Originally posted by Cinders I'm not sure if I like the k-x's auto white balance indoors. It's my first dslr so sorry if I say something stupid. But I like to change to tungsten indoors. Auto white balance looks too warm.....but that might be the lighting situation in here.
Also a matter of personal preference. Tungsten lighting *is* very warm, and some people prefer pictures taken under tungsten lighting to *look* like they were taken with tungsten lighting; others prefer the camera to try to reconstitute the colors as they'd appear in more neutral light, and others such as me prefer a compromise betwene the two. Many cameras give you options to control this - I believe the K-x may be one of them (some kind of custom option?)
Quote: Speaking of that, I have one lamp in my room, a 40watt bulb. It does a tolerable level of lighting the room. I dunno if I'd say it's low light.
One 40-watt bulb isn't just low light, it's *very* low light.
Quote: But my k-x goes up to 12800 ISO when i put it in auto mode, and that's with 1/40-1/60 shutter speed. With the kit lens though.
Right, meaning you're dealing with a maximum aperture of probably f/4 or f/5.6 depending on what focal length you are set to.
Quote: Would upgrading to a 1.8 or 1.4 prime make a huge difference?
Yes, but just going to f/2.8 would make a noticeable difference, too. If you're getting ISO 12800 at f/5.6, that would mean you'd get ISO 3200 at f/2.8. At f/2, you'd get 1600, and f/1.4, ISO 800. But I think you'd find DOF so shallow at f/1.4 it wouldn't be worth it unless that was the specific effect you were going for (eg, eye in focus, nose not).
I'd be choosing a slightly slower shutter speed to lower ISO. With SR, you don't need to be shooting 1/60" just to get a sharp picture with the kit lens or the DA40.