I guess this is more of a Facebook type post, just talking out loud.
I'm switching from full-frame back to apsc. Everybody talks about going the other way. I must be some deranged salmon from British Columbia.
A bunch of my Sony/Minolta gear is in transit to new owners and I am awaiting delivery of a Pentax setup. K5 plus some limited primes and zooms. Somewhat of a replacement of my Sony/Minolta gear in focal lengths. And yes, I'm getting an 18-135 to have a go-anywhere, get-anything travel/hiking/ keep in the car setup.
Why did I go full-frame in the first place? I already had all this great Minolta glass. It was fine on apsc, but it really performed on full-frame, especially at the wide end. So I picked up an a850 when a good deal came along.
The Sony a850 is a marvelous camera, as are the Canikon counterparts. Its main appeal for me was the viewfinder. And of course using the great Minolta full-frame lenses that are available for it. But it's a big beast of a thing for an enthusiast/generalist like me. When I'd hand it to my wife to take a shot (she's pretty good) she'd buckle under the brick in her hand. And it caused me sometimes to hesitate just taking it along. Some people would say full-frame is compact compared with their medium-format gear. I understand that. But for someone who does a bit of everything with their camera from family events to travel to landscapes to creative to some paid gigs – and particularly wanting portability and having it with me as much as possible – compactness is important, among other things.
I'm really looking forward to the K5 and some of the pancakes I've purchased. The K5's resolution is perfectly adequate as well. You have to want huge file sizes with the 24mp sensor.
So I'm going from a FF 20mm to the DA15; from FF 35mm to the DA21 and from FF 100mm and 50mm to the FA43. I was looking at a DA70 but decided to get a 50-135 when a used one came up here on the forum (I see the 50-135 as a wonderfully small/light version of a 70-200, so everything's relative). And then the 18-135 which there really isn't a counterpart for in full-frame, unless you want another big brick in your bag (which you might, but I don't). One lens type I won't have is macro yet, but I'll see as I don't think I'm a true microscopic macro shooter. That 100WR looks nice.
I've always liked Pentax. They have a similar ethos to Minolta with in-camera stabilization, their "natural" approach to jpg processing, and some special lenses. With the K5, I really like Pentax, so I can't wait for it to arrive. And those limited primes. My. Doesn't get any smaller with such good quality. Live-view appeals to me for a lot of still shots. Video for creative shooting will come in handy. Being an available light enthusiast, I like the high ISO. And after a minute, I forget about the smaller viewfinder, honestly. Finally, that shutter sound! What shutter sound?
So, I'll post some more personal reflections you didn't ask for once I get this stuff in my hands and take it out for a spin! Just had to share my excitement.
Oh, a sideline, I really like this forum. Interestingly, that was part of the appeal of Pentax. I'm a small-town guy and 2 gazzillion people on a Canikon forum just doesn't appeal to me. This one is smaller and you begin to recognize names, a lot like dyxum for the sonyminolta crowd. And it's riddled with fellow Canadians. Go Riders. The end.