[DeadJohn]

I think you'll be very happy with the K-1 for astrophotography. The Sony sensors used in Pentax (and Sony and Nikon) cameras tend to have better dynamic range and noise performance than Canon sensors. The K-1 offers a great sensor, astrotracer star tracker, LED lighting to help with lens changes at night, bulb mode that can go up to 20 minutes for star trails. It works very well for landscapes too.

The Pentax shortcoming for astrophotography is that there aren't many Pentax users. In turn, 3rd party astrophotography tools that are available for Canon are not available for Pentax. This matters if you plan to connect your camera to a motorized telescope and do extensive stacking. The K-1 can still do that but it's easier to do with Canon. BackyardEOS software does not work with Pentax. Some specialized adapters and filters can't be found for Pentax either. There are workarounds.

Here's an example of what the K-1 can do. Single exposure, processed with Lightroom:

---

Last edited by DeadJohn; 09-10-2017 at 02:57 PM.

[btnapa]

-Rokinon 14mm f/2.8
-Sigma 35mm Art f/1.4
-Canon 50mm f/1.8
-Canon 24-105L (the first version)

With my K1 I have lenses that almost match your selection. I have the following k-mount lenses:

Rokinon 14mm f2.8 - super sharp lens and a gem but manual focus, great for landscapes
Pentax FA 31mm Limited - one of the members of the Three Amigos family - It is lens making at its best. It is often compared to the Sigma 35 f1.4 (non art version)
Pentax FA 43 Limited - I love mine. It is a super compact and sharp lens. I have shot tons of studio product shots with it.
Pentax 28-105 - This is the latest addition to my lenses. It is my walk around lens for my K1. If I had to bring one lens, this is it.

In an ideal world the Pentax 15-30, 24-70 and the 70-200 will give you almost everything you need for landscape or any other type of photography, barring macro work.

[Adam]

Actually i thought, that we might see a K-3II successor soon.

Yes, I'm sure that's on the horizon as all the other bodies have recently been updated.

[motorhead9999]

Out of curiosity, which Pentax crop camera would be the equivalent to the 7D?

[skierd]

The k-1 is the better camera from everything I've read by far, and you can get your two most used lenses in K mount too. I'd say there's no real danger in switching beyond the money lost on swapping lenses if buying new after selling your currents.

The K-3ii and the KP would be the crop bodies of choice for your purposes with the 55-300 plm.

[leekil]

Yes the K1 can do aps-C crop mode (and square mode) in addition to FF. The "extra reach" you get with crop mode (or an aps-c sensor camera) is illusory however. It is a product of the sensor size and "enlargement" of the file. This is the same with any brand camera. aps-c only appears to give you longer reach because the image is cropped in the first place. You will get the same "extra reach" by simply cropping the FF image.

The advantages of crop mode on a K-1 as opposed to a separate APS-C camera are: 1) speed of shooting, which you don't get in shooting FF and cropping after; 2) price, because you don't have to get a second APS-C camera; and 3) benefits of a possibly more advanced set of features compared to a crop camera. Disadvantages are 1) weight and 2) lower resolution than a dedicated APS-C camera (like the K-3 or KP).

[MadMathMind]

What I think you will find:
1) Canon's bodies are inferior to Pentax's. In fact, Canon's are the weakest in the industry. That doesn't mean they are all terrible but they really do lag behind the competition in a lot of features, most notably in sensor tech. Their video tends to be the best of all DSLRs but Canon deliberately holds it back to sell camcorders, so even that's not as good as it could be.

2) Pentax's lenses are inferior to Canon's. The selection is a lot lower and the quality between comparable lenses not as good; Pentax doesn't have anything as rich and deep as the L lineup. I always laugh a bit when people buy a Canon body and shoot with Sigma lenses--it's like the worst of both worlds. Canon's lenses really make up for its weak body performance in a big way, I think.

[normhead]

What I think you will find:
1) Canon's bodies are inferior to Pentax's. In fact, Canon's are the weakest in the industry. That doesn't mean they are all terrible but they really do lag behind the competition in a lot of features, most notably in sensor tech. Their video tends to be the best of all DSLRs but Canon deliberately holds it back to sell camcorders, so even that's not as good as it could be.

