I have nowhere else to post this, and I thought some of the things I mention might get indexed on here for people researching the K-X versus Canon and other offerings.
So I thought I'd put some thoughts and initial observations on here about my new K-X, having just come from a Canon Rebel XS 1000D, previously having had a K100D, and having loved all three. I would've liked to know some of this stuff before buying, and I still would've bought the K-X.
The Backwards Compatibility
To start with, I should mention why I came back to Pentax. I came back to Pentax because of the ability to use 50 years worth of lenses with no adapters and no loss of functionality of the original lenses. Having a nice-ish 50mm 1.7 and a 28mm 2.8 left from my K100D, I had been itching to come back to Pentax for quite a while.
The Stormtrooper
This is completely frivolous, but I love the white finish. One thing I couldn't appreciate from the reviews and pictures online, and even seeing it under store lights was how nice it looks in person. The white parts have almost a metallic, pearl sheen to them. What that does is makes it a little less likely to show fingerprints and smudges, but has the downside that the pieces that make up the body don't always look uniform (e.g. the left side of the flash area). Still, it's striking. Overall the camera looks classy and looks and feels like a quality piece of kit. My wife urged me to get the white K-X, and I was worried it would be too flashy, it's not.
The camera looks good with the kit lens' white accents, but looks equally good with an all-black lens. I imagine it looks awful with silver lenses, but when did silver lenses ever look good?
Mini-Me
The K-X packs a lot of punch in a small package, which is great for traveling (my upgrade was spurred by my upcoming trip to Europe) but that small package can feel a bit cramped at first. I had handled it in a store, but with one of those ginormous anti-theft collars on it.
When my K-X first arrived, I was surprised at how small the grip was. The camera didn't fill my hand when I put my thumb on the thumbrest. It comes down to my ring finger, and it took me a second to readjust my grip. Attaching my hand grip strap helped quite a bit. I'm still working on the ergonomics of hitting the green button without re-hitching my grip on the camera, not to mention my longish fingers overshoot the ev button every time.
Not Seeing Red
Really, no AF confirm lights?
Really?
I knew about this going in, but I guess part of me didn't want to believe it. I'm living without the lights, but I don't trust my eyes enough to venture out from the Auto-5 AF mode. Using the center point by itself seems to make it hunt a little too much in the AF.
Compared to Canon Rebel XS
It's interesting the different things that you notice when you switch among brands. The controls on the Canon were a little bit bigger all the way around, and you could press the thumb wheel in to select. I can't say that the smaller controls are necessarily a bad thing. They're definitely more logically laid out, and I've yet to hit the wrong button because they're smaller.
One major thing the Pentax trumps the Canon (at least mine) on is LV implementation. 1) A dedicated button. Hitting "Set" to enable Live View was livable, but having a dedicated button makes it more accessible, and leaves the OK button free to perform another function. 2) Live View works in Auto Mode. I could never figure out why they locked that out on the Canon, and it's probably a major reason why my wife never used that camera, as Live View was too inaccessible. For casual shooting, you might be in Full Auto, and if you're casual shooting, you're more likely to want LV. 3) The shutter button auto-focuses instead of using the seperate, and unmaked "*" button. If you've never used a Canon with this setup, you miht not believe me. On the Rebel XS and XSi, if not others, you have to press the "*" button to focus. A button, which, by the way, shares an alcove with another button, and both buttons perform other functions when not in LV mode. So you're likely to hit the wrong one.
The kit lens on the Pentax, while nothing earth-shattering, is about a thousand times better than Canon's offering. The Canon's EF-S lenses have a rotating front element, making a Petal hood useless. More than that, installing a bayonet hood requires you set the lens to Manual Focus, or else you damage the lens' internal Af motor. It's a really poor design.
Speaking of MF, that rotating front element on the Canon has a 1/8" ribbed front edge that's supposed to serve as an MF ring, and the motion isn't damped at ALL, making MF completely useless. Also undamped was the zoom of the lens, resulting a shlocky and cheap feeling. Overall the K-X's lens is a lot more usable, feels like much higher quality, all while being smaller and lighter than the Canon. This isn't surprising, given that the Canon had an AF and IS motor in it.
