Originally posted by 08amczb While I know the lens is very good, I don't understand why would someone buy it. If I would like to travel light/make family memories then the KP + DA 16-85/DA17-70 is much more compact, lighter and cheaper. I think the full frame camera is for the maximal image quality, so I prefer primes on the K-1, or the professional F2.8 zooms.
My walk-about
system camera is the K-1ii + D FA 28-105mm. (Without battery grip).
If I'm doing some serious shooting, in a studio or an outdoor event, I'll
add extra lenses, typically the recent Pentax zooms, or sometimes a prime, to that combination. (And for outside the studio, especially with a long lens, I'll add a battery grip).
The D FA 28-105mm lens is rarely
if ever more than a yard/metre or two from the camera. It is so versatile that it can often cater for cases that the main lens can't handle. It often isn't wide enough, but then I take several shots and stitch them together later.
My most used of the modern Pentax FF lenses is the D FA 150-450mm lens. It has excellent image quality. If I went on a long trip and could only have two lenses, they would be the modern 28-105mm and the 150-450mm Pentax lenses. There is little that those couldn't handle with high image quality.
I've pretty-well switched entirely to FF. My K-3ii is now a back-up in case my K-1ii breaks, which hasn't happened in more than 2 years since I bought the K-1. (Which is now upgraded to a K-1ii).
(My walk-about
non-system camera, really for when I'm not expecting any serious photography and just want to be able take snap-shots, is currently the Lumix LX100).