[Deni]

Well, there have been many K-X vs K20D.

I got some cash from my 30th birthday so was looking for an upgrade to my beloved K100D.

What I'm looking for is:

Better battery life. My k100d doesn't like AAs. 2 sets of eneloops charged with LaCrosse 700 charger last only about 20 shots each set. Now I'm using rechargeable CRV-3s (which give 3.8v each) if I want to go compact or Travor battery grip if I want lots of shots. This goes for K20D.

Better ISO. I always shoot raw and process in Lightroom 2. Up to ISO 800 everything is fine, but starting from iso 1600, IQ deteriorates too much. K-X and obvious choice.

Better flash performance. Using a Digital Concepts 952AF/PEN flash I get all sort of over and under exposure shots, not that bad though. Is the p-ttl in the K-X working fine like it's working in the K7D?

Speed. I'm not very interested in FPS, never used the burst mode in the K100D, as I'm interested in normal performance, like shot to shot. The K100D has tought me to be patient, especially since I'm shooting mainly RAW.

I don't care about the top LCD panel, but the focus points indicator does worry me a bit.

In the future I'd like to start doing weddings, as there are many people over here who can't afford a PRO, so end up with lousy shots from P&S. I've done a wedding for a friend of mine and she liked the images and I felt comfortable doing it, even with my K100D.

Looking at the market prices I can get a K20D for about $500 and the K-X for about $400. I have about $600 to burn. So I could get a K20D + battery grip for $600-ish or a K-X + Metz 48 AF-1 (always feel I'm missing HSS) for $600 ish.

Obviously, the final choice will be mine, but I would also like to hear other people's opinions, maybe the ones who have had the chance to handle both cameras.

Thanks

Deni

[JohnBee]

Obviously, the final choice will be mine, but I would also like to hear other people's opinions, maybe the ones who have had the chance to handle both cameras.

Owning both camera's(two K20D's actually, and a Kx) and... having owned the K100S as well, there is always the chance that I might have something useful to offer on this.

First off, I would say that the K20D is head and shoulders above the Kx as far as form and function goes. That is to say that the Kx has none of the external controls that the K20D has to control the camera during a shooting. Which never really come across as an issue for me personally since the Kx is my wife's camera, but... whenever I use it for whatever, it does stands-out.

Secondly the Kx buffer is real drag. Now I know you mentioned that you're used to that with the K100, but let me assure you that if and when you work with a deeper buffer, you will gladly change your mind on its usefulness also.

Some other notable differences are in the power management side of things. And there are no doubts that the K20D has the advantage here as the Kx can consume batteries quite easily if your not careful, especially when using the onboard flash. And the lack of a grip for the unit comes as an added downside as well.

Additionally, I'd say that the Kx viewfinder is of a lesser brightness and view than the K20D. And though we upgraded ours with a splitscreen with brightness enhancement which helped, it still seems inferior in comparison to the K20's.

As for high ISO performance, both camera's are indistinguishable until around ISO1600, after which the Kx separates itself from the K20 as sensitivities increase. Though I think it's worth mentioning that the K20D can/will produce uncompromisable images up to ISO3200 and coaxed into ISO6400(cleanly) whereas the Kx will easily do ISO6400 and itself persuaded into the 12.8K regions.

Off the top, this is about all I can think of atm.
Though I'm sure there are many other notable differences to add as well.

[NaClH2O]

I don't own the K-x so every thing I have to say should be taken with that in mind. However I do own the ist DS which has a somewhat similar layout as the K-x
Like JohnBee said above, there is a BIG difference in the onboard controls of the two cameras. The addition of a second thumb/finger wheel is a great plus in my book and with the K20D I don't have to get into the menu system to change metering from spot to matrix to CW. Don't know if there is an external control for that on the K-x but there is not on the DS and it's a pain to have to go into the menu system to change. I also rely on the top lcd frequently to get info, not available on the K-x. Then there is weather sealing, the ability to store an "emergency" SD card in the battery grip, and the increased shooting capacity the grip provides. About the only benefit the K-x provides is the ability to shoot video and better high ISO performance (tho the K20D isn't too bad in that department)

NaCl(overall the K20D is a better camera IMO)H2O

[ManuH]

with the K20D I don't have to get into the menu system to change metering from spot to matrix to CW. Don't know if there is an external control for that on the K-x

No but it's much easier than it was with the DS. You press the info button and you have a pad of quick settings that you can change with the back dial.

I also rely on the top lcd frequently to get info, not available on the K-x.

This is replaced by the back LCD which does a great job IMHO, so the need for a top LCD is much less than it was before.

About the only benefit the K-x provides is the ability to shoot video and better high ISO performance (tho the K20D isn't too bad in that department)

K-x also has the newer Prime II processor just like the K-7. It has a more customizable JPEG engine, supports HDR in camera, shoots faster (4.7fps) has a faster AF in low-light. It also has a much better Liveview. Compared to the K-7 the K-x is inferior in every way except size/weight and high ISO. But compared to the K20D it's more difficult to have such a clear cut conclusion. In the end I would say that for pure performance the K-x may win over the K20D, but for usability and build quality the K20D is still better.

