>>3214548As a response/counterpoint to
>>3214552There isn't a Canon camera with in body image stabilization (IS with every lens) that money can buy, although the direction Canon is going now is to put IS into every one of their newly designed mid tier lenses, so that may be less of a concern in the next decade. There are very few Canon cameras with the same level of weather sealing that Pentax cameras have, and even then, you sometimes need to add a front filter to fully seal a supposedly weather-sealed Canon lens, which isn't required on a weather sealed Pentax lens.
Just because there are only like 7 D FA lenses doesn't mean there are only 7 lenses for the K-1. Pentax actually has some very nice legacy lenses for full frame in the FA, FA Limited and FA* lines. Yeah, they're 20+ years old designs now, but it's not like they don't exist, and a lot of them are still being produced today. A few of the DA* lenses are also full frame capable designs (although may require some modification to the baffle around the rear element). I agree that Canon still has more going for it in terms of lenses, but the FA lenses are not to be underestimated.
To an extent, it's true that on Pentax, controls and your way of doing things will need relearning - certain functional shortcuts you may get used to on Canon are simply going to be impossible on Pentax (shutter half press for AE-L, for example, drove me nuts when I switched from a 5DII to a K-3, and the electronic IS switch is easy to forget to turn on/off, as opposed to Canon's mechanical switch) - but on the flip side, the Pentax has more controls that can be customized than the Canon, and the range of possible functions with those controls is also greater. You could have one dial controlling your aperture, another dial controlling your ISO, the third dial controlling exposure compensation, and you'd still have a couple buttons left over for other custom functions.
>>3214558Beat me to it.
