K-X : Throughly Unimpressed (Disappointed)

**monochrome** · 12-23-2009, 05:33 PM

Well, DPReview isn't disappointed, especially in low light. I can't offer a suggestion because I don't own a K-x, but from reading this site and other reviews I'd say your experience is not the norm

DRPreview comment

kostarae · 12-23-2009, 05:35 PM

I posted a picture of the focus in last post on page 2.

How do i fix this? It appears to be front focusing a bit.

Does pentax not check this before shipping to distributors? You would think on an entry-level camera where consumers aren't going to be changing/checking these types of things to have it right out of the box.

keyser · 12-23-2009, 05:39 PM

If you're seriously into fast phtography, you're going to need a fast prime. Low light shots with a kit lens Vs my late 1970s 50mm f/1.4 are night and day when it comes to tone and quality.

What doesn't seem to have been mentioned is that cameras focus more accurately with a faster lens.... that f/4 lens is going to give the camera a harder time than a f/1.8 for sure.

kostarae · 12-23-2009, 05:41 PM

keyser,

I understand this and plan to purchase a prime for the K-x. I am not sure which one to get yet. Have any suggestions?

gokenin · 12-23-2009, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by kostarae

Aperture priority mode on left or top.....Macro Mode with flash on right or bottom (depending on your computer's resolution)

Using a Nikon AF-S 35mm F/1.8 and Pentax 18-55mm kit lens @ 35mm

OK maybe its me but when I used opanda on the two pictures both come up as being taken with the Pentax Kx the first picture shows the picture taken at F4 with the contrast set to soft and an exposure time setting of 1/60 and the second picture is also said to be taken with a Pentax Kx taken at F8 with the contrast set to normal and the exposure setting it 1/25

there is no mention of any picture being taken with a nikon so whats the deal

Eruditass · 12-23-2009, 05:41 PM

Well, there is a tolerance accepted in the body and a tolerance in the lens, but even in the worst combination you shouldn't be able to tell on a kit lens - unless a shipper or someone in the store dropped the box and got it out of spec.

The problem with focusing on a newspaper is it will generally try to focus on what is the closest in the AF area. The AF points are actually a lot bigger than the little LEDs that you see in other cameras - center actually goes down to the bottom of the ( ) in the middle of the viewfinder. Where was this located when you focused?

This is why focus charts have a place in the center with nothing around it for you to focus on.

If it is really FF, I would exchange it for another one, since you just got it. If all else fails, there is a debug menu that is very unintrusive to get to where you can change the AF bias.

ll_coffee_lP · 12-23-2009, 05:42 PM

From the look of your Apocalyptic test is looks as if your lens is front focusing a bit.

I don't have the K-x, but I would suggest giving the manual a good read before you fire up a new camera and expect it to work like your D40. I suspect that you will find that your new Pentax will have many more options to it that you will need to tweak to your liking.

There's some serious white balance issues going on in most of the pics - so that is a start for you. I also suspect that you have the metering different on the two camera's as well - maybe matrix metering on your Nikon and spot or centre on your K-x.

As for the file sizes...you shouldn't be surprised that the files are larger - you purchased a camera that has twice the number of pixels. I'm sure you can select a setting with more compression to fix this.

All that being said, your first stop is figuring out the focus problem (which isn't great in the D40 shots either). I'm not sure if you are tripping the shutter before the focus has fully locked, or shooting manually and just missing. Your Pentax kit lens is competent, but it isn't a prime lens...so don't expect similar results.

Lastly, 50 shots isn't a test - it's just a taste. When I first got my K-7 I took close to 3000 shots before I began using it in paid shoots because I felt that I had the settings the way that I wanted them and was getting consistent results.

Continue reading and continue working on it - this is what owning a DSLR is all about (otherwise we'd all own point and shoots).

Good luck

c[_]

kostarae · 12-23-2009, 05:50 PM

Gokenin,

All shots of text were done with the K-x. The other part of that post referring to the Nikon Lens was answering a separate question on which lenses I was using on the first post of the thread with the portrait shots.

bogiesbad · 12-23-2009, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by kostarae

I posted a picture of the focus in last post on page 2.

How do i fix this? It appears to be front focusing a bit.

Does pentax not check this before shipping to distributors? You would think on an entry-level camera where consumers aren't going to be changing/checking these types of things to have it right out of the box.

