[Rondec]

This is true, but eventually wee all have to look at whether image quality is good enough. Once the image quality is good enough other factors begin to become more important (than they were before). Factors like body size, lens size, autofocus speed, build quality, weather sealing, lens availability, how quiet the camera is, depth of field.

I really like what M4/3 has been doing lately. I particularly think Olympus has been coming out with interesting lenses and bodies at fair price points.

I for one am waiting for the pentax/rico mirrorless to come out (I don't think the k-01 counts). I think they know they have to come out with something, and that any mirrorless camera they create has to be innovative to make any headway into the market.

I feel like for me, personally, K5 size is the lower end of what I can comfortably use (I use it with the grip nearly 100 percent of the time). Smaller is less comfortable.

But, I have heard the "its good enough" argument with regard to smaller sensors, ever since the K5 came out. I do feel like the image quality of the K5 (usable to iso 6400) is adequate, but clearly there is a stop improvement going up to full frame sensors. The reality is that there is no real ceiling to user expectations. The OM-D is at a kx level of sensor performance and while many people continue to shoot with kxs and are satisfied, there are also plenty who have upgraded to a K5 and expressed increased satisfation with its performance.

[audiobomber]

I have interest in a small-bodied MILC that will give full functionality with my K-mount lenses, which means I want one from Pentax Ricoh. I would not consider a MILC to replace a DSLR as my main camera, because a DSLR is far more versatile.

I hate EVF's, they are severely compromised. They tell me all about exposure, the technical side of photography. They are still miles from the clarity and detail of an OVF. It's like looking at a cartoon instead of the real scene, you can see faces, but you can't feel the facial expression.

[tuco]

I have interest in a small-bodied MILC that will give full functionality with my K-mount lenses, which means I want one from Pentax Ricoh. I would not consider a MILC to replace a DSLR as my main camera, because a DSLR is far more versatile.

An all too common story for may people is their MILC ends up taking way more pictures than their DSLR by nature of them now taking it along to more places where you may not be planning to do photography. Whether that will be your case is anyone's guess.

[audiobomber]

An all too common story for may people is their MILC camera ends up taking way more pictures than their DSLR by nature of now taking it along to more places where you may not be planning to do photography. Whether that will be your case is anyone's guess.

No, because most of my photography is landscape and wildlife.

[tuco]

No, because most of my photography is landscape and wildlife.

Perfect. A MILC will get you out and try other types of photography.

[Rondec]

An all too common story for may people is their MILC ends up taking way more pictures than their DSLR by nature of them now taking it along to more places where you may not be planning to do photography. Whether that will be your case is anyone's guess.

It's funny, because I have no trouble taking a K5 anywhere I go. Doesn't really matter to me, the biggest thing is that I am comfortable with the camera I am using and the K5 fits the bill. Unless a camera was actually small enough to fit in my pocket (most MILCs wouldn't qualify), it wouldn't be any easier to take with me, since I don't carry a hand bag.

[audiobomber]

It's funny, because I have no trouble taking a K5 anywhere I go. Doesn't really matter to me, the biggest thing is that I am comfortable with the camera I am using and the K5 fits the bill. Unless a camera was actually small enough to fit in my pocket (most MILCs wouldn't qualify), it wouldn't be any easier to take with me, since I don't carry a hand bag.

That's the way I see it too. If I have to carry a bag, it doesn't matter if the body is MILC or Pentax DSLR. I've been looking at little compacts like the RX100 and Fujis, but I hope Ricoh comes through with something new soon.

[tuco]

It's funny, because I have no trouble taking a K5 anywhere I go. Doesn't really matter to me, the biggest thing is that I am comfortable with the camera I am using and the K5 fits the bill. Unless a camera was actually small enough to fit in my pocket (most MILCs wouldn't qualify), it wouldn't be any easier to take with me, since I don't carry a hand bag.

Well, yes. The k-5 with a prime lens is a good kit to carry. However, one thing with your camera in an every-ready leather case at your side is nice. It's protected for hauling around all day and deploys for a shot real fast. And you may find taking pictures in public to be a new experience. People are far more confortable around a camera that looks amateurish and it draws less attention than the reputation of a DSLR which has been the most noticeable thing for me.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

I read it. I understood it. Your conclusions are wrong.

Should be easy to prove that then. Give it a try. I like to be proven wrong - it gives me the opportunity to learn.

[audiobomber]

People are far more confortable around a camera that looks amateurish and it draws less attention than the reputation of a DSLR which has been the most noticeable thing for me.

