k1 or switch systems?

halonp · 07-14-2017, 07:43 PM

Hi everyone,
I currently shoot with a K5.
I have the Pentax 50 1.7,
Tamron 28-70 2.8,
Tamron 70-200 2.8,
plus a few other shorter lenses I rarely use.
I mainly shoot portraits (generally outdoors).

Unfortunately I find I get a lot of noise in my images. At sunset or shaded areas, I shoot wide open and with SS 1/160, I often need to bump my ISO over 800 - and I'm losing a lot of detail and getting a lot of noise. I have a friend's wedding at the end of the year which means more low light shooting.
A friend recommended the Nikon d750 (full frame), however that means selling all my current gear to upgrade.
The K1 looks really good, and reviews score it better than the d750, however I can't seem to see many compatible lenses for the K1.

Does anyone happen to know if there are any good portrait primes? Like 135 1.8 or something similar? I did a quick google search but I only found shorter lengths and I love the compression with longer lenses. Even a 70-200 would be good.

Are there any other crop sensor Pentax models which are brilliant in low light?

I really appreciate your help.
Thank you,
Kiah

Last edited by halonp; 07-14-2017 at 08:44 PM.

**twilhelm** · 07-14-2017, 08:04 PM - **1 Like**

My two most used lenses for weddings with my K5 were the FA 77 and the 17-70. At times I would need to pull out a lens with further reach, but not often. I found the K5 to be a great camera for weddings. I now have the K3, and although I haven't used it for a wedding ( I don't really plan to shoot any more weddings ) I can easily see it being a better camera. I don't have the K1, but again, as with most modern full frame cameras, the crop lenses will work on them in crop mode and some in full frame.

Good luck and enjoy.

halonp · 07-14-2017, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by twilhelm

My two most used lenses for weddings with my K5 were the FA 77 and the 17-70. At times I would need to pull out a lens with further reach, but not often. I found the K5 to be a great camera for weddings. I now have the K3, and although I haven't used it for a wedding ( I don't really plan to shoot any more weddings ) I can easily see it being a better camera. I don't have the K1, but again, as with most modern full frame cameras, the crop lenses will work on them in crop mode and some in full frame.

Good luck and enjoy.

Oh, thank you Twilhelm, I didn't realise the crop lenses would work.
I had been researching the d750 and only just remembered that Pentax had a full frame model available now.
maybe I'm doing something wrong then because in low light all of my images are so dark :/

**clackers** · 07-14-2017, 08:17 PM - **3 Likes**

Originally posted by halonp

.
maybe I'm doing something wrong then because in low light all of my images are so dark :/

Halonp, you might consider a hands-on photography course rather than spending even more money on gear.

halonp · 07-14-2017, 08:38 PM

Thank you Clackers,
I have been using the Pentax system since 2011, and taken a few online courses, however there's always room to learn more

Here is an example. The sun was still up (no cloud coverage). It was about 4pm, Eastern Australia.
This is shot at 1/160 f2.8 ISO800
SOOC:

Exposure increased:

And zoomed in:

Does this look average would you say for those settings? I know I can always lighten the images in editing, but the loss of detail and noise bothers me (and I know I can fix those - to a degree- but would be nice to be able to nail it in camera).
Thank you

**jatrax** · 07-14-2017, 08:53 PM

Originally posted by halonp

but would be nice to be able to nail it in camera

And you should be able to. What did the meter say for this shot? And @ 1/160 I assume you are trying to use the flash? What flash? The on board one? If so, simply not enough flash. You need a real flash like the Pentax 540 for that shot. Just setting the camera to those settings does not matter if there is not enough light for those settings if that makes sense. You needed maybe 2 more stops for that shot (just guessing) so either ISO 3200 or a bigger flash. Or skip the flash, since the one you are using is not doing anything and slow the shutter speed down to maybe 1/40.

