One can replace a DSLR every year or so, but in my experience the only reason is to limit the depreciation hit. It's not like the older models suddenly become non-working. Lenses on the other hand are not going to have nearly the depreciation hit.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
This is one of the things I like about m4/3--all these old lenses have new life (albeit as portrait and tele lenses).
But I think Robert has hit on the main thing for me--the main point of the DSLR is high ISO performance, which Pentax is not a class leader in; and as it happens it isn't terribly important to me, either. I dislike shooting events--kids' concerts, sports, etc, which generally I would rather engage directly than document--so why not plough that money into something I'll probably have a lot more fun with? IQ appears more than acceptable for the kind of thing I shoot, and I'll get to nerd out with adapters and such.
I did indeed decide to throw over the DSLR stuff, btw. It's kind of a relief.
But I think Robert has hit on the main thing for me--the main point of the DSLR is high ISO performance, which Pentax is not a class leader in; and as it happens it isn't terribly important to me, either. I dislike shooting events--kids' concerts, sports, etc, which generally I would rather engage directly than document--so why not plough that money into something I'll probably have a lot more fun with? IQ appears more than acceptable for the kind of thing I shoot, and I'll get to nerd out with adapters and such.
I did indeed decide to throw over the DSLR stuff, btw. It's kind of a relief.