k20 vs. k-x, vetern vs. newcomer

suds · 11-10-2009, 10:36 PM

Hi, I am getting back to photography and have purchased a k20d, as I am new and not familiar with the K20, I am in no position to decide if it is better than the k-x.

My father always said you get what you pay for.

I am in a quandary whether to exchange the k20 for the k-x.

The k20 has obvious enhanced features and a proven track record, however, this newcomer to the block has the latest hardware under the hood.

I am leaning towards the k-x. If its IQ and colour are equal to the K20 and AF is improved, I can live without the K20 advantages.

I seem to have talked myself into the k-x.

Any k20 users, feel the same. or would recommend keeping the k20 because it really is better.

rjm · 11-10-2009, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by suds

Hi, I am getting back to photography and have purchased a k20d, as I am new and not familiar with the K20, I am in no position to decide if it is better than the k-x.

It really, really, REALLY depends on what you mean by "better".

The K20D has better everything, except it is bigger and heavier, and may lack the last word in image quality to the K-x sensor, though most likely even then only at high ISO.

**Ash** · 11-10-2009, 10:47 PM

Welcome to the forum.

Question is, what exactly is it that you feel you are lacking with the K20D?
I would believe that whatever that may be, it won't be satisfied by the K-x.

The high ISO capabilities of the K-x may be a stop better than that of the K20D, and the AF may be faster, and it has a movie capture mode, but are these issues deal-breakers for you?

As mentioned, there are several other features the K20D excels in over the K-x, and perhaps only to be beaten by the K-7.

Damn Brit · 11-10-2009, 11:11 PM

What do you mean by "getting back to photography"? Were you using SLR or P&S previously.

Karhallarn · 11-11-2009, 04:01 AM

How long have you been walking around with the K20D and what are you missing?

There are a lot of obvious features for one model or the other like the fps, the screen, the movie recording, the body ruggedness or the autofocus. The K-x is definitely better in fps but the autofocus is said to be the same as the K20D. The K-x has movie recording but will you ever use it that often that it needs to be the dslr to do it? Or is your cellphone enough?
In favour of the K20d seems to be only the body ruggedness on the obvious side but have you considered that the viewfinder of the K-x is much smaller, that the K-x has no second screen and that it may not sit in your hand as well as the K20D?!?

I think that if you are not able to really tell if or why you need the K-x over the K20d you should stick with the K20D!

suds · 11-11-2009, 05:52 AM

I had an slr which I sold to buy an expensive G3. When I got the g3, I took way more picutres than with the nikon f70.

Now I want to rekindle the hobby.

tomtor · 11-11-2009, 09:14 AM

Originally posted by Karhallarn

autofocus is said to be the same as the K20D.

K-x has better af, certainly in low light or with moving subjects.

If that's important for you, I don't know. Both are good cameras with different advantages.

unkabin · 11-11-2009, 09:17 AM

You've got the K20D. Use it, I say. Keep away from the media stream of new camera tech and go take photos. The kx isn't going anywhere, if six months down the road you decide you want to make a change. But until the K20D is second nature in your daily use, I think your decision will be made mostly based on stats and hypothetical pluses and minuses, rather than on your actual wants and needs.

niloc22 · 11-12-2009, 07:53 AM

You should check the firmware revision on your K20D too (hold menu button whilst turrning it on).

I just purchased a K20D, it had rev 1.01 on it, latest is 1.03, which apparently had some tweaks and improvements in it.

**interested_observer** · 11-13-2009, 04:19 AM

The other posters have listed the differences and as others have said, if these are not over-riding factors in how you intend to use the camera, then forget about it and go take pictures. The K20 is a great unit, and you paid a great price - there is absolutely nothing wrong with your purchase - enjoy your new toy!

**Rondec** · 11-13-2009, 05:21 AM

The K20 is an amazing camera. As long as you shoot RAW, I don't think there will be significant difference in your noise at iso 1600 or less. Auto focus is pretty speedy in general, although I imagine the Kx has a little quicker, since it is a newer generation. Other than video and frames per second difference, the K20 is a far better camera. It is weather sealed, has two dials, more buttons, and much better build over all. Just start shooting with it and enjoy all of the features it does have, rather than drooling over the newest ones the Kx has.

11-10-2009, 10:36 PM	#1
suds Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Ottawa Posts: 3	k20 vs. k-x, vetern vs. newcomer Hi, I am getting back to photography and have purchased a k20d, as I am new and not familiar with the K20, I am in no position to decide if it is better than the k-x. My father always said you get what you pay for. I am in a quandary whether to exchange the k20 for the k-x. The k20 has obvious enhanced features and a proven track record, however, this newcomer to the block has the latest hardware under the hood. I am leaning towards the k-x. If its IQ and colour are equal to the K20 and AF is improved, I can live without the K20 advantages. I seem to have talked myself into the k-x. Any k20 users, feel the same. or would recommend keeping the k20 because it really is better.

