[dcpropilot]

I use the K-1 for professional gigs, my K-3 for personal travel and as a backup to my K-1.

[SirTomster]

Does the K-1 clean counter tops and polish stainless steel?

I'd hate to post a photo of my kitchen right now at any iso, with any lens...

Heck, if my kitchen was clean I would still not do it.

[-JW-]

Purchased a K1-II a month ago, after coming from a K3 (used since 2013) and a K3-II (bought secondhand this year).
Very very happy. I gradually bought some full frame compatible lenses over the years, with the idea to have the lenses if I ever made the switch.

Resolution, dynamic range, handling, autofocus, viewfinder, to me they all feel like a big improvement.
Though the size does not really bother me (especially with the smaller FA prime lenses the size is still very manageable), I do think I will choose my K3-II over the K1 for travelling longer than 1 week.
This means I also think I will stick to using both APS-C and FF and am planning to get the K-new.

[noelpolar]

Well.... my K3 hasn't been used for about 3 years now..... and I ended up with 2 K1s and am very happy with them. I just recently did buy a KP though. The reason(s) for this purchase are.... e(2x+3y2)÷4cq.... yes.... mostly unfathomable by an every day person.

I am open to suggestions as to what the answer to the above might be.... just so I can explain things to my wife (luckily most Pentax cameras look alike).

[Sandy Hancock]

To enlarge on my much earlier post (number 33 in this thread):

The K-1 is the best handling, best featured camera Pentax has ever produced. Bigger sensor aside, that is enough reason to be happy with it. Maybe the K-new might shift that position, but I will have had four years out of my K-1 by the time that becomes a factor.

A full frame camera also adds a whole new dimension to the legion of cheap old film lenses out there. That's another whole bunch of fun. I'm currently working on my K series collection, and enjoying it immensely.

Then there are the face-meltingly wonderful new lenses - like the DFA* 70-200, DFA* 50, Laowa 12mm Zero-D among others - for which no crop equivalent exists. I can't wait to see what the DFA* 85 and others in the future have to offer.

So yeah, I'm still happy

[James also]

I have been more than happy with the move to FF. I bought it to replace an aging K7 that my daughter still uses.

The big downside was the extra Glass I had to buy, the biggest expense was the 150-450 to replace the Sigma 70-200 2.8 to get that reach when using the camera for sport and wildlife. I still use the 70-200 for indoor sport. I did buy a second hand 77mm a 100mm and a 15-30mm. this is over a few years. (the 150-450 was the only one I could justify buying straight after the purchase of the K1.)

The slow frame rate has also been a bit of a challenge. There is more of a need to be spot on with timing.

[ivki_com]

Satisfied and very. The difference between K5 and K1 is significant.
I went on vacation, took K5 with me (no longer a pity). I really regretted not taking K1

[Munki]

Sorry for necro, but for my personal use, I'd say I would've been happy with a kp and going back to APS-C. The compactness really does it for me. I haven't really touched my K1 all that much if I'm going to be truly honest with myself.

[mbukal]

I used to use da17-70 / 4 on several apsc bodies (before K3lll) and now on K1 I use dfa 28-105 / 3.5-5.6 (and tokina atx 28-70/2,8) with far greater pleasure, in everything but in everything ff the combination is better for me, I would not like to return to apsc although he has a better and greater choice of lenses, I'm not interested in long-distance photography, nor am I dependent on frame rate / burst, I realized / discovered what kind of photo I like and there apsc can't satisfy meand, ff meets my needs, that is the most important thing, although I would like a larger selection of lenses as in apscu

[Theov39]

Overall, I'm extremely happy in moving from a K-5 to a K-1.

Advantages:
* All my wide angle lenses are wide again
* Bigger viewfinder
* Cleaner images

Disadvantages:
* One of my lenses (a Tamron superzoom) was a crop sensor lens
* Less reach with telephotos and macro

But these disadvantages disappear by shooting in APS-C mode on the K-1. In essence, the K-1 has a K-5 built into it so give up almost nothing.

Is the extras weight and size an issue for you? I love my K-3 as its so compact (relatively speaking) but tempted to go FF.

[bdery]

Is the extras weight and size an issue for you? I love my K-3 as its so compact (relatively speaking) but tempted to go FF.

I went that route when the K-1 first came out. For me the amazing ergonomics were worth it. I traveled to Disney World, Paris, lots of camping trips, etc, with that camera, without problem.

The K-1 sold me to full frame, and its ergonomics made me use it almost always, despite still owning the K-3. I actually expected to use then K-1 only to write reviews, but that opinion lasted all of 30 minutes. I evolved my lens lineup in order for it to support FF.

Then last year Sony released the A7C, a ludicrously compact FF camera. So I bought that also, with a different lens lineup than what I have with Pentax. More surgical, if you will. I use that camera now for travel and hiking/camping. That fits with my kids getting older, and our outings becoming longer. The more compact system is welcome.

I still use the K-1 a lot, but also the Sony. What I don't do is use an APS-C camera much. It's FF all the way for me.

[texandrews]

I went that route when the K-1 first came out. For me the amazing ergonomics were worth it. I traveled to Disney World, Paris, lots of camping trips, etc, with that camera, without problem.

The K-1 sold me to full frame, and its ergonomics made me use it almost always,

Ergonomics trump size/weight every time IMO. I like and admire Sony cameras and had 3: A850, NEX7, A7R. The NEX7 I got specifically for the small size, and so didn't expect it to feel great. I liked the feel or the A7R, but in the end thought it was too small for its purpose. I went from that to a 645Z, and the ergonomics of that camera mean that it isn't more tiring to use for me. I'd say for a FF camera the K1/K1mkII 's are as compact as I'd want for that type of FF camera---obviously the Sony RX1/1R cameras are a different type. I'd say as an exception, the video focused Sony A7 series are OK small---because if you are serious about the video use then you's have a cage or gimbal, which adds a lot of size.

[Theov39]

I went that route when the K-1 first came out. For me the amazing ergonomics were worth it. I traveled to Disney World, Paris, lots of camping trips, etc, with that camera, without problem.

The K-1 sold me to full frame, and its ergonomics made me use it almost always, despite still owning the K-3. I actually expected to use then K-1 only to write reviews, but that opinion lasted all of 30 minutes. I evolved my lens lineup in order for it to support FF.

Then last year Sony released the A7C, a ludicrously compact FF camera. So I bought that also, with a different lens lineup than what I have with Pentax. More surgical, if you will. I use that camera now for travel and hiking/camping. That fits with my kids getting older, and our outings becoming longer. The more compact system is welcome.

I still use the K-1 a lot, but also the Sony. What I don't do is use an APS-C camera much. It's FF all the way for me.

Thank you for the update. That makes sense.

[stillshot2]

My K-3 was nice for birding but now that I have kids and take mostly people or landscape photos upgrading to full frame has been amazing there's no going back

[BarneyL]

K-1 gave me amazing files with a ton of room to work with... which as it turned out, I don't really need.

I'm currently in progress of going back from FF to APS-C. For photographing things that move, K-3 III is in a way different league than K-1. For things that don't move, I enjoy shooting film more than digital.