[Belnan]

For me I guess the real question is why haven't I gone FF. Answer = cost. But the next camera i get will be, might even be the K1.

[bdery]

For me I guess the real question is why haven't I gone FF. Answer = cost. But the next camera i get will be, might even be the K1.

Yes, that's a fair reason. And it applies to all systems, not just K-mount.

Lenses do not have to be really more expensive (they can be, but not always) but the body IS more expensive that's for sure.

For lenses:

the 16-85 isn't really cheaper than the 28-105
Same for 60-250 vs 70-210

There are many examples.

[ThorSanchez]

Yes, that's a fair reason. And it applies to all systems, not just K-mount.

Lenses do not have to be really more expensive (they can be, but not always) but the body IS more expensive that's for sure.

For lenses:

the 16-85 isn't really cheaper than the 28-105
Same for 60-250 vs 70-210

There are many examples.

In K mount that's one place where there's really no inexpensive modern full frame options - telephoto lenses. The 70-210 on FF is like a 50-135 on APS-C.


To match a 60-250 APS-C on FF you'd need something like a 90-375, and the only thing like that in Pentax FF is the 150-450, which is almost $2000 new. If there was a 100-400 PLM that went for $500 or $750 or something that would make K-mount FF much more attractive to me. Especially if it didn't weigh 4.5 pounds...

[mikeprotts]

In K mount that's one place where there's really no inexpensive modern full frame options - telephoto lenses.

The DA 55-300mm works quite well, giving most of a full frame at all ranges, and is still not bad with the 1.4 converter, covering about 95% (width & height) of FF

The DA* 300mm is FF, and gives between 85% & 95% (width & height) of FF with the 1.4 converter.

Crop is about 65% (width & height) of FF.

The Sigma range also covers well.

[cometguy]

This is an interesting thread to me, and as a relatively newcomer to Pentax Forums, I just stumbled across this thread this weekend. I'll pitch in without owning a Pentax FF DSLR yet because I have been planning to buy one for a while and will do so in 2021 most likely (though I'm waiting to see if there will be any announcement in the coming 6-10 months by Pentax of a forthcoming K-1 III model; if not, I'll be getting the K-1 II, for reasons I'll describe below).

I've been a Pentax SLR owner for four full decades, starting with my K1000. I bought both an LX and PZ-1 in the following couple of decades (both flagship cameras in their era), and very slowly added more K-mount lenses with time. I subscribed to several photography print magazines a couple of decades ago and would eagerly follow the advances in film cameras (via their reviews) as well as the emergence of digital cameras. DSLRs were pretty crappy in the early days, and there was much talk in the magazines about how it would be a while before they could truly rival resolution of film cameras, and so I waited. To the chagrin of my wife, I still have a freezer with TMax P3200, Tri-X, and Kodak technical pan film for astrophotography -- for those of you who know such things. But because I had started with the K1000 at a time when money was scarce, I never felt a desire to leave Pentax as I slowly amassed more lenses, and I used Pentax for my family photos and my travel photos as well as my astrophotography. Back in the 1990s, I got experience renting multiple Pentax 6x7 cameras and doing black-and-white medium-format photography, and I spent a lot of time in the darkroom from my high-school days onwards (up until a couple of decades ago). I only felt the temptation to make one little stray away from Pentax in the SLR department a couple of decades ago when I got a tremendous offer that I couldn't refuse -- a really low price on a mint Nikon F4 camera (with digital databack that prints photo stats on film) with a 35-70mm f/2.8 Nikkor lens. But I vowed it was just for fun and that I'd not invest much more in Nikon (indeed, I only have three F-mount lenses bought to this day, and the other two are a Tokina and a Vivitar Series 1) because of my investment in, and great fondness for, my Pentax equipment. (Indeed, I personally have always felt sheepish about having ever bought Nikon, but ...)

