>>3260427>Decided to take the /out/ pill>>Should I get a smaller camera than my Bentax K-3?The only problem with using Pentax as a hiking camera, that I've found, isn't so much a lack of options for weather-sealed lenses - there are plenty of options - but there's a real lack of high quality, compact, weather-sealed lenses.
The only WR primes for Pentax are telephoto lenses, so most are quite large. If you're OK with 55mm, that would be a decent option in terms of size, but the SDM autofocus is basically complete garbage and has a solid track record of failure.
There are only a few zooms that are somewhat compact, which are the 18-55 (which is a kit lens and has some softness in the corners), 18-135 (which also has kit lens level softness in the corners, although the reach makes it quite useful if you can live with mediocre sharpness in the center of the frame at the extreme ends of the zoom range) and the 20-40 (which balances well and has fairly good optics, but the zoom range really limits its usefulness given the lack of other options at this size). There's also a retractable 18-55 kit lens now, but I don't like the idea of excessive lens tube pumping from a weather-sealing perspective.
The 16-85 is quite a good, useful lens, but the size is a non-starter for hiking, especially extended. It tends to tilt downward uncomfortably in a way that the 18-55 would never do. The new 55-300 PLM retractable zoom lens is pretty compact for a telephoto, but still a bit big and unbalanced for hiking - and all the extension and retraction seems like a good way to get water into the lens body unintentionally.
I put a lot of emphasis on compactness because if you're going to store your camera INSIDE your backpack anyway, then there is absolutely no need to insist that it have any special level of weather-sealing. You could get any Nikon or Canon and just keep it out of a direct downpour when one happens, and you'd have a more competent camera system with better lenses.
