[WPRESTO]

One camera I'd definitely replace is my recently purchased SONY RX10 MK IV. The 24~600mm f2.4-f4 Zeiss branded zoom is just plain amazing on the one inch sensor. The camera itself has lightening quick reliable AF and a host of options and features. For example it can do a sweep panorama with camera in either horizontal or vertical orientation, panning right-left or left-right, up-down, or down-up, for either a shorter sweep or a much wider sweep (180 degrees). You can zoom with a lever or a ring around the lens, AF single, AF continuous, AF single with instant manual override (just twist the focusing ring), and full manual with several color choice peaking. An aperture ring if you like using one. The usual HDR, high ISO noise reduction, etc. etc. Easily the most full-featured megazoom on the market, and it delivers IQ that is hard to distinguish from some of my K1 images - impossible to distinguish without pixel-peeping. Only complaint I have? The camera is heavy, but nothing compared to toting the equivalent capacity in MFT equipment, much less FF (what does a 600mm f4 for FF weigh??)

---

Last edited by WPRESTO; 04-28-2022 at 08:05 AM.

[acoufap]

For example it can do a sweep panorama with camera in either horizontal or vertical orientation, panning right-left or left-right, up-down, or down-up, for either a shorter sweep or a much wider sweep (180 degrees).

My Sony ZV-1 supports this too. Really nice to use but it's quite restricted - not really for printing and unsuitable for advanced work on images. I guess the SONY RX10 MK IV shows the same restrictions for this mode ...

• JPG only
• Fixed in size depending on how you use it vertical / horizontal move and portrait / landscape orientation of the camera.
Portrait orientation: 3872 x 2160 px (= 4K: 3840 x 2160px)
Landscape orientation: 8192 x 1856 px

I think the SONY RX10 MK IV is a really nice All-in-one solution and under some conditions the results are surprising good - like that of my ZV-1. Compared to DSLRs with lenses covering the same angles of view it's much more lightweight. In higher ISO ranges our Pentax DSLRs are easily better than the 1" sensor. I'd definitely stay with my DSLRs. But the ZV-1 with it's extended video capabilities and lightweight is a nice addition.

[WPRESTO]

My Sony ZV-1 supports this too. Really nice to use but it's quite restricted - not really for printing and unsuitable for advanced work on images. I guess the SONY RX10 MK IV shows the same restrictions for this mode ...

• JPG only
• Fixed in size depending on how you use it vertical / horizontal move and portrait / landscape orientation of the camera.
Portrait orientation: 3872 x 2160 px (= 4K: 3840 x 2160px)
Landscape orientation: 8192 x 1856 px.

The RX10 mIV has the same numbers for the "short" pano setting. For extra wide panos the numbers in horizontal orientation are 12416X1856 and in portrait orientation its 5536X2160 pixels. So in the wide setting the camera is adding pixels in width but maintaining the same pixel density across the image Chances are the two cameras have the same sensor with the same possibilities and limitations. I never do big prints, in fact, I almost never do prints at all. 99% of my image use is here on PF or on a monitor for my own pleasure.

[acoufap]

The RX10 mIV has the same numbers for the "short" pano setting. For extra wide panos the numbers in horizontal orientation are 12416X1856 and in portrait orientation its 5536X2160 pixels. So in the wide setting the camera is adding pixels in width but maintaining the same pixel density across the image Chances are the two cameras have the same sensor with the same possibilities and limitations. I never do big prints, in fact, I almost never do prints at all. 99% of my image use is here on PF or on a monitor for my own pleasure.

Many thanks for the hint! - When Pano mode is selected I can change from standard to wide option on the ZV-1.

[richard0170]

If I lost all of my gear and had to start from scratch.....

1. I would want some film stuff. So a Bronica SQA with 80 and 150mm lenses would sort that out. This would be a direct replacement. An Olympus 35 RC as a compact take anywhere option. Again a direct replacement. I would also want a SLR and a couple of lenses - 40-45mm and 55-58mm. Of my extensive collection, would want to replace my Fujica St801n with its Fujinon 55mm f1.8 and Voigtlander SL 40mm f2 most of all. Finally I would want a interchangeable rangefinder camera and a few lenses. I would choose a Voigtlander Bessa T and Voigtlander 28mm f2, 35mm f2.5 Color Skopar, 40mm f1.4 Ultron and 50mm f2,5 Color Skopar, with appropriate viewfinders. These lenses would also be used adapted to a digital body or two which brings me to....