Please read this to better understand FF/BF/Softness issues related to bodies and lenses.
I would expect a kit lens to be tested with it's body before distribution though.

jacksonpritt · 12-23-2009, 06:01 PM

You shouldn't be comparing prime lenses with the kit lens.

I think the biggest problem is that the kit lens is pretty soft compared to most prime lenses.

I used to complain about how all the images from my K10D were soft, and then I bought my first prime and HOO BOY was there a big difference!

EDIT: Also it looks like the white balance on your camera may be a bit off. You should probably play around with the color, sharpness, and saturation settings until you get something you like.

bogiesbad · 12-23-2009, 06:03 PM

Oooppps......

AdrianN · 12-23-2009, 06:39 PM

Originally posted by kostarae

Sorry about the focus test....I should listen better.....here is new pic

Center focused on the "O" in APOCALYPTIC

Thanks all for the replies and helping hand.

http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/3663/imgp3697h.jpg

Your photo indicates a problem with front focusing, but the newspaper has too many things for the AF to select and could be confusing it.

If you're really keen on getting this sorted out, check out this link: Jeffrey Friedl’s Blog Jeffrey’s Autofocus Test Chart

There's a fair bit of reading, but it should help you get your problem fixed

**Aristophanes** · 12-23-2009, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by kostarae

keyser,

I understand this and plan to purchase a prime for the K-x. I am not sure which one to get yet. Have any suggestions?

Get the prime if you want, but for your intended subjects I recommend a better option is to get a flash that bounces to the ceiling. If you want shots of moving kids, you need faster shutter speeds to stop the action AND maintain the DOF. There's no point in getting a shallow DOF "fast" prime, soft wide open (unless you spend huge $$$), only to get a limited DOF in all your shots because you don't have enough light. And older primes like the FA50 are soft wide open, so you wind up with every shot looking creatively the same: very shallow DOF and slightly soft. It's a lot of $$ spent to get a standard looking, if technically excellent, snapshot.

For the K-x, check the WB as it is a bit on the blue side. And the EV is often a tad high (with flash too). It shows in all your samples. A prime will assist with colour (as will PP, but that's work), but it won't correct the camera pre-sets. I agree with the posters here that the prime vs. kit lens is an awkward test.

My suggestion for a prime (new) would be the DA35, largely because its a decent indoor length without going to the cost extreme of the FA31. It focuses tight and fast, which for tracking a growing kid is far more important a real world measure than other technical arguments. 50mm is too long for moving indoor work. The DA40 is another option, but I still find it too long indoors. Tracking kids you really want AF, especially to take advantage of the shot-to-shot blaze of the K-x (isn't that a reason why you bought it?), so older MF lenses again, aren't maximizing the camera and your subject matter.

A beter option may be a higher quality zoom, like the Tamron 17-50/2.8, or, for more $$$ the DA*16-50/2.8. Bigger and heavier than a prime, but far more versatile. Again, I am trying to match your intended subject matter in all conditions with the advice. A 2.8 zoom lens with a bounce flash can handle any indoor/outdoor situation for following a growing child, with excellent quality, and go wide enough to grab scenes with context, group scenes, etc. Primes are technically great, but have practical disadvantages. The zoom would also work better with video. It's a cost effective solution that should not be discounted if you want versatility.

I cannot speak for the focus issue. Not quite enough evidence to be definitive.

Good luck.

JohnBee · 12-23-2009, 08:08 PM

Wow those pictures are...
Well, they are terrible!
Something terribly wrong here.
Take it back, xchange it, something.

LightBug · 12-23-2009, 08:28 PM

I posted on another forum about activation of SR. There is about 1 second delay before SR is engaged when the shutter is half-pressed. I got the same kind of blurry image as you did when I first got my K-x, after I started watching for the SR-active "Hand" symbol to come up, my images were nice and sharp.

