Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

kiwibird · 12-11-2009, 09:01 AM

Hello everyone,

I'd like the opinions of those who own both the K2000 and K-x....how do the out of camera jpgs compare? I know most people here seem to shoot raw and do their own pp, but these are considered entry level cameras and I think an entry level user would most likely shoot in jpg, at least until they get the hang of all the basics first. Do you prefer one camera's jpgs over the other, and if so, why? I'm considering buying one of these for a gift so any replies would be appreciated! By the way, I have a K20d and really like this camera's jpg IQ.

erickallemeyn · 12-11-2009, 09:09 AM

Will you/they be shooting above ISO 1600 or below ISO 1600?

K-X is the high ISO king, even in JPEG. Otherwise it doesn't really matter. I'd still pick the newer model though.

pxpaulx · 12-11-2009, 09:39 AM

The jpeg settings are quite adjustable with both cameras - while they will likely set it and forget it, doesn't mean you can't help out with that setup!

I thought the K20d was an improvement over the K10d enough to upgrade at the time. While the sensor output is still just as good as the K-x, the K-x blows the k20d out of the water when it comes to low-light capability. Since the K20d was itself and improvment over the K10d, and the K2000 shares the K10d sensor, I have no doubt there is a fairly significant upgrade in IQ over the k2000 (has anyone actually done a head-to-head?). Considering the already great deals you can find on the K-x with alittle searching around, I don't see a reason to go for the older model.

kiwibird · 12-11-2009, 10:30 AM

Thank you both for your replies. The only thing that concerns me about the K-x, though, is the battery problems. I know the recent firmware presumably helped, but this model seems to be quite a power hog, especially with the extra live view, video, etc.

pxpaulx, I notice you have both the K20d and the k-x....do the k-x jpgs at lower iso look as nice as the k-20? I've rarely had to use higher than iso 1600 on my k20 and I think even these look perfectly fine at normal viewing sizes.

erickallemeyn · 12-11-2009, 10:46 AM

I get over 1000 shots with my eneloop rechargables. Battery issue is definitely fixed. Camera turns on every time. Up to you in the end though

Marc Sabatella · 12-11-2009, 11:35 AM

Originally posted by kiwibird

Thank you both for your replies. The only thing that concerns me about the K-x, though, is the battery problems. I know the recent firmware presumably helped, but this model seems to be quite a power hog, especially with the extra live view, video, etc.

Seems the K-m isn't likely to perform any better when using live view or video...

Seriously, I can't see how not having the option of video beats having a power hungry video option.

Quote:

do the k-x jpgs at lower iso look as nice as the k-20?

Does Coke taste better than Pepsi?

pxpaulx · 12-11-2009, 11:42 AM

Originally posted by kiwibird

Thank you both for your replies. The only thing that concerns me about the K-x, though, is the battery problems. I know the recent firmware presumably helped, but this model seems to be quite a power hog, especially with the extra live view, video, etc.

pxpaulx, I notice you have both the K20d and the k-x....do the k-x jpgs at lower iso look as nice as the k-20? I've rarely had to use higher than iso 1600 on my k20 and I think even these look perfectly fine at normal viewing sizes.

I have been pretty happy when I P mode setting auto ISO as high as 3200 - I typically leave it in auto upto 2000, and then leave Sv mode at ISO 4000 - as far as comparing to the K20, I don't generally go past 800, 1600 is fine and 3200 in a pinch - on the Kx I would classify both 6400 and 12800 as pinch-worthy.

That is of course completely objective, Coke or Pepsi as it were, haha.

johnmflores · 12-11-2009, 12:01 PM

Between my wife and I, we own all three cameras being discussed - just got a red K-x yesterday! When reviewing photos in Lightroom on my 23" Apple Cinema Display (with photos filling the screen), I can't tell the difference between cameras at low ISO.

I just printed a book via iPhoto with pictures from the K20d and the K-m. Pictures ranged from little 2" x 3" to 8" x 10". I can't look at a photo and say, "oh that's from the K20d" or "that's from the "K-m" unless I specifically remember the circumstances of taking the shot, i.e., "This was shot with the DA 70/2.4 Limited, which was on the K-m at the time" or "This was with the DA* 50-135/2.8, which was on the K20d."

In other words, both the K20d and the K-m are capable of taking very good photos. In my short time with the K-x I'm pretty sure it will take very good photos too. It's only when you push the ISO up to 1600 and beyond do the differences become more obvious, and you usually have to go to 100% to see them.

So if the person you are buying the camera for is a beginner who would like nice quality 4x6 photos and the occasional 8x10, then either camera will do. But the K-x has a lot of things going for it (low ISO of course, but also video, and a better interface), so unless you can get the K-m for $400 or less, I'd go with the K-x. We got ours for $520 with the 18-55 kit lens. I wouldn't worry about the battery issue. It's either going to be fixed with a firmware update and/or the Internet is making it sound like it's affecting 80% of the K-xs out there, which I doubt is accurate.