2. For digital I want at least one DSLR. I can't stand the NIkon offerings so they are out. I like the Canon 6D so that would be a possibility, but I would probably stick with Pentax K1ii. M 20mm f4, K 28mm f3.5, HD FA 35mm f2, K 50mm f1.4 and FA 77mm f1.8 Ltd. Tamron 72b 90mm f2.8 Macro would sort that out. I would also probably go for another KP and get a K 35mm f3.5 and A 50mm f2.8 Macro to go with it. I much prefer using DSLRs for things like landscape, still life and close up subjects over mirrorless so this is why I would want such a system. However, for everything else I do like Fujifilm cameras. For small and discreet I would want another X-E3 and grip. Lenses would be XF WR 16mm f2.8, 27mm f2.8, 35mm f2 and the adapted rangefinder lenses from the film collection. I would also want a X-T1 with battery grip for heavier lenses like a K 135 f2.5 and Nikkor 200mm f4.

3. A good quality tripod and head.

This all seems rather a lot (it is), but it is a great deal smaller collection than what I currently own!

[GR76]

i first bought my k mount cosina manual focus slr and prime lenses, despite the seller pushing for me to buy the then current film canon rebel with kit lens. now i think i would still buy a pentax if i started again, but i would be tempted by the nikon and canon slr gear available second hand due to the mirrorless transition.

[bdery]

maybe some one could suggest a good version of pentax that will work with w10 and k5ii and k5.

Lightroom seems pretty much a given, isn't it? Just for RAW, RAWTherapee seems to have a big following.

GIMP is also pretty solid, and free. Luminar is a solid other option, too, more focused on AI image modifications, less on cataloging and such.

[Sam_I_am]

This thread made me think of something else that a friend in the insurance business told me. If you rely on your basic homeowner policy, you might not get full reimbursement. Anything that might be considered a hobby, needs to be brought to your insurance agents attention. It might add a little to your policy, but it might make you sleep better. In the case of my other hobby, building plastic models, there may not be anything left to say I even had that hobby.

Don't be like me, I am still procrastinating...

[Paul the Sunman]

This thread made me think of something else that a friend in the insurance business told me. If you rely on your basic homeowner policy, you might not get full reimbursement. Anything that might be considered a hobby, needs to be brought to your insurance agents attention. It might add a little to your policy, but it might make you sleep better. In the case of my other hobby, building plastic models, there may not be anything left to say I even had that hobby.

Don't be like me, I am still procrastinating...

I have my valuable bodies and lenses all itemised on my home contents insurance policy, and covered at replacement value.

[WPRESTO]

This thread made me think of something else that a friend in the insurance business told me. If you rely on your basic homeowner policy, you might not get full reimbursement. Anything that might be considered a hobby, needs to be brought to your insurance agents attention. It might add a little to your policy, but it might make you sleep better. In the case of my other hobby, building plastic models, there may not be anything left to say I even had that hobby.

Don't be like me, I am still procrastinating...

Many decades ago, probably in the 1980's if not earlier. we added a rider to our homeowner's policy to cover photo equipment. As always, read the fine print. I took out a rider to cover my computer. One of the external hard drives crashed. It contained at least 80,000 image files, no backup. It cost me over $1000 to recover most but not all of the images (the entirety of a trip to Florida, about 4500 files was lost, also one day of our trip to the Azores, and one other visit to a local Botanic Garden). When I put in for some insurance refund, I got nothing. The insurance covers accidents, such a current surge caused by a lightning strike, whereas the hard drive failure was regarded as normal aging, so it wasn't covered at all.

[rogerstg]

As always, read the fine print.

So true, and more specifically, find the "exclusions" section and read that. Everyone remembers the dec page (declarations page), but the exclusions rarely get read. The exclusions are pretty easy to understand, because unclear items favor the insured, as a matter of law in most states.

[m96]

If you lost all your photo gear in a fire, and assuming it was fully insured, would you


(1) Replicate exactly what you had;
(2) Stick with the same system but make different specific choices of cameras and lenses;
(3) Jump to a new system;
(4) Get a new hobby?

Probably something along the lines of options 2 and 3. Assuming I wouldn't have to spend every penny of the compensation, I'd probably downsize big time. I have too many systems at hand right now. While not a problem in many perspectives, I think it's doing a psychological number on me. Restricting to one body and maybe one focal length for a period would produce clarity and focus.

And while downsizing, trying out a new system is always an interesting option.

[rvandenbrink]

I’ve been shooting Pentax for ~45 years, don’t plan to stop. But if I was starting over I wouldn’t buy any of my legacy stuff, no screw mount or film stuff for instance. It’d be a toss up between another KP or a new K3, I’d have to try the new body out first …