That's true, and the main reason I'm looking at advanced compacts.

[cali92rs]

It's funny, because I have no trouble taking a K5 anywhere I go. Doesn't really matter to me, the biggest thing is that I am comfortable with the camera I am using and the K5 fits the bill. Unless a camera was actually small enough to fit in my pocket (most MILCs wouldn't qualify), it wouldn't be any easier to take with me, since I don't carry a hand bag.

I would love to be self confident enough to take my K-5 with me everywhere I go...I just feel to self conscience, but that is a personal problem. But anyway that's why I got the RX100...I wanted a camera that fit in my pocket, with a fixed lens to curb lba, and shot RAW

[JinDesu]

I would love to be self confident enough to take my K-5 with me everywhere I go...I just feel to self conscience, but that is a personal problem. But anyway that's why I got the RX100...I wanted a camera that fit in my pocket, with a fixed lens to curb lba, and shot RAW

So we conclude, different strokes for different folks.

My hands are small enough to consider the k-5 well sized and most MILC's reasonable. But there's certainly a lot of people who say the k-5 is already too small.

[Jonathan Mac]

I feel like for me, personally, K5 size is the lower end of what I can comfortably use (I use it with the grip nearly 100 percent of the time). Smaller is less comfortable.

But, I have heard the "its good enough" argument with regard to smaller sensors, ever since the K5 came out. I do feel like the image quality of the K5 (usable to iso 6400) is adequate, but clearly there is a stop improvement going up to full frame sensors. The reality is that there is no real ceiling to user expectations. The OM-D is at a kx level of sensor performance and while many people continue to shoot with kxs and are satisfied, there are also plenty who have upgraded to a K5 and expressed increased satisfation with its performance.

I agree that smaller is less comfortable. I have the grip on my K200D almost always. "It's good enough" is how these things work, DR, high-ISO, DoF etc. There are probably no current cameras, whether 4/3, APS-C, or FF, that wouldn't be good enough for most people, in most situations. But some people have particular uses, requirements or preferences that then drive them one way or the other. The more we go on, the more the small differences in cameras, especially regarding IQ, become meaningless. That bumps up the relative importance of other factors such as ergonomics, functions, battery life etc.

An all too common story for may people is their MILC ends up taking way more pictures than their DSLR by nature of them now taking it along to more places where you may not be planning to do photography. Whether that will be your case is anyone's guess.

I think you're right. Since I started using film at the beginning of the year I have a camera with me more often, but if it's for pleasure then it's usually film. Why? They're smaller, lighter, take up less space, are a pleasure to use and I feel I have to baby them less if they're in a bag.

[kswier]

I feel like for me, personally, K5 size is the lower end of what I can comfortably use (I use it with the grip nearly 100 percent of the time). Smaller is less comfortable.

But, I have heard the "its good enough" argument with regard to smaller sensors, ever since the K5 came out. I do feel like the image quality of the K5 (usable to iso 6400) is adequate, but clearly there is a stop improvement going up to full frame sensors. The reality is that there is no real ceiling to user expectations. The OM-D is at a kx level of sensor performance and while many people continue to shoot with kxs and are satisfied, there are also plenty who have upgraded to a K5 and expressed increased satisfation with its performance.

I am still in k200D land, so I tend to drool over any camera that has the capability of shooting over iso1600 (and good quality above iso1600 is a bonus ). I think you are lucky that you prefer larger bodies. It makes it easy to to find relatively inexpensive cameras with excellent IQ and ergonomics that you prefer.

I have never had the opportunity of using a mirrorless camera for an extended period of time, so I don't really know what ergonomics I prefer. What I do know is i tend to feel a bit self-conscious walking around non-tourist areas with a large DSLR. This is probably a function of my lack of self-confidence than anything else (but if a mirrorless can help make me more comfortable while out shooting, I will take it )

So we conclude, different strokes for different folks.

I think that is always the conclusion we have to come to. But I think the discussion is useful. Based on discussions like this one, I know I need to try out a mirrorless camera before heavily investing in one, because of ergonomics issues (I do have large hands).

[cali92rs]

So we conclude, different strokes for different folks.

My hands are small enough to consider the k-5 well sized and most MILC's reasonable. But there's certainly a lot of people who say the k-5 is already too small.

And so on and so on and Scooby Dooby doo...
Anyway, I have heard people saying that the K-5 is too small, but I feel it is the perfect size, and I have huge hands. Everything just feels right with it. On the other hand my friend has a 7D and I felt that was too big, yet she is much smaller than me and she thinks that it is the perfect size....indeed different strokes