[panonski]

Have had a K-50 and a K-3ii--recently traded up to a K-1 ii and frankly, the results are similar. A 24mp APS-C camera like the K-3ii is a serious tooling though it lacks a bit of the DOF of the K-1ii, I find many photos with the K-1 ii are lacking in certain areas. Part of it is that Pentax has great quality DA lenses developed over a long period of time. The new FA lenses are lacking in volume and in my opinion are not as sharp as some of the DA lenses. Thus, the K-1 ii is currently not reaching its potential. Of all the FF lenses I have purchased thus far, the 18-105mm kit lens produces the best results.
Also, the aftermarket has some great gently used DA lenses that will help you build your kit more economically.

fOR that reasons you mentioned I would never purchase FF. I know I'm repeating myself but APS-C with good glass, is far superior - so why I have to ruin that for bigger, heavier body, which itself need bigger glass?

I shoot a wedding 2 weeks ago, with my K-3 and KP.

On K-3 was mounted an old 50 mm 1.7 FF glass lens - from film era... I cannot believe, what quality this glass is - it's very very sharp, with such pleasent creamy touch, you can almost feel the texture - it's not just sharpness itself, I must say - I'm trully impressed.
K-3 was shining that evening, proving to me - how capable, it still is.

[DeadJohn]

How about the reduced top LCD screen? Is that OK to use?

It seems very crowded on that side of the camera with two top dials and top screen.

I rarely use the top screen. It's an adequate size when I do need to use it.

The dial interface does not feel crowded. My 3rd wheel is most frequently set for ISO or bracketing.

[normhead]

I rarely use the top screen. It's an adequate size when I do need to use it.

The dial interface does not feel crowded. My 3rd wheel is most frequently set for ISO or bracketing.

Thar;s pretty much the same as me. I can see most top screen information through the viewfinder. The only thing i really keep track of while shooting is shutter speed, and I check that in camera looking thorough the viewfinder. After all, I want to check the shutter speed with the camera pointed at the subject.

There's not a lot of times I've actually checked the top screen. I would happily have bought a K-70, K-P if the other specs were up to scratch.

[DeadJohn]

The top screen shows a counter during long exposures. Move that to the rear screen and I don't need the top screen.

[reh321]

How about the reduced top LCD screen? Is that OK to use?

It seems very crowded on that side of the camera with two top dials and top screen.

I don't have one - but I love the idea of a third dial I could use to adjust ISO .... that way I'd have external controls for all the things I'd want to adjust in the field, and I could do all of it in a few seconds without ever taking my eye away from the viewfinder - I'm not sure what I would need a top LCD for.

[normhead]

Being mainly interested in images not hardware, I could care less about the third dial. If I got what I wanted the third dial would have been an ISO dial, like on a film camera. I change ISO almost shot to shot in many situations.

But with my finger trained to hold down the buttons to adjust ISO and EV, I just don't use the third dial.

I've read reports of people who use back button focus, the top screen, and the third dial. An individual might think such things are important. I don't. Your mileage may vary.

My only reason I like the K-1 is every now and then I get an image that just blows me away. The extra dynamic range above what my K-3 offers is significant. And every now and then the extra resolution comes in handy. However, look at what my wife does with her K-5 and it's less difference. For us mostly landscape, macro. wildlife, etc. shooter, the K-3 was step back. And K-1 images that are heavily cropped are printable at 72 DPI because they are so clean.

My K-3 remains a100 ISO to 640 ISO camera. The K-1 takes that to 100-3200, and I am willing to shoot 6400 and clean it up, if conditions demand it. I'm more comfortable with 6400 ISO on a K-1 than I am with 800 ISO on a K-3, and part of that is there is so much dynamic range as you have dynamic range to burn you start lopping it off to create higher ISO values.

[Theov39]

I don't have one - but I love the idea of a third dial I could use to adjust ISO .... that way I'd have external controls for all the things I'd want to adjust in the field, and I could do all of it in a few seconds without ever taking my eye away from the viewfinder - I'm not sure what I would need a top LCD for.

I like the concept too but for ISO they could have just had a separate top button like Nikon has on its FF bodies. To me the layout looks awkward. Anyway, each body is a compromise I guess as we all have our individual preferences. I jump between using Pentax and Nikon systems and the lay out on each body has their own pluses and minuses.

[Gimbal]

How about the reduced top LCD screen? Is that OK to use?

It seems very crowded on that side of the camera with two top dials and top screen.

Unfortunately the top screen is not as good as the one on the K5. I do miss the bigger top LCD screen.