(please note that I shoot RAW but I'm sure that the general ideas apply to JPG as well).

tommen · 12-11-2009, 12:06 PM

Is the autofocus improved on the k-x over the already improved k2000? All reports are that it is very fast.

pxpaulx · 12-11-2009, 12:15 PM

Yes, AF is quite fast and operates better in low light than my K20d.

slow2focus · 12-11-2009, 01:30 PM

Hi,

Got me a k-x. To avoid all this battery issues I been reading, I just start with enloops. I am on my first charge only ~200 photos and playing with settings learning... etc

get a good charger (search for charger in search) and have fun.

but, it is up to you like others said.

erickallemeyn · 12-11-2009, 01:45 PM

Remember to get the two-lens kit if they'll be shooting the kids soccer games. $749 aint bad

kiwibird · 12-11-2009, 01:48 PM

johnmflores, where did you find the k-x for that price?

erickallemeyn · 12-11-2009, 02:11 PM

I got my K-X for $520 as well.

I bought it on eBay for $579 with a 10% bing.com cashback reward (free program)

johnmflores · 12-11-2009, 09:54 PM

Originally posted by kiwibird

johnmflores, where did you find the k-x for that price?

1. Go to Bing. Register.
2. Search for Nintendo Wii
3. Click on eBay link offering 20% Bing discount (if it's still available)
4. When on Ebay do a site search for Pentax-Kx
5. Click on the cheapest one you can find from a reputable seller. Mine was $599 from Beach Camera with free shipping. 20% off of $599 is $118, which brings the price to $481. Unfortunately for me, there's a Beach Camera in NJ, so I paid around $40 tax.

If you live outside of NJ and the deals still exist, $481 for a new K-x is a bargain! $520 ain't too bad either!

The same deal may work for the K7, so you might be able to get one for ~$900! Wow, thanks Bing!

12-11-2009, 09:01 AM	#1
kiwibird Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 43	K2000 vs K-x jpg IQ Hello everyone, I'd like the opinions of those who own both the K2000 and K-x....how do the out of camera jpgs compare? I know most people here seem to shoot raw and do their own pp, but these are considered entry level cameras and I think an entry level user would most likely shoot in jpg, at least until they get the hang of all the basics first. Do you prefer one camera's jpgs over the other, and if so, why? I'm considering buying one of these for a gift so any replies would be appreciated! By the way, I have a K20d and really like this camera's jpg IQ.

12-11-2009, 12:01 PM	#8
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	K20d, K-m (2000), K-x Between my wife and I, we own all three cameras being discussed - just got a red K-x yesterday! When reviewing photos in Lightroom on my 23" Apple Cinema Display (with photos filling the screen), I can't tell the difference between cameras at low ISO. I just printed a book via iPhoto with pictures from the K20d and the K-m. Pictures ranged from little 2" x 3" to 8" x 10". I can't look at a photo and say, "oh that's from the K20d" or "that's from the "K-m" unless I specifically remember the circumstances of taking the shot, i.e., "This was shot with the DA 70/2.4 Limited, which was on the K-m at the time" or "This was with the DA* 50-135/2.8, which was on the K20d." In other words, both the K20d and the K-m are capable of taking very good photos. In my short time with the K-x I'm pretty sure it will take very good photos too. It's only when you push the ISO up to 1600 and beyond do the differences become more obvious, and you usually have to go to 100% to see them. So if the person you are buying the camera for is a beginner who would like nice quality 4x6 photos and the occasional 8x10, then either camera will do. But the K-x has a lot of things going for it (low ISO of course, but also video, and a better interface), so unless you can get the K-m for $400 or less, I'd go with the K-x. We got ours for $520 with the 18-55 kit lens. I wouldn't worry about the battery issue. It's either going to be fixed with a firmware update and/or the Internet is making it sound like it's affecting 80% of the K-xs out there, which I doubt is accurate. (please note that I shoot RAW but I'm sure that the general ideas apply to JPG as well).

12-11-2009, 12:06 PM	#9
tommen Inactive Account Join Date: May 2007 Location: Georgetown, TX Posts: 26	km/k2000 vs kx Is the autofocus improved on the k-x over the already improved k2000? All reports are that it is very fast.