I finally got my first digital camera (not counting a crappy digital camera in an early flip phone) in 2007 -- the K10D, a 10-Mpx camera. I bought the K10D primarily for astrophotography (something I've done heavily since my early teen years), and it proved to be somewhat disappointing for various reasons (small sensor, poor pixel size) but overall it's a fabulous camera given the context of 2007.
I bought the K10D chiefly because there was no FF digital SLR made by Pentax, as we all know, for the first decade of their digital cameras. After buying the K10D chielfly for astrophotography, the iPhone came out, making it just so much easier to do personal photography of the family, travels, etc., with a camera in my pocket. I had long stopped my photography-magazine subscriptions and hadn't gotten into any online forums. But I'd take my K10D on road trips with me (I pretty much stopped taking SLRs on plane trips after Sept. 11, with all the crackdowns on carry-on stuff including demanding that they x-ray even high-ASA film). All along I was seeing great astrophotographs posted by amateur astronomers with DSLRs (a large percentage using Canons, a company that has pitched dedicated cameras for astrophotography, even), and I started to want to try more of that again. Some more work with the K10D showed me that it simply was not up to the task. So I ended up getting off eBay mint copies of the K-3 II and the Nikon D800 after a bunch of research (the latter because of those F4 full-frame F-mount lenses sitting idle because I wasn't using the F4 for astrophotography much). I have been eyeing the K-1 for some time, but its cost put me off (I've never spent more than $900 USD for a camera), and I thought that a used/mint D800 (with only about 1400 shutter actuations) at less than half the cost of a new K-1 II would whet my appetite for FF digital and confirm for me that the K-1 is the right thing, even at the price of a new one. My foray into medium-format film photography in the 1990s was an exciting experiment that has never left my interest, and I've also been looking for a long time at the 645D and 645Z -- but cost always dampens my desire to plunge for one of those.

Anyway, Pentax Forums has encouraged me to continue in my plans to buy a new K-1 within the next year or so. Over four decades, I have amassed two dozen K-mount lenses (about 3/4 Pentax-brand, with about a half-dozen non-Pentax lenses), and all of them except for two (DA 12-24mm and HD-DA 20-40mm Ltd.) are FF lenses. So I get frustrated that my FA* 24-mm f/2 lens and my smc-A 15mm f/3.5 lens aren't all that wide-angle on my K-3 II and K10D cameras, and I long (as many here did) for the ability to get those wide angles again on their FF film-era lenses. The forthcoming K-3 III looks very enticing to me, but I think that it's time to get a Pentax FF camera for me (my D800 camera certainly confirms that for me) and not invest any more in APS-C camera bodies with their smaller sensors. I'm ready to invest in a new K-1 II now in the next year, but am patient enough to wait to see if a K-1 III is a possibility; if so, I may wait for that (even if it's into 2022 because I can imagine a larger sensor and better image quality, faster buffering, etc. -- as we are seeing in the K-3 III). But if there's to be no new K-1 III by 2022, I'll happily be buying the K-1 II and I know that it'll become my primary camera.

[mikeprotts]

I'm ready to invest in a new K-1 II now in the next year, but am patient enough to wait to see if a K-1 III is a possibility; if so, I may wait for that (even if it's into 2022 because I can imagine a larger sensor and better image quality, faster buffering, etc. -- as we are seeing in the K-3 III).

If you're ready to take the full frame plunge, I'd suggest finding a second hand example (K-1 or K-1 II) and then upgrade when you've reached the limits. By then, the K-1 III will probably be available at a reasonable price second hand.

[RobA_Oz]

Anyway, Pentax Forums has encouraged me to continue in my plans to buy a new K-1 within the next year or so. Over four decades, I have amassed two dozen K-mount lenses (about 3/4 Pentax-brand, with about a half-dozen non-Pentax lenses), and all of them except for two (DA 12-24mm and HD-DA 20-40mm Ltd.) are FF lenses. So I get frustrated that my FA* 24-mm f/2 lens and my smc-A 15mm f/3.5 lens aren't all that wide-angle on my K-3 II and K10D cameras, and I long (as many here did) for the ability to get those wide angles again on their FF film-era lenses. The forthcoming K-3 III looks very enticing to me, but I think that it's time to get a Pentax FF camera for me (my D800 camera certainly confirms that for me) and not invest any more in APS-C camera bodies with their smaller sensors. I'm ready to invest in a new K-1 II now in the next year, but am patient enough to wait to see if a K-1 III is a possibility; if so, I may wait for that (even if it's into 2022 because I can imagine a larger sensor and better image quality, faster buffering, etc. -- as we are seeing in the K-3 III). But if there's to be no new K-1 III by 2022, I'll happily be buying the K-1 II and I know that it'll become my primary camera.