There is no question in my mind that the K-1 would have done a better job on that shot. But why would you even attempt that shot in the first place? It isn't going to work with the light you have available at any reasonable ISO.

As an example on the K-5 I felt ISO 200 was good with 400 really pushing the limit. On the K-3 400 is OK and 800 pushing the limit. On the K-1 I shoot @ 400 ISO all the time and have no issue going to 1600 and getting good shots. And people laugh at me for being very conservative with my settings. Others use much higher ISO numbers with good results on the K-1.

halonp · 07-14-2017, 09:03 PM

Thanks Jatrax,
I didn't use any flash for this at all. I'd probably take my soft box along with me if I'd thought I'd need it but I honestly thought there'd be enough ambient light

I've shot a few indoor events before and even with my Pentax 50m @1.8 and SS160 (sometimes even lower) it seems anything over ISO800 is just noisy and lacking in contrast and detail. (And I can get a brighter photo using my iPhone without a flash in these conditions)

Originally posted by jatrax

As an example on the K-5 I felt ISO 200 was good with 400 really pushing the limit. On the K-3 400 is OK and 800 pushing the limit. On the K-1 I shoot @ 400 ISO all the time and have no issue going to 1600 and getting good shots. And people laugh at me for being very conservative with my settings. Others use much higher ISO numbers with good results on the K-1.

This is actually VERY helpful.

**jatrax** · 07-14-2017, 09:10 PM

Originally posted by halonp

it seems anything over ISO800 is just noisy and lacking in contrast and detail.

Agree with that on the K-5. If the resulting image use can allow for a lot of noise then the k-5 can go to 800 or even 1600. But for good quality, salable images and prints I think ISO 200 is the max on the K-5. On the K-1 that is 1600 provided you are shooting ETTR to get as much light as possible.

Originally posted by halonp

I didn't use any flash for this at all.

OK, then I am confused, why would you not go slower and get more light? What mode are you shooting in? I assume M, but I thought you were using flash so maybe I should stop assuming things. If using M mode then the camera meter surely told you there was not enough light?? If it did not then maybe something is wrong with the camera. Can you post that image with the EXIF intact?

halonp · 07-14-2017, 09:11 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

And you should be able to. What did the meter say for this shot? And @ 1/160 I assume you are trying to use the flash? What flash? The on board one? If so, simply not enough flash. You need a real flash like the Pentax 540 for that shot. Just setting the camera to those settings does not matter if there is not enough light for those settings if that makes sense. You needed maybe 2 more stops for that shot (just guessing) so either ISO 3200 or a bigger flash. Or skip the flash, since the one you are using is not doing anything and slow the shutter speed down to maybe 1/40.

I feel that if I go below 1/160 with kids it's really hard to avoid movement. I was at 200mm with this lens, so at that distance the built-in flash would've been useless. I have shot in this location a few times before and the ambient light has been fine (only need ISO400 max).

**ramseybuckeye** · 07-14-2017, 09:12 PM

What's your exposure compensation set at? This looks very underexposed for those settings in daylight.

halonp · 07-14-2017, 09:14 PM

Originally posted by Brooke Meyer

In your example, she's a much smaller part of the frame than need be, you're giving up a l;ot of sensor real estate. And I'd consider shooting DNGs.

I went from K-20s to K5s in 2011 because I needed high iSO in theaters for ballet with high shutter speeds. I live at ISO 3200. The K5 and subsequently K5IIs and now K3II give me good negatives.

Every photograph, in some fashion, is an idea, capture, edit and presentation. Ansel Adams got it as right in the camera as he could but the man spent decades editing individual negatives trying to get them where he wanted. I've no interest in what the camera saw or what the mfr decided to do with the RAW file on it's way to a JPEG. I care about what I saw. Took me a while develop a workflow that satisfied me and it constantly changes. Part of the learning process. This example I've printed at 11"x14" and it's fine.

Beautiful shot Brooke

Thank you for your input.

