Originally posted by 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.
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.