Pentax K-x Hands On

[J.R.]

Tonight, Pentax showed off the newest member of their digital camera lineup, the Pentax K-x.  A sort of hybrid of their K2000/K-m and K-7 models, the small but sturdy camera brings HD video-capable SLRs to a lower price than ever before.  We even got to spend a couple of minutes with one; read on for our impressions.

The new K-x felt sturdy.  That's no real surprise to anyone familiar with Pentax's cameras; they have their faults, to be certain, but poor construction certainly isn't one of them.  It's comfortably weighty -- not too heavy, but not so light that it feels cheap.  It feels strikingly similar to the diminutive K2000/K-m, which is no surprise considering they share a common design heritage.

The new K-x comes in a kit with the same lens as the K2000.  In fact, the only real difference between the two cameras seems to be a sensor upgrade, which brings video and live view along for the ride.  There are also a few minor updates, like a faster shutter speed (up to 1/6000, now). 

Since the K-x is so similar to the K2000, owners of the latter would feel right at home with the updated model.  All of the buttons are in almost the same places.  The one exception is that since Pentax had to add a live view button, the info and menu buttons on the back get pushed down, and the delete key now resides as a secondary function on the flash pop-up.  It's a pretty minor change, all things considered.  There's also a video icon added to the selection wheel at the top of the camera.

The various buttons, toggles and switches are all within easy reach of the thumbs and fingers holding the camera.  I like Pentax's control layout, since it feels very intuitive, and the K-x does little to change this fact.  The shutter was responsive when snapping pictures, but it's hard to get any better of a feel for the camera's capabilities without getting a chance to analyze the pictures that the camera takes. 

The camera is much less pink in person than it appears in the pictures, but even then it isn't a vibrant, garish red.  The only red lens available will be the kit's stock 18-55.  No blue lenses will be made available for the blue model, since only the top fourth of the camera is colored blue, while most of the body actually remains black, and white versions will be available for the 18-55 and the 55-200 lenses.  While the black and white K-x cameras will be available starting in October, the red and blue iterations won't come to market until thirty days after the others.

Pentax made a note of pointing out that their entire camera lineup, from compact point and shoots straight up through digital SLRs, now supports the recording of HD video.  That means that the K2000 is going to be phased out, an unfortunate occurrence since it has become so very inexpensive, lately.  The K-x is therefore replacing the market left by the absence of the K2000 and, with its higher resolution and featureset, dipping its toes into the arena where the K200 used to be.  It'll be interesting to see if Pentax does replace the K200 with a middle-of-the-road camera, but if they do, it won't be for some time; Pentax's President of US Operations Ned Bunnell said that the next camera to be released by Pentax will be the 645D in early 2010.

For now, though, the K-x is definitely shaping up to be both a worthy successor to the Pentax line as well as a strong competitor in the larger camera market.  12.4MP, 720p video recording, live view, great build quality and access to some great fast primes, all for under $650?  Not bad.  While we don't yet know if the image quality is equally as hype-worthy, there's no real reason to believe it won't be.  As it stands, the K-x is an exciting new camera that anyone new to DSLRs, or experienced photographers looking for something smaller should consider.

Stay tuned for our full review of this new camera.

Related Articles:

• Pentax K-x with HD video unveiled
• Pentax K-7 First Thoughts

[krg]

First post for me here. As a current P&S 'super zoom' user (previous generation, it's only a 12X zoom model) who is getting more into photography and even a touch of video, This is the first entry level DSLR that appears to have nearly everything I think I'm looking for and also closest to my desired $ entry point to DLSR (except having a tilt-able LCD which I would like).

I'm surprised by the 200 starting ISO though - would have thought 100 or even 80 or etc... on that end. How does starting at 200 affect things for super bright outdoor pics? etc... I'm usually not that interested in software tweaking to pretend to get a different IQ (the so called 'expandable' ISO to 100).

Also curious if it has any built in system for keeping the sensor clean like some other entry level DSLR models.

Looking forward to a full review on this one for sure!

[Andy Stanton]

I'm surprised by the 200 starting ISO though - would have thought 100 or even 80 or etc... on that end. How does starting at 200 affect things for super bright outdoor pics? etc... I'm usually not that interested in software tweaking to pretend to get a different IQ (the so called 'expandable' ISO to 100).