**twilhelm** · 07-14-2017, 09:19 PM - **1 Like**

I agree with Ramsey, your exposure comp appears to be low. What are you using for post processing? I found Lightroom was great with my K5, especially if I was ISO 400 or higher. I always shot raw also.
Yes the image appears dark, I'll post a couple of mine tomorrow, right now I'm exhausted.

**loveisageless** · 07-14-2017, 09:25 PM

Originally posted by halonp

Hi everyone,
I currently shoot with a K5.
I have the Pentax 50 1.7,
Tamron 28-70 2.8,
Tamron 70-200 2.8,
plus a few other shorter lenses I rarely use.
I mainly shoot portraits (generally outdoors).

Unfortunately I find I get a lot of noise in my images. At sunset or shaded areas, I shoot wide open and with SS 1/160, I often need to bump my ISO over 800 - and I'm losing a lot of detail and getting a lot of noise. I have a friend's wedding at the end of the year which means more low light shooting.
A friend recommended the Nikon d750 (full frame), however that means selling all my current gear to upgrade.
The K1 looks really good, and reviews score it better than the d750, however I can't seem to see many compatible lenses for the K1.

Does anyone happen to know if there are any good portrait primes? Like 135 1.8 or something similar? I did a quick google search but I only found shorter lengths and I love the compression with longer lenses. Even a 70-200 would be good.

Are there any other crop sensor Pentax models which are brilliant in low light?

I really appreciate your help.
Thank you,
Kiah

There is the Pentax DFA 100mm f/2.8 WR lens which can be used for Portraits on the K-1. Also, since you like the 200mm focal length a copy of the Pentax FA* 200mm f/2.8 lens is also an excellent lens. With the K-1 the difference between 1.8 and 2.8 is negligible.

halonp · 07-14-2017, 09:26 PM

Originally posted by twilhelm

I agree with Ramsey, your exposure comp appears to be low. What are you using for post processing? I found Lightroom was great with my K5, especially if I was ISO 400 or higher. I always shot raw also.
Yes the image appears dark, I'll post a couple of mine tomorrow, right now I'm exhausted.

Thanks Twilhelm,
I don't believe I've adjusted my exposure compensation? I shoot manual.

---------- Post added 07-15-17 at 02:35 PM ----------

Above is SOOC.
ISO1600
f2.8
1/100
75mm

Below is after a white balance and +1/3 exposure in lightroom.

---------- Post added 07-15-17 at 02:37 PM ----------

Originally posted by loveisageless

There is the Pentax DFA 100mm f/2.8 WR lens which can be used for Portraits on the K-1. Also, since you like the 200mm focal length a copy of the Pentax FA* 200mm f/2.8 lens is also an excellent lens. With the K-1 the difference between 1.8 and 2.8 is negligible.

Thank you Loveisageless. The 200mm 2.8 sounds nice...I'll bet it's expensive

(probably cheaper than switching systems though!)

VoiceOfReason · 07-14-2017, 09:44 PM

That does seem really dark for daytime. You will gain a few huge advantages with the K1 though. Autofocus will absolutely slay the K5. I push ISO to 3200 all the time and still have good images. You will have more dynamic range. You will have the ability to pull stuff out of shadows you never thought possible. Your 2 Tamron zooms will give you pictures you might cut yourself on with sharpness, but then your background will turn into butter smooth. Hey the K1. You will not be disappointed.

That being said, I think you are also slightly missing focus with the K5 in addition to underexposing. Once you nail focus bump your clarity, contrast, and slightly bump saturation.