Speaking of AF, the AF isn't quite as good on the K-X. Nothing to complain about really, but Canon's One Shot focus was just inimitably fast.
A question, can you have it do contrast af in full-auto Live View? The Phase detect AF sucks so badly, but seems to be the only option when using Live View in Auto?
The main screen menu on the K-X seems to be laid out much better, the font is easier to read, and the color is customizable. I currently have it on a light layout which is nice and visible in the sun. The K-X's Info menu is a God-send, and brings a lot of features to the surface, so you don't have to dig through the menus.
The K-X obviously has a lot more features than the similarly-priced 1000D, including the in-camera HDR, which I haven't gotten to play with properly yet, the cross-processing, digital filters, and so on. I wont' go into that in detail but will mention that I believe the K-X is the cheapest way to do 720p in a DSLR. The video quality is very good with me just twisting the knob and shooting. The sound doesn't seem too bad . . . I won't be recording any concerts with it but for vacation videos, it beats the bulk of a dedicated video camera, and the quality of a Flip.
One difference that is more important than I thought it would be are the sounds the camera makes. The AF motor on the K-X is slightly more high-pitched than the Canon's. The K-X goes ZIIIT ZIIIT, and the Canon went ZERT-ZUCK.
But the shutter sound is surprisingly soft and deep. Almost like a rangefinder, but more manly. The Canon had this CLICK-ZEEEEE sound, that almost imitated an auto-wind on an old 35mm camera. It was annoying and loud, and it always startled animals. The K-X rewards you with a satisfying SHUCKA every time you press the button, or SHUCKA-KA-SHUCKA if you're in Live View mode.
Speaking of the button, I had gotten real used to that slight detent in the shutter button that served as your AF/AE, whereas there's no such thing on the K-X. It took all of 1 shot to re-learn that. I'm not sure which one is faster, or better. It's just different.
Compared to K100D
I bought the K100D in 2007, and it was my first DSLR. I bought the body only, and picked up a used Tamron 28-200 f4. It was heavy, dark, and had a spot on the front glass, but I got in real close at some concerts with it. The "best" lens I had for it was an FA 28-80 f3.5, which is comparable in weight to the kit lens with the K-X, but without the damping, quality, and with a rotating front element. The thing I fought with the K100D was all my pictures came out a bit dark. I had to lighten almost all of them in post-processing. Even ones that looked great on the camera screen looked darker on the computer. Now, granted, I wasn't shooting a lot of RAW back then, but I just assumed the crappy optics I had for it were to blame.
When I got the Canon, the IQ seemed to go way up, and I didn't have to compensate with my images. This reinforced my notion that it was the glass I was using.
Even with the kit lens (a DA L BTW, I'm tempted to find a deal on a DA II 18-55 but my money's probably better put toward a super-zoom Tamron or something, right?) the images still seem dark. I'm determined that I can fix this with settings and I'm sure I just need to sit down with the manual and tweak it.
The Shake Reduction on the K-X seems a lot more effective than the K100D, though the THUNKing sensor frame is a little disconcerting (and can really screw up audio on a video).
About the only thing I miss about my K100D is the AF auto-confirm lights when using manual focus, which made using old primes a snap. They're missing, but I'm hoping that the (much) brighter viewfinder will compensate. It's amazing to me how many features they've packed into an entry-level DSLR in 3 years. I'm really glad I'm back with Pentax.
With each DSLR purchase I've made, I was sure I'd keep the camera for years. But each time, I had gotten a good deal and a year later I was able to trade up to a new model with better features and IQ by spending less than $100. With the K100D, I bought the body for $399, spent ~$100 on lenses, and sold it all off for $450, and bought the Canon kit for $450. With the Canon kit, a year later I sold with a bag, tripod, and 4GB SD card (all of which I needed to replace or upgrade), for $435, and bought the K-X at Sam's Club for $450 with free shipping.
So here I am, looking at my K-X and wondering what I can expect next year. 1080p with external mic port? That's about all I could ask for above what the K-X does.
Oh, that and red autofocus lights.
Last edited by Ryan Trevisol; 08-30-2010 at 11:06 AM.
Reason: Change Title