[daniekr]

Hello everyone.

8 years ago I bought a K-x second hand and it is still with me, although I haven't taken it out much the last couple of years. This year however I have been shooting more and more and I've rediscovered the fun of "working" the photos with a proper camera.

I have the 18-55mm kit lens, a Tamron 70-300 Li LD, and an SMC Pentax-M 50mm f/1.7.

I like the K-x. I know that 99% of bad shots come down to my lack of skill, rather than the equipment. It has good functionality for me, and ergonomically it fits good in my hands. However I also like new toys. So I have been itching a little to buy something. Should I perhaps get a new lens? Or maybe even a new body?

I remember what attracted me to Pentax and the K-x was the shake reduction in the body and not lens and that I could fit a wide range of lenses from many decades ago on the camera, which opened for cheap but good second-hand buys. I also liked the AA-battery solution - this isn't terribly important however.

I like photographing living things, as in insects, animals and people - although I am a little shy to do the latter. I have also a dream of shooting such great astrophotos as I can find online, but up to now I have been unsuccessful.

Some of my photos are here - Rhodos 2019 | Flickr - just brought it with me on vacation to Greece and had to re-learn a lot as I had forgotten even basic camera handling. I'm not very satisfied with any of the shots but it gives an idea of my interests.


My question is:
Is the K-x now "dated" in terms of quality? As with all electronics I am sure also digital photography has been improving fast over a decade.

Or is it still a good option for an amateur who should instead keep learning theory and practice, and perhaps instead get a wider range of lenses if anything?

Where to go next?

[Megapixelmk]

Answer to the first question: Yes the K-x is dated if you compare it to subsequent Pentax models and there are certainly better quality lenses than your current line up.
But in my opinion concentrating on skills like composition and challenging yourself all the time will help you improve far more than new equipment.
I have always maintained one can get great shots from most modern cameras these days if you understand the basics about speed, aperture and ISO. Even without that, shooting in program mode you can achieve fine results by really thinking about what you want to achieve.
Shoot every day, study shots from photographers you admire, and learn from the wealth of tips online.
I love my KP with its fantastic features but it doesn't make me a great photographer. Enjoy the journey 😁

[cport]

If you are reaching limits of your lenses, buy a new one. If you are reaching limits of your body, buy a new one

[daniekr]

Thanks for the kind reply. I also think the biggest gain would be from practice and learning.

I want to refine my question a little: I know the K-x is dated, after all its from the former decade. But, is it "expired"? That would probably be a better word. For example: I work with computers a lot and I build them for myself and others. And people often get caught in a dilemma - should I keep upgrading single parts, or finally upgrade the whole platform? At a certain point, you will lag noticeably behind the current technology which has been vastly improved at what would be an acceptable investment price.

I guess I am applying the same kind of thoughts to the camera business, but I am not an expert in this field.

PS. I am not interested in fancy non-image tech like gps and wifi and what not, just image quality and tech that helps to achieve this.

---

Last edited by daniekr; 08-06-2019 at 05:03 AM.

[jgnfld]

...If you are reaching limits of your body, buy a new one

Or go to the gym!

[aslyfox]

Thanks for the kind reply. I also think the biggest gain would be from practice and learning.

I want to refine my question a little: I know the K-x is dated, after all its from the former decade. But, is it "expired"? That would probably be a better word. For example: I work with computers a lot and I build them for myself and others. And people often get caught in a dilemma - should I keep upgrading single parts, or finally upgrade the whole platform? At a certain point, you will lag noticeably behind the current technology which has been vastly improved at what would be an acceptable investment price.

I guess I am applying the same kind of thoughts to the camera business, but I am not an expert in this field.

PS. I am not interested in fancy non-image tech like gps and wifi and what not, just image quality and tech that helps to achieve this.

1 I am not an expert [ just some one who posts a lot ]

2 IMHO, photography is a formula:

knowledge + experience + equipment = good photos

there are great photos posted in the forums taken by various camera bodies and lenses manufactured from long ago up to a few weeks ago

3 IMHO, I know of no camera body or lens that can guarantee success ( I am well acquainted with Operator Error )

YMMV

[Benz3ne]

First things first, they're nice photos you've taken on holiday! I went through the same thing as you earlier this year - bought the camera (K-S2) about 3 years ago, used it infrequently, had to relearn when I've picked it up 'properly' this time around.

