Question for Smeggy, maybe or others...

Whilst the k-01 is unerginomical in design, technically its very good with a prime lens attached

BTW, I am amazed at the MX-1's output. My son absolutely loves it. He really likes the Q, but he's found the MX-1 outputs exactly what he visioned.

The shallow DOF and bokeh is really astounding for a compact. Also, I love the articulated LCD - great for street photography and shooting from the hip!

I usually carry a Q+8.5mm prime which is pretty excellent (and more lightweight than the MX-1 which is chunky)... but now I wish I had the MX-1 LOL!

Matt

Frustrating isn't it!
They have all the bits but scattered across the range.

What about a K5 variant with the DA21 and the DA40

If I had a K-3 and needed to go out with an SLR I'm struggling to understand why I wouldn't take the K-3! I guess some professionals may need two bodies for the same shoot, or when travelling far away, but my logic is something along the lines of "isn't it better to have different cameras that can do different things and complement rather than replicate each other?" There are more similarities than differences between different SLRs; I'd buy something different.

I was going to wait for the GR (I have the GR1s from my film days and really like(d) it). Having tried an MX-1 in the shop, I bought it instead, neither have a viewfinder and the accessory ones for the GR are too expensive for an optical finder. I bought it because it felt right, the interface was very similar to the K-5 and the good focal length range of the zoom.

The difference between 16 & 12 MPx for what I use it for and the smaller sensor isn't an issue. Although I'd prefer a finder, I wouldn't want to pay much more for one (I bought the MX-1 some time ago when prices were higher). DoF wide open at the long end of the zoom is shallower than any of my other compacts.

All cameras are a trade-off and very few tick all the boxes on your 'wish list'. Sometimes you need to work around a particular camera's weakness (be it size, weight, sensor, focal length, control etc.) but you need to have it with you in the first place.

I take two identical K-5s on a shoot. It makes a huge differrnce 5to grabbing moments when you don't change lenses so often. I generally keep a tele on one body and a wide on the other.

I originally intended to keep my old K-20D as a second body, but I ended up missing shots becuase I kept forgetting which body I was using and couldnt' work on autopilot. Ended up buying a 2nd K-5.

I am thinking about upgrading one of the K-5s for a K-5II for better AF, but Guess they are pretty nmuch identical so wouldn't be a problem

I can understand people taking two cameras on the same shoot, but that didn't seem to be the intention behind the original post, which was about having a camera to-hand when the K-3 was being left behind. In those circumstances, I wouldn't buy another SLR.

I agree Jon. The K3 plus a prime or two would make a nice compact DSLR set up, without needing to invest in a second body. Beyond that, a quality compact for travelling really light would make sense.

An ideal example today of a non-photo trip. We have Georgia (nearly 2 years) with us overnight, so I promised her I'd take her to see some animals. We went to the Lakeside Animal oasis, just off Junction 35 of the M6, and the only cameras we had with us were the Pentax MX-1 and Ricoh GR (me) and the Olympus XZ-1 (Sue}.

Absolutely adequate for the purpose and it would have been total overkill to take a DSLR to somewhere we've been a million times when the whole trip was about a nearly-two-year-old having fun.

I'll look at the pictures later and hopefully add a blog about them.

So basically a Sony a7R then

The MX-1's articulated screen allows the use the camera to be held against the waist like you may have done with a Box Brownie or perhaps something more sophisticated such as a TLR Rollei etc. which allows framing to be more precise than holding the camera shakily at arms length and being unable to see what's in the viewfinder because of the reflected sunlight! It makes a pretty good quality carry any time camera at a competitive price compared to the Fuji offerings.

Tried one today actually, no thanks!

Been out playing at my local camera shop making a total ass of myself as usual, Stated before that my aim was for a K5 ulike of some sort for double duty if my K3 wen't up the Kybosh but I've just binned that idea. I'd always take the K3, for sure whenever I go out, so the K5 would be an ornament, I want something lighter, and different, and that will mean different Lenses I guess! I'll get over the reliability thing and get a lightweight option, I have one in mind, after today, actually it's between two CsC's, and the GR. So I have another question, can you get a Generic optical finder with focal length indications for say 35/50/85 or something like that, or does someone make little individual, single focal length ones? I would be happier with a Hot shoe optical rather than an EVF I think, on the evidence of today. EVF does have certain advantages but the image quality isn't quite there, not even on the most recent examples, I certainly don't need a Tilting EVF...

Jules, you can get second hand turret viewfinders that rotate, looking a bit like miniature TV camera lenses. They offer multiple focal lengths. I've sold two recently on eBay.

The Q and GR have optical viewfinders that are absolutely superb in terms of clarity. They have a price to match that quality.

Of course if you go down these routes the elegance of design disappears and you end up with a whole mass of alternative lenses and accessories...perhaps you might as well take the K-3!

The GR as a basic camera is terrific, but the add on wide lens is very Heath Robinson IMHO, turning an elegant design into an untidy hotch-potch. A technical term obviously!

Personally, I'd go for either a compact or a DSLR and forget more systems and lenses. It becomes very unwieldy.