I voted yes, not because it's clearly better than my old camera - a K20d. I voted yes because it's definitely a keeper and will complement my K20d quite nicely. Plus, it's my wife's camera now and there's no way she'd let me sell it
My rule of thumb for any new lens or body is that it takes at least 1,000 shots before you are comfortable with it and understand its strengths and weaknesses. For those out there scratching their heads at the K-x, I say give it some time. Set it up the way you set up your other cameras and then shoot a thousand shots. For me that meant:
- AF.S on the center point. I think it came with AF.A, but I like making that decision, thank you very much.
- AF on the AF button, not half-press of the shutter
- RAW
- Center-weighted metering, with AF and AE linked
- Auto ISO, 200-6400
- Aperture priority
That last point - Aperture priority - is interesting on the K-x, because I've had to modify my shooting style a little. On the K20d, I'd often find myself leaning on wide-open apertures in low light in an attempt to keep the ISO in check.
On the K-x, I find myself shooting in low light one or two stops down from wide open (i.e., F3.2 or F4.0 on the DA Limiteds) and more willing to let the ISO float up to 3200 and even 6400. The benefit is increased DOF - useful for moving subjects - and slightly sharper results - because the apertures are closer to the lens' sweet spot.
So get out there and shoot, chimp, adjust, and shoot some more. It's a fine camera, but like any camera has it's strengths and weaknesses....