CR3 is absolutely lossless. I can't think of any way a normally generated jpeg would ever be lossless. The format takes a group of pixels (the smallest would be 2x2) and turns it into a pattern. The algorithms were invented at Columbia University by a colleague and old friend, Dmitri Anastasou

Both the phones and the DSLRs are getting better computers for signal processing. Both are getting more and more pixels, so some can be discarded for noise reduction or monitored better for color rendition and shadow detail.

I like the comments lauding both phone and DSLR. Use all the tools you can master. I certainly assume all the tools will continue to get better, too. Much better.

I get great results from A6000 and a Fujifilm X30 walk-around camera, but neither would survive the extreme conditions my K3 and K1 shrug off. Just had the K1 on cold Montreal streets for a week. Pentax glass on A6000 with tilt adaptor for studio work, too!

I've taken my Pentax equipment to within 800 miles of the north and south poles, and into rainforests and desert. When I finally bought the K1 I had a dozen old lenses that all worked on it. Even the few lightweight plastic lenses all still work.

I was in Haiti and DR a decade ago with Pentax 6mp 1stD -- very early DSLR -- kit 18-55 and some ancient primes. It all got wet and dirty but only the kit lens got too dirty to function reliably. Weather seals on Pentax are great but are much better now. Still use the primes on a K1.

Jpeg compresses by taking a bunch of pixels (2×2 all the way up to 128x128 sometimes) and creating a pattern that approximates what the pixels contain. The pattern is mathematically described so it reduces file size but creates fuzziness. Upping the contrast increases the apparent sharpness but that just fools the eye.

I had the spiratone 400. Used it with (contrasty) TriX on Miranda and Pentax. My copy was terrific, but some people complained of internal flare. Non coated glass and shiny metal areas inside, sometimes.

My wife has experimented with an 8x10 at FIT. You are lucky to have the 4x5 cameras.

My wife, who does professional news and event photography, benefitted from course in film at Fashion Institute of Technology in NYC. For that she used one of my old cameras, a Pentax P3N, shooting Fujicolor and triX. My old lenses have new lives on K3 and now a K1.

She now has her late parents' SR101. My 1962-vintage Miranda still works as well, although the 50mm that came with it has blades fouled by oil. The mount is dual Miranda bayonet and m42 thread so no shortage of lenses.

My darkroom is long gone but used to load TriX from 100 foot rolls. We scan the film we still use a few times a year. I confess to liking TriX contrast, grain, and latitude especially at 400.

But really, what I can do with digital is so much better, and cheaper. Had the K1 on Montreal streets over Xmas. Cold down to 9 degrees F did not bother it. Was somewhat careful with the older lenses in the rain. Wife had similar luck with her 6D, using only a pancake 40 mm.

I recently shot thru triple-pane glass in a highrise Las Vegas hotel. Yes kill all the lights in the room. Yes use lens hood up against the glass (I, too,have a rubber hood for this). There will still be stray reflections off the glass surfaces, from outside. I needed to use manual focus to keep the reflections from fooling the camera and to stay at infinity (no near objects in the field anyway). I used a polarizer to catch some of the off-axis annoyances.

Either way, the camera is not made here anyway, although some of its components are. I agree on American warranty, but on Canada please understand that half of all Canadian economy is owned by USA companies and individuals, and 10% of the USA economy is owned by Canadians. In absolute value, it comes out to about the same cross-border ownership by Americans in Canada as by Canadians in the USA. That would not have happened without it just being more economically efficient ("profitable") to do it that way. Thus more jobs are created, and we all also benefit with lower prices. The two economies are very, very closely tied together. From time to time politicians in either country spout jingoistic lies, either out of ignorance or to make political points.

Verily, thou speaketh the truth.

Verily, thine explanations art crafted well. But verily, thou shalt not complain about or flaggeth typos, for thine complaints can be considered churlish and pedantic... though thou art funny with diffracted humor. In an f/16 kinda way.

Exactly. Whatever works for your needs, works.

I've been using old Pentax K and KA lenses (the oldest 50+ years) on a succession of Pentax digitals starting with the 1st D (6 mp) and now the K3 (24 mp) with great results despite the fact that anti-reflection coatings and lens designs have advanced, or so they say.

The APS-C sensor grabs the central part of the full-frame lenses. And while none of the lenses are rated weather resistent, I have long used the 28, 50, and 135 primes and an old 500 mm (Spiratone!) catadioptric in the rain.

Just took advantage of an Adorama deal (apparently no longer available) that included the K1 and a pile of goodies (some of them useful) for less than $1500. It was backordered for a month but just arrived. I'm on the road but will be exploring when I get back, in about a week. The few times I have used my 50 f/2 on a friend's full-frame K1 have been very, very encouraging. And yes, the sweet spot was f/8 or f/11 on that lens, daylight to dark (with tripod in the dark). My old 135 is diffraction-limited at f/32 -- but flare off of bright lights seems a bigger issue on the APS-C. I have a bunch of primes but will be especially interested in the old zooms.

I've used some of these old primes on an A6000 with a tilt-mount adapter in the studio. Also amazing. But one does not rely on the A6000 outdoors in New England winters. And in the studio, one can adjust lighting to minimize glare.

Only real issue I have had with the old lenses on the K3 has been programming some focus tweaks. Diffraction? Meh.