Originally posted by mysticcowboy Pentax has been a conservative company. It seldom offers cutting edge tech, rather it focuses on building with proven technologies and constructing more control rich cameras with very high build quality. When buying a Pentax camera we can generally be assured of getting a quality product that will function well and hold up under continued use. I admire these qualities and have gotten a lot of use out of my Pentax cameras. The K-5 I'm currently using consistently produces good images an is a piece of gear that I rely on.
That said, I've give considerable thought to where the camera industry is headed. My conclusions may be totally off target or even delusional. I don't have a crystal ball or connections in the industry. Here goes.
It's quite possible that APS-C sensor DSLRs are becoming dinosaurs doomed to extinction. Originally the crop sensor was introduced because full frame sensors for 35mm equivalent cameras were too expensive and temperamental for regular production. So, we got crop sensors and full frame lens mounts. That gives the worst of both worlds. It means that the cameras are bigger and heavier than necessary for the sensor size but don't offer the image quality, depth of field, and pixel number advantages of full frame cameras. We still use many lenses that cover full frame sensors, which increases both the size and weight of the lenses.
Sony, Samsung and Fujifilm have all produced APS-C interchangeable lens cameras (ILC) that produce high image quality in considerably smaller and lighter bodies than those of APS-C DSLRS. The cameras aren't DSLRs, even though some of them look as if they are. They offer interchangeable lenses without the penta-mirrors or prisms that DSLRs require. Some offer electronic viewfinders (EVF), some only live view screens. Currently the EVFs don't provide the same quality image preview as an optical viewfinder, but they are getting close. With video, the lack of mirrors and prism's greatly simplify the cameras and offer decided advantages.
Are APS-C sensors even necessary for image quality? The newest micro four thirds cameras from Olympus and Panasonic come very, very close to the best APS-C sensor cameras in image quality while offering smaller and lighter bodies and lenses. With lenses, smaller usually means less expensive, too. They are also arguably better video cameras than DSLRs of any size.
All this gets me to wondering if APS-C sensor DSLRs will even be relevant in 3-5 years. Viewfinder style non-DSLR cameras are convenient and the lens selection for these cameras are growing quickly, more quickly than Pentax is expanding its aging and limited lens line. I'll offer more thoughts on lenses in the next installment.
With roughly equivalent lenses, Pentax 35mm f/2.4 on the K-5 and Sigma 30mm f/2.8 on the NEX, I can't see any image quality difference between the cameras, even when pixel peeping the images at 100% in Lightroom. Guess which camera gets taken when I'm doing street or tourist shooting? The NEX at less than half the weight of the K-5 comes along. Is the 5n as versatile as the K-5? No. Is it good enough for a lot of shooting? Absolutely. Obviously, your mileage will vary. With two systems I have to wonder where to invest my limited funds for new lenses. I'm wondering if the new NEX 6 will give me enough functionality to sell the K-5. It may not be there yet, but maybe next NEX 7 or the Fujifilm X-E1 will. Fujifilm is certainly putting out a number of quality lenses quickly, and its non-Bayer array sensors produce great photos. Zeiss and Schneider have committed to offering lenses for both platforms as have Sigma and Tamron for the NEX cameras, so there should be quality lenses available within the next year or two, even if Sony has its head shoved up where it doesn't belong when it comes to lens production for the NEX camera line.
What has Pentax done with ILC, non-DSLRs? We've gotten the very cute but photographically irrelevant Q system. We've gotten the K-01, which totally misses the point of smaller and lighter, as well as being an ergonomic mess. That its autofocus system is a couple of generations behind the competition and that it lacks the ability to add an EVF make it an oddity at worst and a very small niche camera at best. This camera does not appear to be designed by or for photographers. That Pentax, with its limited resources has invested in two clearly non-mainstream ILC cameras and hasn't appreciably updated its flagship K-5 gives me serious doubts viability about the company's strategic plans, or lack thereof.
Did you realise that you wrote something very ridiculous.
On one hand you say that APS-C cannot match the IQ of a FF sensor because of size.
On the other hand you are saying that the 4/3 sensor comes close to IQ with a APS-C sensor in IQ.
It is either, a smaller sensor has less IQ than a bigger sensor (therefore 4/3 less than APS-C less than FF sensor IQ). Or APS-C also comes close to FF sensor, because the technology of the APS-C also has evolved.
But all this what is better talks should stop, the best system is what you feel most comfortable to make phhoto's with. will it be an ILC or APS-C DSLR or FF DSLR. It all doesn't matter, it is the end product that does matter.
For me, I would be verry happy with a Fuji XE-1 for 90% of my photography, just can't afford one. But will I sell my Pentax DSLR? No, because I also take pictures with a 400mm big-ass lens. and for that, a DSLR is the most handy one, the quickest one.
ps, an NEX with one of those big zeiss lenses on it, isn't much smaller than a pentax witha ltd lens on it