[ManuH]

Better battery life. My k100d doesn't like AAs. 2 sets of eneloops charged with LaCrosse 700 charger last only about 20 shots each set. Now I'm using rechargeable CRV-3s (which give 3.8v each) if I want to go compact or Travor battery grip if I want lots of shots. This goes for K20D.

The K-x should do much better than the K100D anyway. Having used both the K20D and the K-x I have no complaints about battery performance on both. They are more than adequate.

Better flash performance. Using a Digital Concepts 952AF/PEN flash I get all sort of over and under exposure shots, not that bad though. Is the p-ttl in the K-X working fine like it's working in the K7D?

It works well but probably not as good as the K-7 with its 77 segments metering.

Speed. I'm not very interested in FPS, never used the burst mode in the K100D, as I'm interested in normal performance, like shot to shot. The K100D has tought me to be patient, especially since I'm shooting mainly RAW.

The K-x is as almost as fast as the K-7, it uses the same Prime II processor. I'm used to the deep buffers of the K10D/K20D/K-7 but the K-x feels very responsive (be sure to get a fast card like the Sandisk Extreme III or Panasonic Class 10). The buffer is a bit short but it's cleared very fast. I shot some tennis a couple of weeks ago with both the K-x and the K-7. I usually shoot a burst of 3-4 images and the K-x was good enough for that use. I shoot in RAW exclusively. From that point of view the K-x is certainly a huge upgrade from the K100D.

I don't care about the top LCD panel, but the focus points indicator does worry me a bit.

The top LCD has been replaced by the back LCD, it works very well and doesn't seem to use too much energy. The focus point indicator has been discussed a lot. Unless you're always selecting your points, it's no big deal IMHO. The back LCD screen is also possible to be viewed at steep angles, so you can see the selected point on it without removing your eye from the viewfinder. It's not as comfortable as seeing the points in the viewfinder but it's a possible workaround.

Looking at the market prices I can get a K20D for about $500 and the K-X for about $400. I have about $600 to burn. So I could get a K20D + battery grip for $600-ish or a K-X + Metz 48 AF-1 (always feel I'm missing HSS) for $600 ish.

I'd choose the K-x + flash. The K20D is a fine camera, I liked it but it's a 2008 camera with slow AF in low-light (not good for weddings). The handling of the K20D+grip and K-x is very different, you may want to check on that. Choice is yours but for the same price you get a flash vs a grip. The grip is nice but it won't help to get pictures like a flash does.

[philbaum]

I have the K20 but not the Kx.

But i like to shoot indoor live theatre for publicity photos - volunteer work. But they prohibit flash, even for dress rehearsals.

My theatre work has really impressed upon me the value of high iso performance. Its true that new noise software is going to allow me to shoot clean at 3200 ISO but Kx is even more accomplished in this area.

Since you talked about wanting to do weddlings, I think you'll be much happier with the Kx. Good high ISO performance allows one to shoot with higher DOF for those crowd scenes where you want more than one person in focus. Also shutter speed is necessary to stop motion. Both of those shooting parameters benefit from higher ISO performance. Frankly, i think that a high ISO camera is more important than fast glass, since fast glass just forces one to shoot with lower DOF, which is not always wanted.

By the way, i have the Metz 48 and it is excellent. A side benefit is that botht he Metz and the Kx can use the same backup batteries, which is useful i think.

best of luck

[Ash]

Another K20D owner here.
The above poll is not the fairest of choices to have to make.
But for your purposes:

Better battery life, clearly it's the K20D + grip that will go the distance.
Better ISO, clearly the K-x trumps the K20D, but ISO 1600 exposures from the K20D are useable at 100% crops.

Better flash performance, I'm not sure it matters which body you pick up but it does matter what flash you put on the camera. Your Digital Concepts flash is a very ordinary piece of equipment to put it lightly. I skimped on investing into a more reliable flash when I first started out with flash photography and quickly realised it was simply not worth it. Just get yourself a Metz or Pentax P-TTL flash and you won't be disappointed.

Not interested in fps? Then even the K20D is overkill. But what's great about the K20D is the large buffer size and quick write speed that makes continuous shooting even in RAW mode very handy.

Weddings? Well, that's a choice you'll need to make. Being a demanding field requiring good high ISO performance, the K-x seems to be the choice to make. However I've been doing weddings for some time, and even with the *ist D, K10D and K20D, I've not had very many missed shots.

[theperception2008]

Hi Deni,
First off I would like to state that I voted for a K20D plus grip. I used to own a Samsung Gx-20 (just like the K20D minus different menu system)

Well, there have been many K-X vs K20D.

I got some cash from my 30th birthday so was looking for an upgrade to my beloved K100D.

What I'm looking for is:

Better battery life. My k100d doesn't like AAs. 2 sets of eneloops charged with LaCrosse 700 charger last only about 20 shots each set. Now I'm using rechargeable CRV-3s (which give 3.8v each) if I want to go compact or Travor battery grip if I want lots of shots. This goes for K20D.

