Quentin:
I don't have a haddock, will a lake trout do? The lenses to be available seem quite limited to me: widest 32mm, longest 120mm. Correct me if I'm wrong in the details (someone surely will). Your posts and comments have convinced me to soon acquire a K-1. What lenses do you find missing? I currently use a 645Z with lenses from 28mm to 600mm, so if it's MF and lens availability you want, I suggest a 645Z.
Tom
Tom,
Lake trout would work a treat!
I have a Hasselblad H5D-200MS, and I think the K1 is a more versatile, and overall a better, camera and now no longer use the Hasselblad.
Too many people just assume that MF digital must be better without thinking of the downsides, which include cost and weight / size.
I have also owned and used a bizarre assortment of kit over the years, from a Mamiya ZD, which used the same 22mp sensor as the Phase One P25, through various Bronica, Rollei early Fuji equipment, including their 617 pano camera and their S1 pro first digital camera, Sony and Nikon kit including a D810, D700, D800E, Sony A7R2 (and others), Kodak digital, lenses galore, various Contax, a Dicomed field Pro "portable" scanning back (awesome, but talk about bulky, used old SCSI connections), Large format up to 8x10, and loads more. The cameras I have used that had a "wow" factor and impressed me are more limited. Two in recent years stand out: (1). The Sigma DP2M (and to a lesser extent) the DP1M and DP3M, and (2) the Pentax K1. People who know the value of nothing but the price of everything look at the K1 as a camera for those who cannot afford the big Canon and Nikons, but in the process they miss the point entirely; the K1 used within its fairly wide operating range is a great photographic tool.
Now, get ready with the trout! I may weaken and get a Fuji otherwise....
