Was it worth it ?

edo · 06-13-2016, 02:54 AM

Originally posted by kh1234567890

Let's see some pictures then ...

I think that by asking to see pictures taken that would "convince you" is a bad criteria, because it's not the camera, it's the photog and the post processing, never the camera that is important in producing a good photo!

But if you try one you would surely fall for all the arguments already mentioned!

nocturnal · 06-13-2016, 11:44 AM

Does the K1 have a much larger viewfinder than say my K30?

I am a film user, ME Super and MX are what I use in 35mm, anyone who knows these cameras knows what a fantastic frame one has whilst composing a photograph.

I am thinking the K1 larger viewfinder alone is an instant advantage over APS-C cameras for photographers who like to compose their work.

This is a big step up never minding the 36MP sensor, and this is one of the main reasons I would buy it.

I bet it is not as good/big as the ME Super/ MX though

surfar · 06-13-2016, 12:10 PM

I haven't thought to compare and getting ready for a bit of renovation on the house so ME super is packed away(K1 is ready every second though).Once I get sorted i'll check it out, ive actually forgotten what its like!

nomadkng · 06-13-2016, 12:27 PM

Originally posted by kh1234567890

Not being a 'Pro', I am not particularly interested in what they do with it or what pictures they take. I don't even care if anyone ever looks at my shots. All that I was wondering was whether a K-1 would enable me take significantly less boring snaps than I can take with what I have

Here's a suggestion, use the money you would have spent on a K1 and take a trip to a less boring place than the one you are currently in. That alone will create less boring photographs.

Exciting, amazing, WOW photography is 50% opportunity, 49% execution and 1% equipment. So no, if you take 1000's of boring photos with a 10 year old DSLR or iphone, and you use a K1 to take 1000's more boring photos of the same subjects, the K1 is not worth it.

Take some personal responsibility for the poor quality of your photography.

A K1 won't turn a frog into a princess any more than Britney Spears kissing me would turn me into a handsome prince.

Barry Pearson · 06-13-2016, 01:06 PM

Originally posted by nocturnal

Does the K1 have a much larger viewfinder than say my K30?

I am a film user, ME Super and MX are what I use in 35mm, anyone who knows these cameras knows what a fantastic frame one has whilst composing a photograph.

I am thinking the K1 larger viewfinder alone is an instant advantage over APS-C cameras for photographers who like to compose their work.

This is a big step up never minding the 36MP sensor, and this is one of the main reasons I would buy it.

I bet it is not as good/big as the ME Super/ MX though

It does not appear to be as large as the ME Super. (I have both). The reason for this is that the K-1 has a lot of extra information below the frame, whereas the ME Super has information on the left within the frame.

I think the K-1 is better, because I don't have to move my eye so much to go from one corner to another.

repaap · 06-13-2016, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by Barry Pearson

It does not appear to be as large as the ME Super. (I have both). The reason for this is that the K-1 has a lot of extra information below the frame, whereas the ME Super has information on the left within the frame.

I think the K-1 is better, because I don't have to move my eye so much to go from one corner to another.

I was shooting with my K-3 and K-1, have to say that now when I'm used to K-1...K-3 felt so small. That is not much, but now when I actually see it, it makes a differense.

cali92rs · 06-13-2016, 03:02 PM

After shooting with my 6D and D810 for a couple years, I agree, APS-C cameras seem too small to me :/
However, I have never gotten used to the 70-200 f2.8s when I have to lug them around all day!

Wheatfield · 06-13-2016, 09:45 PM

Originally posted by Rondec

Assuming you are using the same lens, for example the FA 77, the biggest thing is that you are going to stand closer to get the same framing. That is often a good thing. But the rendering is really the same if you are shooting on a K3 or a K-1. You'll have a little less depth of field if you step closer, but everything else should be the same.

Nope. I used to think that too. The reality is substantially different.

repaap · 06-14-2016, 01:01 AM

Originally posted by cali92rs

After shooting with my 6D and D810 for a couple years, I agree, APS-C cameras seem too small to me :/
However, I have never gotten used to the 70-200 f2.8s when I have to lug them around all day!

Really size vise and VF is just little bigger but it is there. I'm little sad because I used to like K-3 quite much...only thing what bothers me on K-1 is that flippyscreen is so big so when shooting my nose and cheek is squeeshing in that screen. Little thing love that flippyscreen in LV use...not a problem really.