Now that thing is that I have a K100D Super with Sanyo Eneloops, I have atleast 600 shots per charge with the. I have a Powerex Charger MHC-9000 and I discharge my batteries before I recharge them and I find that it helps. There may be something wrong with the batteries or the camera as 20 shots per set is awfully small number of shots.

Better ISO. I always shoot raw and process in Lightroom 2. Up to ISO 800 everything is fine, but starting from iso 1600, IQ deteriorates too much. K-X and obvious choice.

As for ISO performance, I feel that the Gx-20 did fine up to 1600 after that it was too noisy. Going with a fast lens quality lens would have made it better when I had it.

Better flash performance. Using a Digital Concepts 952AF/PEN flash I get all sort of over and under exposure shots, not that bad though. Is the p-ttl in the K-X working fine like it's working in the K7D?

No clue, I'm sorry. My K100D Super works great with my AF280T flash :-D

Speed. I'm not very interested in FPS, never used the burst mode in the K100D, as I'm interested in normal performance, like shot to shot. The K100D has tought me to be patient, especially since I'm shooting mainly RAW.

Tell me about it! My K100D Super is a slow poke compared with the read/write speed of the Gx-20 using the same brand and model of a memory card the Gx-20 just smoked the K100D super.

I don't care about the top LCD panel, but the focus points indicator does worry me a bit.

I don't know about this either, but I like the focus points on my K100D super too much to give it up.

In the future I'd like to start doing weddings, as there are many people over here who can't afford a PRO, so end up with lousy shots from P&S. I've done a wedding for a friend of mine and she liked the images and I felt comfortable doing it, even with my K100D.

The K20D would be great in a wedding :-) especially with the grip. It would be very comfortable to hold and use :-)

Looking at the market prices I can get a K20D for about $500 and the K-X for about $400. I have about $600 to burn. So I could get a K20D + battery grip for $600-ish or a K-X + Metz 48 AF-1 (always feel I'm missing HSS) for $600 ish.

Obviously, the final choice will be mine, but I would also like to hear other people's opinions, maybe the ones who have had the chance to handle both cameras.

Thanks

Deni

I feel that the K20D is a more Pro level camera with better ergonomics and that the time it takes to transfer info from the buffer to the memory card is alot shorter than the transfer time of the K!00D for sure. I would personally go with the K20D as it is also weather proof :-) I hope that helps!

[Balders]

In the UK, prices from Amazon with 18-55mm Kit lens.
K20D £700 ($1011)

K-x £460 ($664)

That's $347 difference, I know that the K20D is an older model, but what is the point in comparing a much higher priced camara to a much lower priced model?
Wouldn't it be better to compare the K20D to the K7?

[JohnBee]

In the UK, prices from Amazon with 18-55mm Kit lens.
K20D £700 ($1011)

K-x £460 ($664)

That's $347 difference, I know that the K20D is an older model, but what is the point in comparing a much higher priced camara to a much lower priced model?
Wouldn't it be better to compare the K20D to the K7?

Holy cow that's crazy pricing for a K20D!!!
The last one I purchased came was with a :18-55, 55-200, 4GB, bag and camera for 650USD!

I guess its best to steer clear of buying a K20 in the UK!

[hitechrr]

I have both the k20d and kx. I also had the k100d super. I replaced the k100d with the KX. I liked the kx so much that I put the k20d on ebay. I sold the k20d and the person returned it. It was too much camera for him. So now I have both and I think I will keep both. I have the pentax 360 flash and I also find the exposure all over the place on p-ttl. I find I do much better with manual flash. I do like the video on the kx and find that it does use the battery fast. I have a grip for the k20d but find it too heavy to use. The price on the kx is good. I paid $650 for body, 18-55 and 55-300 lens. That was with bing cashback from beach camera. If I had to sell my k20d for less than $600 I would rather keep it. It is a great camera at that price and has a great build. The camera is only a tool and you will get great shots from any of the 3. My daughter used the k100d for 3 years of collage in her photography class. Now she uses the KX. She prints 13 x 19.

[WerTicus]

the kx has a much better sensor, and i like its smaller size

but everything else about the k20d is better...

so if you dont shoot over 800iso get a k20d for sure.

[Balders]

On the question of image quality, which would you say produces the best quality of image?

The K-x on DxOMark has slightly better marks than the K20D, that's if I have read the information correctly.

[Deni]

Greetings from Florence, Italy (on my honey moon ).

I've found myself shooting a lot of times at iso 1600 1/4th of a second. So wanting for better high ISO capabilites.

K-X (looking for) + Metz 48 AF1 (already paid for) is the one I chose. I tried a K-X here in Florence (490 euros for body only ouch) and seemed nice and snapy.

Is the K20D (there's one for $375 of sale in the market) better than K100D at ISO 3200?

Thanks everyone for the opinions.

Deni

[melander]

I got both the K20D and the K-X

Its two different worlds, I use my K20D for outdoorsy stuff, and the K-X for indoorsy stuff