The camera is outdated by today's standards, but it's still serving a purpose for you - if you can afford to go either lenses or body, you have to try and determine which would bring you more value. For me, I've gone down the lenses route recently (even with vintage lenses to try out manual focusing, various use of primes etc) so lenses don't have to be expensive. I have also, however, managed to pick up a good deal on a job lot of items so a 'new' camera is in my midst.

It might be worthwhile disclosing where you're from - there might be someone on here looking to offload a camera (which may be an update vs yours) for a good price!

[normhead]

The K-x is still a functional camera.
Your lenses are not the best, but those lenses are surprisingly good given their cost.
You might be happy with a used K-5 my wife still uses hers. But if you're thinking of keeping the new one for another 8 years, you might be happier long term with a K-P or K-70.

Looking at your images, I'd ask, what do you want to do that's different from what you've done? (The trouble with flickr being we see the ones you got,, but we don't know if you tried some images and failed, so didn't post them. Those would be the images we'd need to see to decide if a new body could help you.)
If everything is to your liking, use the K-x until it dies.

Thanks for the kind reply. I also think the biggest gain would be from practice and learning.

I want to refine my question a little: I know the K-x is dated, after all its from the former decade. But, is it "expired"? That would probably be a better word. For example: I work with computers a lot and I build them for myself and others. And people often get caught in a dilemma - should I keep upgrading single parts, or finally upgrade the whole platform? At a certain point, you will lag noticeably behind the current technology which has been vastly improved at what would be an acceptable investment price.

I guess I am applying the same kind of thoughts to the camera business, but I am not an expert in this field.

PS. I am not interested in fancy non-image tech like gps and wifi and what not, just image quality and tech that helps to achieve this.

Well, I may be more extreme than yourself. I've got five machines running XP and three running Win-7. They all work and do useful stuff, and I hate Win-10 like the devil. I think it may BE the devil; it is certainly demonic. If they'd just take what works and improve it, fix the bugs, etc., that'd be great, but they have to rewrite everything every year in order to keep the programmers employed. Sort of the same mentality that results in badly built highways.

I don't see the camera in the same category, though. A twelve megapixel camera can take good pictures. So if what you're really seriously interested in is improvement in the areas of "practice and learning", stick with the K-x. If it works, it's still a fine camera, and has the advantage that you're already comfortable with it. In this option, spend all your cash on the lens of your dreams - when you go to change bodies, a Pentax lens will still have been a good investment. Keep in mind that FF lenses work great on APS-C bodies, but the converse is not true.

On the other hand, if what you're chiefly interested in is image quality, I'd suggest picking up a K-1 (there are still new ones available) or a KP. The KP is also APS-C, but with more than twice the resolution of the K-x, and is designed for people who want a more conventional camera (e.g., the built-in flash but no GPS) as opposed to the K-3 (builtin GPS but no flash). The KP is selling for less than eight hundred bucks, now. But there's a lot to be said for the full-frame option, for an additional four hundred or so. Of course, there'd be a whole new list of menus to sort through and everything will seem to have been laid out in a perverse way at first.

Or, you could do nothing. Presumably, you've got some kind of lens to go on the K-x, why not just use that for a while until you feel like you've reached the limit of what it is you want to learn. And it will certainly be good practice. meanwhile, save your pennies, until you figure out exactly what it is you want to do, on the assumption that your photography goals for yourself will drive your assessment of hardware needs.

[roberrl]

Just a couple of factors I would throw into the discussion.
I have a KS-2 and would not be without the flippy screen, it enables points of view which would be difficult without it.
And I have lately been taking full advantage of its capability in lower light situations.
These have not made me a better photographer but have enabled me to take photographs which would otherwise be difficult.

[Zooland]

Any upgrade should improve it, but If you are happy with the camera, then just get better lenses.

[macman24054]

You can get some really good auto focus prime lenses for cheap. The DA 50 f1.8 and the DA35 f2.4 are great examples. A K5 family of cameras would be a great upgrade to the KX and may leave enough money for the previously mentioned lenses. Just speaking from my experience my K50 is an awesome and very capable camera, but when I upgraded to the K3, the weaknesses of the K50 was immediately glaring. Just be patient and way your options carefully.

[DeadJohn]

Yes, the K-x is a dated camera that can still take excellent photos. You didn't mention a budget. I'm going to list a few possible upgrades you can purchase one at a time, in any order. I'll keep your stated interests of insects, animals, people, and astrophotos in mind.

