[monochrome]

If I didn't know PF existed I wouldn't be thinking about whether it is worth it.

[Kguru]

Not sure if this has been shown here but take a look at this photo at 1:1
The detail & sharpness is amazing
https://www.flickr.com/photos/petapixel/25203529170/sizes/o/

[PhilRich]

Not sure if this has been shown here but take a look at this photo at 1:1
The detail & sharpness is amazing
https://www.flickr.com/photos/petapixel/25203529170/sizes/o/

What lens did you use. It is indeed amazing!

[Gurdur]

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. .....

Not really. For some trips, perhaps you should delay them a little till you can afford a decent telezoom lens, at the very least a 200mm telezoom, even better the 450mm one. If you go on safari in Tanzania in the Serengeti, or you go whale-watching out at sea, you will be as disappointed as hell if your photos only amount to, "That blob there in the corner is a lion!", or, "Yeah, that indistinct group of pixels was an amazing whale!"

If your memories in the forms of photographs are very important to you, go the extra mile and get a **good** telezoom lens before such travel (and I would ***highly*** recommend you get the K-1 camera too), even if it restricts your travel. You can catch up on travel later; you can't catch up on wasted photo opportunities and consequent regrets. And yes, I take and I took my own advice on previous trips. I look greatly forward to traveling again some time in the future with the K-1 and 450mm telezoom.

[Kguru]

What lens did you use. It is indeed amazing!

Sorry it wasn't by me, found it on this website
These Official Sample Shots Show What the Pentax K-1 Full Frame DSLR Can Do

[johnkrumm]

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

Like a casual camera?

No, just checking them out and making the preview on the LCD look good. Been shooting raw for many years.

[kh1234567890]

Sorry it wasn't by me, found it on this website
These Official Sample Shots Show What the Pentax K-1 Full Frame DSLR Can Do

Exif for that shot claims it was the DFA 28-105mm at 52.5 mm, f8, 5s exposure, ISO100. Pixel shift on, in-camera JPEG development with CA and diffraction corrections on, manual focus. Tungsten illumination correction. Not exactly the sort of a scene I would shoot.

[Rondec]

Exif for that shot claims it was the DFA 28-105mm at 52.5 mm, f8, 5s exposure, ISO100. Pixel shift on, in-camera JPEG development with CA and diffraction corrections on, manual focus. Tungsten illumination correction. Not exactly the sort of a scene I would shoot.

Is this a thread about you or about photographers in general? Because if it is a thread about whether or not full frame would give you benefit in your photography, that is a question that only you can answer and it is perfectly fine to answer "No, for my style of photography it won't make a significant difference." But it is futile then for other posters to produce images that would be hard to produce on crop sensors and have you say "Well, I wouldn't shoot that kind of thing anyway."

I think for portraiture and low light work, the K-1 will show significant improvement over current APS-C cameras. For macro shots, I think you would be hard pressed to see a difference. Wildlife is sort of a toss up. You will see a difference if (a) you can get closer or (b) you can afford a longer lens. If like me, you are stuck shooting a 200mm f2.8 or a consumer 55-300 APS-C zoom, you probably won't see much difference at all. From a landscape standpoint, this is a dream camera, with tons of a resolution and the addition of pixel-shift which can give images a medium format level of detail/dynamic range. I don't do astro photography, but it seems as though that would be a no brainer as well, as it seems as though those folks are always trying to get faster lenses and the addition of the astro tracer could help out some too.

You do a lot of street photography, kh, and I have no idea if you would see a difference in your photos. If you are satisfied with what you have, then why even ask the question?

At the same time, I think the answer is clear -- for certain types of photography, the K-1 is definitely worth it and there is no particular reason to hold back from getting one if you want it, even if it doesn't actually make your images any better.

