| Pros | Powerhouse on the cheap |
| Cons | No AF Point Indicators, Low LCD Res |
| Rating | 10 |
| Price | 500 |
| Years Owned | 1 |
I can recommend this camera: Yes
Value, Features, Performance & Size
See my main review!
Camera Review
This is my Pentax K-x Review and Use comments. I am posting nothing more then a simple (but long-winded) overview of my opinion about this camera; I suspect there are others considering a decision about this camera and this information may be useful. Don't consider it as anything more... (e.g. I'm no expert)
The K-x is one of those cameras I ended up with by chance, but now its become a part of me. I've been using the camera for over a month and have had time to contrast it with a few other cameras, namely the Canon EOS T1i (500D) and the Nikon D5000. The interesting thing is both of those cameras are priced above the class the K-x is in. At the time of this writing, the T1i Kit was selling for $750 (after instant discounts), the D5000 Kit for $650 (after instant discounts), while the K-x Kit was $500 (after instant discounts).
For reference I work primarily as a consultant but also provide photography services and training to my employer and our clients. I have (extensive) experience working with the vast majority of Major-Name DSLRs going back nearly 10 years, including the Canon T1i & XTi, the Nikon D5000, D3000, and D90, the Sony a700, and the Pentax K20D. Although I'm not comparing it to all of these cameras at least it provides you with my perspective. While I've used many of them through my employment, I can only own the more affordable model(s).
There are no sample images in my review, primarily because they never satisfy readers to some extent. There are many, many samples on the internet already and more importantly if you are considering these cameras yourself, take a memory card down to your camera store and shoot some samples from the camera to review prior to your decision making.
Overview
The K-x seemed to come in under the radar. By that I mean when it was released as Pentax's budget offering it looked like nothing more than another low-budget DSLR, something to let Pentax compete with the Nikon D3000 and Canon XSi and Sony's Lemming-like stable of DSLRs.
I didn't pay too much attention to Pentax news at the time, as my only experience with Pentax was the K20D (which was a good experience). I had owned a DSLR system previously but due to economic realities had to liquidate everything. Fortunes changed and recently I had considered buying a new DSLR and I made sure to at least include the K-x on my list to review as a possibility.
Exterior & Handling
The K-x seems very well made, on par with, if not better than its rivals. At first inspection it looks a little 'plasticy' but through handling it becomes obvious that tolerances are tight and it is well built.
The front acutally has a nice rubber grib, something extremely rare at this price point that is comfortable for my small fingers, but is easily too small for average users, it is something you would have to try and be willing to accept. The rear is sculpted in a simple but highly accurate way, it curves outwards along the right side following your palm and providing a natural place to create grip leverage with your thumb, without it sliding off (or cramping up). The left side has no sharp corners so two-handed holding is still comfortable.
The SD card door is secure and does not creak or groan under use, however the battery door on the bottom does have small amount of side-to-side play (around 1mm), but is still secure and locked thanks to its locking mechanism. The camera itself has no squeaks or groans from use or heavy handling.
All of the buttons and dials have a solid operational click or press. The mode dial on top spins easily, but not 'too easily' for me. I actually prefer it because I can switch modes using only my thumb rather quickly. The mutli-function pad buttons on the back are a little undersized and can be a tad difficult in a rush (I have missed-pressed trying to hit the ISO button in a rush) but nothing too concerning.
The 'green-dot' button while nice that it has the ability to change its function, has seen limited use. I can rarely find a reason to use it, primarily I use it to set the 'Program Line' exposure when I'm Manual mode. Its useful, but I could probably find a better use for it.
On the back there is an AF/AE-L button that I program to act only as an AF-ON button. I also remove AF functionality from the shutter button. I use AF.C only - this configuration allows me to focus once by pressing the AF button and then releasing and it automatically holds my focus, or I can keep the button held down in case I need to track something. This is how I've had my DSLRs configured for a long time and its a personal requirement that a camera can be configured this way. The only downside to this configuration is that I cannot use AE-L. Normally I would set the shutter button first-step to act as AE-L, so I can perform my focus first, then compose the scene as I wish it to be metered and lock exposure with single press. The K-x has the option to lock exposure with focus, but this only works if you're NOT using AF.C - besides locking exposure when I focus doesn't always account for additional changes in scene brightness after I recompose after focusing - thus I just live without AE-L for the time being and can revert to Manual if it is that important.
The camera is small, smaller then it leads you to believe, it is smaller then both of its rivals. However it is not so small to be along the lines of the Panasonic micro four-thirds G1/GH1 series (which feel a bit like a toy at times). I considered its smaller size to be an advantage, the less bulk hanging from my neck the better.
