Originally posted by ffking I'd class that more as received wisdom than unpopular opinion
See, I think it's the operator of the camera....I agree with most pros that technology
can make a bad shooter decent, but in some situations, a professional or a serious amateur can manipulate the technology for itself. Example: on that list is "Leica is a toy for rich hipsters". I disagree. the Leica lens and the look is unique. I have 4 Leica's and I'm not a rich hipster. I use the Leica because of the len renderings and the quality of the bodies. Even the Leica CL digital is excellent. It costs more than any APS-c camera (excepting the 4/3 Olympus for the moment) but it delivers. At Street price of $2,500, it costs more than the K-1, but in several ways is superior to it.
Price alone should not judge a camera's potential. That potential should be observed through the user of the camera and the results obtained. Just a quick look at the K-1, KP or K-S2 dedicated photo threads in this Forum show the degree of ability and difference in qualitative work--with those using the same camera and lens.