I like them both a great deal, but #2 just shades it for me.

Phil

Congratulations

Phil

1 & 4 for me as well. The best of a very fine bunch.

Phil

Particularly like # 4.

What don't you like about the K-1?

Phil

Another vote in favour. I don't use it a lot, but when i need it, it does the job.

Phil

I also had an Epsom R800 and it ended up with clogged heads and had to go. I replaced it with a Canon iP8750 (A3+) printer and very pleased with the results. More reliable than the Epsom IMHO.

Phil

If you're a Pro I don't see it as an issue - you just charge the fee to your clients. If you're a 'hobby' photographer it's just a rip off by Adobe to try an force amateurs to support their revenue stream.

I'll keep using Lightroom 6 (+ PS Elements) until I get new kit (and/or operating system) that won't work with them. At which point I'll find another piece of software that does similar.

Phil

A bit of a 'left field' response - I don't think that I'm waiting for any particular lens, because almost every time the weakness in the end result is not down to the kit, but the idiot operating it!

If I could guarantee that each time I took a shot the limiting factor was the lens, then I would definitely be in the market for something new/different. However, virtually always it's me who has got it wrong.

The one 'kit' exception is focusing speed, which means that I very rarely go for birds in flight or other fast moving targets; but as my main interest is in static or slow moving targets it's not a problem. If I was into wildlife (birds in particular), much as I absolutely love my K-5iis, I think that I would have to jump ship.

Congratulations

Phil

Nice collection. Another example of what cracking general purpose lens the 18-135 is.

Phil