|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
02-18-2016, 07:06 AM
|
| |
Right, Norm. I'm not the overly sensitive type when it comes to cameras. I don't need them to be touchy and feely to give me inspiration to go out and take pictures. I man-up and get the job done whatever is in my hand. After all, look, I shoot a rectangle box of a camera that is the 500C/M.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
02-18-2016, 06:54 AM
|
| |
Gee, I've owned K-mount gear for over 30 years and just now found out Pentax has small primes. :) But they are not as small as M-mount. But on a more serious note, I shoot a lot of different cameras and I'm not short on experience holding different sizes cameras. I think a lot of people here dig for rationalization and justification.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
02-17-2016, 10:57 PM
|
| |
Right. And when you're holding a 70-200/2.8 who cares if a camera is 10-20% smaller. In fact, bigger can be better in terms of giving you something more to grab on to and torque the lens up to your face. That is my experience with FF camera and a big 70-200/2.8 lens. I have two FF DSLRs and one weights less than a K-3. And when that 70-200/2.8 is on it, I can't tell I'm holding a lighter camera. But I can tell I have a smaller grip to grab.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
02-17-2016, 08:09 PM
|
| |
Thanks for the post. With FF DSLRs size doesn't mean much anymore. I mean anything within +/- 20% volume and mass of each other is the same given if you want small, mirrorless is the way to go.
|
