After the K-x

Deniz · 08-31-2011, 12:17 PM

Hi there,

Recently I decided to sorta 'upgrade' my camera. Well, not exactly upgrage, let's say ehm.. enlarge! Nothing against the K-x, it's really solid machine. The only downside for me was, I've never found the ISO performance that good. But it just doesn't feel right. The outcomes are beautiful but the I've never quite enjoyed using it so I decided to make a change and that being to pick up one of these two cameras:

Pentax K10D: (Because the K20D is still pretty expensive around here) I think the K10D would satisfy the need for size. As I've seen so far, it has a really bad ISO/AF performance but the CCD makes the photograph truly good.

Canon 40D: This camera is about to become the reason for me to leave Pentax brand. The price is really good. IQ is good. AF is said to be amazing. I don't really know much about ISO performance though. Also there is a wide variety of Canon AF lenses. But I have doubts about Canon, to be honest. Once I used a friend of mine's Canon 550D with 17-85 and 50 f1.8, well.. It was good in low light and AF and anything but the photos were all kinda 'smooth' and soft. I don't know if it is about the setting or a general feature of Canon DSLRs. Anyway, the 40D seems to be the best option but still I need a second best opinion.

So, K-x just wasn't the right camera for me. What should take next?

Ole · 08-31-2011, 12:38 PM

I find the K10D is a solid choice. Even though I have the K-5 I still often use the K10D. It is weather sealed and solidly built and AF performance is good. The highest ISO setting is just 1600, and that is somewhat noisy, so one has to use the lower settings. It has buttons for many functions so you avoid "menu diving" when shooting.

You should, if possible, try to handle both models, the K10D and the 40D, and look for how it fits/feels in your hand, build quality and ease of operation (in my view buttons are preferable over menu diving for the main functions).

RioRico · 08-31-2011, 12:50 PM

I cannot comment on the Canon. The K10D was a major improvement on what Pentax produced previously. The K20D was a major improvement on the K10D. When I bought my first dSLR just 3+ years ago, I chose the K20D rather than the K10D because it IS more advanced -- I did not want to be tempted to 'upgrade' anytime soon. That strategy had worked well; I am very happy with my K20D.

Yes, both the K10D and K20D have WR and tethering and semi-pro controls. I think many use the K10D only at ISO 100. That is fine for studio shooting, not so fine for many outside-world needs. You should ask yourself if you will be happy with its limitations, and for how long?

My recommendation: If you need a studio camera, the K10D should be fine. For anything else, look for a used K20D.

audiobomber · 08-31-2011, 01:01 PM

I had a friend with a 40D who upgraded to a 50D. The 40D photos were not impressive, to me or to him. The 50D photos were much nicer, but we both preferred the look of K20D images. He was a birder, so Canon made sense for him. I am a generalist, and very happy with the K20.

I agree with RioRico, forget the K10D, get a K20D. I have the K20D and K-x, but the K20 is my main camera. Other than 2/3 stop at high ISO, the K20D is a far nicer camera than the K-x, with better features than the K10, better sensitivity and fewer bugs.

Andi Lo · 08-31-2011, 01:01 PM

Originally posted by Deniz

Hi there,

Recently I decided to sorta 'upgrade' my camera. Well, not exactly upgrage, let's say ehm.. enlarge! Nothing against the K-x, it's really solid machine. The only downside for me was, I've never found the ISO performance that good. But it just doesn't feel right. The outcomes are beautiful but the I've never quite enjoyed using it so I decided to make a change and that being to pick up one of these two cameras:

Pentax K10D: (Because the K20D is still pretty expensive around here) I think the K10D would satisfy the need for size. As I've seen so far, it has a really bad ISO/AF performance but the CCD makes the photograph truly good.

Canon 40D: This camera is about to become the reason for me to leave Pentax brand. The price is really good. IQ is good. AF is said to be amazing. I don't really know much about ISO performance though. Also there is a wide variety of Canon AF lenses. But I have doubts about Canon, to be honest. Once I used a friend of mine's Canon 550D with 17-85 and 50 f1.8, well.. It was good in low light and AF and anything but the photos were all kinda 'smooth' and soft. I don't know if it is about the setting or a general feature of Canon DSLRs. Anyway, the 40D seems to be the best option but still I need a second best opinion.