The LCD is a slightly smaller size and resolution then its rivals, at 320x240 and 2.7" compared to others at 3" and 640x480, however it is still quite useable to me. Being that the camera itself is a little smaller, the 2.7" sized LCD looks right at home. I am pleased with the ability to control its brightness and also fine tune its color temperature, something rarely found on others. I mainly use the LCD to check composition and make an attempt to check on the focus using the zooming.
The viewfinder is relatively large and bright for a camera in this class, I have no problems with composition, however judging focus is quite difficult. Additionally, as mentioned in many other places there are no AF point indicators in the viewfinder, the 11 points are described in the manual so you have an idea where they are, but when you are using anything other than single point AF you have no idea which AF point is being used. This is not a problem for me, because I always use single point AF, but its worth mentioning. I do consider this a flaw in the design, it takes away too much functionality for my tastes, but it is not a significant issue in my decision making.
The popup flash is a little closer to the lens axis than I prefer, making red eye more common, but with the use of a Puffer diffuser or other means of diffusion the flash works quite well. In addition to a diffuser I use a small white card to bounce light upwards for bounce flash in small rooms, and I have also placed a piece of Rosco Cinegel 3411 (3/4 CTO) over the flash to balance the flash closer to tungsten lighting, as I use it to supplement tungsten lighting about 95% of the time. This is a small trick that can make a big difference when you use PUF lighting, normally the PUF light appears much cooler then ambient light and it makes it very obvious, by warming the light and dialing it down and/or diffusing it, you get very acceptable results.
The camera has two indicator LEDs. A completely unnecessary (but cool) blue power LED on top, and a card-writing indicator on the back.
Image Quality
This subject is covered in lots of detail elsewhere on the internet, alas:
(These opinions are strictly in regards to the RAW captures, and do not apply to the in-camera JPG captures.)
This camera is simply amazing to me. It terms of APS-C sized image sensors it meets or exceeds all of my expectations with regards to dynamic range, color, and noise. In a way, I am not too surprised as I always got the best images from the Nikon D300 and D90 cameras, the understanding is that the K-x sensor is a modified version of that sensor.
In fact, most of the data on DXOMark show the K-x sensor output as nearly identical to the Nikon D90 for example. (Many people tend to dislike or discredit the information put forth by DXOMark but I have always found it to be very telling and relational with what I find in my own use. Additionally, many forget that when comparing cameras of different resolutions on DXOmark you have to be sure to switch to the 'print' comparison which equalizes the data based on viewing them at equal print sizes.)
As a whole, my images have an exceptional amount of dynamic range, however they always tend to be exposed a bit to the right. This leaves me little room for error on overexposure. Thus while outdoors I almost always start with -1/3 or -2/3EV (sometimes much more), where for indoors I'm comfortable with 0 EV adjustment. This has the side effect that even the RAW image doesn't have alot of room to pull down the highlights, unless of course I planned for it and adjusted EC. The method of metering is somewhat similar to how other Nikon cameras have tended to meter, but quite different from Canon (and Sony). Its never really been a problem for me, but it is something you must be conscious of when you're out and about. If you're not shooting at high-ISOs, you should almost default to using -2/3EV just to be on the safe side.
I'm using Adobe Lightroom 3 beta 2 for all my post processing, mainly because of the amazing noise reduction algorithms introduced in LR3. I own other noise reduction software such as Dfine, etc. and nothing can come close to the ability to reduce noise while retaining detail that I have found in LR3. To put this into perspective, I was able to print a photograph of my son playing with his toys in dim tungsten lighting taken at ISO 12800, post processed in LR3, and printed as an 8x10 - and it looks excellent. There is some grain in the dimmer areas, but no color smearing or blotching. All that said, I don't think that image could stand up to an 11x14 print size - but for a casual user like myself who primarily prints 5x7s and 8x10s its amazing.
Lens
Lens choice for a camera is as much a personal preference as (if not more) choice of camera body. I purchased the two lens kit that contained the DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AL and the DA 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED. Initially I saw some mention that its a worth while upgrade to goto the 18-55mm ALII version which has a metal mount and slightly modified optical formula, however I found that my kit lens reports itself on EXIF info as an AL II version of the lens, I believe Pentax replaced or updated the kit version's optical formula to match that of the AL II (which makes sense considering cost savings for production of the elements, etc.).
The 18-55 is far and away the best 'kit' lens I have ever used, almost incredibly sharp wide open and at f/5.6 its at its peak. I don't have a single complaint about the lens. The build quality is better than the 18-55 kit zooms I have used from Canon and Nikon (including their IS variants).
The 50-200mm seemed to have a somewhat bad reputation from what I found online with everyone recommending the 55-300 version instead, I decided I would give the 50-200 a try and exchange if needed. It wasn't needed, the 50-200 was as sharp, if not more, than the 18-55. I don't know if my copy is above-par, or I have just very low expectations, but compared to similar lenses with Can/Nikon I felt the Pentax was better! I am extremely happy with this lens.