I have to agree with what mikeprotts says, with one proviso. Sales discounts can make a new purchase much more attractive than buying secondhand. I don't expect a K-1ii replacement for a while yet, but you never know. A few internal tweaks to the K-1, deploying some of the technology in the K-3iii could keep the interest up and the price reasonable, pending a major redesign. Just the same, next year would be too soon after the release of the K-3iii, allowing for the price shock of that body to be absorbed, but Ricoh could be thinking about things quite differently.

[Jonathan Mac]

The DA 55-300mm works quite well, giving most of a full frame at all ranges, and is still not bad with the 1.4 converter, covering about 95% (width & height) of FF

The only time I've ever seen a K-1 in the wild (or anywhere, for that matter) it had a 55-300mm on it. It was in Sweden and the user was clearly having a great deal of trouble focusing on something in very low light, not surprising with a slow lens.

[someasiancameraguy]

I went with FF because it is significantly better pixel for pixel than aps-c. Comparable APS-C glass are often just as, if not more, expensive as FF glass, with typically poorer results across the board. Take for example the D FA 28-105 vs the DA 16-85 or 17-70. The DA versions are roughly the same price, for an equivalent aperture of roughly F5.3 - 6 on the fast end versus the F3.5 on the FF version. This translates significantly into IQ for studio work where form factor and weight are less of an issue.

[reh321]

The only time I've ever seen a K-1 in the wild (or anywhere, for that matter) it had a 55-300mm on it. It was in Sweden and the user was clearly having a great deal of trouble focusing on something in very low light, not surprising with a slow lens.

Was that a function of the user or of the system?

My KP readily focuses with the 55-300 PLM even in dimish light.

[pukipuki]

I went for k-1 with one particular scenario in mind - portraits of my 1yo son using fa77 A fear of missing out it was... And now I've added DFA 50mm.

For everything else I was and still is happy with my k3ii.

LBA eventually hit me hard this year... got more old FA*, F and A lenses to have a lightweight fun bundle for K-1. No regrets, though

But there is no way I will let go the APS-C. I need its reach and FPS to shoot tennis/surfing and light weight for hiking or certain travel.

[MJKoski]

I have three K-1 Bodies. One MK2 is converted to full-spectrum, one (MK1) is waiting for monochrome conversion and one (MK1) is for visible spectrum without the accelerator.

[normhead]

Pentax K-1 shooter with DA 150-450 (and the DFA 15-30 on his back seat.

For those of you who've never seen one in the wild, they do exist. He's holding my Tammy while I take his picture with the K-1 and 28-105.

[northcoastgreg]

To match a 60-250 APS-C on FF you'd need something like a 90-375, and the only thing like that in Pentax FF is the 150-450, which is almost $2000 new. If there was a 100-400 PLM that went for $500 or $750 or something that would make K-mount FF much more attractive to me. Especially if it didn't weigh 4.5 pounds...

Yes, FF modern zoom glass is heavier and more expensive than APS-C alternatives. Similar remarks could be said of the DFA 15-30. The DFA 28-105 is something of an outlier in this respect.

However, for those who are willing to use non-star, non-limited FA and F glass, both zooms and prime, it really is a lot less expensive than APS-C and no more heavier. If you're flexible and willing to work around some of the weaknesses of these lenses, you can get some impressive images out of them.

[biz-engineer]

I don't understand this thread. Full frame of what format? Full frame apsc, Full frame full frame, or full frame medium format? Full frame of what?