11-11-2009, 09:17 AM	#8
unkabin Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Moorhead, MN Posts: 176	You've got the K20D. Use it, I say. Keep away from the media stream of new camera tech and go take photos. The kx isn't going anywhere, if six months down the road you decide you want to make a change. But until the K20D is second nature in your daily use, I think your decision will be made mostly based on stats and hypothetical pluses and minuses, rather than on your actual wants and needs. Last edited by unkabin; 11-11-2009 at 09:25 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Newcomer	PGW	Welcomes and Introductions	1	09-26-2010 08:01 PM
Hello from a newcomer from Auvergne-France	alban	Welcomes and Introductions	6	05-01-2010 12:58 AM
Newcomer from Spain.	alvarossorio	Welcomes and Introductions	6	04-10-2010 06:52 PM
Adaptall help for newcomer	boom	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	04-07-2009 09:02 AM
Newcomer	jvanwees	Welcomes and Introductions	5	02-24-2009 10:55 PM

11-10-2009, 10:43 PM	#2
rjm Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Kyoto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 72	Originally posted by suds Hi, I am getting back to photography and have purchased a k20d, as I am new and not familiar with the K20, I am in no position to decide if it is better than the k-x. It really, really, REALLY depends on what you mean by "better". The K20D has better everything, except it is bigger and heavier, and may lack the last word in image quality to the K-x sensor, though most likely even then only at high ISO.

11-10-2009, 10:47 PM	#3
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Welcome to the forum. Question is, what exactly is it that you feel you are lacking with the K20D? I would believe that whatever that may be, it won't be satisfied by the K-x. The high ISO capabilities of the K-x may be a stop better than that of the K20D, and the AF may be faster, and it has a movie capture mode, but are these issues deal-breakers for you? As mentioned, there are several other features the K20D excels in over the K-x, and perhaps only to be beaten by the K-7.

11-10-2009, 11:11 PM	#4
Damn Brit Guest	What do you mean by "getting back to photography"? Were you using SLR or P&S previously.

11-11-2009, 04:01 AM	#5
Karhallarn New Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Deutschland Posts: 7	How long have you been walking around with the K20D and what are you missing? There are a lot of obvious features for one model or the other like the fps, the screen, the movie recording, the body ruggedness or the autofocus. The K-x is definitely better in fps but the autofocus is said to be the same as the K20D. The K-x has movie recording but will you ever use it that often that it needs to be the dslr to do it? Or is your cellphone enough? In favour of the K20d seems to be only the body ruggedness on the obvious side but have you considered that the viewfinder of the K-x is much smaller, that the K-x has no second screen and that it may not sit in your hand as well as the K20D?!? I think that if you are not able to really tell if or why you need the K-x over the K20d you should stick with the K20D!

11-11-2009, 05:52 AM	#6
suds Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Ottawa Posts: 3 Original Poster	I had an slr which I sold to buy an expensive G3. When I got the g3, I took way more picutres than with the nikon f70. Now I want to rekindle the hobby.

11-11-2009, 09:14 AM	#7
tomtor Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Netherlands Posts: 382	Originally posted by Karhallarn autofocus is said to be the same as the K20D. K-x has better af, certainly in low light or with moving subjects. If that's important for you, I don't know. Both are good cameras with different advantages.

11-12-2009, 07:53 AM	#9
niloc22 New Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Photos: Albums Posts: 15	You should check the firmware revision on your K20D too (hold menu button whilst turrning it on). I just purchased a K20D, it had rev 1.01 on it, latest is 1.03, which apparently had some tweaks and improvements in it.

11-13-2009, 04:19 AM	#10
interested_observer Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,707	The other posters have listed the differences and as others have said, if these are not over-riding factors in how you intend to use the camera, then forget about it and go take pictures. The K20 is a great unit, and you paid a great price - there is absolutely nothing wrong with your purchase - enjoy your new toy!

11-13-2009, 05:21 AM	#11
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	The K20 is an amazing camera. As long as you shoot RAW, I don't think there will be significant difference in your noise at iso 1600 or less. Auto focus is pretty speedy in general, although I imagine the Kx has a little quicker, since it is a newer generation. Other than video and frames per second difference, the K20 is a far better camera. It is weather sealed, has two dials, more buttons, and much better build over all. Just start shooting with it and enjoy all of the features it does have, rather than drooling over the newest ones the Kx has.