[geekette]

Should I go ahead and buy it? It seems like the K-X is better than the Nikon D3100 and the entry level Canons.

I see a K-X body for $369 on ebay, no lens. Do I want the kit lens? Or is the quality not that great? I already have 3 manual focus 1970's pentax k mount lenses. I'm not big on autofocus anyways. But if I were to desire autofocus, which lens should I buy for that camera? The kit lens or is there one better for it instead?

[Rondec]

The kx is a good camera. It can easily shoot up to iso 3200. The kr (which superseded it) has added a higher video mode, nicer LCD, and focus points. As far as a lens, you will need to decide what you want. Certainly you can pick up a kit lens for fifty or sixty dollars. Other options for a walk around zoom would be Pentax DA 16-45 f4, DA 17-70 f4 or the Sigma 17-70. All are nice lenses and would be a step up the kit lens with regard to image quality (although they are all more expensive too).

Good luck!

[aurele]

frankly, the kit lense is not too bad at all. it does the job well.

You can find some of those kit lenses on the market for 50-60$ i guess (it's what it cost here in europe, so i think it's the same in USA ...), so if the kit lense cost much don't take it with.

If you want another "kit lense" you can find some for around 300$ at sigma or tamron or even Pentax. You can take some 17-70 f2.8-4 or 28-70 f4, etc ...

And by the way, i have the K-x, and i'm ****ing lovin' it ! i have it for a year, and i couldn't buy something better for me

[Bramela]

The kit lenses can do a rather good job, for the price.
For an example of the versatility of the DA 16-45 :

Bramela's Album: Single in April '11 - PentaxForums.com

My April album all done with that lens, on a K5.

(Not showing off, I assure you)

[UnknownVT]

That's a really good price for the K-x - even at its lowest - it was about $450 body only new.

Let no one kid you, the 18-55 kit zoom is not the "bestest" lens in the world -
but it is very economical and can produce good results -
I have a whole thread started in Dec/2009 -
Kx in Use ( 1 2 3 ... Last Page)
that has numerous photos exclusively on the 2 kit zooms
(simply because those are the only two Pentax lenses I have )

I shoot mainly music - and do a lot of photography in a very dark jazz club -
so dark that in some places the light level is below both the metering and AF limits of the K-x

K-x:

ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/50sec, 35mm (low light about EV=4 @ ISO100)

But to truly show what the 18-55 zoom is actually capable of -
I took this on my old 6mp K100D -

ISO400, f/3.5, 1/40sec; 18mm, 6Mp K100D (hopefully EXIF still attached - PhotoBucket can mysteriously drop metadata)

Both the shots are the humble kit zoom at its wide-open aperture for the respective focal lengths - supposedly the worst performance -
here are some more objective comparisons - I had for a short while a Pentax PRIME A-50mm f/2 - no not the bestest prime either - but at f/8 its optimum aperture it is one of the sharpest lenses one can get - let these speak for themselves:

compare to my two humble kit zooms?
At f/8 the optimum aperture for the A-50mm f/2-

hmmm.... I am impressed with the zooms at f/8 to be able to match a prime at its optimum aperture is pretty good.....

ah but what about zooms wide-open won't they be cr@p compared to f/8 of this prime?

still pretty good - the 18-55 at 55mm wide open does lag very slightly - but really nothing to complain about - especially considering it is supposed to be the worst focal length and wide-open for this lens and these are 100% crops/at pixel level.