**gaweidert** · 06-14-2016, 05:36 AM - **1 Like**

Well, after owning one for almost two weeks, I am going to say yes. Sadly no camera is going to make me a better photographer, but that is not why I purchased it. Maybe if I get a 4 x 5 field camera I can become the next Ansel Adams.

1) I like this size, It fits my hands better.

2) Larger viewfinder is easier for me to use. I wish it was as large as that on a 35mm camera with optical focusing aids, but that is another thread.

3 Focus confirmation is much better. The K1 is better at this that the K3 and much better than the K5.

4) Pixel shift. Something I will have to learn to use, but learning something new is not a bad thing. I know the K3-II has it, but, on it's own, it is not enough to justify purchasing it. It is a nice bonus on top of the additional features of the K1.

5) Faster and more accurate autofocus is a big plus. I posted on another thread how this seems to work much better on the thermal features at Yellowstone than my K5-IIs and K5.

6) The images do have a nice quality to them that is a bit hard for me to describe.

7) Better shake reduction. At my age (65) it is becoming more important.

So for me, it was worth it.

johnkrumm · 06-14-2016, 06:17 AM

I've had mine for a week and so far I love it. First full frame, first digital Pentax. Been shooting with 4/3 Oly and M4/3 since 2007. It's hard to match the pleasing Olympus colors but I'm getting better at using Lightroom for that. Love the color depth. The color sliders react differently than with my Olympus, coming on more gradually. I also really like using an OVF again, though I do have to get my OVF exposure brain working again. Size feels good with a prime, but I don't think I will get a big fast zoom. I'll wait for the new Pentax primes and meanwhile use the FA 35 f2 and FA 50 1.4 and perhaps purchase the 28-105 (or 100 macro, haven't decided).

Been experimenting with the camera jpeg settings. Bright with saturation at -2 and contrast at -1 gives a very accurate, pleasing image on the LCD.... not sure about on the computer. In general I think the default jpeg settings are over saturated, even "Natural".

So, worth it? I bought it to have fun and it is working.

nocturnal · 06-14-2016, 06:30 PM

Originally posted by johnkrumm

Been experimenting with the camera jpeg settings. Bright with saturation at -2 and contrast at -1 gives a very accurate, pleasing image on the LCD.... not sure about on the computer. In general I think the default jpeg settings are over saturated, even "Natural".

So, worth it? I bought it to have fun and it is working.

John, surely you aren't using jpeg output only from your K1????

Like a casual camera?

**sibyrnes** · 06-15-2016, 06:52 AM

As one who has shot thousands of 35mm slides and has a decent collection of legacy lens(50mm f/1.2 for example) I can't wait to get my hands on a K1! But I am finding that in my transition to digital photography and processing, I have a LOT to learn! So, for the time being, I am going to milk every pixel I can from my old K200d. The K1 is definitely in my future when the time is right, and who knows, maybe the price will come down.

filmamigo · 06-15-2016, 06:59 AM

Originally posted by normhead

...

Great pro photographers were still shooting K-3s after the D810 was released, great Pro photographers are going to be shooting K-5s and K-3s after the K-1 is released. That's reality.

...
I rest my case.

Heck, on that site there is good work shot with a Nikon D2Hs -- a camera with FOUR megapixels and a crop sensor.

Much as I lust after the K-1, and long to use the FA Limiteds at their intended focal lengths, I know that most of the time I won't see a big difference to the results from my previous K-5, or my current K-S2.

In fact, searching for a *definitive* difference in look is what led me to picking up a Pentax 67, to get a different look from focal length + field of view + tonality of a large negative.

normhead · 06-15-2016, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by gaweidert

6) The images do have a nice quality to them that is a bit hard for me to describe.

I've been noticing that in the posted images. The best I could do is, the images seem less harsh, or stark. My guess is it's capturing finer gradations in the transitions from one tone to another.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
It was worth it.	Lenscap	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	9	05-14-2016 11:16 AM
Have 50/1.8, is it worth it to buy a 35/2.4?	keanex	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	54	02-28-2016 12:52 AM
Used K-3. Is it worth it?	Dewman	Pentax DSLR Discussion	18	02-24-2016 09:03 AM
Sony's new 42 MP sensor. Is it worth it?	normhead	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	7	10-18-2015 10:29 AM
Should I buy this lens is it worth it	emetcalf	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	2	03-20-2011 06:58 PM

06-13-2016, 02:54 AM	#121
edo Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 75	Originally posted by kh1234567890 Let's see some pictures then ... I think that by asking to see pictures taken that would "convince you" is a bad criteria, because it's not the camera, it's the photog and the post processing, never the camera that is important in producing a good photo! But if you try one you would surely fall for all the arguments already mentioned!