07-14-2017, 07:43 PM	#1
halonp Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: nsw Posts: 82	k1 or switch systems? Hi everyone, I currently shoot with a K5. I have the Pentax 50 1.7, Tamron 28-70 2.8, Tamron 70-200 2.8, plus a few other shorter lenses I rarely use. I mainly shoot portraits (generally outdoors). Unfortunately I find I get a lot of noise in my images. At sunset or shaded areas, I shoot wide open and with SS 1/160, I often need to bump my ISO over 800 - and I'm losing a lot of detail and getting a lot of noise. I have a friend's wedding at the end of the year which means more low light shooting. A friend recommended the Nikon d750 (full frame), however that means selling all my current gear to upgrade. The K1 looks really good, and reviews score it better than the d750, however I can't seem to see many compatible lenses for the K1. Does anyone happen to know if there are any good portrait primes? Like 135 1.8 or something similar? I did a quick google search but I only found shorter lengths and I love the compression with longer lenses. Even a 70-200 would be good. Are there any other crop sensor Pentax models which are brilliant in low light? I really appreciate your help. Thank you, Kiah Last edited by halonp; 07-14-2017 at 08:44 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Can you switch the e-dial functions on the K1?	Jmbern1	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	4	12-14-2016 02:50 PM
Pentax-K1, Playback: Is it possible to switch Images if zoomed in?	Martin__	Visitors' Center	7	06-04-2016 12:38 PM
Should I Get the K5 IIs or Switch Systems?	Hannican	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	21	11-05-2012 11:13 AM
Should I switch systems? Compare these kits:	Shamwow	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	33	04-17-2012 08:49 AM
If you were to switch systems. What would it be?	throndor	General Talk	97	02-16-2010 06:54 AM

07-14-2017, 08:04 PM - 1 Like	#2
twilhelm Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,369	My two most used lenses for weddings with my K5 were the FA 77 and the 17-70. At times I would need to pull out a lens with further reach, but not often. I found the K5 to be a great camera for weddings. I now have the K3, and although I haven't used it for a wedding ( I don't really plan to shoot any more weddings ) I can easily see it being a better camera. I don't have the K1, but again, as with most modern full frame cameras, the crop lenses will work on them in crop mode and some in full frame. Good luck and enjoy.

07-14-2017, 08:12 PM	#3
halonp Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: nsw Posts: 82 Original Poster	Originally posted by twilhelm My two most used lenses for weddings with my K5 were the FA 77 and the 17-70. At times I would need to pull out a lens with further reach, but not often. I found the K5 to be a great camera for weddings. I now have the K3, and although I haven't used it for a wedding ( I don't really plan to shoot any more weddings ) I can easily see it being a better camera. I don't have the K1, but again, as with most modern full frame cameras, the crop lenses will work on them in crop mode and some in full frame. Good luck and enjoy. Oh, thank you Twilhelm, I didn't realise the crop lenses would work. I had been researching the d750 and only just remembered that Pentax had a full frame model available now. maybe I'm doing something wrong then because in low light all of my images are so dark :/

07-14-2017, 08:17 PM - 3 Likes	#4
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by halonp . maybe I'm doing something wrong then because in low light all of my images are so dark :/ Halonp, you might consider a hands-on photography course rather than spending even more money on gear.

07-14-2017, 08:38 PM	#5
halonp Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: nsw Posts: 82 Original Poster	Thank you Clackers, I have been using the Pentax system since 2011, and taken a few online courses, however there's always room to learn more Here is an example. The sun was still up (no cloud coverage). It was about 4pm, Eastern Australia. This is shot at 1/160 f2.8 ISO800 SOOC: Exposure increased: And zoomed in: Does this look average would you say for those settings? I know I can always lighten the images in editing, but the loss of detail and noise bothers me (and I know I can fix those - to a degree- but would be nice to be able to nail it in camera). Thank you

