And the saga continues.  The new K-5 that I ordered arrived.  As I have discussed earlier, I have had problems with accidentally pushing the buttons on the rear of the micro 4/3 Panasonic G3 camera.  The reasons for this are two-fold.  First, as you can see in the photo below, there is no room on the right side of the rear of the G3.  Second, I have arthritis in my right hand, especially the thumb joint, and I no longer have as much gripping power with my extended thumb.  To compensate for that loss, I have used the base of my thumb, or the palm, to hold the camera while only resting the tip of the thumb lightly against the camera in conjunction with the hand grip on the front of the camera.  Unfortunately, this results in my occasionally “mashing” the controls on the lower, right – rear of the G3.

While seeking another camera with better ergonomics, I found that the above control situation is prevalent on all smaller micro 4/3 cameras.  The only cameras with sufficient “real estate” for my situation are the larger DSLRs.  I tried both Canon and Nikon DSLRs but found that the Pentax K-5 fit my hand better, so I decided to give it another try.  As you can see below, it has just enough space for me to use my palm to support the camera, but it weights quite a bit more.  So much more, that I thought that the G3 would serve me better … until I found the ergonomics to be frustrating.

Panasonic G3 …. Pentax K-5

Since my primary use for the G3 has been for shooting wildlife with the Panasonic 100 – 300 mm lens, I also ordered the Pentax 55 – 300 mm lens for my comparison studies.  As you can see below, these are of comparable size mounted on their respective cameras … but not equal in their range.  With the G3, the end of the zoom at 300 mm is effectively equal to 600 mm while 300 mm on the K-5 is only effectively 450 mm.  You can see the differences below.  (You can also see that the K-5 has a better grip on the front.)

Panasonic G3 …. Pentax K-5

G-3 and 300 mm

K-5 and 300 mm

While gaining better ergonomics with the K-5, I would be giving up focal range and gaining weight.  The G-3 with the 100 – 300 mm lens weighs a total of 925 gm.  The K-5 with the 55 – 300 mm lens weights 1210 gm.  Both of those weights include the batteries and memory cards.

I’m now faced with trying to decide whether the change is worth it.  With the K-5 I gain a rugged weather resistant camera along with faster focusing, faster shooting, better sensor, and better ergonomics at the expense of added weight to lug around and a shorter focal range.

I need to comment that having this added weight would not be practical for me if I didn’t also have a lighter weight better camera … the Fujifilm X100.  It has a fixed effective 35 mm lens.  I sold my Olympus E-P3 and replaced it with the Fujifilm X100 … thus I have already made a partial move from micro 4/3 to APS size sensor.  The X100 is, and will be, my preferred choice for a walk-about, travel, etc. camera when the primary use is not shooting wildlife and the ruggedness, weather resistance, zoom ability, etc. features of the K-5 are not needed.  The weight of the X100 is only 470 gm and the size is more suitable for taking pictures in crowds of people.  You can see the differences in physical size below.

Fuji X100 … K-5 with 55 – 300 mm lens

470 gm vs. 1210 gm

My problem now is to decide whether the added weight of the K-5 warrants replacing the G3 and lenses with the K-5.  I do have another option which is weighing on my decision … give up heavy cameras and heavy long zooms and give up shooting wildlife; i.e. become a one camera — one lens photographer.