06-13-2016, 11:44 AM	#122
nocturnal Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 507	Does the K1 have a much larger viewfinder than say my K30? I am a film user, ME Super and MX are what I use in 35mm, anyone who knows these cameras knows what a fantastic frame one has whilst composing a photograph. I am thinking the K1 larger viewfinder alone is an instant advantage over APS-C cameras for photographers who like to compose their work. This is a big step up never minding the 36MP sensor, and this is one of the main reasons I would buy it. I bet it is not as good/big as the ME Super/ MX though

06-13-2016, 12:10 PM	#123
surfar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: mid nth coast,nsw Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,141	I haven't thought to compare and getting ready for a bit of renovation on the house so ME super is packed away(K1 is ready every second though).Once I get sorted i'll check it out, ive actually forgotten what its like!

06-13-2016, 12:27 PM	#124
nomadkng Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 1,448	Originally posted by kh1234567890 Not being a 'Pro', I am not particularly interested in what they do with it or what pictures they take. I don't even care if anyone ever looks at my shots. All that I was wondering was whether a K-1 would enable me take significantly less boring snaps than I can take with what I have Here's a suggestion, use the money you would have spent on a K1 and take a trip to a less boring place than the one you are currently in. That alone will create less boring photographs. Exciting, amazing, WOW photography is 50% opportunity, 49% execution and 1% equipment. So no, if you take 1000's of boring photos with a 10 year old DSLR or iphone, and you use a K1 to take 1000's more boring photos of the same subjects, the K1 is not worth it. Take some personal responsibility for the poor quality of your photography. A K1 won't turn a frog into a princess any more than Britney Spears kissing me would turn me into a handsome prince.

06-13-2016, 01:06 PM	#125
Barry Pearson Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Stockport Posts: 964	Originally posted by nocturnal Does the K1 have a much larger viewfinder than say my K30? I am a film user, ME Super and MX are what I use in 35mm, anyone who knows these cameras knows what a fantastic frame one has whilst composing a photograph. I am thinking the K1 larger viewfinder alone is an instant advantage over APS-C cameras for photographers who like to compose their work. This is a big step up never minding the 36MP sensor, and this is one of the main reasons I would buy it. I bet it is not as good/big as the ME Super/ MX though It does not appear to be as large as the ME Super. (I have both). The reason for this is that the K-1 has a lot of extra information below the frame, whereas the ME Super has information on the left within the frame. I think the K-1 is better, because I don't have to move my eye so much to go from one corner to another.

06-13-2016, 01:54 PM	#126
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	Originally posted by Barry Pearson It does not appear to be as large as the ME Super. (I have both). The reason for this is that the K-1 has a lot of extra information below the frame, whereas the ME Super has information on the left within the frame. I think the K-1 is better, because I don't have to move my eye so much to go from one corner to another. I was shooting with my K-3 and K-1, have to say that now when I'm used to K-1...K-3 felt so small. That is not much, but now when I actually see it, it makes a differense.

06-13-2016, 03:02 PM	#127
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	After shooting with my 6D and D810 for a couple years, I agree, APS-C cameras seem too small to me :/ However, I have never gotten used to the 70-200 f2.8s when I have to lug them around all day!

06-13-2016, 09:45 PM	#128
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by Rondec Assuming you are using the same lens, for example the FA 77, the biggest thing is that you are going to stand closer to get the same framing. That is often a good thing. But the rendering is really the same if you are shooting on a K3 or a K-1. You'll have a little less depth of field if you step closer, but everything else should be the same. Nope. I used to think that too. The reality is substantially different.