So, K-x just wasn't the right camera for me. What should take next?

I have both K10 and K-x. I can relate about how K-x doesnt feel "right"

As far as size goes, K10 + grip + limiteds = <3 The AF and high ISO is inferior to K-x but I find the controls snappier just because of the extra buttons. I think processing speed wise they're around the same. K10 doesnt have that pixallation lag that the K-x does everytime you cycle to a new picture in preview though, possibly because of the lower mpix. K10 is also very cheap these days like you said (There's one in the marketplace for under $200 right now (!!!)). Be wary that you'd feel that you shouldn't shoot over ISO 400 alot though, so watch your exif during your k-x use, on the K-x I can go to 1600 without care.

Canon 40D, I haven't used this camera, but it is the K10D's contemporary back in their days. AF is definitely better like you said, and it gives you access to lenses that pentax doesnt have like 70-200/4 and the wideangle tiltshifts.

As for Canon's plastic skin look. This effect is, AFAIK, created by the combination of the sensor and lens on Canon's lower models. I know for sure that all of the xD models are not affected by this (they better not!). Not sure about the XXD series though.

FYI, my first camera was a K100d and I think that one is still the best for me. If only I can stuff K-x sensor and K-x AF in it! Should try sticking them both in a blender.

aurele · 08-31-2011, 01:43 PM

I decided to buy DSLR thank to a friend with a 40D so, i know some few things.

I used his 40D mostly for sports, and party.

The 40D is very close of the k-x about the iso. In fact, you can get almost exacttly the same result with the K-x by changing

>Menu /C2 / 14 -> put on 3 instead of 2.

The AF is good, little better than the K-x when using the kit. But with some wide aperture lense, very close.

The 40D is somewhat heavy, compared to the k-x, but this heavyness doesn't give a feeling of better construction.
I prefer now, the Pentax ergonomy, but at first, i thought the Canon wasn't bad at all.

Talking about lense, Canon doesn't give that much more lense than Pentax when looking under the 1,000$ per lense.(i guess you won't buy more expensive lense ?)

here are the results :

Nikon : 37 (mostly due to FX and DX version of same lense.)
Canon : 28
Pentax : 24

in general, Canon lenses are a bit cheaper than Pentax, but with Tamron and Sigma, all brand offer almost the same lense, for almost the same price.

I would suggest you to stay at Pentax if you have some lense / gear. If not, the 40D is still a good choice, like a bigger K-x.

i never tried any other body like K20/7/5 or 50D /60D, so i can't say much about those.

tibbitts · 08-31-2011, 04:51 PM

Just curious, why not consider Nikon? If you use wide angle lenses, the 1.6x vs. 1.5x factor can be a modestly significant factor.

Admittedly there are some 3rd party lenses made for Canon/Nikon and not for Pentax, and there are more OEM lenses for those brands, particularly on the long (and expensive) end.

Paul

jimr-pdx · 08-31-2011, 07:02 PM

Originally posted by Deniz

Nothing against the K-x, it's really solid machine. The only downside for me was, I've never found the ISO performance that good. But it just doesn't feel right. The outcomes are beautiful but the I've never quite enjoyed using it...

Wow - that's a first knock on k-x ISO that I've ever heard. Not feeling right I understand, in my case it was the K-7 and the k-x solved it. I researched the cr@p out of cameras to pick the K-7, loved the features but not the 'feel'.

As to your next camera, that's mighty personal. I came from Sony which makes good gear (almost fell for the A700, but it 'felt' waaay too big), but now I know I prefer thumb to pointer when just one control dial is in play. That's the sort of thing that only you can decide. Good luck to you!

aurele · 09-01-2011, 02:00 AM

Originally posted by tibbitts

Just curious, why not consider Nikon? If you use wide angle lenses, the 1.6x vs. 1.5x factor can be a modestly significant factor.

because with 1.6x crop factor, you need shorter focal lengt to get the same angle of view.

And the entry level at Nikon is a big trap : you can only use the more recent lenses.

Andi Lo · 09-01-2011, 06:53 AM

Originally posted by aurele

because with 1.6x crop factor, you need shorter focal lengt to get the same angle of view.

