam - bad QC or bad luck. Voe Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 64 03-03-2010 05:44 PM
Not so bad, K-7 Kameraten Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 01-19-2010 04:34 PM
DP Review modifies K2000 Review jeffkrol Pentax News and Rumors 8 02-05-2009 07:44 PM
Tamron Adaptall... Bad lens or bad adapter Okami Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 05-01-2008 06:52 PM
Photography Review K10D Review benjikan Pentax DSLR Discussion 29 03-04-2007 12:34 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:21 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top