[thazooo]

The KP. Image quality is fantastic. I shoot a lot at ISO 800 and the image comes out 'Clean'. I can see myself shooting with it for a long time.

[johnmflores]

The K20d was a fine camera, as was the K-x, which stepped up the low-light performance.

My objective has been to produce images suitable for two-page magazine spreads, and the K-5 and K-01 got me there consistently.

K-5

Quebec: Postcards from the Province by John Flores, on Flickr

K-01

Pentax K-01 gets two-page spread in RoadRUNNER Magazine by John Flores, on Flickr

I'd be happy with that sensor in a modern camera with improved AF.

[photoptimist]

The K10D is almost "good enough" -- only it's limited usable ISO range holds it back for me.

The K-5 is "good enough."

The K-1 is more than "good enough."

[MSL]

As someone who buys cars new and uses them till they rust away 19 years later, "good enough" is good enough for me in many things. But sometimes, if you look over the fence, one's comfortable impassivity is shaken.

I grew up with a similar philosophy and that's how I've treated cars, unless I needed to upgrade for space reasons (the dreaded minivan).

In terms of camera bodies, the only DSLR I have is a K-5. Aside from the AF that sometimes disappoints, and that could easily be user error, there's nothing it can't do. Sure, more megapixels might be nice, but then I'd have to deal with larger sized files etc. I'd love to try a K1 at some point - but that is as much about using FF lenses as they were originally designed, and the same might be true for the K3mk3 just because it will be a decade ahead of the K5. But even when I was using point and shoot or superzoom cameras, it was more interesting to try to push it to its limits rather than to think about what I might buy next.

[Kerrowdown]

What Pentax camera do you own that is "good enough" for most of your photography needs? Could you see yourself being satisfied with that being your only Pentax camera for the foreseeable future?

My K1's and I waited a long, long time for Pentax to go FF in digital.

[ChristianRock]

I have had and sold the K20D and K-r.
I still have the K10D (electronic issues, and the buttons misbehave), K200D (going strong), K-50 (electronic issues that don't happen most of the time), K-S1 (aperture block failed, chassis is cracked) and K-3 (no issues currently).

I think my K10D and K200D are good enough. Well, my K10D has some issues so I guess it's the K200D. The K200D, in my perception, also has slightly better RAW files compared to the K10D... just a little bit extra "clarity" which brings out a bit more of a "3D" look. It's hard to describe... but I like the K200D files and that makes me not mind the smaller, darker viewfinder or the somewhat unreliable AF.

The K20D was good enough and as a bonus, it had the best skin tones of any camera I've owned, and the handling was just perfect as well. That grip... I miss the camera, but I don't miss its limited dynamic range, even compared to the 10MP CCD bodies.

The K-r was also good enough image-quality wise, the bad AF in artificial light and the small viewfinder made me replace it with a K-S1.

The K-S1 is also good enough except with long lenses. It's also the first camera I've had where I felt the JPEG engine was good enough. Too bad mine is in pretty bad shape and the aperture block has failed (should be easy to fix, but the crack in the body not so much...)

The K-50 grows on me every day - it's certainly good enough. If mine didn't have electronic issues that don't happen a lot but when they do they cripple the camera (I think it has to do with humidity), I wouldn't even have bought a K-3.

Finally, the K-3 is very good and I bought it to have a rugged camera that I can take anywhere. I'm still learning the camera but I feel the sensor in the K-S1 has it beat in terms of color accuracy and just how easy the RAW files are to work with.
I'm still learning the K-3. I won't give up on it as it's the ruggedest, best built camera I've used, and the 3.2 inch screen is gorgeous.
But, I can't really rely on the JPEG engine, I don't think it gets the best from the sensor.
The sensor is the other, and biggest sticking point for me so far. I can see that in RawTherapee the default profile brings me a good look to the files. But once I start making changes in PP, it seems so easy to make the files look bad even with basic adjustments... I need to "learn" that sensor, I guess.

I have a very broken K-S2 that was given to me, and I could send in to get fixed - I guess that would be "more than good enough" and might be the answer to my K-3 troubles.

But I keep going back to the K200D and it's not just good enough. The RAW files are just gorgeous. Of course, it's all personal taste.....

[microlight]

I’d like the K-3III when it comes out, but not because it’ll get me better pictures; it will just be because it’ll be bright and shiny!

In the meanwhile, my K-3II outperforms my ability to stretch it to its limits, so I have no technical reason to change.

[interested_observer]

Well, I have several camera bodies. I never really considered that I would have ever 4 - it just happened.