And the entry level at Nikon is a big trap : you can only use the more recent lenses.

Canon is the one with 1.6x. They make their own sensors, as opposed to Nikon and Pentax which for the most part (except k20d and nikon FF?) have been sharing the same sensor tech for the past few years (K10d = d200, k-x = d5000, k100d = d40 etc)

Imo it's really a non issue though... can't you just step back half a foot?

Also with Nikon, if he has budget for 40D, he can probably get the d200 or d80 for the same money. Both afaik does AF with all their AF lens (but d80 doesnt meter with some, go nikon trap!).

DaveHolmes · 09-01-2011, 10:29 AM

I'd like to know if you have much invested into Pentax... I mean lenses...
I'd really like to trade up from my K-x at some point too... I also sometimes find the body a little small... But I love the results I get... And I have around a dozen lenses now (and hopefully buying my first LIMITED in Sept... DA35-2.8macro) so reckon I'm Pentax for life
For me it'd be (in order of choice...) K5, K20, K7... (until the next flagship comes around)... But without much invested I'd consider going Nikon as they do feel good in the hand...
When it comes down to it... Any DSLR made by any company in the last 5 years is going to (and they all do) produce stunning results if the user gets along with it...

Deniz · 09-01-2011, 01:05 PM

Thanks for the responses. A quick answer for, Y U NO choose Nikon. Because the only Nikon I can get for that price range is the D200 and buying it over the K10D would be pointless imo.

I haven't got so many lenses. The kits of 18-55, 55-300 and a lovely Helios 44K. I don't deny the fact that old Pentax lenses are suberb, just after two years with the Helios I'm kinda sick of MF. Also I can always use the old Pentax primes on other DSLRs with an adapter, right?

Using the K-x in last two years was always the same story. Amazing IQ but using it, just never felt fun.

Now, the Canon 40D seems to be the optimal option (it's actually cheaper than the K20D as second hand). ISO looks very similar to K-x and I wonder if the IQ is worse or not?

In any case, I'd have a walk-around lens like a 18-135 (or keep the kit lenses if I'll stick with Pentax), a 50mm AF finally and a wide angle or a telephoto later. I'm not working with/in a studio. I'm pretty much that average user that says: "I'm into shooting anyway/anything and some portraits." So, with a very realistic prediction, I won't have L or Limited lenses for a long long time and I'm just trying to find a decent camera that can bring up good IQ as well as 'that DLR feeling that K-x doesn't goddamn give".

Andi Lo · 09-02-2011, 06:38 AM

18-55 and 55-300 isn't such a big investment that you can't sell it. The big difference between 40D and K10D in your situation is just AF imo. There are other (pretty major) differences, but I guess either one is going to do you fine

You're buying used anyway, so if it doesnt work out, just sell it again! no big deal made. Think of shipping and resale value lost as rental fees.

RioRico · 09-02-2011, 08:54 AM

Originally posted by Deniz

Also I can always use the old Pentax primes on other DSLRs with an adapter, right?

On Canon-Sony-m4/3, yes. On Nikon, no. And Pentax and Sony have in-camera stabilization, so all lenses benefit from SR. On Canon and Nikon, you get to pay extra for in-lens IS on *some* lenses.

brandonbpm · 09-07-2011, 04:49 PM

Can anyone tell me if the K-x is better than the K10 or K20 when it comes STRICTLY TO IMAGE QUALITY!? I have been doing a lot of research because I want THE best image quality for the price range, so even though I LOVE my kx, I am considering upgrading/crossgrading to an older camera but I don't know if the image quality will be any better than my Kx, which I think produces GREAT Images. For example, I look on dxo and do snapsort camera compares and they rate the kx's image quality and sensor higher than both the K10D and K20D, and even canon models as recent as the EOS Canon 550D (rebel x2i). And many other sourcessay that the kx's image quality is on par if not a little better than some of these, at least when it comes to jpeg, and definitely in terms of high ISO. SO what is it? Is the Kx better than the K10D and 20D strictly in terms of image quality?