[biz-engineer]

There is valid rational, but perhaps difficult to catch by many Pentaxians due to the nature of the user base. Why not wonder why Nikon does make a D5, are all those Nikonian complete dumb idiots? Or is it that a number of Pentaxians are doing portraits in daylight and garden photos at ISO 100 on a tripod, downsized before uploaded on flickr? Now that full frame is out, the thread should instead be titled: "Is medium format really worth?" that a lot more slippery ground IMO, because I don't see myself shooting with a 645Z in a stadium with 400mm prime lens. As for portraits and landscapes who really needs 51Mpixels?

[flambeauriver]

Too soon to tell, since I just received my K-1. But --

Here's the plan: I specialize in photos of alpine tundra plants. I print on Epson 9890 (44") and 7990 (24"), and sometimes on an Epson 60" printer. I have a Pentax K5 and a Sony A7R. I never use files from the K5 on the 9890. I sometimes do print on the 9890 from the A7R. For the big stuff I usually use 4x5 to 8x10 view cameras, though I've never used these big cameras in the high country. ( I'm almost 70 and it will take almost 2 weeks for me to get acclimated to that elevation.) I can carry the K-1 with gear and tripod somewhat easily to shoot w/i walking distance from the car and want to print hi-res files up to 44".

I will be at 10,000' with the K-1 in 2 weeks, mostly shooting alpine flora and geologic photos. I will use the Pentax 100mm Macro and, via an adapter, an older Nikon 200mm Macro (a fantastic lens, by the way, and not too pricey.) I'll try the pixel shift when I can. I also will use an Olympus EM-5ii in its hi-res mode, using a Pentax 50mm Macro and the 100mm Macro when I have to hike a long way or into very rough terrain. I doubt the EM5ii will handle really large prints, but who knows? I'll be trying it b/c I can carry it. From experience, I need a large tripod to take macro photos with the Full Frame Sony A7R. I'll be using the same large tripod with the K-1. With the little E-M5ii I will try a much smaller tripod for the Hi-res mode.

I need to know GPS locations if possible of the plants/rocks. I have been using my iPhone but it should be very handy to have the GPS data from the K-1.

I've taken very few astronomical photos. I want to try the AstroTracer with the K-1. I hope to return this fall with Alpine Tundra photos and a magnificent backdrop of the Milky Way, able to be printed to 44" and maybe 60", all courtesy of the K-1.

I had ordered the K3ii in February but returned it in anticipation of the K-1. I have many FF lenses and I figured why go only half the way, with the K3ii, when, for not much more, all things considered, I could use the K-1 with all my lenses and get a big boost in resolution. That's why I have the K-1 and decided to return the K3ii.

[Gimbal]

@flambeauriver
Impressive story. Thumbs up.

[surfar]

I could use the K-1 with all my lenses and get a big boost in resolution. That's why I have the K-1

This sums it up!

[normhead]

Too soon to tell, since I just received my K-1. But --

Here's the plan: I specialize in photos of alpine tundra plants. I print on Epson 9890 (44") and 7990 (24"), and sometimes on an Epson 60" printer. I have a Pentax K5 and a Sony A7R. I never use files from the K5 on the 9890. I sometimes do print on the 9890 from the A7R. For the big stuff I usually use 4x5 to 8x10 view cameras, though I've never used these big cameras in the high country. ( I'm almost 70 and it will take almost 2 weeks for me to get acclimated to that elevation.) I can carry the K-1 with gear and tripod somewhat easily to shoot w/i walking distance from the car and want to print hi-res files up to 44".

I will be at 10,000' with the K-1 in 2 weeks, mostly shooting alpine flora and geologic photos. I will use the Pentax 100mm Macro and, via an adapter, an older Nikon 200mm Macro (a fantastic lens, by the way, and not too pricey.) I'll try the pixel shift when I can. I also will use an Olympus EM-5ii in its hi-res mode, using a Pentax 50mm Macro and the 100mm Macro when I have to hike a long way or into very rough terrain. I doubt the EM5ii will handle really large prints, but who knows? I'll be trying it b/c I can carry it. From experience, I need a large tripod to take macro photos with the Full Frame Sony A7R. I'll be using the same large tripod with the K-1. With the little E-M5ii I will try a much smaller tripod for the Hi-res mode.

