mountainvisions

30th of February...extra leap year? Pentax K-01, DA 40mm

Panasonic GF2, Super Takumar 50mm f1.4

Pemtax K-5IIs, DFA 100mm WR macro

Million Dollar Staircase Pentax K-5 II s smc PENTAX-DA 12-24mm F4 ED AL [IF] ƒ/5.6 12.0 mm 1/13 1600

The first camera I bought with my own money was what I wanted. A PZ-1P, even though I don't shoot 35mm anymore (I have a 645 system for film), I still have it and probably wont ever part with it. So I understand your point about sentiment. That borrowed K1000 definiely was a gateway camera for me though, and I used it off and on for years after getting a PZ-1P.

The K1000 was literally a box that captured light. No bells or whistles, not even a DOF preview. I'm much more a fan of the MX or even Kx. Honestly even the spotmatic was more of a useful camera. FWIW, the K1000 was my first SLR and I used it for a long time off and on. Nothing wrong with it, just not anything special about it even from a minimalist standpoint.

Pentax K-5IIs, DA 16-85WR

Thanks for the update. I'll have a go at it. In the old days you needed to format it.

[url=https://flic.kr/p/2oeUSgt][img]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52665970809_41d4358485_b.jpg[/img]

K-5IIs, DA70 Big River Crossing - Mississippi River by Justin, on Flickr

You can add the OGPS to the K-5. I have one and it works well. I don't really use it for astro trace much, more for geotagging but it's works for both. I tried astro tracing a bit but never had great results with either it or the K-1, but I do appreciate geotagged photos. I think however, some of it is user error. I feel the same way about the K-5IIs as you. But I'm probably willing to give up the top screen now and go with a KP for a little smaller package. I definitely love having a top screen but playing with my old film cameras I really miss the size of them. And the K-5 is still bigger than the old program series. A KP would be a touch smaller. Alternatively, lower build quality but even smaller/less weight, the K-S2 would work. So when the K-5IIs dies it will probably be sunset. However, I highly doubt it will die anytime soon. I expect probably 5 more years out of it since it is dual use with my k-1 and I use 3 systems now. (FF/APS-C/M43... 40/40/20%). Key thing to always remember is new cameras are better but the old ones didn't get worse. K-5 was putting out good files on release and still does now.

Ultimately, the way I shoot, IQ and size is the most important thing and the K-3/II wasn't vastly superior. AF was better but I think it removed live view Fn button compistion adjust, which is a deal breaker. Finally, it's not a lot bigger but ideally the K-5IIs is the perfect size because it keeps the top screen, is usable with gloves and is as small as you can make it while maintaining those two things in a k-mount. If I wanted smaller the KP or K-S2 would be my choice... But bigger, I have a superior K-1 (yeah, the K-3/II/III does have faster AF but again, the way I shoot the K-1/K-5IIs is adequate if it wasn't I'd probably move on from pentax). Keeping in mind with all of this, none of this invalidates anything you've said. It just highlights everyone has different needs from a camera system. It's why I never take pleasure seeing a brand or format fail. They all are someone's favorite even if we (one of us here or there) make some snide remarks on the value of such a system.

If they still make a body as small as the GF2, I might be interested in a newer body. Unfortunately, they moved away from full featured cameras and got more into larger bodies for the enthusiasts and pro crowd. The GF2 has 99% of the features I need but lacks time lapse and remote shutter and is useless above 400iso even in raw. I treat it like a film camera with a roll of Provia 100F/400F/X and it works wonderfully for me. I also have the eye level finder on it. Not as good as a mirror camera but I wouldn't take my DSLR cycling. Nor would I take a bigger M4/3. I actually use my cameras with the idea all my photos will be printed. So IQ is really inportant to me. Any camera looks OK at 4k resolution.

KP? K-S2? They can't get thinner, they'd have to produce a new lens line. And that won't happen because it invalidates everything. And honestly, do we want it to happen? However, it's hard for me to believe this. The GF2 compared to the K-7 is nowhere close. And remember I'm using 2022 high end DXO software (with AI noise reduction) to process current GF2 images, I don't own a K-7 anymore (though still have gigs of images I could reprocess). When I processed those k-7 images in 2010 or whatever it was with that generation software. The K-7 at the time was maligned as a poor low-light shooter even if it was mostly a certain kind of noise vs unusable images, I believe the M4/3 made strides, but APS-C and FF had to make equal strides (if not greater strides). I'd love to be wrong. And I'm rooting for the M4/3 format because while I kind of dismissed it before, I really appreciate it now. m4/3 as a whole just doesn't appeal to me, I mean I would never use it as my primary format, I do find it's the right format where I'd normally bring a digital compact. my GF2 with the 14mm 2.5 is exactly the same size as the enthusiast Samsung EX1 of the same era with a tiny little sensor. I had a photo published in a fairly prestigious regional calendar (shot in raw) on the EX1. The GF2 is clearly better than the EX1 and gives far more artistic options with lens choices. So the GF2 with its ISO 400 ceiling is still a good camera.

One of the big pros of mirrorless was the size. Now that's gone because lenses are so big. I still use a panasonic GF2 for cycling and climbing photography because it's so small (though I hate the screen centric interface). I can take a whole kit with me and it's as small as some of the enthusiasts digital compacts (sans lenses). This is huge on a long bike ride or overnight bikepack. But even with lenses, which I kept small using old M42 takumar and CCTV lenses as well as a few native M4/3 my kit is high quality, small, cheap, and covers 15mm to 400mm. It's a bit like shooting film though. ISO 400 tops, which is sad considering even Pentax APS-C from the same era could produce images at 800 or more (I believe that was K-7 era)...if it wad K-5 (OG) era 1600 was realistic. Shows just how limited M4/3 is but also how cool it is in the right situation. Mohawk Towpath Scenic Byway - Vischer Ferry Preserve by Justin, on Flickr