08-31-2011, 12:17 PM	#1
Deniz Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Ankara/Turkish Republic Posts: 26	After the K-x Hi there, Recently I decided to sorta 'upgrade' my camera. Well, not exactly upgrage, let's say ehm.. enlarge! Nothing against the K-x, it's really solid machine. The only downside for me was, I've never found the ISO performance that good. But it just doesn't feel right. The outcomes are beautiful but the I've never quite enjoyed using it so I decided to make a change and that being to pick up one of these two cameras: Pentax K10D: (Because the K20D is still pretty expensive around here) I think the K10D would satisfy the need for size. As I've seen so far, it has a really bad ISO/AF performance but the CCD makes the photograph truly good. Canon 40D: This camera is about to become the reason for me to leave Pentax brand. The price is really good. IQ is good. AF is said to be amazing. I don't really know much about ISO performance though. Also there is a wide variety of Canon AF lenses. But I have doubts about Canon, to be honest. Once I used a friend of mine's Canon 550D with 17-85 and 50 f1.8, well.. It was good in low light and AF and anything but the photos were all kinda 'smooth' and soft. I don't know if it is about the setting or a general feature of Canon DSLRs. Anyway, the 40D seems to be the best option but still I need a second best opinion. So, K-x just wasn't the right camera for me. What should take next?

09-01-2011, 06:53 AM	#10
Andi Lo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia Posts: 2,924	Originally posted by aurele because with 1.6x crop factor, you need shorter focal lengt to get the same angle of view. And the entry level at Nikon is a big trap : you can only use the more recent lenses. Canon is the one with 1.6x. They make their own sensors, as opposed to Nikon and Pentax which for the most part (except k20d and nikon FF?) have been sharing the same sensor tech for the past few years (K10d = d200, k-x = d5000, k100d = d40 etc) Imo it's really a non issue though... can't you just step back half a foot? Also with Nikon, if he has budget for 40D, he can probably get the d200 or d80 for the same money. Both afaik does AF with all their AF lens (but d80 doesnt meter with some, go nikon trap!). Last edited by Andi Lo; 09-01-2011 at 07:05 AM.

08-31-2011, 12:38 PM	#2
Ole Administrator Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Copenhagen, Denmark Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,408	I find the K10D is a solid choice. Even though I have the K-5 I still often use the K10D. It is weather sealed and solidly built and AF performance is good. The highest ISO setting is just 1600, and that is somewhat noisy, so one has to use the lower settings. It has buttons for many functions so you avoid "menu diving" when shooting. You should, if possible, try to handle both models, the K10D and the 40D, and look for how it fits/feels in your hand, build quality and ease of operation (in my view buttons are preferable over menu diving for the main functions).

08-31-2011, 12:50 PM	#3
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	I cannot comment on the Canon. The K10D was a major improvement on what Pentax produced previously. The K20D was a major improvement on the K10D. When I bought my first dSLR just 3+ years ago, I chose the K20D rather than the K10D because it IS more advanced -- I did not want to be tempted to 'upgrade' anytime soon. That strategy had worked well; I am very happy with my K20D. Yes, both the K10D and K20D have WR and tethering and semi-pro controls. I think many use the K10D only at ISO 100. That is fine for studio shooting, not so fine for many outside-world needs. You should ask yourself if you will be happy with its limitations, and for how long? My recommendation: If you need a studio camera, the K10D should be fine. For anything else, look for a used K20D.

08-31-2011, 01:01 PM	#4
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	I had a friend with a 40D who upgraded to a 50D. The 40D photos were not impressive, to me or to him. The 50D photos were much nicer, but we both preferred the look of K20D images. He was a birder, so Canon made sense for him. I am a generalist, and very happy with the K20. I agree with RioRico, forget the K10D, get a K20D. I have the K20D and K-x, but the K20 is my main camera. Other than 2/3 stop at high ISO, the K20D is a far nicer camera than the K-x, with better features than the K10, better sensitivity and fewer bugs.