K-70. Compared to the K-x, you'll get several significant improvements. More megapixels if you want to crop photos (to enlarge small insects, animals, and the moon). Faster and more accurate autofocus. Reduced ISO noise and expanded dynamic range help with astrophotography and harsh lighting conditions (such as landscapes with the sun on the horizon).

DFA 100mm Macro WR (or older used non-WR versions for less money): You are already getting good insect shots with the Tamron 70-300. I wasn't familiar with the lens so I searched and found it does up to 1:2 (aka 0.5x) macro. The DFA 100 can go to 1:1 macro closeups if you feel you want such capability. 1:1 gets more demanding in terms of focus, subject movement, camera shake, etc.

A faster, wider lens than your 18-55 for astro, assuming you live in or can travel to a relatively dark area. The Samyang/Rokinon/Bower 14mm/f2.8 lens works well. The new DA* 11-18mm F2.8 ED DC AW would be a great lens, too, but it's much more expensive at $1500. You can also use such lenses for ultrawide landscapes and cityscapes, things you can't do with your existing lenses without stitching multiple photos.

[the DA 15 Limited, DA* 16-50, and Tamron 10-24 are good ultrawides for general use but IMO have too much distortion in the extreme corners for astro]

[kypfer]

My question is:
Is the K-x now "dated" in terms of quality? As with all electronics I am sure also digital photography has been improving fast over a decade.

Or is it still a good option for an amateur who should instead keep learning theory and practice, and perhaps instead get a wider range of lenses if anything?

Where to go next?

The K-x is a 12 megapixel camera ... there's a lot of good photographs still being taken with 6 megapixel cameras, so from that perspective the K-x is still a perfectly good camera, however, what you need to define is where does the K-x fail you, if it does.


The latest generation of APS-C cameras have mind-boggling low-light capability and the "cropability" (aka digital zoom) is spectacular, however these characteristics are of little significance if you usually "fill your viewfinder" with well-lit subject matter.


As for a wider range of lenses, what can't you photograph with the lenses you've already got?. If you regularly "can't fit everything in" then an ultra-wide might make sense. For extreme close-up or longer telephoto the higher resolution of a 24 megapixel body may give you sufficient "digital zoom" so's to not need extra lenses.


I can't comment on "astro" photography, my minimal efforts so far have been mediocre at best, but the GPS module that would fit on my K-70 does seem an attractive concept ... I really need to spend more time out in the countryside after dark to define whether I really need it


Good luck

[DWS1]

I looked at you photos and your level of skill may be greater than you think. Since you said you have the itch to get a new lens or body, I assume you are feeling some limitations or frustrations with your current setup. Based on your stated goals of wildlife, insects, people, astro, and I would add landscape photography, I would suggest a body upgrade first, perhaps a KP or K70. You can get a K70 new right now for about $600 USD, or a better deal with the DA 18-135mm for about $800 USD. Your K-X is a very good camera and I would consider using it as a second camera and backup. You don't realize how great it is to have two cameras with different lenses attached until you shoot that way, especially in an area where changing a lens could be problematic (i.e. wet or dirty conditions). With the newer cameras you will find the increased high ISO, low noise performance along with the night vision mode to be amazing, like night and day difference from your K-X. Especially for astro. The tilt screen (KP) or fully articulated screen (K70) allows you to shoot from some really channeling angles without killing yourself. Also, you will find the pixel shift feature amazing for color depth and bringing out more shadow details. The 24mp allows to you crop much more without degrading image quality or, print much larger. At some point you might want to consider a good 100mm or so macro lens (for insects). If budget is not a concern, which I assume it is, then I would go with a K1ii and a KP with a whole new set of lenses, but we're talking 1,000's of $$$ here. One other thought is if you don't have a decent tripod, get one and use it whenever you can.

This is just my suggestion based on my experiences. Like you, I was out of photography for several years (about 30) then got back in to it with a K50 which I thought was amazing coming from 1980's Minolta film cameras. When the K50 suffered the aperture block failure I got a K70 and the difference was huge. You will see even a greater difference coming from a K-X. Continue working on your skills and learning to fully utilize all the features of whatever camera you decide upon. In time you will begin to discover how your lenses are limiting what you want to do. Then, you might consider upgrading your glass. Just be careful you don't go down that rabbit hole to deep to get out. Good luck to you.