• Spotmatic II - I picked it up down in the Canal Zone when I was in the Navy in 1971. I really do not shoot film any longer, but I keep it.

• K100D - My first digital, and I like the CCD sensor, along with the file size.

• K5IIs - Bought this on a wim, since it was on sale for $400. ISO 80, excellent imaging quality - drop dead simple to shoot. 2 wheels!!! The K5 is Pentax's watershed camera body.

• K1 - Tired of waiting for the K3III, and wanted more star color for astro (milky way over stuff). First time I picked it up - it was heavy. I don't even notice the weight now. I can't live without the articulating screen and the night LED illumination. The built in GPS is just there. It's a beast of a camera with everything. I will never "need" more camera. My ONLY complaint are the &^%$ *#@^& &!$#& white dots. My K28 Shift lens now shoots as it was originally intended. Image quality is stunning.

I usually shoot at night or evening on a tripod. I usually shoot panos (probably more than I should). With the K5 star color was my problem. Now with the K1, it's the foreground noise (well, it's very dark out in the desert, moonless and the white dots). It's funny, but with all the camera bodies, they then to point up the K100D in terms of just how good the image quality is for such a relatively "old" camera.

[texandrews]

645Z purchased spring of 2014, one of the first available (they quickly became unavailable for a few months...). Still great, using it for a job today.

[AlwaysAl]

Great question! Upon reflection, each of my Pentax digital cameras was an improvement over the previous, no regrets.
Started with an *ist D which was, in time, replaced with a K-20D. At that point, I thought I'd won the lottery...wow what a camera!
In due course, researched and bought a K-5IIs and again, fantastic...always wondered how can these Pentax people keep producing such fine equipment? Didn't miss the K-20.
More recently, researched and followed the trend leaping to a K-1. Currently, the K-1 is "good enough" compared to moving to the K-1 II. Having said that, this is not that the K-5 IIs isn't good enough it's just different than the K-1 and each has a purpose. The K-5 IIs is reliable, comfortable and convenient. The K-1 with a concurrent addition of modern, purpose designed lenses gives further depth to the photographic experience and the related improvement of skills. The camera I do miss using, although not digital, is the MZ-S. Unfortunately, acquired it late in the film cycle (the *ist D was not quite on the marketing horizon) and virtually overnight, found it difficult or inconvenient to shoot film as digital seemed to rule the universe. Really didn't think I gave the MZ-s a fair shake or a proper exploration of the many features. Currently, the availability of film and processing seems to be returning to my area and I hope to do the MZ-S proud and give it the workout it deserved soon.

[Kiddo70]

After almost 50 years of film cameras, my first digital was a K-50. I really enjoyed it but wanted to try other cameras. After Fuji and Panasonic, I returned to Pentax with a K-70. I tried a KP but I’m sticking with my K-70s now. I have no desire to use anything else. I’ll use them until they break.

[clickclick]

I have a bad case of GAS, so not sure if there is ever an end in sight.

But beyond that, it all depends on what I'm doing. I'm surprised by how much I use the QS-1. With that available, there's never an excuse to not have a camera with me, and it does amazingly well at many things I thought beyond it. But then I can say there is plenty I do where I "need" my K-3 II. And yet again, I find times where it "must" be my K-1 II. I think the luxury of selection makes it hard to say which is good enough. I will buy the K-3 III at some point, but I bet I then will just switch between 4 cameras instead of 3. That's actually a good thing. Hard to think of a time where I wouldn't want to use one of them.

[35mmfilmfan]

Always had Pentax (or Pentax-clone) film cameras since 1969. First digital (which I still have) - K20D. Very happy with it - always shot RAW, PP in FastStone or XnView. Built up stable of AF lenses from various mfrs - with some the performance was less than stellar, so tried Sigma, Tamron etc. Added Pentax 18-35, 35-70 and 35-80, all pre-owned at bargain prices ! Then received a legacy from a deceased relative, so went for pre-owned K3 with grip, Pentax 18-135, 50-200 and 55-300 lenses, plus Sigma 150-500. Still keeping everything else, of course. Also have MZ-5n film cameras plus battery packs - and several Tamron Adaptall-2 lenses plus adapters, which of course also fit my Nikkormat (SSHH!)

[yucatanPentax]

My ONLY complaint are the &^%$ *#@^& &!$#& white dots.

I guess I haven't heard about that -- what are the "white dots"? In the images?

[jpzk]

I'm not there yet !

With a recent forced retirement and a much lower "income", my trusty K7, K5 and K3 will have to do!