Originally posted by Marc Sabatella Well, it can't in any way *except* noise at high ISO. That's the one tiny, almost inconsequential for most purposes respect in which the K-x beats those two camera. OK, a couple of other equally tiny, almost inconsequential respects too.
Have you used a K-x yet? Having used both the K20D (extensively) and K-x (getting there), well...
I suppose the much faster and more responsive autofocus is indeed pretty much inconsequential, except for the keeping you from missing shots, even when it's just a person walking out of view.
The faster frame rate, as well, is obviously of no importance.
And then bringing it back to image quality... are you really sure the *only* difference is noise at high ISO? The K20D meter (correctly) exposes to preserve the highlights, since shadows can be brought up in post. The only problem is that with the K20D, those shadows are full of noise even at base ISO. With the K-X that noise just doesn't exist.
The high ISO performance is what gets everyone excited, but the much greater versatility at base ISO is what really sells me for the K-x over the K20D.