I need to know GPS locations if possible of the plants/rocks. I have been using my iPhone but it should be very handy to have the GPS data from the K-1.

I've taken very few astronomical photos. I want to try the AstroTracer with the K-1. I hope to return this fall with Alpine Tundra photos and a magnificent backdrop of the Milky Way, able to be printed to 44" and maybe 60", all courtesy of the K-1.

I had ordered the K3ii in February but returned it in anticipation of the K-1. I have many FF lenses and I figured why go only half the way, with the K3ii, when, for not much more, all things considered, I could use the K-1 with all my lenses and get a big boost in resolution. That's why I have the K-1 and decided to return the K3ii.

Awesome, great to hear at 70 you're still at it. You sound like the perfect fit for a K-1. Just curious, what do you do with your prints?

[btnapa]

Too soon to tell, since I just received my K-1. But --

Here's the plan: I specialize in photos of alpine tundra plants. I print on Epson 9890 (44") and 7990 (24"), and sometimes on an Epson 60" printer. I have a Pentax K5 and a Sony A7R. I never use files from the K5 on the 9890. I sometimes do print on the 9890 from the A7R. For the big stuff I usually use 4x5 to 8x10 view cameras, though I've never used these big cameras in the high country. ( I'm almost 70 and it will take almost 2 weeks for me to get acclimated to that elevation.) I can carry the K-1 with gear and tripod somewhat easily to shoot w/i walking distance from the car and want to print hi-res files up to 44".

I will be at 10,000' with the K-1 in 2 weeks, mostly shooting alpine flora and geologic photos. I will use the Pentax 100mm Macro and, via an adapter, an older Nikon 200mm Macro (a fantastic lens, by the way, and not too pricey.) I'll try the pixel shift when I can. I also will use an Olympus EM-5ii in its hi-res mode, using a Pentax 50mm Macro and the 100mm Macro when I have to hike a long way or into very rough terrain. I doubt the EM5ii will handle really large prints, but who knows? I'll be trying it b/c I can carry it. From experience, I need a large tripod to take macro photos with the Full Frame Sony A7R. I'll be using the same large tripod with the K-1. With the little E-M5ii I will try a much smaller tripod for the Hi-res mode.

I need to know GPS locations if possible of the plants/rocks. I have been using my iPhone but it should be very handy to have the GPS data from the K-1.

I've taken very few astronomical photos. I want to try the AstroTracer with the K-1. I hope to return this fall with Alpine Tundra photos and a magnificent backdrop of the Milky Way, able to be printed to 44" and maybe 60", all courtesy of the K-1.

I had ordered the K3ii in February but returned it in anticipation of the K-1. I have many FF lenses and I figured why go only half the way, with the K3ii, when, for not much more, all things considered, I could use the K-1 with all my lenses and get a big boost in resolution. That's why I have the K-1 and decided to return the K3ii.

You rock my friend. I would be curious to know too as to how big of a print you can get from a single frame K1 file.

I have an Epson 9800 and have printed 35"x52" prints from a pixel shift K1 file with very good detail on luster paper. My K3 prints do not hold up much past 20x30.

[normhead]

OK then printing dudes, you guys should start a club, the Over 40 inches wide print club so we can find you.

A couple of questions.
1. Have you compared a Pixel Shifted K-3II file with a pixel shifted K-1 file in a large print?
2. Does a pixel shifted file make a discernible by a layman type difference to a large file in a print (where pixel peeping isn't really possible.) ?, and if so, at what size does it start to show up? I'd like that answered for both a K-3II and a K1 if possible.

I guess the cool thing for me is, I never print larger than 30"x20" so it would seem using a K-1 would not affect my print quality much. But, I'm still wondering if I should be thinking about a camera with pixel shift.

All other camera features for me are subordinate to print out put. SO you guys are the first I've come across that can actually answer my most important questions.