[thequo]

I have to say that I did not switch to FF, but I came home to FF. Growing up with Pentax cameras in the film era, it took a little bit time to get used to the APS-C format, when I bought a K10D back in 2006. And although the K10D was, and probably still is, a fantastic camera (the colors!), I instantly felt home, when I took a first look through the viewfinder of the K-1: Alas, what a great sight! My glasses form the F-series perform very well on the K-1, I don't really care about the weight and size, so for me there will be no turning back to APS-C, I'm really happy with the K-1.

[crash82]

I also don't carry about the weight. The Pentax K-1 is my first FF and I'm very happy to have one.

[bdery]

So you take your K-1 on your hiking trip and don't mind the weight or size? What lenses do you take with you?

Late to reply, I just saw this.

I have not used my K-3 once since getting the K-1, the ergonomics are so much better. And that includes a trip to Paris, to Disney World, many hiking/camping/fishing trips, hotel stays, walks around town, etc.

The weight isn't THAT much of an issue when you have good carry solutions. I loose the strap, use a Capture Clip, a good camera bag (Mindshift Gear Horizon when hiking/camping or anything involving a lot of walking).

I generally carry the 16-85, 2-3 primes, sometimes but not always the 60-250. My water bladder is heavier than my camera kit...

[Merv-O]

+1 Exactly that!

Having owned several Pentaxes starting with the 10D, K-50, K-S2 (still own), K-3 (still own), K-3ii and the K-1ii, I am a bit disappointed in the K-1 performance. I had to adjust every lens I had with a SnyderLensCalc adjustment meter (another $80) because the K-1ii sharpness compared to the APS-c K-3 (with the 18-135mm ) was better. Also, with the FF lenses, the K-1 can be a burden on my old shoulders after a full day in the field.


While I am not disappointed in the K-1ii, it is a heavy body and for most of my street photography I don't need the 36 mp (I only enlarge up to 13" x 19"). I'm keeping it however, as I believe new firmware will augment the camera and to date, RICOH has not updated the K-3ii (I don't count the KP as a true upgrade) so FF may be the present to the future....

[Merv-O]

Happy I have a K-1 ii to go with my current stable of APSc cameras (K-3 & K-S2). In fact, here is a pic of all three wearing my favorite lens for each one. The K-1ii with the 28-135mmFA, the K-3 with the 18-135mm DA & the K-S2 with the 16-45mm DA.
They all have a place and the K-3 is still going strong after 5 years !!

[derekkite]

The low light capabilities of the K1 and even better with the Mark II keeps it in my hands. I have a K3, and it sits forlorn and lonely, without battery or card.

I can shoot wildlife at dusk and dawn, and the dark days of winter.

[normhead]

They all have a place and the K-3 is still going strong after 5 years !!

It's almost like the old days. I'm tempted to try and get 10 years out of my K-3, just because I can. And that's much more likely now that the K-1 has taken some of the load.

K-3 and Tamron 300 with 1.4 TC



K-1 and Tamron 300 with Tamron 2x TC


The K-1 is better for the uncropped, in tight, "in your face" images. ( Top image) The K-1 is better for maintaining detail and context in images where a considerable portion of the environment is included. (Bottom image.) The K-3 is better at images of subjects that are far enough way from the camera, they are going to have to be cropped. The cameras compliment each other, one doesn't replace the other.

K-3 on a long hike... fall colours... with excellent light.


K-1 taken from a bridge over the river, a short walk from the car. Poor , light, overcast day, late in the day.


I really don't have a preference. I definitely prefer the K-3 in good light for it's deeper buffer and twice as fast burst speed. And I prefer the K-1 in low light for it's better high ISO perfpormance. But giving up either means giving up something.

That's why I wouldn't be happy giving up either. On a bright day I head out to the blind with the K-3 and enjoy it's superior image capture performance. On a dull day I head out with the K-1 and enjoy it's superior low light performance.

I wouldn't say I've switched to FF. I've augmented what I use by adding FF. My XG-1, Q, APS_c cameras are all still in play. And they all have their purposes. You can never have too many cameras IMHO. I still haven't made a print from a K-1 file. Other factors besides what camera body is used makes more difference than which camera I had in my hand.

My latest 48x32 print is a K-3 image as is my my latest 32x24 canvas. Some day I'll get a K-1 image that passes the test, but after 2 years, not yet, although I have many K-1 images that would print extremely well, if someone wanted to hang one on their wall, and was interested in the subject matter. Luck of the draw so far has meant no K-1 images have been selected for printing. It can happen.

Some would have you think selecting K-1 images for printing would be automatic. However, that's not my experience. The problem for the K-1 being that what it's good at, low light, often doesn't produce the most compelling images.