Originally posted by enyceckk Will (the) K-1 (be) good for sports/wildlife?
Some of the intrinsic advantages of a FF DSLR's larger sensor is the ability to have more AF points. I'm going to reference the D810 because I sincerely believe that will be the body the K-1 will try to emulate. 51 AF points gives you a lot of options and with 11 f8 cross-types, you've got some pretty good low light capabilities. That's great for sports and wildlife. You should also get better noise performance which means higher "useable" iso. That is a big help for sports and wildlife as well. (You also get better dynamic range and a native iso of 64 which is awesome for landscape, but really not much help for sports or wildlife.)
The one downside I see to FF is "losing" the FoV "advantage" you get from a crop sensor. However what I'm losing isn't actual extra magnification, I just get a tighter "cropped" image. BTW, that's one of the biggest debates I'm having with some friends, I'm claiming that a 300mm lens with a 1.5x TC, (just so the numbers match) should actually be BETTER on a FF than a 300mm lens by itself on a 1.5 crop factor sensor, given that I'm getting equivalent FoV (450mm) but extra magnification with the TC. Some of the debate centers on the definition of "better", but it's an interesting hypothetical.
Back to the advantage of a crop sensor, for wildlife it has its perks for center frame, single subject images. But you can always select "crop mode" on FF cameras to recreate this.
I personally don't see a lot of reasons NOT to go FF. If I get better AF accuracy, speed, low light performance and tracking, plus higher useable iso, that's only going to help my sports and wildlife shooting. Plus I get the better dynamic range and other benefits for my landscape images.