Norm, I do not want to leave a K-1 home -- hardly ever -- whenever it happens I choose to spring for a K-1 a bit down the road! Just for one thing, doing so would screw up my high quality prime lens options immensely. I'll bet many here agree with that sentiment, with or without regard to the investment a K-1 entails. And nobody here, including yourself, has touted the underrated qualities of APS-C, executed optimally as a complete SYSTEM... much more often... than myself, in numerous threads... AND has put a considerable cash investment behind the opinion -- I was being too humble about the "two cents" bit [BTW, I've been largely absent here most of the past 10 months or so, due to a fairly serious disability: older guy, right, Norm? You keep in shape, I know.]. Contrary to what you sort of imply, and directly suggest, I, like you, prefer to have two bodies with me... at least two. Life feels much tougher to navigate not doing so, when you prefer prime lenses. I don't get what the beef is, frankly.
FYI: Sony A5000 (7.6 oz., just over 9 oz. loaded -- 2nd hand Kinotehnik LCDVF on the way)... new addition, Canon M3 (about 13.5 oz. loaded, with EVF attached). A5000: 20.1mp, with arguably better IQ by some margin at 100 & 200 ISO than the A6000 (compare at imageresource.com); M3: 24.2mp packed into a 1.6x crop factor! Forget crummy old 18mp DSLR's from Canon -- I, for one, never considered EVEN THINKING much about one, which is why I bought a Pentax, and became Pentax-centric, then & now!! I'm currently wondering if my K3 becomes the entirely superfluous item in this case, once a K-1 purchase is immanent. I have no intention of ditching the use of DA's 35mm/2.4, 35mm macro, 40mm, and 70mm on a K-1, which I would anticipate meeting virtually all my DSLR requirements, irrespective of cropping. And for an example, this -- 100mm WR macro + 1.4x TC... and/or SMC Pentax 67 200mm + 1.4x... COMPLEMENTED by A5000/"smart" adapted, OR M3: 11-22mm IS STM, nearly diffraction limited wide open (7.6 ounces!) + 55-250mm IS STM, pretty much the same (<13.5 oz.)... image stabilized on EITHER Sony or Canon (Pentaxians get spoiled). Or take this -- Nikkor 200mm f.4.0 AI-S + Tamron SP 1.4x TC = 280mm FF, optimum IQ for this combo at f.8.0 to ~f.10 or so for landscapes, INCLUSIVE of the TC factor... at around 23+ ounces. Works great with the Sigma or Nikon 52mm diameter thread apochromatic close-up lenses for near-macro. So leave another lens at home, if you wish. Again, I don't get the argument. Give me some credit for intelligence, please. -- Fred
P.S.- FURTHERMORE, Norm... 1.22x crop factor ON A PENTAX K-1 yields 24.46 mp's on LARGER and HIGHER QUALITY pixel sites.. with, acc.to Ricoh, superior overall processing, with noticeably lower noise from that factor ALONE, compared a D810; or to a K3 (with its somewhat less than 24 effective megapixels). And by your plan, you saved roughly THREE ounces in DSLR weight! ...And left a $1795 camera at home [!?]. ...I wish I knew who you thought your argument was directed toward -- it can't logically be me. BTW, how do you think your K-01 will do compared to the totally contemporary (save for the the hybrid detection AF speed) 24.2mp M3? DxO, for what that's worth, and noting their strange rating numbers, puts the M3's performance ABOVE that of ALL the sensor/processors in any rated Canon APS-C DSLR... including the circa $1800 variety! Maybe you need to brush up on your facts and make fewer assumptions, eh? Just a suggestion...
BTW, any Pentaxian who would like to make a judgement on all this for his or herself can do so in a matter of minutes -- just go to dustinabbott.net and look at the M3 image gallery postings from American southwest landscape subjects in Dustin's review of the M3. You won't need to waste your time looking over test patterns at 100% crop. These shots were taken with the M3 and the EF-M 22mm f.2.0 (3.7 ounces!) and the EF-M 11-22mm f.4.0+ (7.6 ounces!). They're kind of jaw-dropping, IMO, especially considering the size of the kit. These are NOT "kit" lenses, people. It's Sony who have the lens problem. The 55-200 EF-M lens, BTW, weighs 9.1 ounces, if that's of interest to anyone. My FF 28mm f.2.8 IS USM (bought used, of course -- it's a commodity, given Canon's popularity) is sharp wide open across most of the frame, REALLY pretty sharp to the borders at f.3.2... image stabilized on Canon OR Sony... at 45mm 'normal' or 42mm 'wide-normal' equivalent (as preferred to 50-52mm by me), respectively... at a pittance in weight and bulk compared to Sigma Art, e.g., OR Samyang/Rokinon MF. The M3 with EVF just LOVES Pentax DA Limited lenses, FA 100mm WR macro, FA 77mm, FA 31mm... 28mm f.3.5 SMC Pentax-'K'! Can't quite say the same for live view MF on a K3, can you? And hey, Norm, haven't you noticed that Pentax has nothing remotely comparable (nor does Nikon, yet)? Oh, I'm sure you have. My guiding principles would be, "think outside the box"; "do your own thing and help by explaining it to others"; and "less fanboy, more making practical sense". I don't see why this has to take such justification. I can't buy or use a Pentax camera and lenses that don't exist.
One more bit of advice for the curious: Don't think of evaluating the items I mentioned by B&H prices. No knock on them, but so many people with half-baked ideas have dissed the Canon M-system, mostly based on the *original* M1 release w/o firmware updates (and, unjustifiably, 20.1mp Sony, too -- Hello, K-S1 and K-S2 owners) that I REJOICE! Why? Where others saw faults, I saw opportunity. Hey, Chris at The Camera Store: you don't have to freak out completely over some defeatable LED's, all right? This is exactly the way I looked at the K-01 when that one hit these shores. Marc Newson, Marc Smoosh-son -- who cares? Norm, you have[/had] a K-01 and defended it's usefulness vigorously here. So... did you pay $799 for a one lens kit? ...Or did you wait for the 'fire sale'? Well, I will quietly suggest that the M-system fire sale is on, prematurely & big time, if you know where to look and are O.K. with buying a "bundle". That's it on that.
