Originally posted by john5100 I know that you did some incredible work with the K5 but the auto focus wasn't consistance enough so you switched to the D600.
Pentax AF had been good enough for the OP for 5+ years.
Then, suddenly one day, someone had to point out to the photographer, that the photos do not have the focus at the right spot and this causes a switch to Nikon.
If you want to believe this incredibly story, it's your prerogative.
Originally posted by john5100 Perfectly understandable when you make your living with this tool.
At the time of the switch, the K-5 II had been released already.
As we know the K-5 II's AF is improved over the K-5's in particular with respect to front-focus issues the K-5 sometimes had with certain colour temperatures. It would have been very easy to check out the K-5 II and keep all the lenses, etc.
Instead, a switch was made to Nikon without ever trying the K-5 II.
Originally posted by benjikan Pentax weren't able to keep up with my needs professionally at the time. I.e. the issues with focussing being the major issue.
Given that you did not try the K-5 II -- despite a lot of encouragement from the Pentax community -- you cannot claim that Pentax wasn't able to solve your "major" focusing issue.
I can fully understand that PRO support and perhaps some level of sponsoring is important to a professional photographer. I can understand that one leaves Pentax if one is not happy with the level of PRO support and sponsoring. But that whole "AF suddenly wasn't good enough" story does not really add up.
P.S.: For video, there are better choices than Pentax, e.g., from Panasonic.