>>3349850I entirely see your point, but I don't think there's any real need to get caught up in the ever-changing generations of gear foisted on the market. Ten years ago, yes: a camera that was a couple of years old was significantly worse than the latest and greatest. However - and this is a personal opinion, coming from a background in film stills - I don't think that's the case anymore.
Now maybe there's a feature that currently available cameras lack, or only offer at great expense, and that you consider vital. 4k or 8k video, for instance, can be expected to trundle along as data rates in electronics become more affordable in terms of dollars and milliwatts. But if a modern Pentax does what you want, you can buy it... well, perhaps not 'for life', but certainly thinking in the long term.
Maybe Pentax will stick around for decades, and you can keep on upgrading as you see fit, or maybe it'll fold. I'm no industry analyst, I don't know the probabilities there. But if you end up with a 2018-era camera, that's still enough to do 99% of what you might like, and you'll get the advantage that prices on the used market will be lower so you can end up with multiple bodies and the highest-tier lenses in existence.
My personal parallel there would be film medium format. Back in the 90s that was almost exclusively professional equipment. As the pros abandoned ship, suddenly amateurs became able to pick up systems they'd only dreamed of. Plenty of folk here on /p/ are using late generation 120 gear that would have cost as much as a BMW when new.
In the end, if you think 2018 cameras are shit and you'd want to upgrade in 6 months, save your money for now. If you're living in the real world and know they're able to handle almost any task you could imagine, there's no harm in getting invested.
And as a final thought: I'm not sure how much of a corollary this is, but I own a grand total of 2 FE mount lenses. All the rest is my old film glass, plus adaptors. Be well.
