Other than cheap P&S bowing out to phone tech, nothing looks like it will die. Pentax easily could have had small mirrorless FF cornered, but Sony eventually got there - and their rather unimpressive, late arriving (sorry, but true) domination of the segment with almost no good lenses to match showed just how disorganized Pentax has been (due to corporate tradition and then the Hoya then Ricoh transitions). Pentax remains the master of old tech - and does it very well.
Photographic technology has never been so fragmented and figuratively illuminating. Arguments can be made for pretty much every current technology (well, Sony SLT assuredly will die a deserved and ugly death in a decade or so). DSLR, economical MF, mirrorless, FF, crop, retro, GoPro - all have a good claim.
---------- Post added 12-11-2014 at 09:17 PM ----------
Originally posted by danny09 BTW I still have hard time believing your image of the dog is shot at ISO 3200, 60mm focal length, 1/60 sec. In this image you overcame 2 technical challenges 1-> High ISO noise 2--> Shake Reduction. You were at the cusp of introducing image shake. (remember the rule Shutter Speed = 1/Focal length). Very well done Jim. Keep those shots coming!
Thanks again, Danny. Lots of photo practice on dogs (now only one - the younger one died suddenly last month). This old Joe (cocker) doesn't like photos, even though I never use flash on him, so slower shutter speeds really show his shaking. Not sure about the focal length, as the stated zoom length is arbitrary - but it was close to 60mm (the lens is best from about 60 to 90mm). In any event, I'm fairly steady but the dog certainly is not. I'm a longtime LR user (from version 3 upwards especially), but the latest Capture One program does make a difference in terms of speed, sharpness, micro-contrast and color precision. Not that LR isn't good, but it is also very clear that the best Adobe camera profiles are not reserved for Pentax by any means.
My early conclusions: the K-3 really rewards lenses that render well with few aberrations - even if they lack "modern" ultra sharpness; an occasional old zoom can make the grade at favorable apertures.
Good software can bring out the best qualities in this sensor. Compared to the previous generation of sensors, avoid the usual higher sharpness settings combined with aggressive noise reduction; reduce sharpness, reduce overall noise reduction and clarity settings, but you still have some freedom with micro-contrast sharpening (or fine sharpness, or "structure," both of which are similar). This was a dim room. In fact, the photo was underexposed by at least 2/3rds of a stop, and I even saved the JPEG at 25% of original knowing that posting here required a small upload. I didn't process the photo from RAW for a week because I assumed that the underexposure couldn't be brought up properly. (The hair on the dog that hasn't turned white is still very black after all; the old fart is like shooting a darn bride and groom all in one!)