07-14-2017, 08:53 PM	#6
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by halonp but would be nice to be able to nail it in camera And you should be able to. What did the meter say for this shot? And @ 1/160 I assume you are trying to use the flash? What flash? The on board one? If so, simply not enough flash. You need a real flash like the Pentax 540 for that shot. Just setting the camera to those settings does not matter if there is not enough light for those settings if that makes sense. You needed maybe 2 more stops for that shot (just guessing) so either ISO 3200 or a bigger flash. Or skip the flash, since the one you are using is not doing anything and slow the shutter speed down to maybe 1/40. There is no question in my mind that the K-1 would have done a better job on that shot. But why would you even attempt that shot in the first place? It isn't going to work with the light you have available at any reasonable ISO. As an example on the K-5 I felt ISO 200 was good with 400 really pushing the limit. On the K-3 400 is OK and 800 pushing the limit. On the K-1 I shoot @ 400 ISO all the time and have no issue going to 1600 and getting good shots. And people laugh at me for being very conservative with my settings. Others use much higher ISO numbers with good results on the K-1.

07-14-2017, 09:03 PM	#7
halonp Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: nsw Posts: 82 Original Poster	Thanks Jatrax, I didn't use any flash for this at all. I'd probably take my soft box along with me if I'd thought I'd need it but I honestly thought there'd be enough ambient light I've shot a few indoor events before and even with my Pentax 50m @1.8 and SS160 (sometimes even lower) it seems anything over ISO800 is just noisy and lacking in contrast and detail. (And I can get a brighter photo using my iPhone without a flash in these conditions) Originally posted by jatrax As an example on the K-5 I felt ISO 200 was good with 400 really pushing the limit. On the K-3 400 is OK and 800 pushing the limit. On the K-1 I shoot @ 400 ISO all the time and have no issue going to 1600 and getting good shots. And people laugh at me for being very conservative with my settings. Others use much higher ISO numbers with good results on the K-1. This is actually VERY helpful.

07-14-2017, 09:10 PM	#8
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by halonp it seems anything over ISO800 is just noisy and lacking in contrast and detail. Agree with that on the K-5. If the resulting image use can allow for a lot of noise then the k-5 can go to 800 or even 1600. But for good quality, salable images and prints I think ISO 200 is the max on the K-5. On the K-1 that is 1600 provided you are shooting ETTR to get as much light as possible. Originally posted by halonp I didn't use any flash for this at all. OK, then I am confused, why would you not go slower and get more light? What mode are you shooting in? I assume M, but I thought you were using flash so maybe I should stop assuming things. If using M mode then the camera meter surely told you there was not enough light?? If it did not then maybe something is wrong with the camera. Can you post that image with the EXIF intact?

07-14-2017, 09:11 PM	#9
halonp Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: nsw Posts: 82 Original Poster	Originally posted by jatrax And you should be able to. What did the meter say for this shot? And @ 1/160 I assume you are trying to use the flash? What flash? The on board one? If so, simply not enough flash. You need a real flash like the Pentax 540 for that shot. Just setting the camera to those settings does not matter if there is not enough light for those settings if that makes sense. You needed maybe 2 more stops for that shot (just guessing) so either ISO 3200 or a bigger flash. Or skip the flash, since the one you are using is not doing anything and slow the shutter speed down to maybe 1/40. I feel that if I go below 1/160 with kids it's really hard to avoid movement. I was at 200mm with this lens, so at that distance the built-in flash would've been useless. I have shot in this location a few times before and the ambient light has been fine (only need ISO400 max).

07-14-2017, 09:12 PM	#10
ramseybuckeye Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Hampstead, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 17,291	What's your exposure compensation set at? This looks very underexposed for those settings in daylight.

07-14-2017, 09:14 PM	#11
halonp Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: nsw Posts: 82 Original Poster	Originally posted by Brooke Meyer In your example, she's a much smaller part of the frame than need be, you're giving up a l;ot of sensor real estate. And I'd consider shooting DNGs. I went from K-20s to K5s in 2011 because I needed high iSO in theaters for ballet with high shutter speeds. I live at ISO 3200. The K5 and subsequently K5IIs and now K3II give me good negatives. Every photograph, in some fashion, is an idea, capture, edit and presentation. Ansel Adams got it as right in the camera as he could but the man spent decades editing individual negatives trying to get them where he wanted. I've no interest in what the camera saw or what the mfr decided to do with the RAW file on it's way to a JPEG. I care about what I saw. Took me a while develop a workflow that satisfied me and it constantly changes. Part of the learning process. This example I've printed at 11"x14" and it's fine. Beautiful shot Brooke Thank you for your input.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-14-2017, 09:19 PM - 1 Like	#12
twilhelm Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,369	I agree with Ramsey, your exposure comp appears to be low. What are you using for post processing? I found Lightroom was great with my K5, especially if I was ISO 400 or higher. I always shot raw also. Yes the image appears dark, I'll post a couple of mine tomorrow, right now I'm exhausted.