08-31-2011, 01:01 PM	#5
Andi Lo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia Posts: 2,924	Originally posted by Deniz Hi there, Recently I decided to sorta 'upgrade' my camera. Well, not exactly upgrage, let's say ehm.. enlarge! Nothing against the K-x, it's really solid machine. The only downside for me was, I've never found the ISO performance that good. But it just doesn't feel right. The outcomes are beautiful but the I've never quite enjoyed using it so I decided to make a change and that being to pick up one of these two cameras: Pentax K10D: (Because the K20D is still pretty expensive around here) I think the K10D would satisfy the need for size. As I've seen so far, it has a really bad ISO/AF performance but the CCD makes the photograph truly good. Canon 40D: This camera is about to become the reason for me to leave Pentax brand. The price is really good. IQ is good. AF is said to be amazing. I don't really know much about ISO performance though. Also there is a wide variety of Canon AF lenses. But I have doubts about Canon, to be honest. Once I used a friend of mine's Canon 550D with 17-85 and 50 f1.8, well.. It was good in low light and AF and anything but the photos were all kinda 'smooth' and soft. I don't know if it is about the setting or a general feature of Canon DSLRs. Anyway, the 40D seems to be the best option but still I need a second best opinion. So, K-x just wasn't the right camera for me. What should take next? I have both K10 and K-x. I can relate about how K-x doesnt feel "right" As far as size goes, K10 + grip + limiteds = <3 The AF and high ISO is inferior to K-x but I find the controls snappier just because of the extra buttons. I think processing speed wise they're around the same. K10 doesnt have that pixallation lag that the K-x does everytime you cycle to a new picture in preview though, possibly because of the lower mpix. K10 is also very cheap these days like you said (There's one in the marketplace for under $200 right now (!!!)). Be wary that you'd feel that you shouldn't shoot over ISO 400 alot though, so watch your exif during your k-x use, on the K-x I can go to 1600 without care. Canon 40D, I haven't used this camera, but it is the K10D's contemporary back in their days. AF is definitely better like you said, and it gives you access to lenses that pentax doesnt have like 70-200/4 and the wideangle tiltshifts. As for Canon's plastic skin look. This effect is, AFAIK, created by the combination of the sensor and lens on Canon's lower models. I know for sure that all of the xD models are not affected by this (they better not!). Not sure about the XXD series though. FYI, my first camera was a K100d and I think that one is still the best for me. If only I can stuff K-x sensor and K-x AF in it! Should try sticking them both in a blender.

08-31-2011, 01:43 PM	#6
aurele Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Paris, France Photos: Albums Posts: 3,217	I decided to buy DSLR thank to a friend with a 40D so, i know some few things. I used his 40D mostly for sports, and party. The 40D is very close of the k-x about the iso. In fact, you can get almost exacttly the same result with the K-x by changing >Menu /C2 / 14 -> put on 3 instead of 2. The AF is good, little better than the K-x when using the kit. But with some wide aperture lense, very close. The 40D is somewhat heavy, compared to the k-x, but this heavyness doesn't give a feeling of better construction. I prefer now, the Pentax ergonomy, but at first, i thought the Canon wasn't bad at all. Talking about lense, Canon doesn't give that much more lense than Pentax when looking under the 1,000$ per lense.(i guess you won't buy more expensive lense ?) here are the results : Nikon : 37 (mostly due to FX and DX version of same lense.) Canon : 28 Pentax : 24 in general, Canon lenses are a bit cheaper than Pentax, but with Tamron and Sigma, all brand offer almost the same lense, for almost the same price. I would suggest you to stay at Pentax if you have some lense / gear. If not, the 40D is still a good choice, like a bigger K-x. i never tried any other body like K20/7/5 or 50D /60D, so i can't say much about those.

08-31-2011, 04:51 PM	#7
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,193	Just curious, why not consider Nikon? If you use wide angle lenses, the 1.6x vs. 1.5x factor can be a modestly significant factor. Admittedly there are some 3rd party lenses made for Canon/Nikon and not for Pentax, and there are more OEM lenses for those brands, particularly on the long (and expensive) end. Paul

08-31-2011, 07:02 PM	#8
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	Originally posted by Deniz Nothing against the K-x, it's really solid machine. The only downside for me was, I've never found the ISO performance that good. But it just doesn't feel right. The outcomes are beautiful but the I've never quite enjoyed using it... Wow - that's a first knock on k-x ISO that I've ever heard. Not feeling right I understand, in my case it was the K-7 and the k-x solved it. I researched the cr@p out of cameras to pick the K-7, loved the features but not the 'feel'. As to your next camera, that's mighty personal. I came from Sony which makes good gear (almost fell for the A700, but it 'felt' waaay too big), but now I know I prefer thumb to pointer when just one control dial is in play. That's the sort of thing that only you can decide. Good luck to you!