This is leaving the scope of this review, but as much as I liked the 18-55 I wanted something with a bit more range, and faster. I had considered the Pentax 17-70, Tamron 17-50/2.8, and the new Sigma 17-70/2.8-4. I had used the Tamron on another mount and while it was good it didn't really give me more reach, and I didn't feel it had the contrast I wanted wide open. So then it came down to the Pentax 17-70 and Sigma 17-70, nothing else I could do but examine in person and use them both, they were both excellent but the Sigma was better for me. While it wasn't as sharp wide open, if I stopped it down to match the f/4 on the Pentax is was - plus the Optical Stabilization on the Sigma was way more useable than the AntiShake on the K-x. Focusing speed and accuracy was a draw on both, they both use an ultrasonic ring type design that was very fast and nearly silent. Build quality on both was excellent, I'm surprised the Sigma wasn't designated an EX model. I will now need to start looking for some fast prime lenses!
(I'm sure there many other excellent lenses out there, I just wanted to share my experiences, partially because the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 is so new.)
Image Stabilization
Well, it works, but I wasn't impressed. When I've used cameras with in-body stabilization like the Olympus E-P2 and the Sony a700 I usually can get around 2 'stops' of slower shutter speed reliably. For example, if shooting a 50mm lens (75mm equiv) I would normally use a minimum of 1/80s with no stabilization, 1 stop advantage would let me use 1/40s, 2 stops 1/20s. On the K-x I could only 'reliably' get about 1 to 1.3 stops. 1 stop is better than nothing, but it ranks lower that other in-body stabilization I have used.
(To put it into perspective, using the Optical Stabilization on the Sigma 17-70 I can just as 'reliably' get a 2 to 3 stop advantage.)
Auto Focus
Quite simply I thought autofocus was excellent. Being a budget camera I expected less, but AF is fast and relatively accurate. Both drop a bit in low light.
One of my complaints with all cameras in this class is the lack of any type of AutoFocus fine tuning adjustment. I have some lenses with a little bit of front focus, some spot on, and some with some back focus. All of them are within a degree that I'm comfortable with but at large viewing size and large aperture it is noticeable. It would be nice to give users the option to dial in a little bit of adjustment if they wanted it.
Auto Exposure
As I mentioned before, the camera tends to expose to the right and if I'm not indoors or in a situation using high-ISO I will use a -2/3EV as a starting point for exposure compensation just to protect the highlights. Multisegment metering works well for me except in backlit situations to which I switch to spot metering.
Video
I love the video from this camera, it doesn't take long to get the feel for manually focusing on the fly and the quality of the video is great. Its not a substitute for the family video camera, but I use it often and I'm glad to have it.
The 'jello' effect from rolling shutter seems less pronounced than the Nikon D90 for example, but I never really though it was a problem for my uses anyways.
Battery Life
One of my favorite things about the K-x is its use of AA sized batteries. I dislike spending $50-80 each for a LiIon battery that has to be replaced after about 2 or 3 years regardless of use. On a $500 camera, I don't want to spend $150-200 just for a few sets of batteries, period.
I see lots of arguments about the superiority of LiIon batteries, that they have very low self discharge, high energy capacity, and no memory problems. But I never see the negatives, which are the fact that LiIon batteries typically die due to age, regardless of use. I have lightly used LiIon batteries die at the same time as heavily used ones (by die, I mean the hold 60% of the capacity of the originals or less).
My problem was solved with a $35 investment in 3 sets of eneloop LSD (low self discharge) NiMH batteries and a charger. I get between 600 and 900 shots depending on how much video and fiddling I do with the camera, also get less using the Sigma lens (around 500) due to the OS, per a set of AA batteries. I have no problem keeping a fully charged set with me as a spare, and on trips or long outings I keep a pack of energizer Lithium's for emergency backups.
If I need a new set of eneloops, they can be had for about $10. Sure beats paying $50-80 for a manufacturer's overpriced LiIon battery.
Menus
I will admit that the menu system is bit less user friendly compared to other offerings, it takes some getting used to. There is also no 'My Menu' function for placing commonly used items. But as a whole, it works.
Final Thoughts
At the beginning of this review I mentioned I ended up with it by chance. The reason was helping someone learn the use of their new K-x and I was impressed with the camera's qualities and its output. The camera brings as much to the table as some of the cameras costing twice as much.
If you're in the market for a new DSLR and you are on a tight budget, I honestly do not believe you can get a better complete package for your money than the K-x!
I would be interested to hear of others thoughts on the K-x as well...
)
