You know, it's funny, I go back to LX vs Nikon F. Glass won, plus the LX was like a Ferrari vs a Unimog...
Then I lived through the SFXn days (nice, but EOS looked more appealing, but test rolls of EKTAR in side-by side tests (used Hampton Ct flowers in Teddington), the First Canon lenses weren't crisp. Stuck through the SMCP-F days, was thrilled with FA. I believe the FA* lenses were the best ever made in their class. MZ-s was great, but late... I was also running 645, then 645N, great for landscapes/ flowers, but too noisy for some critters and lousy in the cold (the cold weather batt pack was a dog). Not enough lens reach for birds, too slow to move. Looked at Nikon again when Pentax lagged in digital and their lack of compatibility and obsoleting of lenses 2x was disconcerting. Looked at Canon, lenses were better than Nikon, but I was not impressed with interface....
So like many others, I waited until IST*D came out and rebooted.Traded up once to K-10, finally saw the promise (MP began to make sense) At K-3 limits of some of my old lenses started to show, finally got out of the cave, sold off the 645 MF and AF film gear, and entered the modern age. Since then, my only real desire has been pixel pitch equal to M43 (~30mp) in APSC, better AF and SR2, otherwise the rest of my list comes from "in the field" (arctic cold to wet jungle) learnings. Don't want a Porsche, (I drive used cars), but I wouldn't mind it if Pentax made the same spec and quality leap in the next K-3 that it made in the K-1 and KP.