Also, you can crank up the sharpening on K-x output images. They seem to have a lot of room left for sharpening.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Disappointed with Aperture 3	harmonica2	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	15	05-26-2010 09:04 PM
Really disappointed with KEH	ChipB	General Talk	7	05-10-2010 06:44 AM
disappointed in Adorama	kiwao	General Talk	16	03-03-2010 04:59 PM
Disappointed by the K7	dcreed	Photographic Technique	45	05-26-2009 06:55 PM
disappointed	nathancombs	General Talk	16	05-24-2008 05:28 PM

12-23-2009, 05:33 PM	#31
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Well, DPReview isn't disappointed, especially in low light. I can't offer a suggestion because I don't own a K-x, but from reading this site and other reviews I'd say your experience is not the norm DRPreview comment

12-23-2009, 05:35 PM	#32
kostarae New Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 13 Original Poster	I posted a picture of the focus in last post on page 2. How do i fix this? It appears to be front focusing a bit. Does pentax not check this before shipping to distributors? You would think on an entry-level camera where consumers aren't going to be changing/checking these types of things to have it right out of the box.

12-23-2009, 05:39 PM	#33
keyser Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Tsawwassen, BC Posts: 376	If you're seriously into fast phtography, you're going to need a fast prime. Low light shots with a kit lens Vs my late 1970s 50mm f/1.4 are night and day when it comes to tone and quality. What doesn't seem to have been mentioned is that cameras focus more accurately with a faster lens.... that f/4 lens is going to give the camera a harder time than a f/1.8 for sure.

12-23-2009, 05:41 PM	#34
kostarae New Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 13 Original Poster	keyser, I understand this and plan to purchase a prime for the K-x. I am not sure which one to get yet. Have any suggestions?

12-23-2009, 05:41 PM	#35
gokenin Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: lowell,ma Posts: 1,899	Originally posted by kostarae Aperture priority mode on left or top.....Macro Mode with flash on right or bottom (depending on your computer's resolution) Using a Nikon AF-S 35mm F/1.8 and Pentax 18-55mm kit lens @ 35mm OK maybe its me but when I used opanda on the two pictures both come up as being taken with the Pentax Kx the first picture shows the picture taken at F4 with the contrast set to soft and an exposure time setting of 1/60 and the second picture is also said to be taken with a Pentax Kx taken at F8 with the contrast set to normal and the exposure setting it 1/25 there is no mention of any picture being taken with a nikon so whats the deal

12-23-2009, 05:41 PM	#36
Eruditass Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,207	Well, there is a tolerance accepted in the body and a tolerance in the lens, but even in the worst combination you shouldn't be able to tell on a kit lens - unless a shipper or someone in the store dropped the box and got it out of spec. The problem with focusing on a newspaper is it will generally try to focus on what is the closest in the AF area. The AF points are actually a lot bigger than the little LEDs that you see in other cameras - center actually goes down to the bottom of the ( ) in the middle of the viewfinder. Where was this located when you focused? This is why focus charts have a place in the center with nothing around it for you to focus on. If it is really FF, I would exchange it for another one, since you just got it. If all else fails, there is a debug menu that is very unintrusive to get to where you can change the AF bias.

12-23-2009, 05:42 PM	#37
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	From the look of your Apocalyptic test is looks as if your lens is front focusing a bit. I don't have the K-x, but I would suggest giving the manual a good read before you fire up a new camera and expect it to work like your D40. I suspect that you will find that your new Pentax will have many more options to it that you will need to tweak to your liking. There's some serious white balance issues going on in most of the pics - so that is a start for you. I also suspect that you have the metering different on the two camera's as well - maybe matrix metering on your Nikon and spot or centre on your K-x. As for the file sizes...you shouldn't be surprised that the files are larger - you purchased a camera that has twice the number of pixels. I'm sure you can select a setting with more compression to fix this. All that being said, your first stop is figuring out the focus problem (which isn't great in the D40 shots either). I'm not sure if you are tripping the shutter before the focus has fully locked, or shooting manually and just missing. Your Pentax kit lens is competent, but it isn't a prime lens...so don't expect similar results. Lastly, 50 shots isn't a test - it's just a taste. When I first got my K-7 I took close to 3000 shots before I began using it in paid shoots because I felt that I had the settings the way that I wanted them and was getting consistent results. Continue reading and continue working on it - this is what owning a DSLR is all about (otherwise we'd all own point and shoots). Good luck c[_]

12-23-2009, 05:50 PM	#38
kostarae New Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 13 Original Poster	Gokenin, All shots of text were done with the K-x. The other part of that post referring to the Nikon Lens was answering a separate question on which lenses I was using on the first post of the thread with the portrait shots.

