[dragonfly]

The best choice is the camera that you can afford. Please factor in the cost of all of the lenses that you are going to want...

[outsider]

Like a lot of money-conscious beginners, I am looking to buy a Pentax K-x in the next couple days, because of its rave reviews and low price, but I was wondering if there were any other suggestions as far as Pentax entry level cameras? Overall image quality is most important to me, especially in low light settings, and since this is simply going to start off as a hobby for me, at least for now, price is a big factor as well. So is the Pentax k-x a good choice? Other suggestions?

This is an easy one Man. Yes. Backcompatability, AA powered, a sensor that is on par or better than mid range dslr's of other makers and the k-7. Build quality is as good as you'll see considering it's not metal body. But really you should do your research. I read online for a couple weeks, tens of hours educating myself on pros and cons of different makes and models of camera. The more you research, the less you'll need to ask such a question. Depending on your specific needs, others can inadvertently give wrong advice.

[vegabraveian]

For the money...yes. K-x is the best choice for it class...I mean...yeah...I need the camera who has good high iso result and K-x does. Glad to be K-x owner....

[vegabraveian]

...Depending on your specific needs, others can inadvertently give wrong advice.

Agree

[geekette]

I use the K-x a lot - especially for very low/available light -
and I can get away with just the two kit zoom lenses (18-55 and 50-200)
- this was undreamed of only a few years ago -
the K-x's HighISO performance is extraordinary -
and it still ranks among the top HighISO performers today
even in the company of the top APS-C dSLRs like the K-5, K-r, and Nikon D7000.

But one could take it that I'm biased -

Here's something that may be a little more objective:

ConsumerSearch.com reviews the reviews -
ie: survey the available reviews, rate them, then comes to some consensus -
kind of what I would do logically if I had the resources and time -

They have done a survey of dSLRs
the Pentax K-x (link to review) was their pick of the entry level dSLRs

I'm not impressed with their reviews. They are saying it isn't as capable as the Canon T2i (a camera that costs about 300 more dollars than the k-x). Thing is the Pentax K-X has better image quality, much better color depth, better dynamic range, built in image stabilization, and takes AA batteries Seems a hell of a lot better than any canon below $1000. I was looking at the entry level canons--below 1000 dollars--a week ago or so and the Pentax K-X is just better for a lot less money! So I bought a K-X. The K-X is better than the Nikon D3100 as well (that camera doesn't even take a lot of the older nikon lenses and if they do, it doens't meter through them at all).

[GeneV]

Late to this party, but I will say that, as an almost 40 year Pentaxian, I have owned many bodies, but I have had two Pentax cameras that were hard to pry from my hands: The MX and K-x. I like my photo equipment compact, functional and simple.

I bought the K-x, and had 10,000 exposures on it before I knew it. It goes anywhere without weighing me down, shoots in just about any light I need, takes Lithium AA batts that last for thousands of shots with my style of shooting, and on and on. My K100d, K10 and K20d are lonely now.

[GatorPentax]

Now that the K-r is available, to me that one is definitely the most cost-efficient and best performing entry-level camera around...

I agree with Ash, the Kr may be a bit more expensive, but the focusing points and the option to use a lithium ion battery pack vs AA is worth the extra cost. Other than that, Im glad that pentax didn't try to "improve" on the image quality of the Kx when making the KR. the Kx and the Kr makes amazing photos.

[UnknownVT]

I'm not impressed with their reviews. They are saying it isn't as capable as the Canon T2i (a camera that costs about 300 more dollars than the k-x). Thing is the Pentax K-X has better image quality, much better color depth, better dynamic range, built in image stabilization, and takes AA batteries Seems a hell of a lot better than any canon below $1000. I was looking at the entry level canons--below 1000 dollars--a week ago or so and the Pentax K-X is just better for a lot less money! So I bought a K-X. The K-X is better than the Nikon D3100 as well (that camera doesn't even take a lot of the older nikon lenses and if they do, it doens't meter through them at all).

It's not really their review - since ConsumerSearch.com reviews the reviews -
ie: survey the available reviews, rate them, then comes to some consensus.

Unfortunately "capable" is not the same as "image quality" -
it's things like video at full HD 1080p/30fps, faster Live View, 3" sharper LCD, that makes the Canon T2i more "capable".

I am really, really surprised that their much, much BIGGER faux pas was not cited, since we're nit picking:
from: Pentax K-x -

Low-light performance is a letdown too.

huh? what? the K-x was and still is one of the very top HighISO performers available - I know as I shoot at ISO5000 in dark available light all the time - they may have got that from PopPhoto.com Test Results Panel where if not read with the review one would have thought the HighISO was not that good - coupled with what is generally known - Pentax AF is sluggish at very low light.

The point is the Pentax K-x was picked as the top entry level dSLR -
just because they didn't say the K-x was "perfect" in every way,
we are only talking of an entry level dSLR -
doesn't mean the K-x is not a good camera -
after all it is their top pick for an entry level dSLR.

[geekette]

For me, the Pentax K-X is the best DSLR under $1000, and only costs 1/2 that

[fafo13]

from what ive learned in few months with dslr, owning kx and t1i, tried few more for litle time my thoughts from my experience when ive strted with none:

kx had great features for me most important, are size, aa batteries, high iso iq, menus and ergonomics, but i would not recomend it as point and shoot camera, why ? Cause p&s should be p&s and on auto mode chooses to slow shutter speeds, af with mind of his own and exposure with flash, honestly, when i give my kx to my gf she cant get a decent picture with it, yhen she crabs canon and smile comes to her face, but if i shoot kx and she do it with canon, them we compare it at 100% shes not smiling anymore.
Dont get me wrong with my experience (cant talk about anyones else) kx is great if you willing to take time amd learn, but if you looking for p&s and illing to sacririce a liltle bit on iq, you much better with canon.

This is mine opinion, and i love my kx and im planing on buying k5 and most likely keep botj cameras

[UnknownVT]

For me, the Pentax K-X is the best DSLR under $1000, and only costs 1/2 that

I own and use K-x extensively - since Nov/2009 -
I share your enthusiasm -
so you'll get no arguments from me regarding its capabilities and value -
But even allowing for enthusiasm -
I think over-exaggerated praise would tend to devalue any real valid points.

There are now examples of under $1K dSLRs that have better performance and/or features than the K-x -

Pentax K-r is one example even within the Pentax group -
then the new Nikon D5100 - which is the D7000 in a cheaper body -
its image quality is on par with the K-5, since it uses the same sensor and processing as the D7000,
and maybe even the Sony A580 which again uses the same sensor as the K-5 and D7000.

However to me the K-x is still better value for money than those.

[vegabraveian]

I've compared with my C 500D. K-x have three winning. Perfect Low Light result, 1.5 FOV and SR body. Canon 500D winning on Visible AF Point. The rest is standard. But in my country, one more winning for Canon are lot's of lens available than Pentax lens who same like treasure, rare and expensive. But all of choice is depend on needs. Sorry if oot.