The Nikon D40's lowest ISO is also 200 and it's not expandable. We'll have to wait until the professional reviews come out to see whether the Pentax K-x is noisier than other DSLR's under bright conditions.

Also curious if it has any built in system for keeping the sensor clean like some other entry level DSLR models.

The K-x uses the sensor shake method. The Pentax K200d and K2000 also use that method. It seems to work reasonably well.

[KCook]

ISO 200 is the native baseline sensitivity for lots of ASP-C sensors. Some of these cameras will show a ISO 100 setting, but they may be running the sensor at ISO 200, then processing the data to simulate ISO 100. DSLRs is different in many ways ....

Kelly: DSLR trainee

[Jim Keenan]

[QUOTE=krg;38365]
I'm surprised by the 200 starting ISO though - would have thought 100 or even 80 or etc... on that end. How does starting at 200 affect things for super bright outdoor pics? etc... I'm usually not that interested in software tweaking to pretend to get a different IQ (the so called 'expandable' ISO to 100). [QUOTE]

While 80 or 100 ISO is usually a good thing for compact digitals since the smaller sensors with higher resolution don't handle higher ISOs very well, a DSLR has a much larger physical-sized sensor. If the camera starts at 200 ISO its best quality will be at 200 (I've got Nikon DSLRs - a D3 and a D300 - that both can be shot at 100 even though 200 is the nominal ISO, and I don't see any real change in image quality by going down to 100). Starting at 200 is a good thing since it gives you a faster shutter speed right off the bat.

The difference in starting at 200 ISO vs. 100 is 1 EV (or 1 stop if you will) - with all camera settings the same, a camera at 100 ISO that shoots at 1/500th of second for a particular scene will shoot the same scene at 1/1000th of a second at 200 ISO. Unless you're trying for a slow shutter speed for some reason, 200 is a better deal than 100. DSLRs typcally have a much wider range of shutter speeds and lens apertures available than compact digitals which makes them more versatile across a wide range of lighting conditions.

[KCook]

All very good points in the post above. Just wanted to add, that if/when you have a genuine need for low ISO, as a combination of open aperture and very low shutter speed, ND filters (or a polarizer) can be used to get you to those settings.

Kelly

[krg]

I knew there was a reason I posted to this site. Thanks for the insight.

I know enough to be dangerous, but clearly much left to learn still.

[KCook]

While I have over a half century of experience with film cameras, I'm now struggling with my very first DSLR. So I'm certainly having some days with that "dangerous" feeling

Kelly

[Ric]

thank you for the opportunity to add my 2cents about the new K-x.

I checked out the K-x's new upgrades over the older model doing a few easy searches.

I'd have to differ though on your casting the K-x as "the only difference" and "so similar" and "a minor update" to the K2000/Km.

11 adjustable AF points, over the 3 in older model. This alone makes it much more useable, and is not a minor update (at least to me).

There is the option to shoot at ISO 6400, the K-m 3200.

The K-m has a shutter spec'd to operate to 100,000 actuations (clicks) a feature seen only with much more expensive models. I think this is a definite first on this level of camera. Do you not agree? This makes noteworthy news to me.

4.7 FPS (over the older K-m/2000's 3.5).

I noticed it also has HDR implementation, not found in the older camera.

Shutter also operates to 1/6000th sec. This would indicate (to me) a new shutter design and implementation (along with the 100,000 actuations mentioned above.

These are a few I could tease out doing a little bit of searching. :-)

Thank you,

Ric

"In fact, the only real difference between the two cameras seems to be a sensor upgrade, which brings video and live view along for the ride. There are also a few minor updates, like a faster shutter speed (up to 1/6000, now).

Since the K-x is so similar to the K2000, owners of the latter would feel right at home with the updated model. All of the buttons are in almost the same places. The one exception is that since Pentax had to add a live view button, the info and menu buttons on the back get pushed down, and the delete key now resides as a secondary function on the flash pop-up. It's a pretty minor change, all things considered. There's also a video icon added to the selection wheel at the top of the camera".