09-01-2011, 02:00 AM	#9
aurele Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Paris, France Photos: Albums Posts: 3,217	Originally posted by tibbitts Just curious, why not consider Nikon? If you use wide angle lenses, the 1.6x vs. 1.5x factor can be a modestly significant factor. because with 1.6x crop factor, you need shorter focal lengt to get the same angle of view. And the entry level at Nikon is a big trap : you can only use the more recent lenses.

09-01-2011, 10:29 AM	#11
DaveHolmes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 1,501	I'd like to know if you have much invested into Pentax... I mean lenses... I'd really like to trade up from my K-x at some point too... I also sometimes find the body a little small... But I love the results I get... And I have around a dozen lenses now (and hopefully buying my first LIMITED in Sept... DA35-2.8macro) so reckon I'm Pentax for life For me it'd be (in order of choice...) K5, K20, K7... (until the next flagship comes around)... But without much invested I'd consider going Nikon as they do feel good in the hand... When it comes down to it... Any DSLR made by any company in the last 5 years is going to (and they all do) produce stunning results if the user gets along with it...

09-01-2011, 01:05 PM	#12
Deniz Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Ankara/Turkish Republic Posts: 26 Original Poster	Thanks for the responses. A quick answer for, Y U NO choose Nikon. Because the only Nikon I can get for that price range is the D200 and buying it over the K10D would be pointless imo. I haven't got so many lenses. The kits of 18-55, 55-300 and a lovely Helios 44K. I don't deny the fact that old Pentax lenses are suberb, just after two years with the Helios I'm kinda sick of MF. Also I can always use the old Pentax primes on other DSLRs with an adapter, right? Using the K-x in last two years was always the same story. Amazing IQ but using it, just never felt fun. Now, the Canon 40D seems to be the optimal option (it's actually cheaper than the K20D as second hand). ISO looks very similar to K-x and I wonder if the IQ is worse or not? In any case, I'd have a walk-around lens like a 18-135 (or keep the kit lenses if I'll stick with Pentax), a 50mm AF finally and a wide angle or a telephoto later. I'm not working with/in a studio. I'm pretty much that average user that says: "I'm into shooting anyway/anything and some portraits." So, with a very realistic prediction, I won't have L or Limited lenses for a long long time and I'm just trying to find a decent camera that can bring up good IQ as well as 'that DLR feeling that K-x doesn't goddamn give".

09-02-2011, 06:38 AM	#13
Andi Lo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia Posts: 2,924	18-55 and 55-300 isn't such a big investment that you can't sell it. The big difference between 40D and K10D in your situation is just AF imo. There are other (pretty major) differences, but I guess either one is going to do you fine You're buying used anyway, so if it doesnt work out, just sell it again! no big deal made. Think of shipping and resale value lost as rental fees.

09-02-2011, 08:54 AM	#14
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by Deniz Also I can always use the old Pentax primes on other DSLRs with an adapter, right? On Canon-Sony-m4/3, yes. On Nikon, no. And Pentax and Sony have in-camera stabilization, so all lenses benefit from SR. On Canon and Nikon, you get to pay extra for in-lens IS on some lenses.

09-07-2011, 04:49 PM	#15
brandonbpm Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: United States Posts: 86	Can anyone tell me if the K-x is better than the K10 or K20 when it comes STRICTLY TO IMAGE QUALITY!? I have been doing a lot of research because I want THE best image quality for the price range, so even though I LOVE my kx, I am considering upgrading/crossgrading to an older camera but I don't know if the image quality will be any better than my Kx, which I think produces GREAT Images. For example, I look on dxo and do snapsort camera compares and they rate the kx's image quality and sensor higher than both the K10D and K20D, and even canon models as recent as the EOS Canon 550D (rebel x2i). And many other sourcessay that the kx's image quality is on par if not a little better than some of these, at least when it comes to jpeg, and definitely in terms of high ISO. SO what is it? Is the Kx better than the K10D and 20D strictly in terms of image quality?