12-23-2009, 05:55 PM	#39
bogiesbad Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Lower AL Photos: Albums Posts: 355	Originally posted by kostarae I posted a picture of the focus in last post on page 2. How do i fix this? It appears to be front focusing a bit. Does pentax not check this before shipping to distributors? You would think on an entry-level camera where consumers aren't going to be changing/checking these types of things to have it right out of the box. Please read this to better understand FF/BF/Softness issues related to bodies and lenses. I would expect a kit lens to be tested with it's body before distribution though.

12-23-2009, 06:01 PM	#40
jacksonpritt Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Berkeley, CA Posts: 124	You shouldn't be comparing prime lenses with the kit lens. I think the biggest problem is that the kit lens is pretty soft compared to most prime lenses. I used to complain about how all the images from my K10D were soft, and then I bought my first prime and HOO BOY was there a big difference! EDIT: Also it looks like the white balance on your camera may be a bit off. You should probably play around with the color, sharpness, and saturation settings until you get something you like.

12-23-2009, 06:03 PM	#41
bogiesbad Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Lower AL Photos: Albums Posts: 355	Oooppps......

12-23-2009, 06:39 PM	#42
AdrianN Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Sydney Posts: 66	Originally posted by kostarae Sorry about the focus test....I should listen better.....here is new pic Center focused on the "O" in APOCALYPTIC Thanks all for the replies and helping hand. http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/3663/imgp3697h.jpg Your photo indicates a problem with front focusing, but the newspaper has too many things for the AF to select and could be confusing it. If you're really keen on getting this sorted out, check out this link: Jeffrey Friedl’s Blog Jeffrey’s Autofocus Test Chart There's a fair bit of reading, but it should help you get your problem fixed

12-23-2009, 07:57 PM	#43
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by kostarae keyser, I understand this and plan to purchase a prime for the K-x. I am not sure which one to get yet. Have any suggestions? Get the prime if you want, but for your intended subjects I recommend a better option is to get a flash that bounces to the ceiling. If you want shots of moving kids, you need faster shutter speeds to stop the action AND maintain the DOF. There's no point in getting a shallow DOF "fast" prime, soft wide open (unless you spend huge $$$), only to get a limited DOF in all your shots because you don't have enough light. And older primes like the FA50 are soft wide open, so you wind up with every shot looking creatively the same: very shallow DOF and slightly soft. It's a lot of $$ spent to get a standard looking, if technically excellent, snapshot. For the K-x, check the WB as it is a bit on the blue side. And the EV is often a tad high (with flash too). It shows in all your samples. A prime will assist with colour (as will PP, but that's work), but it won't correct the camera pre-sets. I agree with the posters here that the prime vs. kit lens is an awkward test. My suggestion for a prime (new) would be the DA35, largely because its a decent indoor length without going to the cost extreme of the FA31. It focuses tight and fast, which for tracking a growing kid is far more important a real world measure than other technical arguments. 50mm is too long for moving indoor work. The DA40 is another option, but I still find it too long indoors. Tracking kids you really want AF, especially to take advantage of the shot-to-shot blaze of the K-x (isn't that a reason why you bought it?), so older MF lenses again, aren't maximizing the camera and your subject matter. A beter option may be a higher quality zoom, like the Tamron 17-50/2.8, or, for more $$$ the DA*16-50/2.8. Bigger and heavier than a prime, but far more versatile. Again, I am trying to match your intended subject matter in all conditions with the advice. A 2.8 zoom lens with a bounce flash can handle any indoor/outdoor situation for following a growing child, with excellent quality, and go wide enough to grab scenes with context, group scenes, etc. Primes are technically great, but have practical disadvantages. The zoom would also work better with video. It's a cost effective solution that should not be discounted if you want versatility. I cannot speak for the focus issue. Not quite enough evidence to be definitive. Good luck.

12-23-2009, 08:08 PM	#44
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Wow those pictures are... Well, they are terrible! Something terribly wrong here. Take it back, xchange it, something.

12-23-2009, 08:28 PM	#45
LightBug Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: OC, CA, USA Posts: 506	I posted on another forum about activation of SR. There is about 1 second delay before SR is engaged when the shutter is half-pressed. I got the same kind of blurry image as you did when I first got my K-x, after I started watching for the SR-active "Hand" symbol to come up, my images were nice and sharp. Also, you can crank up the sharpening on K-x output images. They seem to have a lot of room left for sharpening.