06-14-2016, 01:01 AM	#129
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	Originally posted by cali92rs After shooting with my 6D and D810 for a couple years, I agree, APS-C cameras seem too small to me :/ However, I have never gotten used to the 70-200 f2.8s when I have to lug them around all day! Really size vise and VF is just little bigger but it is there. I'm little sad because I used to like K-3 quite much...only thing what bothers me on K-1 is that flippyscreen is so big so when shooting my nose and cheek is squeeshing in that screen. Little thing love that flippyscreen in LV use...not a problem really.

06-14-2016, 05:36 AM - 1 Like	#130
gaweidert Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Rochester, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,325	Well, after owning one for almost two weeks, I am going to say yes. Sadly no camera is going to make me a better photographer, but that is not why I purchased it. Maybe if I get a 4 x 5 field camera I can become the next Ansel Adams. 1) I like this size, It fits my hands better. 2) Larger viewfinder is easier for me to use. I wish it was as large as that on a 35mm camera with optical focusing aids, but that is another thread. 3 Focus confirmation is much better. The K1 is better at this that the K3 and much better than the K5. 4) Pixel shift. Something I will have to learn to use, but learning something new is not a bad thing. I know the K3-II has it, but, on it's own, it is not enough to justify purchasing it. It is a nice bonus on top of the additional features of the K1. 5) Faster and more accurate autofocus is a big plus. I posted on another thread how this seems to work much better on the thermal features at Yellowstone than my K5-IIs and K5. 6) The images do have a nice quality to them that is a bit hard for me to describe. 7) Better shake reduction. At my age (65) it is becoming more important. So for me, it was worth it.

06-14-2016, 06:17 AM	#131
johnkrumm Senior Member Join Date: May 2016 Location: Duluth, MN Posts: 141	I've had mine for a week and so far I love it. First full frame, first digital Pentax. Been shooting with 4/3 Oly and M4/3 since 2007. It's hard to match the pleasing Olympus colors but I'm getting better at using Lightroom for that. Love the color depth. The color sliders react differently than with my Olympus, coming on more gradually. I also really like using an OVF again, though I do have to get my OVF exposure brain working again. Size feels good with a prime, but I don't think I will get a big fast zoom. I'll wait for the new Pentax primes and meanwhile use the FA 35 f2 and FA 50 1.4 and perhaps purchase the 28-105 (or 100 macro, haven't decided). Been experimenting with the camera jpeg settings. Bright with saturation at -2 and contrast at -1 gives a very accurate, pleasing image on the LCD.... not sure about on the computer. In general I think the default jpeg settings are over saturated, even "Natural". So, worth it? I bought it to have fun and it is working.

06-14-2016, 06:30 PM	#132
nocturnal Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 507	Originally posted by johnkrumm Been experimenting with the camera jpeg settings. Bright with saturation at -2 and contrast at -1 gives a very accurate, pleasing image on the LCD.... not sure about on the computer. In general I think the default jpeg settings are over saturated, even "Natural". So, worth it? I bought it to have fun and it is working. John, surely you aren't using jpeg output only from your K1???? Like a casual camera?

06-15-2016, 06:52 AM	#133
sibyrnes Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Location: Pittsburgh, Pa. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 447	As one who has shot thousands of 35mm slides and has a decent collection of legacy lens(50mm f/1.2 for example) I can't wait to get my hands on a K1! But I am finding that in my transition to digital photography and processing, I have a LOT to learn! So, for the time being, I am going to milk every pixel I can from my old K200d. The K1 is definitely in my future when the time is right, and who knows, maybe the price will come down.

06-15-2016, 06:59 AM	#134
filmamigo Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 797	Originally posted by normhead ... Great pro photographers were still shooting K-3s after the D810 was released, great Pro photographers are going to be shooting K-5s and K-3s after the K-1 is released. That's reality. ... I rest my case. Heck, on that site there is good work shot with a Nikon D2Hs -- a camera with FOUR megapixels and a crop sensor. Much as I lust after the K-1, and long to use the FA Limiteds at their intended focal lengths, I know that most of the time I won't see a big difference to the results from my previous K-5, or my current K-S2. In fact, searching for a definitive difference in look is what led me to picking up a Pentax 67, to get a different look from focal length + field of view + tonality of a large negative.

06-15-2016, 09:05 AM	#135
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by gaweidert 6) The images do have a nice quality to them that is a bit hard for me to describe. I've been noticing that in the posted images. The best I could do is, the images seem less harsh, or stark. My guess is it's capturing finer gradations in the transitions from one tone to another.