12-11-2009, 01:30 PM	#11
slow2focus Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 82	Just use enloops Hi, Got me a k-x. To avoid all this battery issues I been reading, I just start with enloops. I am on my first charge only ~200 photos and playing with settings learning... etc get a good charger (search for charger in search) and have fun. but, it is up to you like others said.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
People WOWJessie.jpg	MJB DIGITAL	Photo Critique	10	04-17-2010 01:42 PM
What is your JPG settings on K-7?	fulcrumx29	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	08-10-2009 04:45 AM
Does JPG count as PP?	schmik	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	42	07-02-2009 01:55 AM
PNG vs JPG	VeijoM	Photographic Technique	11	03-08-2009 04:21 PM
Jpg vs. RAW	darthku	Post Your Photos!	13	10-01-2008 03:06 PM

12-11-2009, 09:09 AM	#2
erickallemeyn Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: United States Posts: 112	Will you/they be shooting above ISO 1600 or below ISO 1600? K-X is the high ISO king, even in JPEG. Otherwise it doesn't really matter. I'd still pick the newer model though.

12-11-2009, 09:39 AM	#3
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	The jpeg settings are quite adjustable with both cameras - while they will likely set it and forget it, doesn't mean you can't help out with that setup! I thought the K20d was an improvement over the K10d enough to upgrade at the time. While the sensor output is still just as good as the K-x, the K-x blows the k20d out of the water when it comes to low-light capability. Since the K20d was itself and improvment over the K10d, and the K2000 shares the K10d sensor, I have no doubt there is a fairly significant upgrade in IQ over the k2000 (has anyone actually done a head-to-head?). Considering the already great deals you can find on the K-x with alittle searching around, I don't see a reason to go for the older model.

12-11-2009, 10:30 AM	#4
kiwibird Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 43 Original Poster	Thank you both for your replies. The only thing that concerns me about the K-x, though, is the battery problems. I know the recent firmware presumably helped, but this model seems to be quite a power hog, especially with the extra live view, video, etc. pxpaulx, I notice you have both the K20d and the k-x....do the k-x jpgs at lower iso look as nice as the k-20? I've rarely had to use higher than iso 1600 on my k20 and I think even these look perfectly fine at normal viewing sizes.

12-11-2009, 10:46 AM	#5
erickallemeyn Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: United States Posts: 112	I get over 1000 shots with my eneloop rechargables. Battery issue is definitely fixed. Camera turns on every time. Up to you in the end though

12-11-2009, 11:35 AM	#6
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by kiwibird Thank you both for your replies. The only thing that concerns me about the K-x, though, is the battery problems. I know the recent firmware presumably helped, but this model seems to be quite a power hog, especially with the extra live view, video, etc. Seems the K-m isn't likely to perform any better when using live view or video... Seriously, I can't see how not having the option of video beats having a power hungry video option. Quote: do the k-x jpgs at lower iso look as nice as the k-20? Does Coke taste better than Pepsi?

12-11-2009, 11:42 AM	#7
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	Originally posted by kiwibird Thank you both for your replies. The only thing that concerns me about the K-x, though, is the battery problems. I know the recent firmware presumably helped, but this model seems to be quite a power hog, especially with the extra live view, video, etc. pxpaulx, I notice you have both the K20d and the k-x....do the k-x jpgs at lower iso look as nice as the k-20? I've rarely had to use higher than iso 1600 on my k20 and I think even these look perfectly fine at normal viewing sizes. I have been pretty happy when I P mode setting auto ISO as high as 3200 - I typically leave it in auto upto 2000, and then leave Sv mode at ISO 4000 - as far as comparing to the K20, I don't generally go past 800, 1600 is fine and 3200 in a pinch - on the Kx I would classify both 6400 and 12800 as pinch-worthy. That is of course completely objective, Coke or Pepsi as it were, haha.

12-11-2009, 12:15 PM	#10
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	Yes, AF is quite fast and operates better in low light than my K20d.

12-11-2009, 01:45 PM	#12
erickallemeyn Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: United States Posts: 112	Remember to get the two-lens kit if they'll be shooting the kids soccer games. $749 aint bad

12-11-2009, 01:48 PM	#13
kiwibird Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 43 Original Poster	johnmflores, where did you find the k-x for that price?

12-11-2009, 02:11 PM	#14
erickallemeyn Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: United States Posts: 112	I got my K-X for $520 as well. I bought it on eBay for $579 with a 10% bing.com cashback reward (free program)

12-11-2009, 09:54 PM	#15
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by kiwibird johnmflores, where did you find the k-x for that price? 1. Go to Bing. Register. 2. Search for Nintendo Wii 3. Click on eBay link offering 20% Bing discount (if it's still available) 4. When on Ebay do a site search for Pentax-Kx 5. Click on the cheapest one you can find from a reputable seller. Mine was $599 from Beach Camera with free shipping. 20% off of $599 is $118, which brings the price to $481. Unfortunately for me, there's a Beach Camera in NJ, so I paid around $40 tax. If you live outside of NJ and the deals still exist, $481 for a new K-x is a bargain! $520 ain't too bad either! The same deal may work for the K7, so you might be able to get one for ~$900! Wow, thanks Bing!

K2000 vs K-x jpg IQ

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!