07-14-2017, 09:25 PM	#13
loveisageless Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Oakland, California Photos: Albums Posts: 1,250	Originally posted by halonp Hi everyone, I currently shoot with a K5. I have the Pentax 50 1.7, Tamron 28-70 2.8, Tamron 70-200 2.8, plus a few other shorter lenses I rarely use. I mainly shoot portraits (generally outdoors). Unfortunately I find I get a lot of noise in my images. At sunset or shaded areas, I shoot wide open and with SS 1/160, I often need to bump my ISO over 800 - and I'm losing a lot of detail and getting a lot of noise. I have a friend's wedding at the end of the year which means more low light shooting. A friend recommended the Nikon d750 (full frame), however that means selling all my current gear to upgrade. The K1 looks really good, and reviews score it better than the d750, however I can't seem to see many compatible lenses for the K1. Does anyone happen to know if there are any good portrait primes? Like 135 1.8 or something similar? I did a quick google search but I only found shorter lengths and I love the compression with longer lenses. Even a 70-200 would be good. Are there any other crop sensor Pentax models which are brilliant in low light? I really appreciate your help. Thank you, Kiah There is the Pentax DFA 100mm f/2.8 WR lens which can be used for Portraits on the K-1. Also, since you like the 200mm focal length a copy of the Pentax FA* 200mm f/2.8 lens is also an excellent lens. With the K-1 the difference between 1.8 and 2.8 is negligible.

07-14-2017, 09:26 PM	#14
halonp Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: nsw Posts: 82 Original Poster	Originally posted by twilhelm I agree with Ramsey, your exposure comp appears to be low. What are you using for post processing? I found Lightroom was great with my K5, especially if I was ISO 400 or higher. I always shot raw also. Yes the image appears dark, I'll post a couple of mine tomorrow, right now I'm exhausted. Thanks Twilhelm, I don't believe I've adjusted my exposure compensation? I shoot manual. ---------- Post added 07-15-17 at 02:35 PM ---------- Above is SOOC. ISO1600 f2.8 1/100 75mm Below is after a white balance and +1/3 exposure in lightroom. ---------- Post added 07-15-17 at 02:37 PM ---------- Originally posted by loveisageless There is the Pentax DFA 100mm f/2.8 WR lens which can be used for Portraits on the K-1. Also, since you like the 200mm focal length a copy of the Pentax FA* 200mm f/2.8 lens is also an excellent lens. With the K-1 the difference between 1.8 and 2.8 is negligible. Thank you Loveisageless. The 200mm 2.8 sounds nice...I'll bet it's expensive (probably cheaper than switching systems though!)

07-14-2017, 09:44 PM	#15
VoiceOfReason Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Mishawaka IN area Photos: Albums Posts: 6,124	That does seem really dark for daytime. You will gain a few huge advantages with the K1 though. Autofocus will absolutely slay the K5. I push ISO to 3200 all the time and still have good images. You will have more dynamic range. You will have the ability to pull stuff out of shadows you never thought possible. Your 2 Tamron zooms will give you pictures you might cut yourself on with sharpness, but then your background will turn into butter smooth. Hey the K1. You will not be disappointed. That being said, I think you are also slightly missing focus with the K5 in addition to underexposing. Once you nail focus bump your clarity, contrast, and slightly bump saturation.