K-x? Or Micro 4/3?

[Kevin Peters]

Thanks Jim, good aspects I am surprised how close in size they are, doesn't a micro 4/3 give a little better DOF (easier bokeh)--excellent point about the m 5/4 viewfinder.

Definitely depends on your micro-4:3 kit. The Oly gear is small and stabilized, so lenses can be smaller. Here's a k-x with 75-300 equivalent lens, compared to a Lumix GH1 with 90-400mm equivalent lens - pretty close!



I bought into micro 4:3 to replace my compact, and the G/GH is great with flip screen and live-viewfinder. That has saved me numerous white-balance and exposure errors that an OVF cannot do. Being in auto mode with a PK lens that has an aperture ring is quite nice.. but a 50mm is 100mm equivalent with the tighter crop factor. On the other hand, batteries last far longer with the K-x and more versatile gear is available, especially if f/4-5.6 is not fast enough. I have an Oly 17mm pancake that makes the GH1 pretty small if I need to.

Pentax DAs are actually smaller
i would go for k-x anytime
(have k-x and it completely replaced my E-620 in real use)

Smaller than the field equivalent M-Zuikos? I just can't believe that and would like to see what you're comparing. Perhaps you're thinking of the E-System 4/3 lenses with M4/3 Adapters?

--
Tony-H

--

Jim in Oregon.. granitix.blogspot.. Alpha & Pentax veteran, now shooting K-x + G1

 

[inlawbiker]

That is what I meant by my post about size. That goes for the GF1/GF2 or NEX-3 but not really the large GH2. With a small lens on a small MFT body you have a nice package suitable for environments where a DSLR isn't. But once you add big lenses the value goes away. Their only true advantage is size. Once you add big lenses the size advantage is gone and there certainly is no price or performance advantage.

Overall though I would say MFT's are improving, are competitive with DSLR's and the size issue is a real one. I do not enjoy carrying around a big clunky DSLR with me, for example I'm going to a BBQ tonight. I will bring the camera but I'd be a lot happier about it with a small MFT equipped with a high-quality pancake prime. If they weren't so expensive I'd have kept it.

So in summary I would say the smaller body MFT cameras are intended for folks moving up from point n' shoots who want a "real" camera but would never consider carrying a big ol DSLR. Once they buy in there are lens options to go along with more types of shooting.

Personally I may be in the minority but I'm looking forward to the extinction of DSLR's. Once small-bodied cameras with electronic viewfinders are equal to DSLR's in terms of performance AND price them I will happily buy in. That may be 10 years so so though.

 

[Kevin Peters]

How's kr video? Or beat to buy separate video cam??

 

[Kevin Peters]

does any one know if the K-x or K-r auto rotate once a portrait pic is taken? Or does it not give its IBIS? With 18-55 lens for example?

 

[Yamin Tedja]

I have pentax KX and it is a good camera that I enjoy to use. But sometimes when I want to travel light , I want to use smaller camera like Micro 4/3 or sony nex because even tough I use the smallest lens I have, KX body is still too big to be pocketable. So my suggestion is that you keep your olympus camera and buy KX, and you can still use small older manual focus pentax prime lens on your micro 4/3 camera when you want to travel light. If you don't like the E-pl2, then maybe you can should the panasonic GF2.

 

[eadrian75]

I have pentax KX and it is a good camera that I enjoy to use. But sometimes when I want to travel light , I want to use smaller camera like Micro 4/3 or sony nex because even tough I use the smallest lens I have, KX body is still too big to be pocketable. So my suggestion is that you keep your olympus camera and buy KX, and you can still use small older manual focus pentax prime lens on your micro 4/3 camera when you want to travel light. If you don't like the E-pl2, then maybe you can should the panasonic GF2.

I'm not sure what size pockets you have, but i never found any of the m43 cameras to be "pocketable" (even with the 20mm pancake, let alone the kit lens). Maybe in a jacket (or if i still had my parachute pants), but even then i found it awkward.

It was usually strapped across my shoulder. If this is how you carry it then why not carry something that will give you the performance and IQ that m43 lacks. Then get yourself an enthusiast point-and-shoot for true pocketability when you don't mind sacrificing IQ.

 

[waxwaine]

4 years ago my wife bought a Panasonic FZ18. I just love it: good IQ, more specifications than a Nikon D5100, great built in lens(28-504mm f2.8), nice grip, solid build and relativity compact size. Few days ago looking for more manual control and optic posibilities I research almost all model at the entry/middle level. I wanted a camera for last becouse I do´nt like to expend money on desechables things. My impressions of mirrorless machines was that they cost almost the same as DSLR but without surplus value of the last ones. I felt them unconfortables, complicated, fragiles, and limited. My FZ18 is also limited but so complete on caracteristics that for transportables needs it´s enough fo me. So, I went on Pentax K-r. I just love it too. I felt like I did a correct jump from a complete point and shoot camera(FZ18) to a superior level and unlimited one. Just happy now.

My opinion is that the size it´s no only important for electronics, so also you have to feel confortable the machine in your hands, unless you can transform them too.

 

[wayne131]

Hi..
I think I have found the perfect camera combination, well for me anyway.
I have a Pentax K-x with the 18-55 mm kit lens and Tamron 18-200mm.

I also have a Samsung NX100 with the 20-50mm I-function lens and the 30mm F2.0 lens.

The 30 mm is superb and gives me a great alternative to the Pentax in a smaller compact form.
Regards,
Wayne.

 

[waxwaine]

Me too almost, I think.
Pentax K-r with 18-55mm kit, 18-200mm Sigma, manual 50mm(80mm) f1.7 Vivitar.
When money comes, my next search will be for a 35mm f1.4 and a macro 1:1 lens.

 

[Kevin Peters]

thanks but that really is a huge kit compared to the GH2. which is much lighter.

 

[stern]

SO, I have the Olympus EPL2 micro 4/3 camera and like it for the most part, but no viewfinder (I know you can add one but it's a bit clunky). I'm not too impressed with the IQ of the EPL2, even though It suppose to be a good camera. I was in a photo shop today and they had a K-x and it was a nice looking camera and one thing I did not realized is that the pentax lenses are relatively small and not much larger than the micro 4/3 lenses!

Anyone have input if the K-x is a good JPEG type camera, and any good samples, wisdom. thanks!

When I had my K10D, I needed a smaller travel camera (the K10D just didn't fit into my airtravel hand luggage. So, I got me an Oly E-410. Great little camera (only set backs: no SR and IQ wasn't as good at ISO higher than base ISO due to the small sensor). Then, my E-410 was stolen which made me buy an almost equally small Pentax K-m (similar form factor to the K-x and the K-r). I was REALLY happy with the K-m (IQ much better than Oly and SR!). Well, then one of my sons wanted the camera and he has it now. I am currently on a K7 (smaller than the K10D, larger than K-m, but still o.k. to take on SOME trips... as a lean and mean pocketable travel camera, I use a Ricoh GX200 now - back to base ISO though...). If you need something small, the K-x is certainly a good deal (tried the K-r, but wasn't happy with it due to its frontfocus issues in low light - the K-x, using the older AF-module, should do much better in these situations, although it misses the focus points in the viewfinder - something I worked around with the K-m by only using the center point like in the olden days).

--
http://sternbild.zenfolio.com (gallery)