Originally posted by Rondec I know this isn't a thread about the K-1 -- far from it -- but the biggest limitations on the K-1 have to do with buffer size and auto focus speed when it comes to shooting a wedding. The whole 20 frames per second thing isn't important though. SLRs can operate "fast enough" for most folks, even pros.
The question in my mind is if mirrorless cameras will eventually be cheaper to produce and so consumers will get more bang for their buck shooting them versus SLRs.
But it really isn't top end cameras that bring new photographers into the fold. It is entry level cameras.
You are way more than right about the buffer in the K1.. is not about the fps.. its about how long can the camera hold that fps.. and hate to say it but in the K1 that buffer holding sucks...
Right now the A7iii is way more camera than many cameras in the market for $2000, perhaps (but depends of the photography style) better thant he K1 in many aspects.. ofcourse the K1 have a bigger MP sensor, astrotracer, pixelshift. and many other key features that we love.. but those features are too nichy.. are not ment to a general usage, just for photographers that will eventually use the key features.
IMO only thing that saves Pentax (general shooters) at this time from Sony stealing the clients is that Pentax lenses dont work AF in Sony bodies, but IMO, when that changes ( if it happens at all) many many Pentax shooters will fly to Sony fast
K1 mk2 was a bad move, Pentax did not needed that kind of upgrade, it needed a body that could be more versatile than the original K1... and ofcourse.. lenses.