[DeadJohn]

(lots of text snipped for brevity) ... The issues are these ...
2. D600 opens a non-dead-end path in regards to lenses and future camera upgrades. I can keep my lens kit and just switch bodies and keep going. From K-5 to FF entails losing any DA lenses, whose value will have crashed. ...

That statement applies only you must go to FF. If you buy the K5 and later upgrade to a new Pentax APS-C body none of your lens purchases will be a dead end. In other words, the K5 is only a dead end if you later buy an FF camera or change brands. And the D600 is also a dead end if you later decide that APS-C was better for you, or change brands.

You're stuck between 2 excellent choices. I've been using Pentax for just over 2 years and any time I think my sensor is holding me back - would full frame be better? - I look at some of the great photos here and realize it's me, not the sensor.

[brntoki]

DJ,

You really think there is room for improvement in APS-C? I think Pentax has taken it as far as it can reasonably go.

Couple that with a not so unlikely scenario where APS-C is pinched out being the monkey-in-the-middle, and I think it is a valid concern.

Yeah. In a real sense, either choice is right.

[RonHendriks1966]

wow, not a single image in this section.

My only landscape from 2012:


Made an 13"x19" (A3+) print on watercolor paper and that is absolutely stunning. I have no doubt that you can make it even one size larger then that. This was iso125, so there is still a very little improvement going to iso80. This with K-5, so K-5 IIs would be slightly better. With some great lenses you ca make great images.

[brntoki]

Not fair, Ron!

Are you a sales rep.? What's your commission?

Nice image.

[Bestzoom]

Hi brntoki,
I love my Pentax. I don't want to mislead you since you have asked the question at the Pentax forum. You should know the opinions provided here are biased.

May i suggest you rent a FF and if not possible, download files from web of FF and APSC cameras to process and judge for yourself.

Here is an interesting opinion about FF from a photographer who is a non Pentax user:
USER REPORT: My road to the Fuji X100 by Miroslav Mosko | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

Even though a lot of us here love to have a Pentax FF myself included, the more i shoot with K5, the more i realise APSC is more than enough for my day to day use. I am just a hobbyist and not a pro.

Good luck with your choice.

[brntoki]

Thanks, Best.

It may eventually come down to flipping a coin. Either system can do what I want, but there are inherent problems either direction I go.

Perhaps I should give a little background. As I mentioned, I print also from 35mm transparencies and good quality 6x9 neg film, scanned by myself. I know, I think, what the differences are between formats, resolutions, print quality, etc., etc.

I used Leica M, a few different 35mm SLRs, and a few MF 6x6 and 6x9 (still have the 6x9 rangefinders).

Here is a small (very small) sampling of what I do: My Images (I might add, the reason this is a small sampling is because I've just put this site up. Therefore, if anyone cares to look and notices any wonkiness on my site, it'd be really appreciated if you let me know. I also just hit some strange color management issue and realize some of the images may be darker than intended; I'm looking into it.)

That gives a general idea of what I like to produce. The thing is, a lot of what I do isn't about having uber sharpness across the image. I don't mind rough edges: I kinda like 'em. Perhaps, also, one can get the feel for my working often without a tripod. I used a tripod on maybe 3 of the images currently there (5 are 35mm film, while the remaining are digital).

I don't know if the background will give anyone a better vantage point from which to help me with my decision, but maybe.

[DeadJohn]

I'm further convinced that the K5 is enough camera for you because your style of photography is B&W and sepia. One possible advantage of FF over APS-C - slightly less noise - shrinks when you don't use color. (I am not implying that the K5 has too much noise; it's a great low light camera.)

If photo quality were your only concern I'd say go with the D600 or spend even more money on a higher-end FF. The APS-C K5 wins when you factor in handling, portability, cost.

[brntoki]

I'm further convinced that the K5 is enough camera for you because your style of photography is B&W and sepia. One possible advantage of FF over APS-C - slightly less noise - shrinks when you don't use color. (I am not implying that the K5 has too much noise; it's a great low light camera.)

If photo quality were your only concern I'd say go with the D600 or spend even more money on a higher-end FF. The APS-C K5 wins when you factor in handling, portability, cost.

The K-5 is more than enough camera for what I'm doing. The dilemma is about the future of the system and all. I really am torn. It didn't help to pick up an Ansel Adams book today and see him happily toting his massive LF gear around. And I'm worried about handholding a D600??? Yeah, it's not the same thing; I know. But still . . .