2) Pentax's lenses are inferior to Canon's. The selection is a lot lower and the quality between comparable lenses not as good; Pentax doesn't have anything as rich and deep as the L lineup. I always laugh a bit when people buy a Canon body and shoot with Sigma lenses--it's like the worst of both worlds. Canon's lenses really make up for its weak body performance in a big way, I think.

That's an interesting thought....I recently looked at Canon.

go to this page and give the charts for the Canon EF 70-200 f4 and then the Pentax 60-250 ƒ4.

How is the Canon lens better? The Pentax has more range, looks just as good on it's charts.

Looking at the charts...
The DA* is about the same as the Canon it's graph looks about the same, ibut the Canon lacks the nice tight construction that SR brings, and is WR. In this case the Pentax is a much better value than the Canon for about the same image quality. Unless you have some examples showing what you are tailing about, I'm just going to dismiss this point outright. Being a 60-250 owner, Pentax has the best lens for less money. I find it kind of outrageous that you'd even say such a thing. Maybe you should in the future specify which lenses you are talking about, because if I can look at one pair of lenses and show you to be wrong (one I actually own), I'm guessing a lot of other folks can too.

To me, Canon would be an inferior lens at a higher price for less capability. How does that make Pentax inferior? Let's not get stupid here.

And it's not just the 60-250, Pentax kits , 18-55 and many others, the 18-135s, the 28-105, the 55-300 have been judged superior to their Canikon counterparts.

I can run with a whole lens kit superior or equal in every case with what Canon has to offer at a similar price. Maybe you should qualify your post by stating that for some users Canons are equal or better. For a K-1 user with a 28-105, a 60-250, a DA*200 and 100 macro and the other lenses I own. Canon has absolutely nothing to offer for anywhere near the same money. By that I mean, they don't have as good quality or IQ at the same price and what they do have costs a lot more if you want to exceed what Pentax offers, when that's even possible.

[DeadJohn]

...2) Pentax's lenses are inferior to Canon's...

I think that statement oversimplifies things.

Pentax lens selection is inferior compared to Canon. There are many specialty lenses available for Canon. Pentax equivalents are either out of production or were never made. It's important to note, though, that almost any photo opportunity can be captured with a new Pentax lens barring some extreme examples. Extreme examples include the Canon 200/2, 300/2.8, and 400/2.8; the "cheap" lens of that bunch costs $5699.

Pentax lens quality is similar to Canon when you compare lenses in the same price range. Some Pentax lenses are better, some are worse. That applies to image quality and build quality. We can all find cases to say some Pentax lens or some Canon lens is superior to the competition.

[patarok]

Why didnt you consider Sony?

[normhead]

Out of curiosity, which Pentax crop camera would be the equivalent to the 7D?

A K-3ii is roughly the same as a 7DmkII. The K-3 has more MP in the sensor, a 20% slower FPS rate and there are many other differences, where one exceeds the other in this or that spec. The Canon probably has better AF for moving objects.

However a K-3ii is about $600 cheaper. You can almost buy a K-1 for the cost of a 7D MKii

[motorhead9999]

Why didnt you consider Sony?

I did, but I'm opting against mirrorless for the time being, mainly based on battery life issues. Also, from what I understand, the lens situation is even worse on the Sony side of things, both in terms of range AND price. Not to mention I've heard some real horror stories about their customer service.

[patarok]

I did, but I'm opting against mirrorless for the time being, mainly based on battery life issues. Also, from what I understand, the lens situation is even worse on the Sony side of things, both in terms of range AND price. Not to mention I've heard some real horror stories about their customer service.

I think you maybe right choosing pentax. I am still curious about the successor to the K-3II (will it incorporate the AF from the K-1? or even better? etc. etc.)
Ignoring M43 systems, one can say you will still have the best bang for the buck with a Pentax System.
Fuji also still looks interesting, but they would have to handle some problems first to get me.

X-Trans: The Promise and the Problem
worms, color bleeding, etc.

[surfar]

2) Pentax's lenses are inferior to Canon's.

The only area where Canon is superior is in the availability of lenses designed for digital bodies.

Fuji

handle some problems first to get me.

Which are?

[redpit]

Welcome to Pentax! You will love the K-1 and you can wait for the K-3ii replacement that will be an awesome camera as well.

(That is my answer to your question).