Originally posted by timw4mail It's almost weird to use such an expensive lens on such a cheap camera...
The lens would usually cost more than the camera, yes... but in this case it was basically free so I won't complain
(it came with a film camera I bought and was not even mentioned in the ad, so I can consider it a freebie, and I won't complain that it has some fungus)
While the K-S1 is considered a "cheap" camera, I find it's IQ is generally on par with the K-3 and better than previous generation "top of the line" APS-C cameras such as the K-5 or even the K-5 IIs. Also, when working with manual lenses like this one, I really only need one control wheel for the shutter speed - I use a fixed ISO and change the aperture on the lens itself. So it's basically the ability of the camera itself to take good pictures plus the one control wheel that I need... and the small camera size is a huge bonus when working with those older smaller lenses
(the K 50 1.2 is not small for manual lenses standards, but it's still quite a bit smaller than my Sigma 30 1.4 Art, for example... or any off my zooms.)
Edit: I just realized you were talking about the K10D picture, not a K-S1 picture.
What's not to like about the K10D? To me the way it renders its colors at ISO 100 is pretty much unmatched
I'm a huge K10D fan and honestly I don't think a newer camera would have captured that light exactly like the K10D did. There's just something almost magical about it regarding how it captures luminance.